well no one else has seen the doc so far, apparently, so there really is no way to discuss the actual content of the documentary
and honestly, after the reveal who funded this I don't see a lot of room for it anyway, it definitely seems to be an ad for MRA, which means my question at the end of my op seems to have been answered, I was duped and so was Cassie Jaye, or she was bought.
there were definitely some questionable statements from feminists in the film, but those may have been taken out of context
I just watched it. Here's my criticism of the movie itself not looking at the contextual stuff:
There are some interesting points made regarding men's issues, but the documentary is REALLY problematic.
First of all, several of the big issues they bring up have some validity to them, but I think this is where they dupe people a bit. A premise is not a conclusion. They talk a lot about the issues, but rarely about the solution, and when they do, the problem always seem to be feminism. Not all of the issues have valid premises either, there is A LOT of anecdotal evidence. One case in Texas, one case in India etc. That's where it feels really manipulating to me, to give the cases a face so you can personally relate to them and not see the bigger picture.
The use of statistics is also a bit weird. She says custody goes to women 80% of the time and 20% to men. She doesn't really dig into those numbers. Should it be 50-50 because that sounds equal? What if like 75 - 25 is actually what it should be, that 5% were given wrong custody. If that was right, the numbers would still sound "unequal". 80-20 doesn't say anything really.
It also seemed a lot of the guys toned stuff down. You just know they try to hide some of their most shitty views, like a racist trying to not say the N-word even though they really want to. Especially that guy talking about innocent paternity (or what it was called), why the fuck did he use a girl fucking six guys at a party as an example? It just reeked of slut shaming.
An other major issue with the movie: she starts with saying she wanted to learn more about MRAs because of the vile articles they wrote, but she never really bring them up again (she "clears" one at the end, but not the 100 others) and never confronts the MRAs with it! She mentions r/theredpill and MGTOW quickly at the end almost as an afterthought. She makes the MRA seem misunderstood/victims throughout the entire movie. You know, there might be other reasons people protest them other than "feminists won't listen".
From a filmmaking perspective, documentaries like this always have a problem with the "voice of god", the authority of the narrator. It sort of takes the role as a moral compass and feeds you information you are supposed to take as true facts. Pro-tip for watching documentaries: always question the narrator. She say she started as a feminist, but never actually went into what that entailed. What were her original views? Her being a so called feminist seems to be used as a rhetorical tool "look, we changed a feminist's mind". Case in point, she NEVER questions the MRAs directly. Her only reaction was "I'm not sure how I feel, my views are being challenged". She then goes "oh well, I guess I need to interview some feminists now". Why? Aren't you a feminist yourself? Where's your journalistic back bone? Challenge those people! If you can't do it, at least put them in the same room as feminists.
There are also a lot of other problems, but now I just hate this movie too much to write more about it. I have to say though, I did feel my views were being challenged a few times and I learned a little bit, but in general it was pretty bad.
