How feminism and MRA are destroying the family unit and therefore destroying society.

Both feminism and MRA have done and are doing great things for society but there are major flaws in their approach that I am now going to explore.

First you need to understand that they both subscribe to the wrong definition of equality. When feminists and MRA say equality what they really mean in interchangeability. Men and women can be equal in value while maintaining certain differences and having very different roles. A key and a lock can be equal to society if they are both worth the same amount of money for example. If people would pay a euro for the lock and a euro for the key then the lock and the key are equal. But the lock and they key are not interchange able. If you have a lock you need a key and another lock just will not do and vice versa.

When feminists argue about the low numbers of women in CEO positions or the low numbers of stay at home dads, and when MRA argue that women need to pay their way in a relationship, or that fathers need to have the same custody rights as women (which I agree with) and that that would mean true equality they are wrong. That scenario would mean true interchangeability. Feminists are trying to gain the rights that men have had historically while MRA are trying to gain the rights that women have had historically and they do this all under the guise of liberalism.

The problem with this is that there is still one undeniable difference between men and women. The only difference that counts, and when you shame all aspects of traditionalism or guidelines within society this difference is what becomes the structural basis of society. And that difference is that essentially without science we can define women and men by saying women make babies and feed infants and men do not make babies or feed infants freeing them up to do other things with their time. And a society structured upon this principle alone is a society without long term relationships and where men grow up marginalized. Women grow children and males lack role models in the home, they then seek role models in society and end up being very easily used by those who only want what they can get from them.

Traditionalism; whether through the family unit or through a community setting counteracts that. Traditionalism benefits males especially because it ensures that there is a male role model present during the developing stages of a boy’s life.  And both feminism and MRA are destroying traditionalism by essentially saying that individuals need to just do what is best for themselves and everything will work out fine. They are shaming the idea of sexism, which traditionalism is built upon and they are telling males and females that society does not need structure or values forced upon their respective sexes and that if they both seek their own self-interest it will all work out.

This is a lie, and it is a lie which weakens society. If men and women simply do what feels best, and do not follow any form of traditional guidelines what happens is that children get raised by women and society surfers. Males become marginalized when raised in settings without male role models and this is exactly where feminism and MRA are taking society. This will lead to less productivity but maybe a higher quality gene pool (about the only good thing that will come from this scenario is less children).  The society as we know it today will be destroyed, we will return to a natural society. A hunter gatherer society, without guidelines and without tradition this is where our biology leads us. Please read this for a more updated view of where I think society it actually heading.

Examples of MRA shaming traditionalism:

Examples of feminism shaming traditionalism need not be given because the entire concept behind feminism shames traditional roles: think BIGOT, CHAUVINISTIC PIG, SEXIST or simply why aren’t there more stay at home dads? why aren’t there more female CEOs? Read this feminist housewife article at jezebel. Or what about the questions can you be a real feminist and a stay a home mom or housewife?


14 thoughts on “How feminism and MRA are destroying the family unit and therefore destroying society.

  1. This “separate but equal” nonsense reminds me of JIm crow laws.You’re simply defending your privileges without any regard for male sovereignty.The traditionalist lifestyle for women is to live without any responsibility with men to do everything for you.You repeatedly use an appeal to nature argument to suggest that society would fall into anarchy if we truly became an egalitarian society.Well guess what?Over the last 50 years the crime rate as fallen significantly,your argument is bunk.You’re a big girl,you can pay for your own meals.Forcing a role on men is oppressive and reeks of authoritarianism,i don’t see how you can claim to be a “liberal traditionalist”.

    We don’t deny the differences between men and women.We known women are weaker,is it mens responsibility to risk their lives to protect females?Hell no we’re not going to be of utilitarian value.It is completely false to say that men lack the ability to nurture,look at all the countries which paternal leave which are producing healthy children.Traditionalism doesn’t benefit men,it offers an identity based around servitude to women,the idea that men have to earn their way out of worthlessness by acquiring status and doing favors for women is shallow and pathetic.We know you don’t care about men,you care about having some faceless entity providing for you.

    A key that sits back and microwaves kraft dinner is NOT equal in value to a lock that pulls 60 hour workweeks to provide for his wife.The housewife in a modern context is obsolete with no real aspirations other than to suck on the teet of her husband.Would you really want someone with no career and presumably education to be passing on knowledge to your children?Rotating parental leave for the first 4 years of a childs life,precooked meals and organization skills all make the modern housewife as useful as a dial up modem.

    Women can expose themselves to all the stresses that men have traditionally have to deal with,instead of hiding in the kitchen like cowards.Men are going to get our independence weather or not traditional women like it.You say you’re against alimony?Well guess what,in arrangements with housewife it HAS TO EXIST out of necessity which is another reason why men should abandon your archaic social structure.

    • Firstly thank you for your comment. It is my first comment. I have a lot to change in this blog because my views about certain things have recently changed. I actually do not think MRA or feminism will destroy society; I think it is a pendulum and society swings back and fought btw. two very bad extremes.

      But let me address your points! It is not really separate but equal it is different but equal. Different and together but equal. Traditionalism does benefit men because the opposite of traditionalism is essentially a society without relationships and I have come from such a society and men are pretty screwed in such a setting. What happens is that men have to compete for sex and women typically leave out a large group of sexually frustrated males while selecting and mating with a smaller group of eligible males.

      Males get screwed just as badly as females do. To me a traditional women is not one who contributes nothing. I consider myself to be a housewife/traditional and I contribute. My husband and I are equally dependent on each other. I take care of kids, do housework, and run a small business. To me once you are at home with your kids.. and have a spouse you are pretty traditional. I am against alimony yes..because I do not see the point. I think that we need stronger family ties though and if a women and a man divorce it should be a family member who ”supports” her if she can not support herself. Esp. in the case of her leaving the relationship for a more superficial reason.

      The social structure that I want is not archaic. You talk about egalitarian structure but I do not see that as possible or healthy. Also how do you suppose we go about creating this egalitarian society?
      So far what I see MRA and feminist promoting is far more archaic than traditionalism. You all are promoting that we follow our biological impulses which leads to NO RELATIONSHIPS. It leads to no commitment between the sexes and it leads to women caring for children and men competing to impress women for sex. This social structure is what is most natural to humans.

      It is a capitalistic way of structuring family life and leaves quite a lot of men without sex from females. There are things that can be put in place to stop this from happening but within the given system it would be like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. There is a lot of ”naturalness” to consider here. Women need the opportunity to be nearer to their kids, or we will simply stop having kids. What feminism and MRA push for in the quest for equality is a society that sucks quite a lot of joy out of parenting.

      I think the traditional system is good because it allows for women to work less so that they can have kids. But well to each his own.

    • Also about the separate but equal comment it is YOU who wants separate but equal. I am arguing to save marriage (a union and system of trading where men and women work together not separate). YOU are fighting for a movement that supports a marriage strike and no relationships.

      We need together but equal and to do that we have to start working together. Men and women.

  2. I agree with what you are saying. Now when I comes to child custody I don’t believe unwed fathers should be given rights. This is a recent legal trend and I believe it causes problems with the stability of a child’s life and greatly lessens the incentive for men to marry. Married fathers who are providers for their families should be given full legal recognition as a parent. I think divorce should be harder to get that way children won’t be separated from parents. Feminism demolished the tender years doctrine (a common law doctrine protecting mothers with young children in custody disputes under the belief that children of tender years do not need to be separated from their mothers) but I believe it should be brought back for children about 8 years old and younger unless the mother is truly unfit to care for the child. Whether anyone likes it or not, all children are by default in the custody of their mothers and they should be left that way unless it is harmful to the child. Since men do not get pregnant or give birth they can only obtain custody of a child via a third party.

    • I am reading your blog and it is FANTASTIC! Thank you for sticking up for women’s rights you are more of a feminist than any feminist out there! It is so sad what is going on today and yes MRAs are the biggest group of male feminist out there. They are feminist no other way to describe it and feminist is anti-women… in fact feminism is the biggest misogynistic group I can think of.

      Egalitarian. hA! When men are having children and nurse them then they can talk about egalitarian; only then they will see that equal means that the person free from the bearing, nursing and caring for children should do less. Our focus is children, their focus is supporting that in other ways. Still reading.. but so far AMAZING BLOG! Thank you!

      • Thank you so much! At least someone else gets it. 🙂 and thank you for liking my blog posting.

    • Also just want to say I come from a place that is ‘patriarchal’ in structure but ”matriarchal” in practice. Jamaica. You are right that it is horrible system. Sex is free. FREE. Liberal and it is impossible to find a faithful male (pretty hard to find a faithful woman as well). It is a horrible system for women. Women work really hard because they have no male support and males only seek to provide for themselves so they work less. Males who are free from the ”burdens” of childcare have a much greater capacity to work. And so obviously in a patriarchy more work gets done and these societies are more successful.

      The mythical dream of a matriarchy being a paradise is silly; it is horrible and I do not wish it on any female!

  3. Mamaziller, I’m glad to discover you are blogging! I agree with the great majority of what you are saying. I am just starting out with my own blog now, Secular Patriarchy. I am still in the process of building things up, I have the About section written already and some links up that I think are good. In a couple of days I should have some real content there. It’s great that you’re doing your own blog like you’re doing now but I am hoping that some day you might want to join the TWRA group that me and The Radical One are a part of more formally. I think it is good that like minded people work together rather than everyone doing their own thing. It is easier for new people to find an organized mass than it is to randomly bump into an isolated person here and there. Also being in a group helps us learn from each other faster.

    There needs to be more people out there rejecting both the MRAs and feminism; we can’t let the MRAs pretend that they are the only alternative to feminism.

    • Hi thanks for your reply and support. I would like to be a TWRA. The only thing is I see this movement as a necessary movement socially, not legally. Someone needs to start speaking up for real woman’s rights. Cause feminism is the most anti-woman thing ever. Also did you see the letter on AVfM? MRAs are male feminists!

      The thing is I would ideally strive for a society where traditional minded people and feminists minded people can coexist, with traditional minded people being the largest unified majority. It is important that more non-religious people start speaking up for the traditional roles because it feels like more religious people will not be taken seriously by the secular portion of society. It is like the non-religious people will say that since religious folk do not make sense in their theory on creation and God then nothing they say makes sense. Which is totally false, there are things about religion that do not make sense to me but there are also many things about religion that do make sense.

      We do need to form a group and I would be interested in teaming up and starting an official website for TWRAs to join and discuss things. We need to provide a safe place for women (and men) who are traditional to talk about why we are traditional and why it makes sense. The liberal minded notion that sex is just sex and we need to do what feels best is not really true. Sex leads to babies and we sometimes need to do what is best for them. Let me know if you are interested in starting a TWRAs website, or is their one already?

      Also yea this blog is really chaotic at the moment because, I changed my mind about somethings recently. Now I just hope for a balanced society; I can respect that liberal minded people would not to be happy under a traditional system. They still need to respect that traditional minded people can not be happy under their system though. And right now it feels hardly anyone is speaking up for the traditional minded people.

  4. TWRAs are both social and legal. Social reforms and legal reforms go together; what the laws are are a reflection of what the society’s social values are. You mention about traditional minded people and feminists co-existing; traditionalists and feminists will have to co-exist by definition because we are both in the same society. My goal however is for the traditionalist side to be dominant and for the laws of society, particularly the laws relating to family matters, to be based on traditionalist patriarchal values. Traditional Women’s Rights would then be established by changes in the law due to changes in social attitudes consistent with the ethic that men should provide for and protect women.

    I to hope for more non-religious people speaking up for traditional gender roles. The “mainstream” of society is secular and laws are based on what the secular “mainstream” social consensus is (at least in the United States and the Western World). There are a lot of atheists who claim that because religion is “irrational” that means that all religious moral values are “irrational” as well. This is a logical fallacy of major proportions. Religious values are what they are because the moral values have worked generation after generation. Religious people live in the real world just like atheists do; it makes perfect sense that religion has incorporated into itself moral values that work, moral values that atheists would be wise to emulate.

    As things stand now there are two TWRA websites; my website (Secular Patriarchy) and The Radical One’s website (What’s Wrong With Equal Rights). We would love for you to join us and make your website (The Secular Traditionalist) the third TWRA website. There is no single “official” TWRA website; there are different TWRAs who have different websites. To express your affiliation with the TWRAs I would suggest you add “TWRA” to your own website such as the title of your blog reading “The Secular Traditionalist – TWRA” or “The Secular Traditionalist, a TWRA site”. Also add a Blogroll and link to my site and The Radical One’s site. This will publicly establish that you are part of the TWRA network.

    Also I identify as both a Traditional Women’s Rights Activist (TWRA) and a Traditional Family Activist (TFA). The “About” section of my website gives a definition of what a TFA is exactly. I am hoping that you can support my additional requirements for being a TFA (support for unconditional Chivalry by men on behalf of women and obedience to the Superior Power; the “Superior Power” being broadly defined as objective truth or objective morality). As far as definitions go The Radical One defines what a TWRA is and I define what a TFA is. The public self-identification is TWRA; TFA is a sub-set category within the broader TWRA group.

    Anyways welcome aboard! We are happy to have you as a part of our group!

  5. Obviously, when women rejected their traditional roles, it was just a matter of time before men rejected theirs. “The patriarchy” and men in general have been openly attacked and shamed for the past 40+ years. More and more, men are opting out of “the system”. When your fall is celebrated – when your role in society is denigrated – when your relevance to society is refuted, it’s best to opt out and go your own way.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s