Under the first few sentences, it states "As a part of the manosphere," however, the manosphere is described as promoting masculinity and misogyny, however, under my experience, the movement has been largely quite the opposite. Many times, misogyny inside of the community, at least the one I know, has been quickly pointed out and discouraged, and a large part of the men's rights community has been actively pushing against the supposed forced masculinity from society. I would like to know if this is a misunderstanding on whomever added that sentence, or a misunderstanding from me of what the male rights community truly is. I personally believe that this could be fixed by a simple "Some view this as a part of the manosphere." thus being neutral, but still getting both views into the text. Cheeseburger3 (talk) 06:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Many times, misogyny inside of the community, "at least the one I know, has been quickly pointed out and discouraged, and a large part of the men's rights community has been actively pushing against the supposed forced masculinity from society".
As well as a questionable opinion, might not this non-NPOV be aimed at down-playing the true level of misogyny and forced masculinity within this right-wing movement? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.175 (talk) 15:32, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
10: SPLC does not say that some branches of MRM are not hateful. It says that some branches use legitimate grievances to draw new members in, without meaningfully addressing said grievances; "instead directing followers to blame women [...] for everything". (To quickly locate the relevant passage, search for the word "legitimate" in the source.)
11 very clearly considers MRM hateful. Not sure how it can be argued it ties to the sentence is is linked to. 91.26.88.218 (talk) 12:11, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
In the mid-1970s, this movement began to focus on the oppression of men and less on the effects of sexism on women. This shift was influenced by author Warren Farrell and his book The Myth of Male Power. He emphasized how male gender roles disadvantaged men by forbidding them from being seen as caring or having emotion. The Myth of Male Power physically couldn't have done it in 70s because it was written in 1993 year. Farrell is indeed mentioned in the source, but not that way:
In 1971, educator Warren Farrell helped form the National Task Force on the Masculine Mystique within the National Organization for Women, an idea which quickly spread toover fifty local NOW chapters and provided a framework for the further development of the men’s movement. Farrell’s more lasting contribution to the growth of men’s awareness of their culturally limited options was his influential 1975 book The Liberated Man: Beyond Masculinity, which quickly assumed for men the place occupied in women’s liberation by Betty Freidan’s The Feminine Mystique. Its publication sparked the beginning of a separate men’s literature concerned with offering theories of and solutions to male oppression. Two viewpoints characterized this body of writing: acceptance of feminist criticism of masculine status and behaviors, and calls for the restoration of ‘‘traditional’’ masculine social roles. Among the more important works produced at this time were Herb Goldberg’s antifeminist The Hazards of Being Male: Surviving the Myth of Masculine Privilege (1976), and the anthologies The Forty-Nine Percent Majority: The Male Sex Role (1976) and For Men against Sexism: A Book of Readings (1977).
I delete the sentence from the article. Reprarina (talk) 12:43, 14 March 2024 (UTC)