I'm a little bit put off that this article is essentially suggesting that not only should young men, who are being failed by the educational system, go to trade-school instead (instead of say, fixing the educational system), but that trade-school is also somehow feminist/progressive as well because it challenges gender norms or something. The majority of engineers are still men, and just because an increasing number, soon to be majority, of corporate drones are women doesn't mean we're "progressing as a society" if a relatively small class of professional women manages the working class men and women, while a supreme tech aristocracy made up almost exclusively of men lords over all.
There are men at the top. What is the demographic at the bottom (garbage workers, manual workers, farm labor). Which sex goes to prison more, commits more suicides, dies in war, and loses custody battles the vast majority of the time?
Have you heard of the term toxic masculinity, weaponized incompetence, patriarchal, misogyny used? Are women discussed the same way? Are women ever misandrist?
I'm also skeptical of MRA simply because I do think they are resistant to many feminist arguments that are actually applicable primarily to the working class. I'm in total agreement, I think working class men often suffer a great deal of the blunt of exploitation, but to say that women in similar economic positions don't have their own struggles is also faulty. Anyone who truly wants to change society should recognize that a social movement must involve the concerns of men AND women, white and black, etc. and not be some sort of cheap identity politics that re-enforces the norms of victimhood ideology, and as far as I can tell MRA does fit into that category--but I could be wrong.
