Currently a number of acronyms attributed to so called “men’s rights” groups have popped up in the discussion about the #Hanau terror attack.Regardless if they apply in this case (as far as I know analysis of the manifesto of the terrorist is not yet conclusive) it’s important to
bring to light what they mean and what kind of hateful ideology is behind them. Let’s start with MRM: it stands for Men’s rights movement, a term which spans over various sub groups that differ slightly in narrative, but overall have close links to racism and violent misogyny.
MRM believes that Western society actually discriminates against men, not women, and organised pushback is needed to fight this alleged legal, societal and economic discrimination of men. MRM sub groups are often affiliated with neo-reactionary strands of anti-progressivism.
It sees itself as an answer to third-wave feminism and regularly demonises female rape victims and women in general. Under the guise of alleged male discrimination, it is a hot bed of misogyny and commonly calls for violence against and suppression of women as well as a return to
“traditional” patriarchal gender roles. The various sub groups usually lean far-right and blame women and socialism for the perceived ills of the “suppressed man”. Feminists in their view are part of an oppressive matriarchal regime that indoctrinates women to suppress men.
MRA stands for “men’s rights activist/activism” and is often used synonymously with MRM. Incels have been prominently analysed before in public debate so unless you want me to, I won’t go into the Chad/Stacy ideology again, but focus on terms that may not be on your radar yet.
I’ll start by explaining the terms “blue pill” and “red pill”. A “blue pill” references a person who has not yet “woken up” and realised that they are living under a alleged matriarchy and are being suppressed by women on a daily basis. The term is a Matrix reference.
Opposite to that, a “red pill” refers to a person who has realised the alleged discrimination of society against men. “Red pilling” is also a common term amongst conspiracy theorists like 9/11 truthers. It is used in various right-wing “enlightenment” groups.
“Red pill rage” refers to the anger the newly awakened man feels once he has realised he has been suppressed this whole time. The so called “manosphere” has close links to the pick-up artist scene, abbreviated as PUA. Men and women are referred to as males and females as this
stresses the animalistic nature of interaction between men and women.I will now turn to some of the specific terms used within this scene and the concepts behind them. At the core of many of these groups is the belief that women mistreat men and use them for their money and looks
An “Alpha” is a man who is supposedly successful in sleeping with (lots of) women because of his commanding nature and muscular body. He is above “betas” and “omegas” in the imagined sexual hierarchy. A “beta” has not yet adopted the demeanour of the “alpha”.
An “Omega” can be referred to as a “neutral” - no beefed up jock for eg. This is why many PUA pride themselves as being “omegas”- they believe it shows the success of their misogynistic tactics and manipulation in getting women to sleep with them.
A “beta uprising” refers to what they believe will happen when “betas” and “omegas”unite and commit violence against women, thereby forcing them to choose their partners not on provided resources (money and status) and shitty behaviour but give “nice guys”(equally shitty)a chance
These so called “nice guys” - mostly used as a self-descriptive term- are frustrated because they allegedly treat women “nicely” but do not receive sex in return. Apart from how messed up this logic is, the combination of often antiquated gestures they perceive as “chivalrous”
come across as demeaning or creepy, especially when they are obviously tied to the expectation of sexual favours in return. Upon closer inspection, eg in message boards, these self-proclaimed “nice guys” often use incredibly derogatory language when it comes to women.
Behind this belief lies the assumption that women want to be treated badly and the only solution to receive sexual favours is to do just that. At the core of this is the toxic idea that a man, just by existing, has earned the right to sex and that it is unfair for women
to choose who they sleep with - it basically sees sex as a universal male right that female bodies have to provide. This is why the term “friendzone” is so inherently toxic, esp. as it’s commonly used outside of MRA circles as well. It constitutes the idea that the only reason
for relationships between men and women is sex - because women are not considered to be more than bodies and their only purpose is to provide sexual gratification for men. Being “friend zoned” therefore implies that something unjust has happened, that is against the natural
order of things. A common myth proclaimed in MRA circles is that women, before they got 30, sleep with as many “alphas” as they can, preferably those with higher socio-economic status than them(referred to as “hypergamy”)before they are rejected and “settle” for marrying a “beta”
who will then be stuck with a “toastie” - an intel term for a non-virginal woman, formed by the (insane) belief that the labia of a woman who has had sex resemble roast beef.
The cut-off age for the sexual value of women is deemed between 25 and 30, which is when they supposedly hit what is referred to as “the Wall”, therefore becoming unattractive to “Alphas” and “Chads” and “Betas” and “Omegas” and the rest of the alphabet are left to deal with them
This narrative aims to justify male violence - radical misogyny is always at the core of reactionary ideologies. It is one of the, if not the root of facism, as Theweleit showed in 1977 - it splits women into two categories, pure and “other”, or “threatening”
“What puts them adjacent to fascism is not only the copious links between incels, the “manosphere”, and the alt right, but the way that their culture, and their forums, work to shape their resentment, and channel their desires towards violence. This violence may not yet be...”
“... organised on a mass scale but it is celebrated as a natural end-point of their endeavours, and as a positive political value. This is a misogyny that desires the death of the other, and the chances are that we will look back on it as the harbinger, and the heart, of an even”
“more extensive program of violence... The worst thing we could do is to play into the cliches surrounding these radical misogynists, and not take them seriously.We should not take them at their word about the reasons they have taken the path they are on, nor should we negotiate”
with them on their demands, which are an affront to justice.”
Excerpts from theguardian.com/commentisfree/… by Jason Wilson who also offers a historic perspective on misogyny in the interwar period and how today’s incel culture can be traced back.
Excerpts from theguardian.com/commentisfree/… by Jason Wilson who also offers a historic perspective on misogyny in the interwar period and how today’s incel culture can be traced back.
While “Incels” are involuntary “celibate”, MGTOW are not. It’s stands for “Men going their own way” and promotes the seclusion of the male from all females, ergo male sepeparatism. Like incels, they fail to see women as individuals, rather than a large group oppressi them.
