This video, perhaps better than any other I’ve seen, captures the entirety of gender dynamics in all its complex glory.
We see not only the common viewpoints and arguments between MRAs and PUAs…not only the typical brainwashed subhuman referred to a “male feminist”…not only the full force of the Feminine Imperative, captured on camera…but we see that this dynamic has not changed, at any point.
This video is from 1992; when Ross Jeffries (<3) was just helping to found the PUA Community and Mens’ Rights was beginning to gain notoriety.
Though over two decades old, this interview could have happened yesterday.
Here’s a recap for those of you who struggle with sitting still for any length of time:
–Any time the male feminist spouts out an idealogical platitude about how great women are / how bad men are / how men should change to better serve women, the audience–entirely female–cheers and claps
–Any time the PUA or MRA speaks, the audience is either silent, boos, or feels the need to attack the speakers. Their experiences, as men who are not ashamed of themselves, are subjected to the kind of shaming tactics which turn weak men into male feminists
–The PUA’s position is quite fascinating; he first (correctly) acknowledges that what matters to him most about women is what they respond to (as opposed to, for example, what they think they want or claim to want). He also mentions something which resonated with me but I’ve never heard verbalized before: that he kind of wishes he didn’t have to act the way he did to get so much pussy. There’s almost a kind of nostalgia about him for his “nice guy” days, and seems to assert with a tinge of sadness that his new persona is what works so well
–The MRA, first and foremost, disagrees with the PUA on the (accurate) grounds that he has changed himself to better suit women (albeit in a different way than the male feminist). He asserts that there’s more to life than sex, and that people like Jeffries shouldn’t change who they are just to get more pussy. While I’ve certainly undergone my own conscious personality change in order to get romantic success, I can certainly understand the MRA’s point of view on the topic.
However, his single best point, in my opinion, is that the fact that PUA works so damned well speaks volumes about the immature, fickle, emotional nature of most women. He sees the fact that women respond so well as a sign of their own shortcomings, and while he takes a more moral stance on the topic than I do, I find myself agreeing with this view to some extent.
Where the MRA goes wrong, in my opinion, is his moral stance on the nature of women. He looks down on such behavior primarily because he is comparing the nature of the feminine (changing, yielding, flowing) to the nature of men (firm, centered, grounded). Thus, he is using male nature as the standard by which he measures that of the female.
–The most depressing part of this video occurs when the MRA challenges the women in the audience to “say something positive about men.” After a room full of silence, he asserts his challenge again.
Not one women in the audience can think of a positive thing to say about men.
The show’s host trivializes an important question, laughing it off by encouraging an audience member to say “at least they pick up their socks.” If that doesn’t speak volumes about the way our cultural narrative has guided people to think about men and masculinity, I don’t know what does.
All in all, nothing has changed–except that as hypergamy has become even more unhindered, PUA has worked even better and MRAs have been given even less credence.
I think it is absolutely awesome that men like Jeffries and the MRA agreed to face the full wrath of the feminine to stand up for what they believe in as men, and it is my hope that more men will do the same.
Your voice matters; never allow it to be silenced.