No offense, but you can stop with the BS. You know people are bound to be thrown off by the avatars.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Men rights and issues
- Thread starter SquiddyCracker
- Start date
- Status
NovemberMike
Member
IIRC combat arms are generally a middle-upper class thing. In the Civil War the first group to sign up was Southern aristocracy, WWII actually had people committing suicide because they couldn't join and right now the Infantry trends white, middle class and educated compared to the country's demographics.
And obviously Zaraki_Kenpachi is not, hence him naming us both separately. I do understand if others are thrown off though. I certainly didn't fault WorriedCitizen for it.
pics or gtfo
LOL, if I can convince her to make some tonight maybe we'll make a sandwiches thread or something.
Mine is to show that men and women gravitate naturally towards different career paths, and biology plays a large role. I believe going against our own biology is a recipe for suffering in society
Better watch out or the Militant Feminazis will be banging down your door for ruining their plan to neuter men.
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
So here's my question - how should I support the leveling of the field when it comes to divorce equality? How do I get behind the idea of equality and be as active as I can be? How do I stop people from assuming I'm a pedo at the park if I grin at a kid?
Tell me what to do, because all I can do is basically take it and deal with it. I'm not going to support a group that fights for this AND a bunch of other unequal bullshit or crazy ideas like some of the ones listed.
Let's just say these are the only 2 causes I'm interested in fighting - should I even bother? Or because I'm a straight white male, should I just ignore it because I'm lucky enough to be born how I was born anyhow, as a previous posted suggested?
Tell me what to do, because all I can do is basically take it and deal with it. I'm not going to support a group that fights for this AND a bunch of other unequal bullshit or crazy ideas like some of the ones listed.
Let's just say these are the only 2 causes I'm interested in fighting - should I even bother? Or because I'm a straight white male, should I just ignore it because I'm lucky enough to be born how I was born anyhow, as a previous posted suggested?
And where does it talk about women taking or not taking certain jobs due to biological traits? Oh yeah, its not there. You also forgot the little bit that states that the whole language thing is still mostly due social nurturing, and not that women or men are somehow inherently better at it.
Make us some sammichs devo!
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Show me where I said you were the same person? This argument is going on for no reason now.
ill post in it, I make pretty awesome sandwiches tbh
Deified Data
Banned
I inherited my first car from my parents in '08 (a crappy '92 Cavalier), and bought my second (a '90 DeVille) from a friend, which I still use.
The scenario you laid out sounds very plausible, and likely happens all the time, it's just not one I've found myself in at this point in my life. So it's not just me saying "white/male privelage doesn't effect me and never will", because as I said earlier blanket statements are pointless. I'm just saying I haven't experienced it yet. Or perhaps I have. All I know is that I'm the best judge of such matters. I'm not so proud that I wouldn't admit it were it staring me in the face.
Academia and our progression through it influences career paths. Care to say otherwise? And the link shows boys and girls, from an early age, are academically different due to brain chemistry
You are lost man, if you even read the article you would know that it still comes down to nurturing and not that one gender is inherently superior to the other in certain cases for language. You're just using it as an excuse to make wild assumptions about biological traits in genders without any information to back it up.
I think the frustrating thing is you seem to take excessive pride in "not experiencing" white privilege, wearing it like a badge of honor since it's difficult to disprove a personal experience claim like that even though there are probably dozens of opportunities to experience that privilege in a month. Probably a hundred in a year, often without being obvious to the person because "that's just the way you SHOULD treat someone." For example it's possible you've gone to a store and NOT been followed by security while a black person could go to the same store as you and be followed simply for the color of their skin.
Individual personal anecdotes of this type however in any case do nothing more than cloud the issue which is the undeniable reality of these types of privilege. All you're doing is demeaning this reality with your anecdotes.
I'm sure the minority of conscripts who came from wealthier, non-minority backgrounds felt a lot better about dying painful, needless deaths, knowing that they were privileged.
This is pretty much why I hate these discussions. individuals become statistics and, crucially, are never treated as individuals again. Based on statistics, they are treated with prejudice. At best, people are seen as the intersection of multiple groups, but thought is rarely afforded to variation within the group.
Did I say inferior or superior? I believe in difference, not inferiority, between the genders.
I think that there is a bit of social engineering going on. But that's just me trying to gaze at the big picture. On the small scale there's the reality and the implied reality or the portrayed reality, or maybe even the target reality, that only plays in the local corners of western civilization. The 'male under attack' idea. The 'feminism on the rise' idea. This 'battle of the sexes' where one has to be in direct competition with the other to achieve this nebulous social concept of "equality", while promoting the hasty formation of families, the breakup of families, early sexual experimentation, the credibility of and investment in financial deathtraps, unrealistic portrayals of real life that become the unattainable ideal. All these things as if on a mine-field, seemingly designed to leave people as emotional and financial wrecks, helpless to do anything else but work, pay debt, take medicine to ease the pain, and work more to afford all of that + life. One of them is going to get you.
These have been set up into our modern society somehow, but instead, lets blame the women. They've been acting suspicious lately with the working next to us at the same jobs, going for the same goals, and having the deck statistically stacked against them. Perhaps during those bathroom breaks they take together in pairs, they're secretly plotting to take the world out from under us men.
We've been set in someone's divide and conquer strategy for a century or more at least. Perhaps devised to create a small stumbling block to slow the success of the middle class. This latest stratagem starts like all the others did, with first suggesting who is to blame. Minorities and modern living ruined the economy. Unpredictable, but totally predictable, even expected financial meltdown wiped out so much. Fewer pieces of the pie, and women are getting a bigger slice now. The government is giving it to them, of course, so they're in on it too. Meanwhile, real, actual rich pieces of shit are silently disappearing into the background. The further we move away from the financial crisis, the less chance we have of bringing those responsible to justice. But hey, lets all fight over that working class pie.
'Men's rights' shouldn't have gone after things based on their sexual equity, but rather the injustice or the merit of the particular issue. Men as victims of a feminist society is a hard sell to actual victims, actual feminists, and actual yeah.
These have been set up into our modern society somehow, but instead, lets blame the women. They've been acting suspicious lately with the working next to us at the same jobs, going for the same goals, and having the deck statistically stacked against them. Perhaps during those bathroom breaks they take together in pairs, they're secretly plotting to take the world out from under us men.
We've been set in someone's divide and conquer strategy for a century or more at least. Perhaps devised to create a small stumbling block to slow the success of the middle class. This latest stratagem starts like all the others did, with first suggesting who is to blame. Minorities and modern living ruined the economy. Unpredictable, but totally predictable, even expected financial meltdown wiped out so much. Fewer pieces of the pie, and women are getting a bigger slice now. The government is giving it to them, of course, so they're in on it too. Meanwhile, real, actual rich pieces of shit are silently disappearing into the background. The further we move away from the financial crisis, the less chance we have of bringing those responsible to justice. But hey, lets all fight over that working class pie.
'Men's rights' shouldn't have gone after things based on their sexual equity, but rather the injustice or the merit of the particular issue. Men as victims of a feminist society is a hard sell to actual victims, actual feminists, and actual yeah.
Because there was zero reason to include both of us in your post. You were addressing me. Please show me where I've made malicious comments towards other individuals in recent threads and didn't get banned. This is the third time I'm asking, and you still haven't answered. If you don't answer once again, I'm going to have to assume that you're just making stuff up about me, which really isn't cool.
The thing about white privilege, if one even gets to experience it,
is that it works for both white men and white women.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Bravo.
Devolution
Member
pics or gtfo
No pics atm but I'm a firm believer in baby spinach instead of lettuce, letting the tomatoes sit on paper towels while I make up the rest of the sandwich (so they don't make the sandwich soggy), using tarragon mustard and ham.
I find Feminism and MRM to be misguided political deviations from the overall Human Rights agenda, which should again focus on basic human rights (as opposed to privileges or entitlements.)
Gender discussion on it's own requires dualistic perspectives as societies never developed a male or female perspective of gender irrespective of their counterpart, they came about together from environmental pressures and solutions to reform social problems would also require a dualistic approach.
Gender discussion on it's own requires dualistic perspectives as societies never developed a male or female perspective of gender irrespective of their counterpart, they came about together from environmental pressures and solutions to reform social problems would also require a dualistic approach.
This sounds dangerously like conspiracy theory
I literally would love a sandwich
CornBurrito
Member
Source please.
Deified Data
Banned
I've not been followed before. I've also been followed. I sort of feel like the clerk's eyes are following me regardless of who I am, but that's just me.
I can understand how that could come across as annoying. I don't feel prideful - it's simply the life I find myself in. In these threads I try to go with a tone of relating straight facts, and if that comes across as arrogance on my part I apologize. That said, I often feel that such attitudes are assumed of me for holding such a position. I'm a poster who considers himself "exceptional" in some ways, in the most literal sense, and those who disagree with me label that hubris. And they have a right to that opinion.
But you're right. My situation is anecdotal. It's valid in a thread where the universal nature of privelage is being discussed, but not here. I'll drop it.
Well now.
See the above discussion
Here's one woman's perspective:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RozEFVPDxeg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RozEFVPDxeg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA
lopaz,
I have read of studies with twins separated at birth showing that they both end up going into similar professions, have the same hobbies, suffer equally from alcoholism, etc., regardless of how their adopted families raised them. In these cases, its proven nature plays a role. Introversion and extroversion are also predetermined, with upbringing and environment determining the extent and how you handle it day-to-day.
However, I'm not aware of anything that says career aspirations are wired to be gender-specific. Do you have anything that says a boy's brain is wired to more likely make him a fireman more than a girl's brain?
I have read of studies with twins separated at birth showing that they both end up going into similar professions, have the same hobbies, suffer equally from alcoholism, etc., regardless of how their adopted families raised them. In these cases, its proven nature plays a role. Introversion and extroversion are also predetermined, with upbringing and environment determining the extent and how you handle it day-to-day.
However, I'm not aware of anything that says career aspirations are wired to be gender-specific. Do you have anything that says a boy's brain is wired to more likely make him a fireman more than a girl's brain?
In Sweden, the majority of classes taken by students in higher education have a small to big female majority, except philosophy and mathematics (probably a few more). This will be very interesting to see how this issue is going to unravel. A female majority in almost every field which requiers a higher education. Just like I don't believe a male majority in any field is good, it should be equal, what will be done in the next decades to come? Interesting and thought provoking.
There's really not a whole lot you can do about it as it pertains to social discrepancies towards X,Y or Zed. Movements rarely get the desired outcomes when they try to legislate or use government action to their advantage, so I can't recommend that route. I think the best approach is simply talking and reasoning with people in your personal life, and making proactive positive decisions when it comes to marriage and ignoring people who assume you might be a pedo in the park. Really the only ways to "fight" this stuff.
I'm not a person who thinks "men's rights" is the correct distinction to solving issues of traditionally steered social assumptions on status or perceived blame or even perceived social mandating. I think that's a much broader issue. And once again, the best way to change these social perceptions is talking and reasoning with people on a personal level, as well as how you live your life, not just what you choose to say.
The ability to hold beliefs such as the bolded is privilege per se.
Karsticles
Member
Tomatoes on the towel...genius...!
CornBurrito
Member
Devolution
Member
The end products don't have to be 50/50 to be equal but the choices available and the encouragement to enter these things should be. I hope I'm making some sense.
Fresh baked sourdough is great too.
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
Thanks for answering with your thoughts. I thought nobody had an answer. So, I'll go ahead and roll on.
"I haven't experienced privilege" = "I am privileged"? What on Earth
Yes
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2741240/
Happy?
SquiddyCracker
Banned
She is right on the "women and children first, men last"-mentality.
Getting through the other video now.
Devolution
Member
How precious and what have equalists put forth or managed to gain for anyone?
I actually don't doubt that source as I've seen it in a few of my sociology books, what I do put in doubt, is his assumption that you can take that specific case, which in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter much(which the article even says) and grossly apply it to any issue that he believes to be biologically based instead of socially.
Actually, the correct term is Egalitarianism and Egalitarianism has been the basis for the advancement of all forms of human rights. Far more so than any single gender specific ideology could ever hope to achieve.
I have watched some of her video's she does present everything very logically.
Seems like a very smart individual.
She can probably out debate most.
Though she does let some anger slip at times.
Devolution
Member
Gender and group specific ideologies can target specific problems. General Egalitarianism wouldn't even bother to help minorities within minorities because they simply get ignored if they don't make their presence and problems known.
Both feminism and mens right both in practice and it would also make sense for this to happen tend to be confrontational and competitive with the opposite gender and advancing the interests of one gender as a target even if you pretend to be pro rights for everyone will inevitably attract those who are not, or lead to such views.
On the negative side a more focused group will more passionately focus on advancing the interests of such group and be more focused in their goals. So from a purely self interest point of view you could support that but I tend to believe that a society that is sufficiently respectfull to both genders is a better one so that is how I see self interest and people who belong in any quite exclusive group as far as genders go should show effort to remove any bigotry whatsoever and also give soem of a fuck about the rights of others instead of being confrontational about that.
However being confrontational and painting a more negative picture for the group you are representing allows you to pursue even bigger goals and benefits. Sufficient restraint is not perceived to provide benefit.
Overall though as this is a rather shitty world and various people are discriminated so despite problems I can see positive accomplishments in influencing society to be less shitty even from groups that have their issues but those groups should not themselves take too much power but rather positively influence certain discrimination at stopping, so there is a limit to their usefullness and trust they deserve in. After all someone's rhetoric "balancing the world" might be discrimination in the opposite direction sicne for years the opposite group who has privilege according to the theory had the privilege on the opposite direction to them.
A more general movement in favor of rights is one I would identify more strongly with, however getting it to work might be harder as the other movements have the advantage of being able to attract people who care for self interest than being mutually humanist in general and there are the issues of specific groups being more focused and having one clear path ahead of them, the one that serves the interests of their group.
See end of last page for a scientific study on the specific point
- Status