Going back to Kimmel, he asserts that a chief failing of the Men’s Rights Movement, is their, to be frank, racism, classicism and homophobia; he argues that the MRM is largely a middle-to-upper middle class, straight White Male thing, which actively eschews the inclusion or involvement of Men of Color, Gay Men, or Men from the Working Classes. Given that I am known by some as “the Blackest Man of the Manosphere”, I must say that Kimmel has a quite valid point. In your book, while you do mention Men of Color, it seemed rather clear to me that you spoke more to White Men who were more in line with what Kimmel has said in his book “Angry White Men”; this, despite the fact that you interviewed Men across the country. I am curious as to why you didn’t seek out, to be frank, Men like me? I ask because, it has always been my view that Men of Color in particular have a unique contribution to make in the MRM saga; as we go, so go our White brothers. In your view, do you see this as a major problem for the MRM to resolve, or no, and why?I do not actively eschew anyone's involvement in Game-related intellectual endeavors, I simply don’t give a damn about the problems of other cultures, societies, and civilizations. Western civilization is my sole societal concern. Obsidian is focused like a laser on a community I care nothing about; when he is waxing on about “Bruthas” and “Sistahs” and threatening to start “chin-checkin foos”, it has no more relevance to me than the pressing problems of women in Heian Japan.
DR. HELEN: I did talk to some Men of Color in my book, for example, Carnell Smith, who I mentioned earlier is African American and so were several interviewees such as a man named “Jerry” in the end of the book who I used as an example of a man who understood how to use the legal system to make sure that he was not charged with unfair child support or false domestic violence charges.
I think that what Kimmel is attempting to do and what many anti -men’s rights types want to do is make the MRM look like a bunch of nasty racists who do not include others and some of them might even be (gasp) Republicans! It is a way of marginalizing the MRM even further. This is a mind-hit being used to make the MRM seem out of the mainstream and weird. It is anything but. Millions of men and some women across the US believe that men are entitled to reproductive rights, due process and liberty just as women are.
I think that the MRM can cut across all demographic groups because as you mention, Men of Color have much to add and many of them have encountered severe sexism in the form of domestic abuse charges and jail time for lack of child support payments for kids that are not even their own. Many Men of Color in the NFL and sports world are keenly aware that women can falsely accuse them of rape and paternity fraud is so rampant that Kanye West has a whole song written about it. I have come across many Men of Color in my work who have been treated unfairly by the legal system in domestic disputes, so much so that they have a sense of learned helplessness about such issues. I would hope that all men would be welcome in the MRM.
Following up on my question above, I note that you cite two very well known bloggers in the Manosphere, who would be considered to fit Kimmel’s characterization like the proverbial hand in glove: Chateau Heartiste, formerly known as Roissy, and Vox Day, of the blog Alpha Game. Both have been cited for their racist views of people of color, and neither seem particularly interested in being inclusive of Men of Color under their tents (in fact, I would go so far as to say that they are both actively hostile to such inclusiveness – I say this based on direct observation and experience of both). As noted above, their astute observations and the like, many of which I do agree with, are utterly undermined by their racism, and gives folks like Kimmel, et al a smoking gun with which to discredit the entirety of the MRM cause. I am curious to know if you had known this prior to the completion of your book, and if so, why you found it necessary to cite them as sources in any event?
DR. HELEN: I don’t have any reason to believe that Roissy or Vox Day are “racist.” I do think that they are astute observers of male and female behavior in today’s society and that is why I chose to include them in my book.
I don’t live in America. I don’t speak Jive. I don’t care any more about what is or is not taking place in Obsidian’s community than he does about what is taking place in mine. That doesn’t mean I don’t wish him well, or recognize that there are some issues that affect his community in the same way that it affects mine. But Obsidian might as reasonably declare himself to be racist because of his actively eschewing the concerns of South Korean men. Furthermore, it is amusing to hear him claim that I have anything against Men of Color considering that I am a bona fide Man of Color myself.
This strikes me as little more than the usual magical thinking and a Black man complaining because the Magic White Man isn’t solving his problems for him. Kimmel’s criticisms are irrelevant; almost all social change springs from the educated classes for the obvious reason that they are the only ones intelligent enough to ever accomplish anything. Moreover, it is excess inclusion that has destroyed American society, more inclusion will only hasten the ongoing collapse and the eventual triumph of barbarism.
The raciss card was played out years ago. The complete failure of desgregation is more than apparent to everyone. No amount of labels and attempted disqualifying will change the readily observable fact that the Civil Rights Movement in America was not only a failure, it was a societally destructive catastrophe.
Either my observations and Roissy's observations are true or they are not true. That is the sole relevant metric. They cannot be undermined by racial preferences anymore than they are undermined by sports team or ice cream preferences.