Right, because when I think people I trust to accurately represent and report the opinions of MRAs, I think The Mary Sue and David fucking Futrelle.

Idiot.

Right, because it's not as if the jackasses claimed Mad Max is MERIKKAN. And I'm the idiot, herpderp.

And they just quoted them. How the hell is that misrepresentation? Words mean things.

Yep, because anything in my tone expresses anger and not dismissal. I know that text is a limited format format in expressing tone, but you seriously missed the boat on this one. Or do you somehow think I actually wrote those articles for some strange reason?

That doesn't follow whatsoever. Why would I give a shit if these twats (British) dislike a highly anticipated film with a 99% Freshness?

I am not an MRA, but from what I've seen, this is kind of like if articles circulated around about how "feminists hate X" because Andrea Dworkin or Valerie Solanas went on record she hated it, and ladies of SCUM wrote ignorant letters about it.

They're telling men that it puts their masculinity at risk if they go see it. A movie. They're encouraging people of a like mind with featherweight certitude of self to get to a proper froth and be offended as possible. They literally said "DEY DOOK DER ACTION FLICKS!" and "feminists are infiltrating everything we love! Wah!" It's babytown frolics at its most petulant.

Nobody in the fucking world listens to RoK. Every single MRA I've talked to or listened to hates them. The fucking article had to write a correction stating that RoK isn't actually associated with them.

Maybe every MRA you know, but I've met a few who take Roosh's words as gospel. They're incredible asshats, mind you, but it's anecdotal evidence in both cases.

As far as I can tell, people are generally not actually upset about this and it's a small group of people being treated as representative of a larger group because it's apparently OK to do that for certain groups of people and not other groups of people.

I give no fucks about the whole MRAs vs psycho-fems, but dishonest journalism is kinda shitty.

People use small groups and individuals as representatives of entire groups all the time. A certain segment of the gaming community seems to enjoy doing that quite regularly.

Is that supposed to be a response to what I said? I don't see how that connects to Mad Max and it ignores what I actually said. Seems like it's just justification for misrepresentation.

Whether the PUAs of RoK are MRAs is immaterial given their association with the larger rise of the Manosphere that thrives on douchebaggery. I don't anticipate the MRM particularly loving the film any more than the PUAs given the topics raised in the film.

It sounds like you are trying really hard to look like you're saying something instead of actually saying something.

I did poking around, and haven't found a single reasonable person that actually thinks that movie is heavily pushing agendas, pro- or anti-MRA. The complaints I've heard have to do with it just being worse than Road Warrior, which is completely reasonable. It still just looks like a very small group of dumb people have a dumb opinion that's being used to assume the opinions of a larger group.

Here's a more journalistically honest article on the topic for your perusal (and/or condemnation, if you're feeling frisky): http://www.theguardian.com/commenti.....-me-my-popcorn