Hi. Just to put in my two cents, I would like to make a suggestion about how to assess the MRM (or any other movement). It's basically a simple kind of litmus test, and is partly based on the fact that the MRM is commonly accused of being a hate movement that condones violence against women, homophobia, etc.

First, I recommend reading the Reddit Men's Rights FAQ page: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/wiki/faq

Then, I recommend asking yourself: 1. Is there anything written on the page that constitutes hate speech, sexism, rape apologia, or anyother form of prejudice? 2. Is there anything that seems patently false? (If you believe that there is, I would be very interested in reading what it is, and why you think so.)

As to your observation that a lot ofposts here are concerned with expressing a hatred of feminism:

First of all, thank you for making a distinction between hatred of feminism and hatred or women (or even of individual feminists). Now, I'd like to give one example of why so much ire is expressed against feminism. You wrote: "Some topics that I already agreed with are men are put at a disadvantage in divorce courts, male rape statistics are generally ignored, and general male gender role enforcement." I might also add that male victims of domestic violence are, officially, not allowed to exist, despite the fact that they do. http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/Dutton_GenderParadigmInDV-Pt1.pdf The official disregard of such problems is endorsed by feminist individuals and organizations. Using the DV example again, Murray Straus, a self-described feminist and domestic violence researcher, has described the tactics used to suppress evidence of female-on-male intimate partner violence: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V70%20version%20N3.pdf Such suppression is largely supported and approved by feminist academics and feminist-supported bodies that practice such DV intervention methods as the Duluth Model, which treats DV as a solely male = prepetrator / female = victim issue.

So when men (and their female supporters) want to get together and seek ways to properly address these issues, they are called haters, bigots, misogynists, and rape apologists. This is what happened at the University of Toronto, when feminists physically blocked access to an on-campus venue that was to be used as a forum on issues such as male suicide and school attrition rates.

So basically, even if all MRAs want to do is peacefully assemble, feminsts are deliberately making themselves problem #1 for the MRAs, and deliberately supporting (or at least denying the existence or importance of) issues such as male victimization in rape and dv cases, paternity fraud, and false rape accusations. The idea that women cannot possibly lie about rape is directly contradicted here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa5kQbUl5_o&list=PL1XAfQlY9jVi4jTM7G4y8VK3t9MbDknd7 Please note that in the first video on the playlist, for example, no charges were filed against the women for falsely accusing the cab driver of rape despite the fact there there was indisputable video evidence of his innocence. Feminists tend to deny that this kind of thing is a problem, and accuse people who assert otherwise of being rape apologists.

I think one reason for this reality-denial by feminists is that, if you acknoweldge that DV is not gender symmetrical, or that false rape accusations are a real and legitimate issue in Western society, or that there are issues particular to men that women don't face nearly as often (such as homelessness and fatality rates at work), such acknowledgement undermines partiarchy theory, which is the bedrock of the feminsit worldview. As I see it, ideology-preservation takes precedence over recognizing problems for what they are. Men are not ubiquitously privileged, at all socio-economic strata of society, and refusal to recognize this is a driving force behind feminist resitance to the MRM. MRAs are not asking for agreement or even support from feminists (though it would be nice). But feminists have no right to suppress dissent by trying to prevent MRA meetings (such as at the U. of Toronto in 2013 and in Detroit last year), or to make efforts to try and have this subreddit shut down (see the FAQ page). It's not the MRAs that are trying to do that to feminists; allowing a free exchange of ideas means you truly believe you have truth and justice on your side, but trying to shut down those who disagree with you is the mark of the propagandists. That's why I'm always skeptical when I hear that "feminism is good for men, too." Thank you for posting your question. I hope that if you look at the actual statements and actual actiuons of MRAs directly, and not through a feminist website filter, you will gain an accurate assessment of what the MRM is really about. In closing, if I had to recommend one source of information on the this issue, it would be this: https://www.youtube.com/user/bane666au (Don't be put off by the "skull in a pitcher of kool-aid" image and the occasional off-colour language. His logic and, more importantly, his evidence, are spot-on.)