Who is more resistant in their cognitive dissonance: MRAs with regard to "androcentrism" or Feminists with regard to "toxic feminity"?

Never even heard of androcentrism mentioned until this point but partially knew such a term existed since Gynocentrism does exist.

However there are numerous examples in everyday society, especially in the west, where Gynocentrism is observable where as such examples with androcentrism are either very rare or non-existant.

Now then, unlike a feminist I am willing to hear what you have to say on androcentrism and what examples you believe are proof of its ingrained existence in my country's laws and culture where as the feminist response to "toxic femininity" will undoubtedly be to either:

A. Have your question banned for even suggesting such a thing exists.

B. Call you hurtful things for even daring to speak its name

C. Change the goal posts or put words in your mouth to try and change the subject as best as they damned well can or

D. Say something asinine and stupid such as "We're not even at the point of discussing that" as they go on and on about toxic masculinity which is actually them outlining their version of "You're not a REAL MAN unless you do as I -a woman- says". Thing to bare in mind is that feminists are under the mystical delusion that sexism, racism and everything else is like a domino effect. You fix it for women first and everything just falls magically in to place...except that is a delusional fantasy because those who are sitting on the sidelines are seeing this and just growing with more and more resentment towards those who are being uplifted before them which results in a never ending spiral.

Hope to hear from you Peter.

Men's Rights Movement is a reactionary movement to feminism. They aren't androcentric. They're just calling feminism on its BS. There is no cognitive dissonance. So the question is wrong. The feminists are more resistant in their cognitive dissonance because they're the only ones who have it. And boy are they ever resistant in it! You show the tiniest bit of cynicism to the claims of feminism, and they will appoint themselves white knight and protector of the holy name of feminism. You are now their enemy, they will be on a holy quest to make you GO DOWN, not to get to the truth by reasoned logic. And they will NOT allow anyone to say that men have it worse than women in ANYTHING, and they will NOT allow anyone to say that men are actually more capable than women in ANYTHING or more interested in doing certain things than women. Unless that thing is sanitation work. They'll readily accept gender disparity in that. If there's some high paying illustrious career that is well respected and less than 50% of the practitioners of that career are women, then it is the result of misogyny, that is their fundamental principle. But 80% of homeless people are men, you say? Crickets chirping.

Are we supposed to know what MRAs are?

I think if there were a term "toxic feminity", it would be what feminism has been fighting - the gender roles that are toxic to females - I would say it's the base of feminism. I'm sure MRAs would never acknowledge "androcentrism" even if almost all the words in the English language have a default male setting and God is male and women were not even included in most constitutions. In Canada a woman was not legally deemed a person until 1929 - if that is not "androcentrism" I don't know what is!

Ask again later.

yes

Are you saying that feminists should believe in androcentrism and that feminists should believe in toxic femininity?

Dunno. I can only speak for myself. I don't see this 'androcentrism'. Then again, I haven't seen any case for it except the feminist case and it's pretty weak.

As for toxic femininity, I don't think it's any more valid than toxic masculinity and I don't think either of these are worthy, valid concepts.

That's not really a fair question. Are you familiar with the old-style pre-solid-state radio tech term "heterodyne"?

They heterodyne off of each other, driving each other to greater and greater heights, more and more frenzied, and more and more irrational "ideology" based on "Did you hear what THEY just said?" and making a snappy remark about the other gender.