The Case For “Men’s Rights Movement” MRM > “Gender Equality Movement” GEM And In Turn “Men’s Rights Activist” MRA > “Gender Equality Activist” GEA

'By definition, gynocentric societies don’t care about men’s rights, they regard men as disposable,

as slaves to women, children, and the state.'

By Mike Buchanan: In recent times we’ve been giving some consideration to how we might more effectively present our arguments to the public and the media, and the results may have implications for the broader Men’s Rights Movement (MRM).
Men’s Rights Activists (MRAs) have always had a presentational problem. By definition, gynocentric societies don’t care about men’s rights, they regard men as disposable, as slaves to women, children, and the state (although men’s income taxes largely fund the state). So it’s always been an uphill battle to get public interest in men’s rights, although much progress has been made, particularly in recent years.
So what alternatives might there be to “men’s rights movement” as a term, which could get better traction in the media, and with the general public? I’ve been persuaded that the term “gender equality movement” is the way forward, at least at this stage. Because of course if real gender equality – as opposed to feminist “gender equality”, which is invariably about extending female privilege over males – were to be enacted, either women (and girls) would need to lose privileges, and/or men (and boys) gain more rights.
This is true of virtually all 20 areas explored in our 2015 general election manifesto.
What do we demand in the case of (for example) MGM? Male minors to have the same protection from genital mutilation as female minors. The 1985 Female Circumcision Act (and subsequent amendments) need only be made gender-neutral. Simple as that. And easier to present to the public and media than the crime and harms and human rights violations inflicted on males by MGM, about which few care.
Feminists can do their worst at attacking the MRM, and have, fooling some gullible people that there’s something amiss about the movement. But they’ll have more difficulty attacking the Gender Equality Movement (GEM), or the associated Gender Equality Activists (GEAs), without simultaneously revealing their hostility towards gender equality.
Speaking personally, I’m happy to be described as a MRA or a GEA, and for the great movement in which I’ve worked full-time for many years to be described as the MRM or GEM. But henceforth I plan to generally publicly present myself as a GEA, and our movement as the GEM. I invite other MRAs to join me. In the meantime, I’ve changed the wording accordingly in two places in my conference profile.
I know some will say that the proper term to employ should be not “Gender Equality Movement”, but “Sex Equality Movement”, and technically they’d have a point. However, in common parlance, the two terms are interchangeable, and “sex equality” would surely cause confusion in the minds of those not steeped in gender political terminology, the vast majority of people.
Please let us know what you think of the reframing away from “men’s rights” and towards “gender equality”. Thanks.

Source