A Difference: between MRM and Feminist Organisations.

Percy’s Anvil. 2

1. A Difference:

between MRM and Feminist Organisations.

Every year somewhere in the diffuse MRM, someone raises the issue of organisation. A few put forward an outline, the word spreads around various discussion boards, some debate takes place, the jeers arise

A few years ago a well known US MRA, the Gonzman, wrote a fairly comprehensive Manifesto and posted it on the old Colosseum Board of MND. It had eminently sensible features. I will be looking at that in another posting. But at the time the usual sound voices were enthusiastic and the usual jeerers spiked any serious debate.

On another occasion Mr George Rolph in the UK wrote a thorough Organisation Plan for a large and international effort to combat feminism which drew much support and again, discussion, before it too petered out. That was posted on MND too, and SYG, and a small group tried to advance it. It didn’t get far.

Both came in for the same mixture of positive and negative criticism – and no action.

Both had merit in abundance. They were based on the Real World and emphasised Truth. The Manifesto was clear and reasonable in its desires. It was fair, both to men and women, fathers and mothers and children. The Organisational aspects of George’s Plan were first rate.

It is notable in comparison that Feminist demands are almost universally based on lies, mendacities, exaggerations and significant bias.

Recently on Karl Mathews’ Anti-Misandry.com Board, another opening was attempted. That too saw its few days, a week or two, and disappeared in the smoke of minor flaming.

The MRM is good at talking and joking and disliking Feminists and creating discussion forums. But very few effective MRM Organisations that actually do anything exist. There are some local groups, particularly in California and the Eastern United States which seem to be doing useful work but even they are struggling.

Several intelligent ‘Independent’ men’s voices have become established – Glenn Sacks, Steven Baskerville, David Usher, Marc Rudov – and receive the usual mixed reception of praise and unnecessarily vitriolic criticism from within the MRM.

Individual ‘heroes’ get acclaim from time to time – Jolly Stanesby in the UK for instance and Ray Blomhorst in San Diego come to mind. Fantastic guys who need to be emulated. F4J did wonders in raising public awareness before it too fell due to internal bickering and back-stabbing.

Two small, under-funded, volunteer driven groups – RADAR and TEN – have made some very effective contributions. They are all praised and jeered, commented upon and largely not given MRM active support.

Yet, Feminist Organisations abound. And they get Political air-time. And money. Their demands get passed into law like hot shit off a shovel.

One can find a whole range of reasons why MRM organisations have not fared well, while Feminist ones have. Such reasons often focus on external factor: Politics; voting demographics; Marxism; conspiracies; but I want to mention one. To my mind the most important one. It is also a simple one which MRAs themselves can fix.

It is a Male – Female difference.

Their’s work. Ours don’t.

That is one Hell of a difference.

Yes, it is a gainsaid. But what is the difference that Makes It Work for them and so far, not for us?

2. Individual Attitude.

I put it to you that the major factor of difference is Humility.

Not that either women or men have it in abundance but it has different aspects in men and women. Call it lack of confidence, if you will. That’s usually how the negative aspect of humility is seen. It is also seen in over-confidence. It effects and is effected by Group.

It is a constant source of concern to men that women almost universally call themselves feminists. Even women who do not act like Feminazis. Even women who like men. Even women who are not ‘organised’ in some feminist dominated group. Even women who agree with most of the MRM platform.

Actually it is very easy for them. It is easier to agree with the label than to disagree with it.

And they constitute a co-operative Army.

Most women are usually unskilled, unthinking, unaware, and do as they are told or asked. They lack self-confidence and will do any small thing to shine in the eyes of other women, especially the more assertive ones. (it is why they constantly rattle on about ‘empowerment’). They will gravitate toward ‘groups’ even if that group is simply picking their noses.

And they don’t have to do much. Hold a sign, type a flyer, moan, ask someone to do something for them. (That, by the way is a powerful tactical weapon, and I will come back to it some other time). Doing something for the leader makes these women want to follow all the better.

All these women need is a pushy woman to lead them, ask them to do something simple, tell them what to do, and off they go, creating the desired mayhem. One pushy woman turns into a hundred noisy moaners all brandishing banners. They stop traffic.

They are like members of a regular Army. Troops. And it is the troops that do the daily sniping.

The politicians count heads.

Men on the other hand, especially young men, are all over-confident. They think they know everything. Every one is a friggin’ Chief, a hero in his own lunchtime. They are constantly trying to impress one another even when these others can see that they are unimpressive; they see because they are unimpressive too. Nyabonana - “We See Each Other”.

Turning young men into a group, a Team, and Army, takes tremendous effort. This effort is not helped by constantly repeating that men are team-oriented. Hah! Teams do not just ‘form’, they are MADE - usually by superior-skilled and superior-knowledgeable men. Men who have achieved.

Many men in the MRM are tried and tested men, fathers, ex-husbands, employees in Companies, maybe even small entrepreneurs. They compete. They know that to shine in another man’s eye means hard work. And many do want to be respected and valued in other men’s eyes, just like the women do. But they don’t want to be troops, and they do want to have strong noticeable, laudable achievements.

The shining lights in the MRM are the Independents. The Lone Rangers. They gave up on the MR Army a while back and get on with the job by themselves. And they cannot possibly win by themselves. They evoke quite a bit of jealousy. They get undermined by small minds in the MRM.

The MRM needs an Army of men, with much activity going on daily, everywhere. It isn’t always the big stuff that needs doing; it is the small stuff that makes an army.

Men – and women – in the MRM, MUST learn how to be followers. Followers of leaders, and willing to do as they are asked to or told to. Small things that don’t get readily noticed, but add up to the greater effort.

At the moment, most are like the camp-followers that enabled the small 14th Legion defeat the Saxon Army that outnumbered it 25 to one. A Saxon army lead by a woman.

The MRM must establish self- and imposed discipline.

I suggest that everyone who joins in the MRM prove themselves, in even small ways, before they are given much more than the time of day. No one should be permitted or enabled to criticise or belittle their more active, more effective betters until they have earned the right.

Every member of the MRM must show they are doing something, not just talking to the hand; their own friggin’ hand in many cases.

Learn humility.

Earn real confidence.

Every man in the MRM, and every women, should be accountable – report to – a more senior member. Mentorship, training, development and real leadership is a serious need.

And DO something.

Men in the MRM are constantly claiming to be DOERS, but show precious little activity.

Activity will be the basis for organisation.

Nyabonana - “We See Each Other”.

3. What could be done today, close to home?

So, big organisations don’t appeal? Can’t be done, yet? No leaders and followers handy? Look closer to home then. Go smaller.

Let us imagine a typical MRA discussion board. There are many. Discussion forums are the barrack-room of the MRM. Proto-leaders can be found there, along with all the over-confident and the repeaters, the loud mouths and the wannabbes – and a lot of damned good men and women who want to know what to do.

The discussion board takes a while to get going but it has been the ‘success story’ in bringing people together from all over the world, telling our stories, expressing our anger and hurt and exchanging information. But it has not evolved.

Consciousness has been raised but very little real leadership or effective action has eventuated. Boards degenerate easily into undisciplined and unfocused noise.

Many discussion boards are small communities with maybe a dozen or two regular contributors and several hundred hangers on who signed up, never to be heard of again. Not surprising as two hours perusing shows that little actually happens. They drift away. Each community ought to shift gear and become a small MRO. Within these small communities, great skill and effective fighting units could be developed. The energy, skills, interests, professional expertise and specific knowledge of the participants is presently wasted on idle moaning. People may stay and become active.

Try it out. There is nothing to lose.

Of the twenty-five regulars on a Board, four of five will stand out. We aren’t talking just of moderators here. Elect these outstanding people as your Company Captains.

Do a Poll. Include every regular poster. Every member chose your top five. Number them 5 to 1. Collate and calculate. Top five are it.

Crikey, i can think of five or six really sound people on each of four major boards who would make splendid group leaders. I am sure most everyone reading this who contributes to a board could make a list too.

So do it. Who would you chose as leaders? Who would you follow?

Each Captain should be responsible for tasking five or six people. Tasking. Setting, distributing, monitoring and evaluating small tasks. Making sure they get done. Effective, contributory things for the troops to do, in addition to just chatting in the barracks.

Whatever small but effective task that is needed. Each ‘troop’ must act and report. No iffs; no buts.

Ask the troops. Tell the troops. Persuade the troops. Seek the troop’s positive, constructive input.

Learn to be leaders in a way that works in the MRM.

Be troops. Learn to be followers. Learn how to contribute some ‘doings’ instead of just mouthings. Talk has become cheapened. Even I could be an effective troop, a follower.

If troops, the main body, the majority of the MRM members do not want to be part of the effort; do not want to go along with things they are asked to DO; refuse to do as they are told – what the fuck are they doing there at all?

Such idle bastards should go and join the feminists. They would be more useful to us there.

The Captains will elect one of their number, the acclaimed best amongst them, as Chief, the Colonel. That person is the Leader. He/she seeks the input of the Captains and decides strategic objectives and action objectives for the Companies of Troops. The leader issues Orders. What the leader wants, the leader gets. No iffs; no buts.

You now have a small organisation with three levels. A Leader; several exec officers; and a bunch of troops. In all maybe 25 to 30 of you.

Re-organise every 12 months. Promote on merit 6 monthly. Make new troops from Newbies with promise. Create roles as the breadth of activity increases. Elect another Captain. Specialise. Recruit people.

We need few chiefs and lots of Indians.

Some boards have rankings of contributors. Supporters, newbies, Moderators, whatever.

Newbies is fine for joiners, who can progress to Trooper, when they ask and can prove ability. They must prove themselves. Trooper is Honourable. It indicates an ACTIVE MRA. Use whatever name/title you like but so long as it is understood that they are valued as a member of a TEAM and TAKE ORDERS. They can make constructive suggestions.

And Honour the Captains. Do NOT permit Captains to be adversely criticised by troopers. A Captain’s authority has to be maintained by those above and those below. The disgraceful name-calling and ill-discipline that infects discussion boards seriously undermines the whole MRM. Have people use the pm systems for one on one rows.

Do whatever you think you can.

Set up an emailing battalion with a recruitment base outside the board, perhaps.

Appoint an ‘Educator’ for all the newbies. Include a woman.

All join RADAR and contribute $5.00, maybe. All join TEN. All get the Glenn Sacks and Jerry Boggs newsletters and updates.

Liaise and cooperate with other Boards instead of competing with them.

Develop letters to editors and target specific issues. Set a target of say one letter to an editor per person per week. From EVERYBODY.

Identify and go after a local or national advertiser who is misandric. Again set targets and meet them.

Collect news reports on specific egregious issues. Don’t leave everything to the Board provider.

Collect and collate data. Make it coherent. Publish it for all as a neat and brief argument.

As a sub-group of five, write one coherent Essay of 500 or 1000 words every week.

Get the Board’s publicly-seen face cleaned up.

Whatever.

I’m sure the leaders and followers can come up with twenty or thirty things to do.

The point is to DO SOMETHING as a group and several specialist sub-groups, in a disciplined manner, effectively.

Ignite the Boards.

It is hardly a surprise that so much harassing goes on from Feminist thickos and slags. Most MRA discussion boards invite snipers to interfere as they present as a disorganised rabble. Imagine yourselves facing a couple of dozen slovenly enemy troops wandering aimlessly down a narrow road. You’d think it was a turkey-shoot opportunity. That’s how Feminazis see most MRAs.

Shape up.

The MRM will become organised when someone starts to organise it.

That person is YOU.

The MRM, our men, our boys, our women and girls, our Society, NEED you to get the act together and lift your game.

Percy.