# MRA Avengers parody



## *LittleDeer* (Apr 19, 2012)

I found this really funny. Thought some of the TAM women might enjoy it too. :smile2:
This Avengers Parody Comic Perfectly Illustrates The Absurdity Of 'Men's Rights'


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

I liked The Incredible Jerk the best!


----------



## Amplexor (Feb 13, 2008)

This thread has the potential to spin out of control pretty quickly. Just say'n.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

:iagree: Yeh right!


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Yes, of course everyone knows that men don't (and shouldn't) have rights!


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

That is pretty funny.

Does the MRA really protest conferences on how to prevent date rape?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## MountainRunner (Dec 30, 2014)

Read the comments in the article....


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Apparently a fellow named Goth thinks that date rape prevention seminars on college campuses are to blame for men not going to college.

This movement seems silly to me.

I don't think a MRA that maybe dealt with real issues would be bad.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

Amplexor said:


> This thread has the potential to spin out of control pretty quickly. Just say'n.


Which is why I didn't comment initially...



ConanHub said:


> Apparently a fellow named Goth thinks that date rape prevention seminars on college campuses are to blame for men not going to college.
> 
> This movement seems silly to me.
> 
> I don't think a MRA that maybe dealt with real issues would be bad.


I agree. I'm thinking specifically--because I see so much of it on here--of the rights of fathers in custody decisions, things like that. Our cultural representation of fathers in mass media as bumbling idiots is filtering down, and is has real-life repercussions.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Totally agree FeministInPink.

It isn't good for girls to see attractive, accomplished women with unattractive, out of shape boobs for husbands either.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Pluto2 (Aug 17, 2011)

But if you're talking about media depictions, I think its the producers who only want attractive young women on TV, and only tend to see characters in one dimension.

The comics demonstrates some of the absurdities of MRA, I doubt the MRA will see it that way.


----------



## Icey181 (Apr 16, 2015)

Pluto2 said:


> The comics demonstrates some of the absurdities of MRA, I doubt the MRA will see it that way.


Mainly because this is little more than 3rd Wave Feminist shaming of men, yet again.

I particularly liked this exchange in the comments.


> Benoit Perreault • Top Commenter
> Why would you want to be an MRA?
> Because you think circumcision is child abuse and should be illegal like female genital mutilation is. Because you think boys being only 40% of college students overall is a bigger issue than women being 35% of the students in Stem fields. Because you think the fact that 80% of the homeless are male is a bigger problem than manspreading. Because you believe that man representing 80% of the work injuries and almost a 100% of work related deaths is something that we should address before we worry about how many woman are ceo'S of fortune500 top companies. Because you think paying child support for 20 years for a kid that is not yours is immoral and unjust. Because you think ther should't be asentencing gap in the justice system. Because you think falsely accusing someone of rape or domestic violence is a crime that should be prosecuted.


All of which are valid and legitimate issues.

And it took a few seconds for Benoit here to be lectured that…



> Daniel Bein • Top Commenter • Latex Salesman at Vandalay Industries
> At the beginning of your comment, you compared circumcision to female genital mutilation... You compared snipping the foreskin for the purpose of cleanliness to that of violently mutilating a young girl's genitals so that they will remain/be seen as chaste. That's a great example of how the victimization of men in our society is so much less severe than that of women that it's ridiculous to compare the two.


Cutting off pieces of male genitalia for purely aesthetic reasons is simply "snipping the foreskin for cleanliness" whereas doing the same to a girl is "violently mutilating…so they will remain/be seen as chaste."

Circumcision discussions are one of my Litmus Tests for gender equality in these discussions.

The moment you get someone willing to make a distinction between one form of genital multination over another simply due to gender because of "reasons" I am done with the conversation.

And sorry, no major studies have demonstrated the cleanliness argument actually applies in non-3rd world western nations where AIDs is not at African-levels of prevalence in the population and condoms are available.

I am not a particular fan of the MRA movement overall. MRA individuals tend to be left of center men who seem to want to elevate the Male Gender as yet another victim group to be protected by the Federal government.

I am not a fan of that.

However, continuously targeting and emphasizing the extreme factors of MRA online bickering is nothing more than a radical 3rd Wave Feminist attempt to delegitimize the notion that MRAs actually have anything serious to discuss. 

This comic is a literary version of pulling a Fire Alarm at a talk about Men's Rights on college campuses by radical feminists, because of "reasons."

Garbage all around.


----------



## anonim (Apr 24, 2012)

*LittleDeer* said:


> I found this really funny. Thought some of the TAM women might enjoy it too. :smile2:
> This Avengers Parody Comic Perfectly Illustrates The Absurdity Of 'Men's Rights'


Alomost absurd as feminism.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

Men still have the physiological need for sex, but the young men today are much less willing to accept the covenants that legal marriage creates. Hence we have the ridiculousness of MRA as a response to the equally absurd agenda of the third wave feminists. Rates of marriage will decline as they have in Europe, eventually getting to the point when only securely attached partners will marry (20%). There are only three reasons why men fought to protect the liberties this country is built upon: God, Country & Family. Third wave feminists are doing their very best to destroy the latter. It's sad that women such as Friedan & Steinem have a platform to project their personal neurotic paternal deficits into the breach.
...
The truth is radically different than fish needing bicycles: Women are the air men breathe, and men are the water women drink. Neither will survive very long absent the other. 
..
One thought: Jung would argue the rejection of either the masculine or the feminine inside ourselves is self-loathing.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

Each of the issues that you note, Icey are indeed issues, however I don't think they moot the need for "Third Wave Feminism" - I think they raise questions that do indeed need answers. But I think saying one of those things is a bigger problem than another is saying that because X group of people has problems the problems of Y group don't matter as much. They are both issues. 

But when you present the front "male problems are more serious than female problems because .... Men" then that's the heart of the problem with MRA. 

First, I personally agree against mutilating children's genitals male or female and my son is indeed, uncut. 



> Because you think boys being only 40% of college students overall is a bigger issue than women being 35% of the students in Stem fields.


Is this honestly because of campus discussions about rape somehow killing the male psyche to the point they can't go to college? I seriously doubt that. 

How are we defining college here? A four year school? Are men going into more jobs that don't require a four year degree? And going to more technical schools or on the job training programs? Are men more likely to get jobs that don't require an education to have the same earning potential? What's the correlation between male earning potential and education level compared to female earning potential and education level?



> Because you think the fact that 80% of the homeless are male is a bigger problem than manspreading.


I have no idea what manspreading is. But one reason, unfair, and horrible but honest reason you are more likely to find men homeless is because in cases of dire need, a woman can likely exchange sex for somewhere to sleep, at least for one night.



> Because you believe that man representing 80% of the work injuries and almost a 100% of work related deaths is something that we should address before we worry about how many woman are ceo'S of fortune500 top companies.


Because men work jobs where that is more likely to happen. And most likely those jobs don't hire women to do them. I'm not sure that's really a male-female issue, that's a job safety issue. Regardless if you are male or female you shouldn't be getting injured and killed at work. If that's happening - why is it happening and why are we allowing it to happen?

I'm going to guess the answer is likely greed more than feminism. People want stuff bigger, faster, and cheaper, and sometimes ignore the human cost of that desire. 

-


> Because you think paying child support for 20 years for a kid that is not yours is immoral and unjust.


I have a personal bias here, so I'm not really the right person to comment on child support stuff because I had a father who never paid and got subsequent hell from my mother and later stepfather for it. 

However, I'm thinking one potential side-effect of the legalization of same-sex marriage will inevitably be a look at child support and spousal support laws and enforcements. I don't know how it can't be.

-


> Because you think ther should't be asentencing gap in the justice system.


Correct, not for men or women, and regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation. Let's add regardless of government elected position or wealth in there too. The law is the law regardless of who breaks it. We have a basic problem with that.



> Because you think falsely accusing someone of rape or domestic violence is a crime that should be prosecuted.


I want to agree with this, but from a logistical standpoint I don't know how to go about it. Because no matter where you set the bar for proof on either of those things, you are setting the standard for what someone can get away with and those are both really ugly things.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

Starfish ... One of the most obvious manifestations of female privilege is the ability to avoid working in the three D's.... Dangerous (firefighter, mine worker), Dirty (garbage collector, janitor), Deadly (soldier). This is precisely why female life expectancy is longer than male life expectancy. It's researched under the topic: male disposability. Perhaps you'll agree someone has to do these jobs and in many cases there is no making these jobs better/safer. Men are paid a premium for doing these jobs, and the feminists compare these wages to admins who work in offices.... ahhhh!


----------



## Icey181 (Apr 16, 2015)

Starstarfish said:


> Each of the issues that you note, Icey are indeed issues, however I don't think they moot the need for "Third Wave Feminism" - I think they raise questions that do indeed need answers. But I think saying one of those things is a bigger problem than another is saying that because X group of people has problems the problems of Y group don't matter as much. They are both issues.


You missed the point.

Third Wave Feminists are the ones who find it utterly ludicrous that things like Female-perpetrated domestic violence, Female-perpetrated sexual assault, etc etc _actually exist_.

The 3rd Wave does not simply say that those issues are "not as important," most of them seemingly reject they are issues, at all.



Starstarfish said:


> But when you present the front "male problems are more serious than female problems because .... Men" then that's the heart of the problem with MRA.


The problem with MRAs is that they are bemoaning their place in the world and demanding the Federal and State governments cater to them as a protected minority group.

Which makes my eyes roll into the back of my head. 



Starstarfish said:


> First, I personally agree against mutilating children's genitals male or female and my son is indeed, uncut.


Kudos

I cannot understand the cognitive dissonance which allows male genital mutilation on the grounds of aesthetics to be fine, but female genital mutilation to be a horrendous absolute evil.



Starstarfish said:


> Is this honestly because of campus discussions about rape somehow killing the male psyche to the point they can't go to college? I seriously doubt that.


Of course not.

That is a strawman you just concocted in order to pretend this is not a real issue.



Starstarfish said:


> How are we defining college here? A four year school? Are men going into more jobs that don't require a four year degree? And going to more technical schools or on the job training programs? Are men more likely to get jobs that don't require an education to have the same earning potential? What's the correlation between male earning potential and education level compared to female earning potential and education level?


Again, are you kidding me?

Are you really asking, "How are we defining college here?" 

Are you sure we should not start with, "What is the definition of is," first? I mean, if we truly are trying to redefine things to make up reasons why the growing education gap is not important, terminology is a good starting position.

Young boys are failing at math and science across the board in Grade School through High School.

Young men are representing less and less of overall collegiate populations across State and Private Colleges and Universities at _all levels_. It is becoming common to see gender divides which reach into the 60/40 or 70/30 break in favor of women at State universities. (With some interesting influences on sexual mores for women in those colleges…)

Men are receiving 77 graduate degrees for every 100 earned by women as of 2013.

Considerably smaller degrees of educational achievement deficits on the part of women in the 80s and 90s necessitated 20-years worth of dedicated funding and programs to get girls into math and ensure they were being accepted into colleges at historic rates.

And yet, for 3rd Wave Feminists, there is no demand that we give young boys a hand up like the country did for women.

But of course, the Patriarchy and all, so that actually makes sense.



Starstarfish said:


> I have no idea what manspreading is. But one reason, unfair, and horrible but honest reason you are more likely to find men homeless is because in cases of dire need, a woman can likely exchange sex for somewhere to sleep, at least for one night.


Actually, no, prostitution is not the answer.

The answer lies in the different degrees of state and federal funding directed at helping men versus women.

The fundamental difference in the social-welfare apparatuses directed at helping men versus women is immense.



Starstarfish said:


> Because men work jobs where that is more likely to happen.


And women just pick jobs which pay less. So we can safely ignore any and all claims to a pay gap as well, I assume.



Starstarfish said:


> And most likely those jobs don't hire women to do them. I'm not sure that's really a male-female issue, that's a job safety issue. Regardless if you are male or female you shouldn't be getting injured and killed at work. If that's happening - why is it happening and why are we allowing it to happen?
> 
> I'm going to guess the answer is likely greed more than feminism. People want stuff bigger, faster, and cheaper, and sometimes ignore the human cost of that desire.


Wow.

So it is the evils of capitalism that is at the center of it all.

I knew it! :wink2:

Still, that does not explain why I have never seen 3rd Wave Feminists demanding there be more Female Garbage Collectors, or Women working for slightly better than minimum wage to change my oil.

It is always and only STEM fields we need to help women with.

And I have yet to see a Feminist drive to help protect these men…



Starstarfish said:


> I have a personal bias here, so I'm not really the right person to comment on child support stuff because I had a father who never paid and got subsequent hell from my mother and later stepfather for it.
> 
> However, I'm thinking one potential side-effect of the legalization of same-sex marriage will inevitably be a look at child support and spousal support laws and enforcements. I don't know how it can't be.


Your personal issues are not a legitimate reason to force a man to pay for decades' worth of child support and alimony for a child that is not his.

Personally, I cannot wait to see a NYS court have a mental breakdown when they have to figure out which of two _men_ gets full custody of the kids and which gets to pay for everything.

Or even better, when they have to figure out which _woman_ gets custody taken away and replaced with 18-years of alimony and child support.

Should be fun. >



Starstarfish said:


> Correct, not for men or women, and regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation. Let's add regardless of government elected position or wealth in there too. The law is the law regardless of who breaks it. We have a basic problem with that.


The problem is of course that there is a systematic bias against holding women accountable to the same degrees as men for crimes.

If 3rd Wave Feminists were actually about equality they would demand all female sexual predators to go through the same system and punishments as men.



Starstarfish said:


> I want to agree with this, but from a logistical standpoint I don't know how to go about it. Because no matter where you set the bar for proof on either of those things, you are setting the standard for what someone can get away with and those are both really ugly things.


In other words, while you technically agree, you would rather avoid it.

Better we let women falsely accuse men of heinous crimes which ruin the rest of their lives than having to deal with those pesky issues like a burden of proof and all…


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Jung_admirer said:


> Starfish ... One of the most obvious manifestations of female privilege is the ability to avoid working in the three D's.... Dangerous (firefighter, mine worker), Dirty (garbage collector, janitor), Deadly (soldier). This is precisely why female life expectancy is longer than male life expectancy. It's researched under the topic: male disposability. Perhaps you'll agree someone has to do these jobs and in many cases there is no making these jobs better/safer. Men are paid a premium for doing these jobs, and the feminists compare these wages to admins who work in offices.... ahhhh!


In Aussie women can and do work as Firefighters, in the mines (in all areas from truck drivers, office admin, technical, Engineering. Our wealthiest woman is in the mining industry). We can be garbos, janitors and participate in the military.

Circumcision is rare these days with the exception of some Religions (male dominated so it is not the women doing this).

Yet we still have horrific domestic violence with the vast majority being perpetrated against women and children by men. Pay and opportunity inequality and plenty of other inequalities.

Seems we are in so many ways miles ahead of the culture in the US but even so women as a gender are still not equal to men.


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

Icey181, you have a rather ill-informed and skewed perception of what feminism is and what it's about. You seem to think that the extremist FemiNazi feminist is an accurate representation of all feminism, when that couldn't be farther from the truth.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

Holland said:


> In Aussie women can and do work as Firefighters, in the mines (in all areas from truck drivers, office admin, technical, Engineering. Our wealthiest woman is in the mining industry). We can be garbos, janitors and participate in the military.
> 
> Circumcision is rare these days with the exception of some Religions (male dominated so it is not the women doing this).
> 
> ...


But that's my point exactly ... women can choose. Choice is privilege, and for D/D/D jobs, women choose NOT to do them 95% of the time. Want you eyes opened to the research studies?
The Privileged Sex
...
US Bureau of Labor Statistics


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

Car insurance companies charge men on average more than women despite all rumours about "bad female drivers."

So, I mean here's some more statistics and graphs:

Fatality Facts

So are more work related deaths related just to female privilege of not having dangerous jobs? (Again, is that because women don't apply for these jobs, or because they aren't hired? If they aren't hired why?) 

Or does it follow that perhaps, just perhaps, men are more likely to also engage in risky behavior? Insurance companies gamble that they are. 

Also, while I know people hate definitions, what we defining as "Dirty" jobs? Women overwhelmingly work in healthcare and childcare and I'd say cleaning up other people's body fluids is certainly a dirty job. You also risk catching people's diseases like that nurse who caught Ebola. Just because women aren't as likely to die doesn't mean they aren't doing jobs that are dirty and dangerous, but dirty and dangerous in a different way. 

Why does everything need to be a fight about privildge? Don't we hate when feminists use patriarchy and privilege to argue against men?


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

Our unconscious mind is wired for a very simple goal: survival of the species. In those terms, one of the most valuable things in existence is a viable womb. ALL our norms, laws, cultural imperative have evolved to support this goal. On the Titanic? "Women and children first". The Bible? "Men must protect their family with their lives". This crosses all cultures and all traditions because it is rooted in the most *basic biological truth*. However, every privilege may also be viewed as a burden. Are you protected from death or prohibited from serving during military conflict? Want another example:
Women feel invisible at age 51
So why don't men look at random women the same way after 50? And why are men's second marriages commonly to a younger women? Womb viability ... nothing less than the pre-programmed survival of the species.
...
This most important protection (of women, their wombs and hence our species) is carried out by invoking privilege. Male disposibility is a contract to ensure female viability, and hence the survival of humanity. Most human males will gladly make these sacrifices. The hubris of the third waves feminists is to suggest these sacrifices men make are unwanted and unneeded. I cannot imagine a more insulting and disingenuous position.


----------



## Icey181 (Apr 16, 2015)

FeministInPink said:


> Icey181, you have a rather ill-informed and skewed perception of what feminism is and what it's about. You seem to think that the extremist FemiNazi feminist is an accurate representation of all feminism, when that couldn't be farther from the truth.


Unfortunately, no, I do understand what modern feminism is.

3rd Wave Feminism takes it intellectual foundations from post-modernist theories concerning the social construction of items such as gender, sexuality, et al.

The primary issue of course being that, unlike Aristotle who informed us millennia ago that mankind is by nature a social animal and that socially constructed items are both _real_ and _valid_, modern 3rd Wavers conflate "socially constructed" with "unnatural and wrong."

Combine that bastardization of post-modernist thought with 3rd Wave preoccupations with a ubiquitous "Patriarchy" that has demonized and subdued women since the dawn of western society and dash in some half understandings of discourse theory and viola…

…you get modern 3rd Wavers who quite literally believe that men, by their very existence within traditional gender roles, are constant sources of oppression for all women, whether that is through language, looking (the "male gaze"), or even spreading their legs so their balls do not stick to their thighs ("man spreading"), etc etc.

And to be honest, I am not even sure whether or not 3rd Wavers have ever come down on their issues with sex as of yet.

Some claim the very act of sex itself is gendered oppression (a left over from the closeted lesbians who used 2nd Wave Feminism to address their sexual identity in the 30s-70s) others think it is liberating, etc etc.

I have yet to see a coherent idea about sex come out of Feminists studies/theory classes, students, and professors.

3rd Wave Feminists subscribe to Patriarchy Theory as a first principle.

If you do not, then you are not a modern 3rd Wave Feminist.

They represent the formerly radical fringe of 2nd Wave Feminists and they happen to be disproportionally highly educated, high socio-economic status, white women.

Intersectionality is an issue with modern feminism precisely because it has become little more than a white-women's power movement.

Now, that is 3rd Wave Feminism, the _movement_.

I know a handful of self-identified Feminists who subscribe to partials or none of those ideas. They like the word "Feminism" because it creates a legacy-tie to the useful and generally well respected movements of the early 20th century.

Not because they subscribe to patriarchy theory and think that "Rape = Sexual Assault + Power" and therefore men cannot be raped by women, because by definition within a patriarchy, women have no real power.

The fun thing about moderate feminists of the current day however is that they are functionally non-existent.

They do not teach the Women's Studies classes. They do not offer briefs in support of items such as the Deluth Model or Affirmative Consent doctrines on college campuses.

They do not write articles in the NYT or show up as talking heads on MSNBC, CNN, and FNC.

They primarily log complaints on web forums declaring that people do not "understand" feminism.

Despite the fact that they have no actual influence on the political and cultural discourse where those "radical" feminists control the message.

There is a reason that when asked less than 25% of the American population self-identifies as feminists today.

And there is a reason that the vast majority that do are highly educated white women pursuing liberal arts degrees at State Universities.

I happen to be an American historian who has had numerous advisors whose specialties were Gender issues from Colonial to Modern American society.

I know the pre-19th century foundations of modern feminist theory better than most of those self-identified feminists.

For instance, I doubt many modern "Fight the Patriarchy" feminists could explain how their theories derive from Marxian interpretations of the development of Free Market Capitalism in Colonial America or how their conceptions of "gender's social construction" derives from ideological Republicanism as practiced in the Early Republic.

Then again, they do not care.

I am many things.

Ignorant of the history and or state of Feminism, both the ideology and the socio-historical movement, is not one of them.


----------



## Icey181 (Apr 16, 2015)

Personal said:


> My wife who still identifies as a Feminist, and was a prominent activist Feminist organiser (Third Wave) through the mid 1990's, does not think female perpetrated domestic violence and or sexual assault etc does not exist.


I did not comment on what your wife believes.

I commented on the general cultural responses that come from 3rd Wave Feminists.

There are plenty of women who self-identify as Feminists who do not actually subscribe to 3rd Wave doctrines and theories.

Point of fact; if your wife does not believe that a ubiquitous patriarchy has enforced unnatural gender roles on women in order to subjugate them, then she is not a 3rd Waver.

Part and parcel of that belief is a general contention that sexual assault and domestic violence perpetrated by women is either totally non-existent or that it is in some way caused by men and is not prevalent anyways.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

Who gets to define whether or not something is "natural"? And does something being natural make it moral? And what defines morals?

Also, I'm not sure you can argue something is natural for scientific, biological reasons and also use the Bible for reasons why it's done or lauded. As then aren't we arguing that gender roles stem from "nature" likely via human evolution and that biblical ideas just happen to fit into something happening anyways. In which case the Bible praising it is moot.

Also, what's with the need to drill down the whole history of the feminist movement with a "I know the truth" flag? It's like Robert Langdon in a Dan Brown book just intela-hurling facts to prove a point long since lost. You knowing the "true history" of feminism doesn't change fact.

Whether or not it had a biological basis, supposedly humans are not base animals and are capable of conscious thoughts and rational decisions. At some point, "we need to reproduce" stopped being a valid, logical reason for the way women were viewed historically. At a certain point, men of a certain standing gained political, financial, and social precedence as benefits for maintaining the status quo. The same status quo that allowed some groups of people to own and control others through slavery and oppression and feel justified. 

So why is feminism linked to other movements? Because racism, classism, and chauvinism come from the same place, one group wants to maintain their power at the expense of others. You joke about "oooh evil Capitalism" but really ...

The guy above you wins if he can convince you that your otherwise sad life is just that much better if there's someone to look down on and feel (if not be) superior to. Because if you keep looking down, you won't worry what he's up to.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

Case in point, who doesn't work dangerous, dirty, deadly jobs and who has priviledge? Whose children are safe from being that collateral damage?

Politicians who make boatloads, tell people if they just worked harder things would improve or that they will magically improve things and laugh all the way to the bank. Both parties, both sides, SSDD.

But as long as intellectual men keep all that ire towards women for having choice and being privileged and all this perception, the people with the real choices and privileged keep on rolling. 

We are just slowly screwing ourselves.


----------



## SurpriseMyself (Nov 14, 2009)

Pluto2 said:


> But if you're talking about media depictions, I think its the producers who only want attractive young women on TV, and only tend to see characters in one dimension.
> 
> The comics demonstrates some of the absurdities of MRA, I doubt the MRA will see it that way.


Just look at Fox News. Women wearing off the shoulder tops beside ugly men twice their age. We all know why.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------

