Support NeoGAF

[rocketknight]

If both are fighting against it, then there isn't a problem. Whether you call yourself a "feminist" or a "men's right activist" if you're fighting for equality, then who cares what your preferred nomenclature is (teehee). If you're more interested in fighting the "other side" then you're an idiot an not helping your professed cause one iota.

I mean, I see feminists actively trying to educate people about and subsequently work to dismantle rape culture. Whenever I see MRAs talking about prison rape it's in the context of "feminists don't care about prison rape" or working themselves into a froth over made up statistics that other people are supposedly denying. There's a pretty large efficacy gap between those two strategies.

 

[APF]

How? Jiji's question is an absurd one trying to have a question based on absolutes answered.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

 

[IHaveCandy]

I mean, I see feminists actively trying to educate people about and subsequently work to dismantle rape culture. Whenever I see MRAs talking about prison rape it's in the context of "feminists don't care about prison rape" or working themselves into a froth over made up statistics that other people are supposedly denying. There's a pretty large efficacy gap between those two strategies.

Do you only look at PETA when you look at animal rights activists?

 

[Cronox]

Feminism typically tries to address the root of the problems, not the symptoms. If you agree that the unfair child custody system is caused by bullshit gender norms, you should be able to recognize that a movement that works to break down bullshit gender norms is going to improve it.

Feminism isn't as inclusive as you think, or there would be no MRA.

Who, and which concerns?


That sounds like a strawman to me; cite?

That's why I couched it in "I've read/It's my understanding" qualifiers. The last time I wandered into a feminist thread I ended up reading some interviews with a known figure in the community that was dismissive of men being raped, for the reasons I gave. It wasn't as big an issue as the rape of women, so they weren't going to deal with the baggage of incorporating all rape into their messaging and diluting it. It was a while ago and I don't have the link unfortunately.

 

[IHaveCandy]

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

One question is asking a question that is less absurd. The less absurd question isn't forming its question around absolute conditions.

 

[APF]

One question is asking a question that is less absurd. The less absurd question isn't forming its question around absolute conditions.

"Are all feminists really interested in favoring the mother in all custody disputes, in all circumstances" is an absurd question to you? Perhaps that's part of your problem.

 

[rocketknight]

Feminism isn't as inclusive as you think, or there would be no MRA.

Given that the men's right movement generally arose as opposition to feminism rather than an attempt to address excluded legitimate grievances, I really doubt that's true.

 

[Murder. She Wrote]

Most if not all of the problems you list are caused by the bullshit gender norms enforced (on everyone) by the patriarchy (which again is not some menacing cabal of men but simply The Way Things Are). Breaking down those norms fixes the root of problems for both genders.

Ding, ding, ding! Gender norms and the constant reinforcement of gender stereotypes cause so much damage. That's the biggest enemy.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

"Are all feminists really interested in favoring the mother in all custody disputes, in all circumstances" is an absurd question to you? Perhaps that's part of your problem.

That question has only one answer and that is "No". Only extremists would ever say Yes to such a broad question.

It doesn't answer my question though.

 

[poppabk]

Feminism typically tries to address the root of the problems, not the symptoms. If you agree that the unfair child custody system is caused by bullshit gender norms, you should be able to recognize that a movement that works to break down bullshit gender norms is going to improve it.

This is nice in theory, but in reality this is unlikely to be the case, especially as beyond the social constructs of gender, there are true gender differences. The current debate about boys failure in school in some part suggests that boys and girls flourish in different environments, and a move away from a more competitive adversarial learning environment has negatively effected boys and positively effected girls. With limited budgets it is not going to be possible to meet the needs of both sexes, and any move towards 'equality' at this point is likely to be a negative for girls. Likewise the custody debate is not just based on perceived gender roles but also on the fact that the woman carried the baby inside her body for 9 months and that this gives her more of a right and a connection to the child.

 

[radios shipping overview]

It's like there is a defense force that pops up to try and discredit certain questions.

Feminists are no more monolithic an entity than men's rights activists. Surely there are plenty of MRA who don't like to be associated with certain other MRA due to beliefs they disagree on.

Feminism has been around for decades, and has had time to develop in three distinct waves and to separate and splinter into many subgroups and branches of ideology.

Why would MRA want to orient their entire message against such a diverse and often-conflicting body of ideas? It seems to me that the cause of men's rights would be better-served by focusing on specific issues instead of trying to create a generalized enemy to rally against. When I see MRA tilting at windmills like that, it hurts their credibility in my eyes. It makes the whole MRM look a bit too much like the right wing when it uses dogwhistle phrases to stir up racial resentment.

 

[APF]

That question has only one answer and that is "No".

Then you admit your question was a red herring. Or at least so loaded as to be meaningless in comparison.

 

[darkpower]

Feminists are no more monolithic an entity than men's rights activists. Surely there are plenty of MRA who don't like to be associated with certain other MRA due to beliefs they disagree on.

Feminism has been around for decades, and has had time to develop in three distinct waves and to separate and splinter into many subgroups and branches of ideology.

Why would MRA want to orient their entire message against such a diverse and often-conflicting body of ideas? It seems to me that the cause of men's rights would be better-served by focusing on specific issues instead of trying to create a generalized enemy to rally against. When I see MRA tilting at windmills like that, it hurts their credibility in my eyes. It makes the whole MRM look a bit too much like the right wing when it uses dogwhistle phrases to stir up racial resentment.

As if there isn't a such thing as conservative feminism!

 

[MotherFan]

I don't know that there needs to be a mens right's movement and the ones that claim to be a part of it seem to miss important issues and become mass woman hate groups.

What I do think is important and needs to be addressed is suicide and drop out rates. Young boys are getting trapped by what the media portrays as the normal and ideal male (an issue women deal with too). Young boys need to learn how be a modern man and this includes how to take care of yourself, how to be an involved and good parent, and how to keep from losing hope and turning to suicide.

I think another main point that needs to b e learned is that they have value even if they don't make as much money as their gf/wife/fiance. The media portrays it such that you have to be a bread winner. But, there is more than that. You can be an equal contributor even if you don't make as much money.

 

[maharg]

Feminism isn't as inclusive as you think, or there would be no MRA.

Man, that's not even remotely true. Honestly, take a look at my local city's MRA's website. Tell me this arose out of people feeling a lack of inclusion and not out of people just plain being angry at feminists, if not women in general.

Do you only look at PETA when you look at animal rights activists?

You keep bringing this up, but in this case the equivalent of the SPCA (as a more rational actor in animal rights) either doesn't exist (please find it and share if it does) or you have to basically consider it to be intersectional feminism.

 

[APF]

As if there isn't a such thing as conservative feminism!

You're just tossing words you read out there, you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[darkpower]

You're just tossing words you read out there, you don't know what you're talking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conservative_feminisms

BAM! That just happened!

 

[rocketknight]

This is nice in theory, but in reality this is unlikely to be the case, especially as beyond the social constructs of gender, there are true gender differences. The current debate about boys failure in school in some part suggests that boys and girls flourish in different environments, and a move away from a more competitive adversarial learning environment has negatively effected boys and positively effected girls. With limited budgets it is not going to be possible to meet the needs of both sexes, and any move towards 'equality' at this point is likely to be a negative for girls. Likewise the custody debate is not just based on perceived gender roles but also on the fact that the woman carried the baby inside her body for 9 months and that this gives her more of a right and a connection to the child.

This gets right at the root cause vs. symptom dichotomy I was talking about. It's very likely that patriarchal norms are what's causing the education gap and that biological disposition on its own doesn't support the variance we actually observe. There's reams and reams of evidence that expectations are one of the most significant predictors of education outcomes, so teachers who have certain societally-imposed views of what boys and girls are like and are capable of (not to mention that the children themselves have been fed this stuff to perform as well) will tend to produce different outcomes from each gender. If we can combat this gender norm stuff, education disparities will even out a bit and we can focus on individual children's learning styles rather than leaving the system to cope with the massive destabilizing force caused by (here it comes again) gender role bullshit.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Then you admit your question was a red herring. Or at least so loaded as to be meaningless in comparison.

No, jiji's question has only one answer.

Ask yourself this: Are all feminists really interested in favoring the mother in all custody disputes, in all circumstances?

Nothing is ever this 100%, all feminists, all custody disputes and all circumstances.

 

[APF]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conservative_feminisms

BAM! That just happened!

Yeah, you just proved my point....

No, jiji's question has only one answer.

Uh, how does that make your question less loaded or less of a red herring? I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing now.

 

[Cronox]

Man, that's not even remotely true. Honestly, take a look at my local city's MRA's website. Tell me this arose out of people feeling a lack of inclusion and not out of people just plain being angry at feminists, if not women in general.

There is of course a lot of reactivity, but outside of fundamentalists and guys with resentment of women in general, I think the groups have similar goals. Reminds me a little of how gay rights groups used to have an uneasy relationship with transgender rights. Now it's been wrapped up into the LGBT label and things are more unified, it seems to me.

Not to be obtuse here, but technically if MRA people are attacking feminists, by definition they don't feel included.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Feminists are no more monolithic an entity than men's rights activists. Surely there are plenty of MRA who don't like to be associated with certain other MRA due to beliefs they disagree on.

Feminism has been around for decades, and has had time to develop in three distinct waves and to separate and splinter into many subgroups and branches of ideology.

Why would MRA want to orient their entire message against such a diverse and often-conflicting body of ideas? It seems to me that the cause of men's rights would be better-served by focusing on specific issues instead of trying to create a generalized enemy to rally against. When I see MRA tilting at windmills like that, it hurts their credibility in my eyes. It makes the whole MRM look a bit too much like the right wing when it uses dogwhistle phrases to stir up racial resentment.

So, you want to tell me what this rant has to do with what you quoted?

 

[Kazerei]

Are feminists really interested in fathers getting custody more often? Really?

Feminists are certainly interested in eliminating gender roles and getting men more involved with child care and house work, which will in turn help dispel the notion that women are better suited to raising children. I'm not sure what else you expect people to do to help make custody battles more fair.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Uh, how does that make your question less loaded or less of a red herring? I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing now.

How does it make my question a red herring at all?

You think I am just arguing for the sake of arguing? Let's review. I ask a legitimate question that only required a simple answer and you pop up and start telling my question sucks. Which of us arguing for the sake of it?

 

[maharg]

There is of course a lot of reactivity, but outside of fundamentalists and guys with resentment of women in general, I think the groups have similar goals. Reminds me a little of how gay rights groups used to have an uneasy relationship with transgender rights. Now it's been wrapped up into the LGBT label and things are more unified, it seems to me.

Not to be obtuse here, but technically if MRA people are attacking feminists, by definition they don't feel included.

The problem is that it's the fundamentalists who *run* these groups. They are not an outside extreme, they are the core of it.

And seriously? Yes, I'm sure they don't feel included. But is that the root of their cause? I don't see how anyone could look at that page (particularly if they either scroll down or look at any subpage) and conclude that merely finding feminism not intersectional enough is the core of their problem with feminism.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Feminists are certainly interested in eliminating gender roles and getting men more involved with child care and house work, which will in turn help dispel the notion that women are better suited to raising children. I'm not sure what else you expect people to do to help make custody battles more fair.

How long does the indirect route take?

 

[radios shipping overview]

So, you want to tell me what this rant has to do with what you quoted?

I'm saying that you should probably ask some feminists yourself and study different feminist schools of thought to determine the answer to your question. You're not going to find a single answer that you can ascribe to all of Feminism as a single entity.

 

[Kazerei]

How long does the indirect route take?

A long time, unfortunately. Cultural attitudes change slowly. Is there a more direct route?

 

[rocketknight]

How long does the indirect route take?

What other route is there? The law as written (at least as I understand it) is fairly neutral, so the resulting outcome is almost entirely due to (say it with me now) gender role bullshit.

 

[darkpower]

Yeah, you just proved my point....

Did you not even bother to click the link?

You're saying there were no such thing and that I was talking out of my ass. I provided the link to show you that they do exist, regardless of how futile their purposes might be. You're just dismissing them because of....I don't know, really.

Does no good to pretend such groups don't exist out there.

 

[WanderingWind]

I mean, I see feminists actively trying to educate people about and subsequently work to dismantle rape culture. Whenever I see MRAs talking about prison rape it's in the context of "feminists don't care about prison rape" or working themselves into a froth over made up statistics that other people are supposedly denying. There's a pretty large efficacy gap between those two strategies.

You know those MRA's you're talking about? What you just said is exactly how they think. Just switch the pronouns. This is why there will be no real reconciliation. Each side views each other as combative in nature, when it doesn't have to be that way. If you care more about custodial rights, then just be about those and don't concern yourself with what another organized group focuses their attention on. We can't all care about each and every issues equally. People need to stop getting angry at others who don't feel equilateral outrage at every issue.

 

[Devolution]

Did you not even bother to click the link?

You're saying there were no such thing and that I was talking out of my ass. I provided the link to show you that they do exist, regardless of how futile their purposes might be. You're just dismissing them because of....I don't know, really.

Does no good to pretend such groups don't exist out there.

Okay, so when this disgusting excuse for a human being gets put in jail, we'll all be sleeping peacefully knowing that those people that are in jail with him know just what to do with sick people like him!

.

Yeah feminists are the problem for sure.

 

[rocketknight]

.

Yeah feminists are the problem for sure.

Dammit, I was just about to do that

 

[APF]

How does it make my question a red herring at all?

You think I am just arguing for the sake of arguing? Let's review. I ask a legitimate question that only required a simple answer and you pop up and start telling my question sucks. Which of us arguing for the sake of it?

You're not following the conversation. Your loaded question was a red herring to rocketknight's post about custody battles and gender norms http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=54150648#post54150648; instead of discussing feminism's dissection of those norms, you instead introduce a loaded concept framing the debate in terms of feminists interests re: which gender should get custody more often, an irrelevant twisting as demonstrated by jiji's followup question, had you bothered to take it more seriously.

You're saying there were no such thing

No, I said you were just repeating words you read somewhere, and didn't really know what you were talking about. As evidenced by you not understanding my point, or the point you were trying to respond to ("dog whistles"). Instead in both places you leaped to prove yourself ignorant.

 

[shakin_haitian]

Who cares what a couple of betas on the internet say?

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

A long time, unfortunately. Cultural attitudes change slowly. Is there a more direct route?

Of course there is, feminists seem to get things done when they attack them directly. Let's take VAWA for example, it was in danger of not passing this time around but with alot of activism it did get passed. How about abortion issues, lots of activism there too.

It's the difference between directly dealing with an issue and putting it on the back burner. How long has this issue been on the back burner and how much longer will it be?

My point is that this is not a priority for feminists so while they may claim that they are interested in helping fathers get custody more, it's mostly just talk. Maybe in 100 years when they have finally flipped the gender roles?

 

[poppabk]

This gets right at the root cause vs. symptom dichotomy I was talking about. It's very likely that patriarchal norms are what's causing the education gap and that biological disposition on its own doesn't support the variance we actually observe. There's reams and reams of evidence that expectations are one of the most significant predictor rs of education outcomes, so teachers who have certain societally-imposed views of what boys and girls are like and are capable of (not to mention that the children themselves have been fed this stuff to perform as well) will tend to produce different outcomes from each gender. If we can combat this gender norm stuff, education disparities will even out a bit and we can focus on individual children's learning styles rather than leaving the system to cope with the massive destabilizing force caused by (here it comes again) gender role bullshit.

Patriarchy is quite the boogy man, previously responsible for boys out performing girls and now responsible for girls out performing boys. You are ignoring the fact that boys and girls brains have been established as being different and a lot of the differences are established before birth, before society gets a chance to meddle. Girls in general have better language skills while boys have better spacial recognition and gross motor skills. Gender blindness will not change these differences.

 

[Devolution]

Patriarchy is quite the boogy man, previously responsible for boys out performing girls and now responsible for girls out performing boys. You are ignoring the fact that boys and girls brains have been established as being different and a lot of the differences are established before birth, before society gets a chance to meddle. Girls in general have better language skills while boys have better spacial recognition and gross motor skills. Gender blindness will not change these differences.

Patriarchy is a boogy man, lol. This thread. It's like history doesn't exist or reality. I guess women haven't been trying to secure their rights against a system set up to restrict or ignore them as people.

 

[darkpower]

.

Yeah feminists are the problem for sure.

Not sure what the two quotes have in common, or why you invoked what I said about a man who murdered a 1 year old girl because he felt good about causing her pain into something about MRM and feminism, but okay! Whatever!

No, I said you were just repeating words you read somewhere, and didn't really know what you were talking about. As evidenced by you not understanding my point, or the point you were trying to respond to ("dog whistles"). Instead in both places you leaped to prove yourself ignorant.

You're pretending that no such thing as a conservative feminist exists and are calling people who call you out on such assumptions ignorant. Perhaps you should enlighten people on how it's somehow not true when I provided you a list (albeit on Wikipedia, a common source on this board) of the actual types there are.

Perhaps you just know that it prevents you from being able to call people concern trolls if they try to distance themselves from certain feminists you've white knighted for whatever reason.

 

[Devolution]

Not sure what the two quotes have in common, or why you invoked what I said about a man who murdered a 1 year old girl because he felt good about causing her pain into something about MRM and feminism, but okay! Whatever!

I mean it's clearly feminists handwaving male rape right not people like yourself endorsing it? Just find it funny you're in here criticizing feminism and how it deals with male issues and pull that in another thread. Amazing.

 

[WanderingWind]

I mean it's clearly feminists handwaving male rape right not people like yourself endorsing it? Just find it funny you're in here criticizing feminism and how it deals with male issues and pull that in another thread. Amazing.

He's going to pretend he wasn't talking about prison rape.

 

[rocketknight]

Who cares what a couple of betas on the internet say?

This is part and parcel of the gender norm bullshit that hurts everybody.

Of course there is, feminists seem to get things done when they attack them directly. Let's take VAWA for example, it was in danger of not passing this time around but with alot of activism it did get passed. How about abortion issues, lots of activism there too.

It's the difference between directly dealing with an issue and putting it on the back burner. How long has this issue been on the back burner and how much longer will it be?

My point is that this is not a priority for feminists so while they may claim that they are interested in helping fathers get custody more, it's mostly just talk. Maybe in 100 years when they have finally flipped the gender roles?

What specific legislation or activity can you propose to solve this problem without addressing the gender norm bullshit cause? Just as a thought exercise.

Patriarchy is quite the boogy man, previously responsible for boys out performing girls and now responsible for girls out performing boys. You are ignoring the fact that boys and girls brains have been established as being different and a lot of the differences are established before birth, before society gets a chance to meddle. Girls in general have better language skills while boys have better spacial recognition and gross motor skills. Gender blindness will not change these differences.

The biological differences are much, much smaller than the socialized differences, and the socialized differences are crazy harmful across the board. Working to tear down bullshit gender norms solves a lot of the problem and frees up resources to address legitimate differences in learning styles that remain, across genders.

 

[Pau]

I really wish any time someone made a claim and tried to pass it off as fact they would cite their sources.

 

[hgarrett54]

I really wish any time someone made a claim and tried to pass it off as fact they would cite their sources.

But that's hard!

 

[darkpower]

He's going to pretend he wasn't talking about prison rape.

Which I'm not sure what that has to do with ANYTHING in this thread!

I mean it's clearly feminists handwaving male rape right not people like yourself endorsing it? Just find it funny you're in here criticizing feminism and how it deals with male issues and pull that in another thread. Amazing.

1. When did I ever say they did anything of the sort.
2. Try reading what that thread you pulled that quote from was about and who I was referring to.

 

[Karkador]

I really wish any time someone made a claim and tried to pass it off as fact they would cite their sources.

It's all here at HTTP://WWW.DIVORCE-LAWYER-SOURCES.COM

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

What specific legislation or activity can you propose to solve this problem without addressing the gender norm bullshit cause? Just as a thought exercise.

Just as an idea, you know those Title programs to give minorities a leg up in situations like this? Doesn't matter though, it's on the back burner and that's where it will stay. That's the point.

I want people to really stop and think about what it means when feminists CLAIM to care about fathers getting custody more often. It means "not really a priority".

 

[Devolution]

Which I'm not sure what that has to do with ANYTHING in this thread!

Oh plenty.

You advocate male prison rape.

Why the fuck should anyone take your criticisms of feminism seriously?

 

[WanderingWind]

Which I'm not sure what that has to do with ANYTHING in this thread!

You don't understand what the advocation and propagation of rape culture has anything to do with equal rights between the sexes? Not even a little clue?

 

[rocketknight]

Just as an idea, you know those Title programs to give minorities a leg up in situations like this? Doesn't matter though, it's on the back burner and that's where it will stay. That's the point.

I want people to really stop and think about what it means when feminists CLAIM to care about fathers getting custody more often. It means "not really a priority".

So, like, you want to require judges to gives fathers custody in X% of cases, or something?