Mehr über die Frauen der Männerbewegung
Auf den Seiten des internationalen Lifestyle- und Jugendmagazins Vice (siehe ausführlicher hier) findet man heute einen mega-ausführlichen Beitrag über die Frauen der Männerrechtsbewegung.
Für die ständig sinkende Zahl von Menschen, die noch nichts von dieser Bewegung gehört haben, wird in diesem Beitrag auch ihre Geschichte kurz umrissen:
The origins of the Men’s Rights Movement are murky. If you go back you can find mentions of groups like the League for Men’s Rights in late 19th-century London (it advocated against the "encroachment of women") and Der Bund für Männerrechte, or the Federation for Men’s Rights, which formed in Vienna in 1926 and focused on divorce and paternity rights but also "fighting all the monstrosities that have come from the emancipation of woman."
The modern versions of Der Bund für Männerrechte formed as a backlash to second-wave feminism and the burn-your-bra career gals of the 1970s it inspired. The most notable organization of the era was the National Coalition for Men, which still exists today and seeks to "promote awareness of how gender-based expectations limit men legally, socially, and psychologically." The idea that men are oppressed by society was later championed by Warren Farrell, whose 1993 book The Myth of Male Power inspired Elam and many other current-day men’s rights activists (MRAs).
Alex Brook Lynn, die Autorin des Beitrags, beginnt, sich insbesondere für die weiblichen Männerrechtler zu interessieren:
As I read their posts and watched their vlogs, it struck me that the feMRAs, especially Karen and Janet, were articulating their theses surprisingly well, more so than many of their male equivalents. Like most MRAs, they’re essentially egalitarians who are in favor of discarding traditional gender roles; Janet is a staunch liberal who supports LGTB rights, legal abortion, and civil liberties for all. I wanted to find out how these clearly intelligent women could say the things that they did, and Dean Esmay, AVFM’s managing editor, helped me contact them after vetting me over the phone. Soon I was chatting with the Honey Badgers about everything from Jay-Z and Solange to Sharia law to rape allegations. I eventually got invited to the Honey Badger Brigade podcast by Alison Tieman, one of the group’s founders, and came to know a lot of feMRAs.
It’s unpleasant to defend people who throw around words like cunt, bitch, and whore while talking about about gender, but I must admit that in my conversations with them the Honey Badgers drew my attention to things I had never thought about before and even convinced me some of their grievances are legitimate. I now believe male circumcision could be described as "genital mutilation" and we shouldn’t be so casual about performing it. I also think that society is too eager to accept women being physically violent in relationships, and that we need to start talking about due process in regard to rape allegations, even if the conversation is uncomfortable. Almost against my will, I found myself liking the group and marveling at their diversity.
Außer mit ausführlichen Porträts der bekanntesten Männerrechtlerinnen beschäftigt sich ein längerer Teil des Artikels mit dem Für und Wider der Frage, ob der polternde Tonfall vieler Männerrechtler der Bewegung hilft oder schadet:
Though this sort of language probably helped AVFM get called out for misogyny by the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2012, the general consensus among the MRAs I’ve encountered is that bombast like Elam’s is worth it—the tone might alienate a few potential allies, but it also brings a lot of attention to the issues. (In the case of the quote above, the issue is that the media treats violence against men as a joke.)
"There is a lot of over-the-top, strange, hyperbolic, polemical, deliberately provocative stuff in this movement," Janet wrote to me one day. "Do I agree with everything anyone who calls themselves an MRA publishes? Are you fucking nuts?!? Of course not. But I realize that those early, angry movers were utterly essential to the movement emerging. And now, we are in a different place in the dialogue and the conversation needs to shift a little."
One of the more notable results of this "shift" is that more and more activists have referred to their cause as the Men’s Human Rights Movement in an effort to emphasize a link to the broader notion of human rights.
"There have to be reasonable and rational calm voices in this movement." Karen said. "But it’s not going to be very effective if that’s the vanguard." Janet, Karen, and the rest of the Honey Badger Brigade themselves at the forefront of that vanguard, the tip of the spear that will pierce through all the illusions of feminism, one diatribe at a time.
(...) Under all that page-view-grabbing vitriol, what do MRAs want? Are they trying to change the world or just speaking to an increasingly embittered choir? It seems unlikely that the MRM, in its current state, will metastasize into political viability, partly because so many activists have an aversion to how politics is practiced in the real world. Trying to get legislation passed would inevitably mean softening the tone and would force the MRM to compromise on some issues. And it’s way more fun to cause a ruckus.
Und genau in diesem Spannungsfeld befindet sich die Männerbewegung tatsächlich: zwischen den Polterern auf der einen Seite, die offenkundig gar nichts anderes vorhaben als Dampf abzulassen und für die ernsthafte politische Arbeit z.B. bei MANNdat ein Graus wäre, und den Leisetretern beispielsweise des Bundesforums Männer auf der anderen Seite, die so wenig fordern wie möglich, um ja nirgends anzuecken, und somit ein Tempo vorlegen, das dazu führt, dass die vielen berechtigten Anliegen von Männern vielleicht im Jahr 4500 angegangen werden.