I am the founder and chair of the UK's first ever university MENS society. In our successful attempts to have this society established, we have come across some inexplicably vitriolic opposition. Anti-MENS groups have been established, members of the student union have fought to silence us, and we have been misrepresented, misquoted and lied about in a variety of sources.

Why? How can a society, established by a teetotaller, that actively campaigns against alcohol abuse with sponsored sober pub crawls in order to raise money for local alcohol abuse shelters, be accused of being a veiled drinking club?

How can we be accused of discrimination when 90 of our 306 members are female and we have always expressly stated that we are open to everyone, regardless of gender?

Why are we being accused of forcing men into a specific gender identity when we will be running workshops that teach practical skills such as cookery, stitching, bike repair and DIY, regardless of the gender categories that these activities traditionally fall into, as well as holding lectures and screening documentaries exploring the historical perceptions of masculinity?

And why are some people unsure of what a MENS society can address, when issues such as prostate and testicular cancer, higher suicide rates, domestic violence towards men, male-on-male rape, statistically overwhelming male-on-male violence, falling male performance in education, custody and paternity leave inequalities, alcoholism, higher rates of depression, and the social stigma directed towards men in supposedly feminine jobs such as nursing, affect thousands of men every day, and yet are being ignored?

In answering these questions I do not wish to insult our opponents. I bear no grudge against them. The reaction of our opponents is ultimately, I believe, born of a genuine concern for women's rights. They are afraid that this is a slippery slope. They are concerned that attention will be drawn away from important issues of discrimination that still affect women. They need not be.

Standing for the welfare of one group does not necessarily mean you reject the rights or welfare of another group. Welfare and human wellbeing do not have to be zero-sum games. All people have something to gain from others being cared for. For instance, is it helpful for women to have to deal with a generation of angry and confused young men who believe that their masculinity is best displayed through sexual conquest (and the ensuing objectification of women) and violence (often directed towards women in later life)?

Does it benefit women for men to be overlooked in university welfare collectives, thereby breeding a cohort of disillusioned and resentful men, who begin to stack the blame for their being neglected on radical feminists, whose shrieks drown out the voices of the moderates? I have a brother and a father, and I have a sister and a mother, and I would like all of them cared for, not just one or two. When one is happy and cared for, they are more likely to spread care and happiness to others. Goodness then, is a renewable energy.

The MENS society is no threat to women's rights or their welfare, and we certainly aren't a reaction to them. We are the only (as far as I am aware) society at Manchester to have a code of conduct for members. We are being trained by Nightline, the excellent listening and counselling service, with a view to establishing a drop-in centre. We hope to work closely with the LGBT and women's rights collectives. Together, not as men or women or trans, but as human beings, we can make a better community, a better world. But this can only happen through a rejection of fear and suspicion, in favour of the more powerful forces of love and trust. The MENS society will be a part of this solution. Will you?