Search Site • Hit Enter to Search
January 17, 2012
Fidelbogen Speaks
Alek, are you beginning to understand why I personally have discarded the label “MRA”? The root of this whole mess lies in the chaotic beginnings of political opposition to feminism. There was never any committee of advanced thinkers who sat down and drew up a central plan. There was never any VANGUARD. The whole thing just GREW. . . and it grew chaotically. And that is why we have such a mess nowadays. If a few wise heads had had the foresight to draw up a manifesto or mission statement circa 2003, then we would at least have a stable point of reference. Then, people could point to that statement and say “THAT is what “MRA” means, even if certain individuals have deviated.” Of course, MRA is merely ad hoc terminology. No stable meaning was ever assigned to it in early days. The reason for this, I think, is that “MRA” was never meant to be anything but an umbrella word. Or a big tent word. Well, when you set up a big tent and leave the door open, be prepared for the company you might be forced to keep. BTW, Alex, I am still pondering upon that “PUA” article that we discussed some time ago, and I will indeed be writing it (and youTubing it). I am more convinced than ever that the PUA movement is a big leech and a bad political bedfellow. Basically, I view that whole sector as parasitical, opportunist, and reactionary. Throw in “counter-revolutionary” while you’re at it. In a nutshell, they prey upon fear. And they are selling men a kind of “drug” which does not attack the root of men’s problems in today’s world. It offers only a “buzz” which lets men ignore those problems, so that the problems grow bigger and more entrenched. BTW: Check out the idiot who commented on my latest YouTube.
Alek, are you beginning to understand why I personally have discarded the label “MRA”?
The root of this whole mess lies in the chaotic beginnings of political opposition to feminism. There was never any committee of advanced thinkers who sat down and drew up a central plan.
There was never any VANGUARD.
The whole thing just GREW. . . and it grew chaotically. And that is why we have such a mess nowadays.
If a few wise heads had had the foresight to draw up a manifesto or mission statement circa 2003, then we would at least have a stable point of reference.
Then, people could point to that statement and say “THAT is what “MRA” means, even if certain individuals have deviated.”
Of course, MRA is merely ad hoc terminology. No stable meaning was ever assigned to it in early days. The reason for this, I think, is that “MRA” was never meant to be anything but an umbrella word. Or a big tent word.
Well, when you set up a big tent and leave the door open, be prepared for the company you might be forced to keep.
BTW, Alex, I am still pondering upon that “PUA” article that we discussed some time ago, and I will indeed be writing it (and youTubing it).
I am more convinced than ever that the PUA movement is a big leech and a bad political bedfellow. Basically, I view that whole sector as parasitical, opportunist, and reactionary. Throw in “counter-revolutionary” while you’re at it.
In a nutshell, they prey upon fear. And they are selling men a kind of “drug” which does not attack the root of men’s problems in today’s world. It offers only a “buzz” which lets men ignore those problems, so that the problems grow bigger and more entrenched.
BTW: Check out the idiot who commented on my latest YouTube.