I have no problem with the bulk of what you’ve said, I have no problem with the idea of complementary roles because these absolutely do exist. In a world where we weren’t forcing our girls to go out and work and preaching to them independence, most of them probably would fall into a role of a homemaker.

All I really ask is that we have some sanity and realize that not everybody is the same. Not every man is going to be bulky and brawny, and not every girl is going to be delicate and feminine. Some men are going to prefer staying home or be on the sensitive side, just like some women are going to be rough and rugged and be on the independent side.

So, while I am here, I ought to make some corrections to the analysis given in the article.

The so-called “men’s movement” (whatever THAT is) is not “imploding”. The truth is quite the opposite — it is EX-ploding. Growth of numbers is boosting the inherent tensions and bursting the patched-over consensus of earlier days. This is the classic pattern for new movements, new religions, new cultures, etc. Just study history.

You guys are not something apart from the so-called “manosphere”. You are part and parcel of it, and partakers in the diversity of it. The “men’s movement” is exploding, and you guys are just one of the many fragments now being propelled outward by that explosion.

That’s right, Groin.Com people — YOU TOO are part of this vaguely defined thing called “men’s movement”, whether you like it or not. So don’t feed us any more of your krapp-a-loo-la!

All that aside, I find your game transparent. What you are doing, in a nutshell, is narrative building. You are projecting a phony construct which you call “the men’s movement”, and then defining yourself in opposition to that projection so as to create a fabricated history. In this way, you hope to draw numbers of people into your narrative so you can position yourself as a dominating force on the gameboard.

But of course, your narrative is a fabrication. And what you are attempting is just a good ol’ fashioned power grab. It’s the age-old game of politics, but the problem is that you guys are helping to prop up feminism in order to construct your egos. And you are engaging in some classically feminist behavior, too.

Which feminist behavior do I mean? Well, lying, for starters. . .

Also, if you take the definitions to be based on traits conferred by sex hormones, then it is a perfectly objective measure. There are objectively masculine and feminine brain structures.