There has been quite a bit of nonsense written recently around this corner of the internet regarding the relationship between Christianity, and its patriarchal value system, on the one hand, and the men’s rights agenda, on the other. Specifically, claims are being made here, for example, to the effect that because the men’s rights activist community (MRAs) is a diverse group which includes many secularists who embrace various aspects of the contemporary “liberal” (classical or progressive) scene, it is therefore to be shunned as worthless, and traditional Christians, at least, should avoid participating in it.
This is an understandable, yet fundamentally misguided view, for the following reasons.
- MRA is neither a religion nor a political party. The MRA community is not organized around a specific ideological agenda or religious belief or identity system. It is organized around one basic idea: improving the lives of men in the here and now real world, in brass tacks terms. What does that mean? It means that MRAs are all over the map in terms of ideological disposition, religious affiliation (or none), and political engagement. What unites MRAs is a common sense that men are not being given a fair deal in the real world, and that men need to share ideas about how best to rectify this situation.
- MRA is about practical issues facing men. This means that the MRA world is primarily focused on the following: what problems men are facing in our society currently and what can men do, collectively and individually, about these problems. It is a pragmatic focus, and one which, of necessity, transcends ideological and religious convictions.
- MRA does not offer “one size fits all” solutions to men. Because the MRA is a diverse group, the solutions that men within the MRA community come up with for the various problems facing men are also diverse. In other words, MRA does not propose that all men do “X”. Rather it offers varied solutions to men based on their own personal situations, and personal ideological/religious commitments, all with a view to alleviating or mitigating the problems that all men face in the current social, legal and cultural environment. It’s claimed by some in the traditionalist and Christian communities, for example, that MRA is insistent that no men marry. There are certainly some MRAs who are insistent about that, but this kind of blanket statement about MRA as a whole overlooks the many married MRAs who propose no such thing, and instead propose other solutions for men who are inclined, for religious or other personal reasons, to seek marriage with a woman. Again, the MRA is a clearinghouse of strategies for men given the current social, cultural and legal situation that we face – it is not a one-size fits all “programme” which advises all men to follow the same path.
For a Christian who is engaged in the MRA community, it’s clear that there are things that are expressed in the MRA community that are not Christian. But this should be no more surprising to a Christian than the fact that what he might encounter in a political party, or other non-religion-based group, may also be inconsistent with Christianity. That’s because neither MRA nor a political party is a religious organization, but rather is something that brings people together, regardless of their religious commitments (or none) around common ideas or problems. In the case of political parties, this commonality is increasingly a political ideological commitment. In the case of MRA, the commonality is the shared experience of the difficulties men face in the current environment, together with the conviction that by banding together to share ideas, experiences, and strategies, we can enhance the ability of all of us to avoid some of the worst pitfalls the current environment throws at men, while nevertheless pursuing whatever goals any particular man may have in life, be they based on religion or something else. The specific ideas, strategies and solutions offered, however, are diverse – as one would expect in any group which draws people around an idea or an issue, rather than around an identity.
So, the solutions offered in the MRA community run the gamut from “men going their own way” (which can either be secular or religious, by the way), to “pick-up artists” (which, again, can be used in various ways), to “running married game” (the idea being to maintain happy marriages and avoid divorces) to political activism (changing the laws that impact male/female relationships to be more fair) and beyond. These solutions are inherently contradictory because no man is expected to pursue all of them! The idea is to be a clearinghouse for different kinds of approaches based on what a particular man seeks to get out of life – which in turn will be informed by his own ideological, cultural, personal, and religious orientation, something he brings to the MRA and keeps with him thereafter.
In reality, this is not very different from the experience of belonging to a political party. I know many Christians who are Republicans and many Christians who are Democrats. I don’t know very many of them who, despite their political ideological commitments, agree with everything either party stands for, or who agree with everything every other member of their party says or advocates. Yet they remain in their political parties because that kind of diversity of views does not obscure what holds them in common – and it isn’t religion (Christians being represented pretty well in both parties). This kind of “well I don’t like what some people in that party say, therefore I can’t be a member” isn’t something that most Christians – whether Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox – really consider very much when picking a political side. It’s taken as a given, rather, that much of what each party holds will be, to some degree, inconsistent with this or that aspect of Christianity, because these parties are, after all, broader coalitions of people who are Christian and not Christian, and are not organized around Christianity as such (at least not normally). The MRA is similar to this in that a certain amount of what is advocated in terms of personal solutions for men is not consistent with Christian teaching, in the form of specific solutions, but these are not the specific solutions Christians will generally pick from the clearinghouse. Instead, Christians will pick other solutions that generally suit their own life goals and orientation, based on their faith, from the MRA clearinghouse of strategies. And they will not feel alienated from other MRAs who pick other strategies because what binds them together is not the individual coping strategies that they select, but, again, the underlying, common conviction that men face daunting and novel difficulties in the current social, legal and cultural environment, and that all men can do better in this life, in practical terms, by sharing experiences, ideas, and strategies.
Therefore, the notion that Christians, or traditional Christians (or what have you), should shun MRA is not only wrong, but is terribly bad advice for the men who are Christian or traditionalist Christian and yet are suffering in the current environment. No traditionalist Christian church is really going to give a man advice as to how to maintain his marriage, in brass tacks rather than pie in the sky terms, given the cultural messages that even his devout Christian wife is constantly bombarded by, for example. No traditionalist Christian church is going to tell men what actually attracts women in the current climate (yes, including traditionalist Christian women). No traditionalist Christian church is going to lobby the state governments to change the family law, as Glenn Sacks and his group do tirelessly on behalf of all men (oh gosh, Glenn is actually politically liberal, which I guess to a traditionalist means he is undeserving of their support despite all of his hard work on behalf of all kinds of men, including traditionalist Christian men). Rather traditionalist Christian men could benefit greatly by participating in the MRA community, in pragmatic ways that their churches are simply not in a position, or even inclined, it would seem, to provide.
One final note. It’s often claimed by traditionalists – Christian and otherwise – that the MRA is a tiny, insignificant group compared to the robust, fecund traditionalist community. I think this is a big misperception. MRA is growing by leaps and bounds these days, especially among younger men. It isn’t an “organized movement”, but rather a set of ideas that is now in quite wide circulation. Just 5-10 years ago, the kinds of memes addressed by the MRA community about the current situation and environment were not widely present to any significant degree in the public discourse. That has changed to a substantial degree, a recent example being the interesting comment thread at Kay Hymowitz’s Wall Street Journal op-ed this past weekend, where a huge number of the comments reflected MRA memes to one degree or other. In fact, MRA memes are catching on to such a degree that it’s clearly bigger than the very small traditionalist community, despite the latter’s presumed fecundity (often overstated because many traditionalists are white hairs). This makes sense, because MRA is not tied to any political or religious commitment, but rather to the common, shared experience of men – a very broad commonality indeed. Therefore, these kinds of claims about MRA being insignificant as compared with traditionalism are rather misplaced and, to me at least, represent wishful thinking rather than the actual facts on the ground, as it were.
*Dislcaimer: The author is a layman of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
{ 305 comments… read them below or add one }
{ 3 trackbacks }