I recently received a message on a Facebook page I administrate (hint, hint) that reeked of foul play.

The post linked to a post from “TheStranger,” a site I had never heard of prior and therefor cannot make a judgement off of their website’s past performance in the field of impartiality. The article, written by “Paul Constant”, states

Stephanie Zvan noticed that the Men’s Rights subreddit is surveying themselves. The results are…well, they’re exactly what you think Men’s Rights “activists” would be

Confirmation bias: Check

Impartiality: X

The post linked to a survey of /r/mensrights, a left-libertarian leaning MRA subreddit. The article went on to claim that the 3,000 responses the survey received were indicative of MRAs being overwhelmingly (98%) Caucasian, aged 17-20, and 83% hardcore conservatives. It also claimed that MRAs are highly supportive of marijuana legalization (yes, because “hardcore conservatives” are well known for supporting legalized pot), and highly opposed to LGBT rights, abortion rights, and minimum wage increase.

Riight.

MRAs have always been largely active in South Asian countries, particularly India. One could make a solid argument that the majority of MRAs in the world are from India, and without a doubt represent more than a measly 2% of MRAs. That is, of course, not even accounting for black, mestizo (Latino), east asian, or middle eastern MRAs, who also make up a large portion of Men’s Rights activists. While it is likely that whites make up the majority of the MRM, this shouldn’t be surprising, considering much of the MRM is based in the USA, Canada, and Europe, predominately white regions.

Also, while I mean no disrespect towards the conservative leaning sections of the MRM, to say that they represent any majority of MRAs is a ridiculous claim. It seems that MRAs in general, much less the predominately left-leaning /r/mensrights/ aren’t heavily socially conservative. However, this is all based off of anecdotal evidence, right? It doesn’t debunk the survey, does it?

While the anecdotes may not debunk the survey, it seems that when the original list of respondants is viewed, manipulation of the survey becomes painfully obvious. Take for example, the hundreds of responses that entered the exact same information within seconds of eachother.



As if it wasn’t suspicious enough that 16 people who agreed with each other on every topic but one commented within a few seconds, it had to be followed up with an additional 12 people who agreed with each other on every single topic but one. However, this time the totally real individuals responding to the survey responded a little bit faster, taking under just one minute to cast their votes.

While I am limited to how many I can show at once, I remind you that you can go look at the results yourself here. If you need to be convinced.

As if the clearly visible poll rigging isn’t bad enough, the article goes on to state:

Speaking as someone who was once that age, no white man between the ages of 17 and 20 has ever said anything of value. (Comedian Rob Delaney put it best: “A male in their 20s? Run in the opposite direction. Nothing he says matters; his fears, his hopes his dreams are garbage. Men in their 20s are the worst thing happening on our planet.”)

Self hating misandry: Check

The article closes on a very ironic note, accusing MRAs of being sociopaths who can’t understand reality.

The only shame of it is that we’ll never get to see the moment when they realize that they spent the first few years of their adult lives building ornate castles out of bullshit. But those castles always fall; they simply can’t withstand reality.

Am I in a Star Wars-Wizard of Oz crossover? Because I seem to be surrounded by projections and strawmen.

While accusing someone of not understanding reality, it’s probably best to make sure the survey you used as a source is real.