The MHRM/MGTOW philosophical idea of Gynocentrism dare not say it's name.

I have distanced myself a bit from the broader Men's Human Rights Movement, but, not because of not being a Men's Human Rights Advocate. It is because it is very clear that there seems to be a bit of an issue with this movement and one particular word. That is the word Gynocentrism and what it really is talking about. What the fundamental aspects of this Gynocentrism are really made up of that makes it so appalling. 

The truth is that philosophically what is so appalling about Gynocentrism is altruism as it was defined by the founder of the philosophy one Auguste Comte. Whom was a known extreme left-utopian/dystopian and one of the founders of the formation of the non-science of sociology. He also was a quack that decided to create a "religion of Humanity." Which was an insane way of trying to make a heaven on earth. 

A key part of August Comte's view being altruism or the idea that what is moral is to live for others. As opposed to being selfish which is defined as looking after self and what the self finds is in its best long term interests and rational good. However, this view was not original it was he simply extended it to be in a secular context and removed the inclusion of God. All religions are altruistic in the philosophical definition as none of them say being selfish is good and they hate the mind. The one thing that is anything like a "human soul." 

Our neuron networks, our brain and our person is that which mystics mistake for a soul. Mystics of mind either are ignorant, or evil and simply evading the fact our brain structure/our mind is what makes us human just as much as the rest of the functions of our body. There is no mind/body dichotomy. For our mind is in our brain and that is the core of our body and its functioning in so many ways. 

Thus altruism which says we should live for others at the expense of ourselves is basically a slow death sentence. It is choosing a long slow suicide for the sake of others living like being the energy source for a world of parasites and vampires. How is this philosophical Gynocentrism? Well, how is Gynocentrism as a moral philosophy anything, but, altruism taken to its most extreme. It is simply taking the floating-abstraction other and giving it an image that of the female human of the species. 

Gynocerntrism is a collective death sentence for males saying to all men to live for women and die for them too. It is a collectivism within a collectivism a gendered division within the greater altruism and societal collectivism of both genders. Except it's ideas are targeted towards men and manipulate men's natural tendency to desire to protect and provide for women with ideas that one should always act on such instincts. As a blank check without thinking about what it means for the self of that man. 

There are two Gynocentrism's; the natural instincts to protect women and children and the "philosophy" which says all women need saving and you the man are the one to do it. The philosophy is altruism writ large over all men on a collective scale. It collectivizes all men as wanting the same thing. Even if these instincts exist not all men want, nor should need to have a woman or children around; let alone protect them at the expense of their own life. It is the anti-male division of the greater collectivism we see in society. 

Yet, the Men's Human Rights Movement never seems to bring it up. Neither does MGTOW which has now made it too susceptible to collectivism. As Men supposedly going their own way make their own collectivist shrieks and shrills of "all women are evil." Which is simply taking the Feminist idea of male Patriarchy and reversing it calling "all women toxic." Even if a lot, hell, a good portion of women in the modern day are toxic in their views of men, especially feminists, that does not equal a collective "all women." 

A truly liberating movement for men would champion individualism and not collectivism. For it is collectivism that is at the heart of Philosophical Gynocentrism and it is that which fueled the existence of a feminist movement. Feminism with it's all men were evil throughout history views are simply one more modern version of collectivism. Which is itself a manifestation of altruism's core tenants of living for others like a servant at the expense of ones own self-worth and value. To live for women by women's social rules has always been nothing more than altruism brought to bare to men. 

It has always taken the natural instincts of protecting and providing for women/children within ones own relations and extended that to being "living for all women and all children everywhere." I am not arguing men protecting the women they love and their children is wrong. Hell, that would be to go against the reality of men's evolved psychology and a core of masculinity. However, I contend Philosophical Gynotheism, as was coined by Youtuber Jay Double Gee, is instincts gone insane. Pushed upon and unleashed without reason or rhyme on purpose. 

Not as part of some conspiracy or any such tin foil views of the extremer MGTOW's out there. It came into being because irrational people drank the kool-aid that collectivism was good and act ignorant. It is also very possibly a reaction to the ever more expanding freedom of expression of women's own psychologies being gone unchecked by being told to "shut the fuck up special snowflake." Thus pushing ever more worse collectivism and Philosophical Gynocentrism through men reacting at a more instinctive level and less reasoning manor to women's exposed evolved psychologies. 

That freedom without understanding of individualism vs collectivism can unleash collectivist attitudes on us. Through unleashing the more wet-ware instincts on a massive scale without the rational mindset to go with them. That in a sense altruism which is core to collectivism has taken something which is beautiful in the right context; protection of others not at expense to self, but, because those saved are a high value.. Having replaced it with not protecting, but, complete self-sacrifice and suicide to "save everyone, but, the self that is a man because my being is to be sacrifice itself." 

The MHRM needs to address collectivism, but, to do that it needs to address the core tenants of that philosophy called altruism. Not the tit for tat and win/win benevolent reciprocity and mutualist aspect of our human instincts, but, complete and utter self-sacrifice. The idea that win/lose is noble, but, win/win is bad because a win/win feeds the self its "spiritual fuel" as Ayn Rand would say. The MHRM if it is serious about the rights and liberty, hell, liberation of men needs to stand up against the altruist-collectivist origin of the movements it is against. It needs to be a beacon of individualism and let manhood be all about that.

A Voice for Men headlines fostering In-Group thinking

Last night I was looking at A Voice For Men and came across an article stating that men should start using "we." Thar men should use it to talk about men as to foster the ability to think of themselves as in-group with other men. That women use the term all the time to foster in group solidarity as a sex/gender and thus men should start doing so as well. Using terms like ourselves as opposed to other men or words such as that. The Author whom goes by the name Andy Man also says that men should be something called Zeta Males and that males need to begin making connections with each other without regard for women. The term from what I can see is something made up entirely by himself.

One of things I noticed is that he was using Zeta Male as basically a different term for being a MGTOW essentially. What he seemed to be saying was that men should start to become MGTOW to an extreme. Not just not marrying or anything, but, instead men should not bother associating with women socially at all. While there is nothing wrong with this it seems that he forgets that women are not some collective "woman." I am not arguing against the idea of men being social with each other exclusively nor against developing a brotherly relationship with the men in your life. What I do have issues with is the idea that men should start saying, "we."

It sounds to me like the building blocks for a tribalism around sex/gender among men. Which is no better than sex/gender tribalism based around a "collective woman." There is no collective suicide or collective workplace accidents. Individual men are experiencing these; "we" are not. Anymore than a collective woman is experiencing things that women might experience as the Feminist Narrative says. When I watched the International Conference on Men's Issues I found myself appalled at the language used calling "women as a class doing this." So, there is a class called woman and a collective woman that is doing all of these bad things to men. How is this any better than Feminist Theory stating everything bad that happens is due to some "collective man?"

I am against all forms of tribalism irregardless what it is built around. I do not condone the idea of the MHRM becoming some sort of tribalism around men. I hope the MHRM does become a new collectivist movement in social war with the already collectivist Feminist movement. We does have legitimate uses when it comes to talking about you and other people in your life doing things together. However, this is not "men," as some sort of collective. This would be the individual men in your life you are currently doing something with. As it would be any women you are doing things with that too would be a "we." Also, such a "we" is really just multiple 'I's." One needs to fend off tribalism where they see it creeping up.

Victim is not code word for female or feminine. Being a victim does not remove a man's balls.

Recently the #MeToo has blown up on Twitter following the exposing of Harvey Weinstein within Hollywood. During this time many men started trying to include their own stories of being victims of sexual assault or sexual harassment. Yet, as soon as these men came out as being at one time victims they were told they were not to talk because it was taking the light off of "the real victims women." That they were trying to take the wind out of the sales of the hashtag.

There was a serious lack of any empathy for victims that was not within their own sex/gender. A serious lack of any caring about the stories that men had to share. Men came out about being molested, raped, harassed and what are they told to sit down and shut up because the women are talking. Or even more shameful when it was looked over these men were told they knew what it was like to be a woman. Or told other men would now be their enemies because they were exposing feminine traits.

No, these men are not now "female typical." No, these men are not now feminine because some low life abused them and used them. In fact, a fair number of the people that came out talked about women as perpetrators and not other men. So, where is the "toxic masculinity" in these experiences? Surely, if you were to call it toxic anything surely it would be toxic femininity. It does not take having a vagina to be a victim in this world. Any human can be a victim and any other human could victimize as we are all human.

Victim is not a code word for females or feminine. The last time I checked male victims of sexual predation did not get their genitals cut off. Nor the last time I checked is there any sort of historical standard of only women or feminine people being victims. Men die all the time at the hands of both sexes. Men get abused and attacked by both sexes. Men get raped, molested and exploited as well not just women. Men of all shapes and sizes. From the most chiseled abs to the skinniest bro all of them can become victims at the hands of a vile piece of trash low life.

There is an empathy gap here between men and women. Women like those seeming to pop up in this hashtag are actively helping to widen the gap between this empathy. Men whom are victims should not be met with women saying they matter more because they are women. There needs to be just as much acknowledgement of men being human and worthy of empathy as any woman that has been abused. In addition, men should not be seen as having their balls removed due to being a victim at some point. Men do not become more feminine due to being victims at some point. Male victims remain all man.

I am Not A Feminist nor am I a chauvinist

Male Privilege is a Myth