Support NeoGAF

[IHaveCandy]

Sums up the whole thing pretty well. You don't need a "Men's rights" movement because all rights have traditionally gone to the dominant group in society. White, Christian, heterosexual, men. Which is why you don't need a white person's rights group or a straight person's rights group, etc. either.

That assumes women have no unfair privileges by law or by society. Are you comfortable with saying that?

 

[ronito]

I believe in Men's issues. Sure.

Men's Family Law issues.
Men's Health issues.

Men's rights? I think you're taking it a bit too far.

Fight a fight where it's necessary. No need to declare war.

 

[Vermillion]

I think the focus on female rape comes from the fact that we got a real problem with females getting raped in this world. It's pretty common in the West, but it's a downright epidemic in developing communities.

Oh, absolutely. The fact that it far outstrips male rape is by far the largest reason. Both of which could be fixed if we were teaching the right people the right lessons about consent over here.

I've got no idea what to do about the developing countries, but I'm sure someone here will float an idea.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Um? No. This applies to women feeling completely comfortable as well.

You're saying men have to be coddled by feminism and women have to accept MRAs. Either way, we're still where we've always been with men having all the control and privilege.

 

[MGrant]

Every one. Every single MRA group points to rape or sexual assault on men is just an excuse to dismiss assault on women? Are we applying this logic to all of their arguments?

If not, than again I ask why are these issues brushed aside as not relevant, and people who talk about them compared to groups like the KKK?

They're not irrelevant, and it's not every single one. Please see my use of "a majority of," and "a great deal of." We're talking about implication here, so you're not going to get any proof from me, but it is my opinion that, as a reactionary movement, the MRM has a frequent problem with trying to erase the disadvantages of those without privilege.

There are many feminists who are very serious about the problem of male rape. In fact, fewer than 1% of male rape victims report their rape. Patriarchy has stipulated that boys and men are meant to "man up" in times of physical and emotional trauma, which leads society to laugh or disbelieve any allegations.

 

[Artemisia]

I'm well aware of Intersectionality. And I think that it's a great first step, but it's not quite there yet. I also think that as a whole the MRA groups aren't filled with very good people, but I was just saying one should be careful about calling anyone looking into men's right issues a "hater" is problematic.

Feminism is still "feminism." I'm talking of truly equal rights groups. Now, i'm not even trying to say that women don't face more issues then men - they do. But the issues should be looked at as the severity of the issue, from a gender-less perspective, and dealt with accordingly. A lot of men (discounting the terrible ones not worth listening to) still don't feel connected to feminism, and as long as one gender doesn't feel totally comfortable in the movement of the other then there's still a long way forward to go.

I mean, let's face it, the focus of feminism is still women. That's what it was created to do. And that's not necessarily even a bad thing. But intersectionality isn't quite the same thing as an equal human rights group, in practice. But, it's moving toward that at least.

I will admit, my hopes are kind of pie-in-the-sky for now, though.

Don't you think a movement that large and broad in its scope would lose focus?

Also, I feel as though feminism is the only movement that is criticized for focusing on particular issues (even though it's quite broad). You never hear people demanding race oriented groups or the LGBT movement to be more inclusive or focus on the issues of white and straight people. Why people do so for Feminism is strange because it's just as welcoming and inclusive.

 

[mullet2000]

You're saying men have to be coddled by feminism and women have to accept MRAs. Either way, we're still where we've always been with men having all the control and privilege.

That's not quite what I said. I don't think women should accept MRAs, because unfortunately they've attracted a bad following, as a whole.

What I am saying is that there should be a group that focuses on issues of men and women, where both genders feel equally represented. Not necessarily converting MRAs (because you won't be able to) but creating an environment where people who don't really fall into either extreme feel comfortable and represented? I'm not a very good writer right now (tired from exam/studying times) so hopefully my point is getting across.

 

[essyouemeight]

Regarding the whole "boys aren't doing as well" comment - that probably has to do with the fact that boys have pretty much "stagnated" in a society that is rapidly changing and becoming more interdependent. Boys are still stuck on stereotypes of "the good old days when boys were boys" (aka doing stupid shit) while society has changed to play more to the strength of girls.

We are beginning to rely more and more on inter-communication, "soft skills," and we are basically getting to the point where things require more time and longer commitment to see them through. These are all areas that in the past were relegated to girls, whereas boys where out working in industry and all you needed was a high-school diploma.

I'm not suggesting that boys/men are somehow incapable of doing any of the above; rather, I am suggesting that the stereotypically masculine way of thinking - i.e "do it now" "dominate everyone" "instant gratification" "do crazy things" etc - are becoming irrelevant. Yet we still have a society that says that it is "girly" for guys to want to communicate or be patient or cooperate etc - basically a patriarchy. If you don't fit the model of a "dude, I am a bro, talking is for women, lets do things, not analyze lol women are so indecisive," you are actually punished for it in a sense. Boys aren't doing well in school because they are being taught by society at an early age that men should use their hands and fix cars and drive trucks and PLAY FOOTBALL BRO, rather than reading a book or two.

I don't know if that makes sense.

 

[The Crimson Kid]

You will never convince a feminist of that, at least not the extremist ones.

I saw a video the other day with extreme feminist basically shutting down a MRA meeting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvYyGTmcP80
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO_X4DkwA_Q

It's hard to take feminist serious when they act like fucking children.

How is it that the MRM can be classified as a hate group, but feminism perpetuates the idea that men are oppressors (Patriarchy) and rapists (Rape Culture) yet they are not?

But feminist aren't?

I have yet to see any kind of outlandish behavior from the MRA groups that the feminist do a daily fucking basis.

The subject of this thread, as well as these three posts, wonderfully illustrate why this debate is so divisive and so heated today.

In any subject that is publicly debated, the people that shout the loudest and that hold the most extreme and controversial positions often receive a disproportionate amount of attention and reception to their positions relative to the number of people holding that extreme position on that subject.

Even in this thread about an article that wonderfully illustrated the range and variety of positions that are occupied by people that want these men's issues to be addressed, nearly all of the discussion in the thread has been about the most extreme of the positions described.

These radical feminists make up a small percentage of the total population of feminists, but their influence vastly outsizes their numbers. The "men's rights" group is just a vocal minority of people who want these issues and disadvantages that men face addressed as well, yet they are the public face of people advocating for these changes.

If the moderate majorities do not push back against these extreme positions enough, these extremes will become more and more normal in their group to the point that what was the moderate majority will end up finding themselves marginalized and drowned out. The current state of the Republican Party is a prime example of this phenomenon. The moderate Republicans did not push back enough against the extreme voices on their side for many years, and those extremes became seen as the new normal, and the old moderates were seen as outsiders that needed to be purged from the group (and were!). And because the Republican establishment didn't contain that extreme minority of the party when they had the chance, now the party doesn't really represent the majority of their base anymore. Many polls of the public have shown majorities of Republicans in favor of universal background checks for guns and for raising taxes instead of cutting social spending programs, but none of that is reflected in the outward perception or actions of the party at large.

Without pushback from the more moderate majorities of both groups, these extreme elements can appear to people as being representative of the entirety of their respective "movements," which further divides people and makes it harder for anything of substance to be achieved. If the silent majorities of these groups stay silent, then these more extreme elements are the only ones speaking for the group, which leads to distorted perspectives like the ones I quoted, even though I can totally understand how those perspectives were formed if those extreme viewpoints were all you had to go off of.

This phenomenon is why the feminist movement needs to step up and take more responsibility in loudly and repeatedly demonstrating that these extreme voices and perspectives in their ranks do not stand for the views and opinions of most of the feminists out there. Feminism originated, and is still seen by most feminists, as a movement to disassemble the biases relating to gender and gender roles and remove the obstacles preventing females from obtaining equality with males, with the end objective of obtaining equality between the sexes. Many radical feminists believe that women are inherently superior to men and should take the dominant role in society that men have held for so long. This perspective is at odds with the goals of feminism at large and should not be allowed to take hold as an end goal of the movement, which would alienate many feminists and potential future feminists and would drastically reduce the chance of positive change actually occurring.

Too many people are getting caught up in debating solely about these extremes when we should be realizing that there is a significant amount that the vast majority of feminists and the vast majority of people wanting these men's issues to be addressed would agree upon. If people would stop focusing so much on these extremes in these groups and would instead focus on what most people believe in these groups, then these debates might be able to actually get somewhere.

 

[Bleepey]

I'm all for feminism. Slowly but surely, I've taught my friends and brother to tone down/eliminate the use of "fag", "bitch", "pussy" (in a negative way), "cunt" (sorry, Football-GAF), and so on.

However one time I was punched in the face for not using "womyn"...that soured me for a while.

You're joking about the latter right?

 

[Vermillion]

Where ever there's a movement for progress, there will always be a counter movement.

The history of male-female relations is amusing because there are certainly legitimate complaints, but many (all?) of them are because of the same system that oppresses women.

 

[mullet2000]

Don't you think a movement that large and broad in its scope would lose focus?

Also, I feel as though feminism is the only movement that is criticized for focusing on particular issues (even though it's quite broad). You never hear people demanding race oriented groups or the LGBT movement to be more inclusive or focus on the issues of white and straight people. Why people do so for Feminism is strange because it's just as welcoming and inclusive.

Hmmm...perhaps it would it's current focus a bit. But I don't think having a focus of equality looking at either gender's issues is necessarily a bad thing. It would require some restructing of course, but I think there is a hard "goal" to be found there.

And I suppose it is criticized for that. Hmm. I don't have much of a comment on that I guess, sorry. I don't think feminism is strange or anything, for the record, but I also don't feel personally represented by it to the point of labeling myself as a "feminist." In terms of the movement as a whole, I mean. Not the definition. Obviously I do by definition.

 

[Devolution]

I keep hearing about extreme feminists in these kinds of threads but nothing concrete. Just links to old shit like SCUM or Dworkin.

 

[Deified Data]

That's not quite what I said. I don't think women should accept MRAs, because unfortunately they've attracted a bad following, as a whole.

What I am saying is that there should be a group that focuses on issues of men and women, where both genders feel equally represented. Not necessarily converting MRAs (because you won't be able to) but creating an environment where people who don't really fall into either extreme feel comfortable and represented? I'm not a very good writer right now (tired from exam/studying times) so hopefully my point is getting across.

That's feminism, and if you're a man who doesn't mind being stripped of unearned privilege (that some of us don't even take advantage of), you should feel comfortable in the femenist movement. What we have here is an issue of sloppy semantics. Get past the fact that the name has cooties and you'll find that the feminist movement is totally compatible to seeking equal rights for women and men. There are pig-headed demagogues in just about every socio-political movement. Ignore them and move on.

I think one of the biggest roadblocks for men in accepting feminist theory is the idea that "patriarchy" means "men"...it doesn't.

 

[MGrant]

I keep hearing about extreme feminists in these kinds of threads but nothing concrete. Just links to old shit like SCUM or Dworkin.

To be sure. I want to see some Judith Butler up in this. I feel like a lot of these criticisms fall on second-wave feminism, which has been transcended.

 

[Devolution]

Also here's a post by mumei that sums up the problem well.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=50776758&postcount=915

To be sure. I want to see some Judith Butler up in this. I feel like a lot of these criticisms fall on second-wave feminism, which has been transcended.

The self-identified feminists I know are basically striving for basic autonomy/reproductive rights, fair wages, work/volunteer at rape/violence crisis centers and donate their time and money to various causes seeking to improve the lives of women because we're not at full equality yet. When I hear all this ruckus on the internet about extreme feminists I just don't know where they get this shit.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

I think one of the biggest roadblocks for men in accepting feminist theory is the idea that "patriarchy" means "men"...it doesn't.

That and also not be in control of or creating something. It's not a situation most men have ever experienced, so they have an immediate defensive reaction to it.

 

[cubicle47b]

I keep hearing about extreme feminists in these kinds of threads but nothing concrete. Just links to old shit like SCUM or Dworkin.

Tumblr and SRS (not the circle-jerk but its satellite subreddits - often good, sometimes bad). The group of feminists in the Toronto protest. It's examples like those that stick out to a lot of people even though they're not representative of feminism as a whole.

 

[Devolution]

Tumblr and SRS (not the circle-jerk but its satellite subreddits - often good, sometimes bad). The group of feminists in the Toronto protest. It's examples like those that stick out to a lot of people even though they're not representative of feminism as a whole.

This just exemplifies the problem. People using the internet as their barometer for social justice. Social justice is busy doing things outside the internet.

 

[CLEEK]

I keep hearing about extreme feminists in these kinds of threads but nothing concrete. Just links to old shit like SCUM or Dworkin.

You're sounding like you're about to use the fallacy term 'straw feminist' to outright dismiss that there is any unsavoury or extreme view amongst a subset of feminists.

The reality is, feminism is a broad church. It doesn't have a single, centrally controlled dogma that everyone adheres to. Anyone can call themselves a feminist. Amongst the spectrum of views, on the one side, you have progressive, third wave feminism, that looks for egalitarianism and equality for all. At the other end, you have extremist views.

Why would feminism be unique amongst all ideologies where everyone is morally pure and there are no extreme or militant members? The common (valid) criticism of MRM is that it is steeped in hatred of women. The fact that a subset of MRM supporters hold extreme views of the opposite gender is used by some feminists to deny the factual claims that are made, and to diminish their validity.

But when the same view is taken toward feminism - that a subset of supporters have deep issues towards men - the calls of 'straw feminist' are made to try and claim that these people don't exist. With any ideology or belief system, the moderates validate the extremist. It is for moderates to call out the fringes of their movement, not to shield them. But with gender politics especially, it leads to tribalism and us vs them.

What an example? Just view ShitRedditSays for a minute, then come back here and try to claim with a straight face that militant feminism doesn't exists in today's world.

 

[Vermillion]

You're sounding like you're about to use the fallacy term 'straw feminist' to outright dismiss that there is any unsavoury or extreme view amongst a subset of feminists.

The reality is, feminism is a broad church. It doesn't have a single, centrally controlled dogma that everyone adheres to. Anyone can call themselves a feminist. Amongst the spectrum of views, on the one side, you have progressive, third wave feminism, that looks for egalitarianism and equality for all. At the other end, you have extremist views.

Why would feminism be unique amongst all ideologies where everyone is morally pure and there are no extreme or militant members? The common (valid) criticism of MRM is that it is steeped in hatred of women. The fact that a subset of MRM supporters hold extreme views of the opposite gender is used by some feminists to deny the factual claims that are made, and to diminish their validity.

But when the same view is taken toward feminism - that a subset of supporters have deep issues towards men - the calls of 'straw feminist' are made to try and claim that these people don't exist. With any ideology or belief system, the moderates validate the extremist. It is for moderates to call out the fringes of their movement, not to shield them. But with gender politics especially, it leads to tribalism and us vs them.

What an example? Just view ShitRedditSays for a minute, then come back here and try to claim with a straight face that militant feminism doesn't exists in today's world.

I mean of course they exist, but they don't speak for the majority.

 

[Devolution]

You're sounding like you're about to use the fallacy term 'straw feminist' to outright dismiss that there is any unsavoury or extreme view amongst a subset of feminists.

The reality is, feminism is a broad church. It doesn't have a single, centrally controlled dogma that everyone adheres to. Anyone can call themselves a feminist. Amongst the spectrum of views, on the one side, you have progressive, third wave feminism, that looks for egalitarianism and equality for all. At the other end, you have extremist views.

Why would feminism be unique amongst all ideologies where everyone is morally pure and there are no extreme or militant members? The common (valid) criticism of MRM is that it is steeped in hatred of women. The fact that a subset of MRM supporters hold extreme views of the opposite gender is used by some feminists to deny the factual claims that are made, and to diminish their validity.

But when the same view is taken toward feminism - that a subset of supporters have deep issues towards men - the calls of 'straw feminist' are made to try and claim that these people don't exist. With any ideology or belief system, the moderates validate the extremist. It is for moderates to call out the fringes of their movement, not to shield them. But with gender politics especially, it leads to tribalism and us vs them.

What an example? Just view ShitRedditSays for a minute, then come back here and try to claim with a straight face that militant feminism doesn't exists in today's world.

It doesn't exist outside of stupid ramblings on the internet that people use to justify their dumbass stance that feminism has gone too far. Feminism hasn't gone far enough. The fringe doesn't really exist from what I've run into in real life. As I said it's great that people are using inane ramblings on reddit (lol reddit) to substantiate their claims of feminism sheltering the extremists. I simply do not run into those types while volunteering. They'd be asked to take their putrid views of allies outside.

 

[Deified Data]

You're sounding like you're about to use the fallacy term 'straw feminist' to outright dismiss that there is any unsavoury or extreme view amongst a subset of feminists.

The reality is, feminism is a broad church. It doesn't have a single, centrally controlled dogma that everyone adheres to. Anyone can call themselves a feminist. Amongst the spectrum of views, on the one side, you have progressive, third wave feminism, that looks for egalitarianism and equality for all. At the other end, you have extremist views.

Why would feminism be unique amongst all ideologies where everyone is morally pure and there are no extreme or militant members? The common (valid) criticism of MRM is that it is steeped in hatred of women. The fact that a subset of MRM supporters hold extreme views of the opposite gender is used by some feminists to deny the factual claims that are made, and to diminish their validity.

But when the same view is taken toward feminism - that a subset of supporters have deep issues towards men - the calls of 'straw feminist' are made to try and claim that these people don't exist. With any ideology or belief system, the moderates validate the extremist. It is for moderates to call out the fringes of their movement, not to shield them. But with gender politics especially, it leads to tribalism and us vs them.

What an example? Just view ShitRedditSays for a minute, then come back here and try to claim with a straight face that militant feminism doesn't exists in today's world.

Where did Devolution once say that these people don't exist, period? Just stop labeling an entire movement after a minority and your problem's solved.

It doesn't exist outside of stupid ramblings on the internet that people use to justify their dumbass stance that feminism has gone too far. Feminism hasn't gone far enough. The fringe doesn't really exist from what I've run into in real life. As I said it's great that people are using inane ramblings on reddit (lol reddit) to substantiate their claims of feminism sheltering the extremists. I simply do not run into those types while volunteering. They'd be asked to take their putrid views of allies outside.

lol, nevermind, she said it right here. Needless to say I disagree with that statement. There are hateful morons wherever you go. We're basically just pitting anecdotes against anecdotes at this point.

 

[seldead]

Why did I just read someone say that not masturbating is a cure to men's rights issues? No fap dudes are messed up with their cultish behaviour. As an anecdote, not jerkin marginally increases your risk of prostate cancer which is like kinda a real men's issue ya know?

 

[Devolution]

lol, nevermind, she said it right here. Needless to say I disagree with that statement. There are hateful morons wherever you go.

They're honestly not in any of the groups I've encountered. They would be told to leave. No one is sheltering that.

And of course it's anecdotal but do you think feminist groups would make much leeway calling men vile scum?

 

[Sanky Panky]

I'm not suggesting that boys/men are somehow incapable of doing any of the above; rather, I am suggesting that the stereotypically masculine way of thinking - i.e "do it now" "dominate everyone" "instant gratification" "do crazy things" etc - are becoming irrelevant. Yet we still have a society that says that it is "girly" for guys to want to communicate or be patient or cooperate etc - basically a patriarchy. If you don't fit the model of a "dude, I am a bro, talking is for women, lets do things, not analyze lol women are so indecisive," you are actually punished for it in a sense. Boys aren't doing well in school because they are being taught by society at an early age that men should use their hands and fix cars and drive trucks and PLAY FOOTBALL BRO, rather than reading a book or two.

I don't know if that makes sense.

Ask yourself - what is the source of "feminine" or "girly" being perceived as a bad thing for men? MRA's seem to consistently pick the wrong battle with the wrong group.

P,.S. The whole "white male C student can't comfortably land in a job anymore" thing has to be the biggest bullshit "issue" I have ever read.

 

[CLEEK]

Also here's a post by mumei that sums up the problem well.

Yes, it sums up the issue where the entire men's right movement is dismissed. As though it's a single entity, and everyone has the exact same motives and beliefs.

I don't think we're on the same side; the men's rights movement abandoned its more nuanced understanding of the problems with the masculine gender role more than a quarter-century ago, and its raison d'etre today is in blaming the problems men face on feminism. So naturally feminism and the men's rights movement are not secretly allies. That said, the feminism I subscribe to is an ally of men.

So if I support equal legal rights for both genders in family law (i.e. courts deciding which parent should have custody on merit, not gender), I am against feminism? The logical conclusion to this is feminism is against equal legal rights for both genders.

Men's Rights is no different from feminism. Neither are a structured, centralised, set in stone group of beliefs. I certainly don't subscribe to the mindset I see in MRA threads and comments, which all too often decend into anti-women nonsense. But I certainly do subscribe to some of the political goals they are trying to achieve.

Mumei's last line is the most telling. "That said, the feminism I subscribe to is an ally of men." That he shows that feminism has many faces and motives, and that he subscribes to a particular flavour only. Why can you do that to feminism, but to to the male equivalent?

 

[Deified Data]

They're honestly not in any of the groups I've encountered. They would be told to leave. No one is sheltering that.

And of course it's anecdotal but do you think feminist groups would make much leeway calling men vile scum?

I don't think mainstream feminism has anything to do with those people. Perhaps we've had a misunderstanding. I was of the impression that you don't believe those people exist, period. However if you believe that they are not reflective of mainstream feminism and not worth bringing up in the first place, I agree with you.

 

[Devolution]

I don't think mainstream feminism has anything to do with those people. Perhaps we've had a misunderstanding. I was of the impression that you don't believe those people exist, period. However if you believe that they are not reflective of mainstream feminism and not worth bringing up in the first place, I agree with you.

We agree then. They exist but they're not being sheltered nor are they representative of the mainstream movement.

 

[Ikael]

I keep hearing about extreme feminists in these kinds of threads but nothing concrete. Just links to old shit like SCUM or Dworkin.

Spain, my very own country's short lived, cringe-worthy ministry of equality. If that does not sounds orwellian enugh, a big chunk of theanti-domestic violence laws that it actually passed were nothing but radical feminism, including some downright anticonstitutional laws such as bigger penalties for the same crimes depending on the gender that commited them (hint: guess which gender got the shaft) and the ever wondrous "get accused of marital abuse, stay in jail for 24 hours straight just in case without actually meeting any lawer or judge". Bonus track: only appliable to males, of course. Oh, and also loosing custody rights over your sons just by getting accused of marital abuse with no need to wait for any silly judicial sentence that prooves your guilty of such accusation. Positive discrimination.

Radical feminism does exist. And when it wields political power, this is the type of shit that you got. It is also worth noting that the actual effects of such politics were a doubled rate of suicide among divorced men, and a short term decrease of domestic violence... followed by a constant increase of domestic violence towards women on the latter years, to boot.

 

[maharg]

Name one country that had more female presidents than males

OH WAIT YOU CAN'T because it hasn't even made 100 years that women earned the right to even VOTE in most countries

edit : Finland, New Zealand, Australia, Cook Islands, Isle of Man and Pitcairn Islands are the only ones that allowed women to vote before 1913. Norway allowed EXACTLY in 1913

See but that's all ok because women didn't have to be in the draft in the US. Which was of course entirely their decision.

MRAs can start getting respect when they stop putting woman-hating bullshit one-link deep on all their websites. Their front pages always look nice and reasonable, talking about reasonable issues like education disparities, custody issues, and even circumcision. But you never have to go far from there to find them blame 'evil mothers hurting loving fathers' or running oppression olympics by comparing male circumcision to third world female genital mutilation.

 

[essyouemeight]

Ask yourself - what is the source of "feminine" or "girly" being perceived as a bad thing for men? MRA's seem to consistently pick the wrong battle with the wrong group.

P,.S. The whole "white male C student can't comfortably land in a job anymore" thing has to be the biggest bullshit "issue" I have ever read.

I know. It's like they don't even realize that a lot of what they are advocating is what is actually hurting them.

It doesn't exist outside of stupid ramblings on the internet that people use to justify their dumbass stance that feminism has gone too far. Feminism hasn't gone far enough. The fringe doesn't really exist from what I've run into in real life. As I said it's great that people are using inane ramblings on reddit (lol reddit) to substantiate their claims of feminism sheltering the extremists. I simply do not run into those types while volunteering. They'd be asked to take their putrid views of allies outside.

Just like extreme militant MRM activists don't exists outside of a few ramblings, and anyone who says so or points it out is using that to justify their dumbass stance that MRM activists are misogynistic.

amirite?

They're honestly not in any of the groups I've encountered. They would be told to leave. No one is sheltering that.

And of course it's anecdotal but do you think feminist groups would make much leeway calling men vile scum?

Oh come on. You didn't see it, so it doesn't exist? Every group has crazies. There are videos on this very page.

 

[Devolution]

I know. It's like they don't even realize that a lot of what they are advocating is what is actually hurting them.



Just like extreme militant MRM activists don't exists outside of a few ramblings, and anyone who says so or points it out is using that to justify their dumbass stance that MRM activists are misogynistic.

smfh



Oh come on.

MRM doesn't need extremists, their mainstream movement thus far has been pretty anti-feminist. You and some others can deny this all you want but it's true.

 

[kittens]

MRAs are some of the most anti-social, sociopathic, backwards assed people I've had the displeasure of engaging with. Just yesterday my friend was telling me about an argument she was having with a 6'1" wrestler dude who "blames women for being afraid of men". He was arguing that women are blowing male violence way out of proportion, and that women need to get over it. This is very representative of how unempathetic and misogynistic MRAs are.

Also, what is wrong with "militant feminism"? Yes, I take the idea that patriarchy is fucked up to an extreme degree. Why wouldn't I? Why wouldn't you?

 

[essyouemeight]

MRM doesn't need extremists, their mainstream movement thus far has been pretty anti-feminist. You and some others can deny this all you want but it's true.

That's not the point here. I generally agree with what you are saying, though I think some of their concerns are legitimate (though ironically those concerns are actually a product of patriarchy). I am saying that there is a very vocal minority of feminists that say really really stupid things and it hurts the feminist movement. Denying it because you don't see it at your meetings or whatever isn't helping.

 

[seldead]

Spain, my very own country's short lived, cringe-worthy ministry of equality. If that does not sounds orwellian enugh, a big chunk of theanti-domestic violence laws that it actually passed were nothing but radical feminism, including some downright anticonstitutional laws such as bigger penalties for the same crimes depending on the gender that commited them (hint: guess which gender got the shaft) and the ever wondrous "get accused of marital abuse, stay in jail for 24 hours straight just in case without actually meeting any lawer or judge". Bonus track: only appliable to males, of course. Oh, and also loosing custody rights over your sons just by getting accused of marital abuse with no need to wait for any silly judicial sentence that prooves your guilty of such accusation. Positive discrimination.

Radical feminism does exist. And when it wields political power, this is the type of shit that you got. It is also worth noting that the actual effects of such politics were a doubled rate of suicide among divorced men, and a short term decrease of domestic violence... followed by a constant increase of domestic violence towards women on the latter years, to boot.

Feminism is equality for women. Radical feminism is radical equality for women. A policy change that does not promote equality isn't a feminist policy change and it isn't a radical feminist policy change. Calling this feminism is what purportrates the misconception among men's rights groups that women have some agenda to be the alpha gender (lawl).

 

[Slayven]

Men's Rights Movement is an antireality movement.

 

[Devolution]

That's not the point here. I generally agree with what you are saying, though I think some of their concerns are legitimate (though ironically those concerns are actually a product of patriarchy). I am saying that there is a very vocal minority of feminists that say really really stupid things and it hurts the feminist movement. Denying it because you don't see it isn't helping.

I don't see it. I see people going out of their way to find trolls on reddit to justify what they see feminism as because they don't actually want to invest themselves in finding out what the movement is really about. It's a great tactic really. Claim they're actually harming feminism because some people refuse to actually learn about feminism. Cyclical logic really.

 

[essyouemeight]

Feminism is equality for women. Radical feminism is radical equality for women. A policy change that does not promote equality isn't a feminist policy change and it isn't a radical feminist policy change. Calling this feminism is what purportrates the misconception among men's rights groups that women have some agenda to be the alpha gender (lawl).

I'm pretty sure that the generally understood connotation for "radical feminism" is basically women that hate men. So in that sense, he is correct.

 

[Protome]

Groups like this spouting nonsense like this is why the real issues regarding men are overlooked.

Rape of men is significantly lower than female rape (it's actually pretty high in Australia for some reason though I believe), but still an issue that can have just as significant mental aftermath. Then it gets made worse by there being so few publicised help groups, by there being no male equivalent to Woman's shelters/refuges in most places and by the simple fact that it's overall viewed as a crime committed to woman. That last one alone can really fuck people up.

People like this going off arguing the crud the guy in the OP argues just gets real issues like this written off and they continue to be overlooked.

Why is equality so hard, everyone? Lets just all settle down and be nice to each other.

 

[Surreal]

That's feminism, and if you're a man who doesn't mind being stripped of unearned privilege (that some of us don't even take advantage of), you should feel comfortable in the femenist movement. What we have here is an issue of sloppy semantics. Get past the fact that the name has cooties and you'll find that the feminist movement is totally compatible to seeking equal rights for women and men. There are pig-headed demagogues in just about every socio-political movement. Ignore them and move on.

Excuse me if I say anything stupid, I'm just learning about these things...

I think the problem is that, even though feminism is about equality between genders, feminism largely focuses its energy on the inequalities that women face (or maybe my perception of the movement is incorrect, please let me know). This is because the inequalities faced by women are more numerous and severe than those faced by men. And that's great.

But I think the problem is that generally men, while sympathetic to the plight of women, aren't as passionate about the wage gap or other feminist issues because directly it has nothing to do with them. I've heard the argument that feminists are dismantling the patriarchy so it'll eventually fix the problems that men face too, but I feel like that is just telling men to join them only to put their concerns in the backseat until it all works itself out. I suppose that I feel like that isn't a satisfying answer for a lot of men.

I think there is room for a group that focuses on tackling the patriarchy from the other end. I don't think the current wave of MRAs are those groups. There's too much bad blood there for some reason, but a few of the points raised are valid. We should be concerned about the education of men and the unrealistic ideas of manhood... so hopefully one day there can be a group that gets men involved who believe in equality between genders and focuses on the issues that men face.

A lot of people will say that these issues are insignificant and that men are being "whiny", but I don't see any harm in letting those who are passionate about it put in work as long as it does good. There are a lot of "insignificant" causes out there that do good in small ways.

 

[CLEEK]

MRAs are some of the most anti-social, sociopathic, backwards assed people I've had the displeasure of engaging with. Just yesterday my friend was telling me about an argument she was having with a 6'1" wrestler dude who "blames women for being afraid of men". He was arguing that women are blowing male violence way out of proportion, and that women need to get over it. This is very representative of how unempathetic and misogynistic MRAs are.

Also, what is wrong with "militant feminism"? Yes, I take the idea that patriarchy is fucked up to an extreme degree. Why wouldn't I? Why wouldn't you?

First of all, who did you know he was an 'MRA'? Are you just labelling him with that because he had some anti-women views. And if I meet a women with unsavoury views about men, can I dismiss all of feminism?

Secondly, if you think that extreme anti-women views are bad, why do you know feel the same way about anti-male views (which is at the heart of militant / radical feminism)?

 

[cutmeamango]

By whom is the mainstream feminism comprised?

 

[Valnen]

Once women are actually proportionally represented in positions of power, and once women make as much money as men do, on average, we can start working on unfair custody laws and the like.

Or we could work on them now. Saying "that can wait" is nonsense and shows you don't want true equality IMO.

Unfair custody laws are something that needs to be dealt with immediately.

 

[Devolution]

Excuse me if I say anything stupid, I'm just learning about these things...

I think the problem is that, even though feminism is about equality between genders, feminism largely focuses its energy on the inequalities that women face (or maybe my perception of the movement is incorrect, please let me know). This is because the inequalities faced by women are more numerous and severe than those faced by men. And that's great.

But I think the problem is that generally men, while sympathetic to the plight of women, aren't as passionate about the wage gap or other feminist issues because directly it has nothing to do with them. I've heard the argument that feminists are dismantling the patriarchy so it'll eventually fix the problems that men face too, but I feel like that is just telling men to join them only to put their concerns in the backseat until it all works itself out. I suppose that I feel like that isn't a satisfying answer for a lot of men.

I think there is room for a group that focuses on tackling the patriarchy from the other end. I don't think the current wave of MRAs are those groups. There's too much bad blood there for some reason, but a few of the points raised are valid. We should be concerned about the education of men and the unrealistic ideas of manhood... so hopefully one day there can be a group that gets men involved who believe in equality between genders and focuses on the issues that men face.

A lot of people will say that these issues are insignificant and that men are being "whiny", but I don't see any harm in letting those who are passionate about it put in work as long as it does good. There are a lot of "insignificant" causes out there that do good in small ways.

They aren't. They were backing the stalling of the passing of VAWA. The mainstream groups are anti-feminist.

 

[seldead]

I'm pretty sure that the generally understood connotation for "radical feminism" is basically women that hate men. So in that sense, he is correct.

Radical feminist are feminist who believe society needs radical change of its social structures for there to be equality, they think that societal patriarchy is completely engrained in our culture. This doesn't, however, mean that they have to hate men and that hating men has anything to do with the feminist cause.

 

[essyouemeight]

I don't see it. I see people going out of their way to find trolls on reddit to justify what they see feminism as because they don't actually want to invest themselves in finding out what the movement is really about. It's a great tactic really. Claim they're actually harming feminism because some people refuse to actually learn about feminism. Cyclical logic really.

Well I don't see why we need feminism in the first place. All the women I work with are totally okay and not raped so feminists must just hate men.

 

[Kazerei]

Interesting article. Some good points raised and some facepalm-worthy comments made too.

“My sense is that to be a young man in university today is to be told over and over again that you’re part of the half of the human race that has always had it really good, and that it’s your turn to step back and turn power over to your sisters,” Fiamengo said.

“Many men are, if not consciously, then unconsciously, demonstrating an awareness of that fact by dropping out of university.”

Sounds unlikely.

Dwyer said that feminism has done a good job of redefining what it means to be a woman, expanding opportunities and choices beyond the home. He says, however, that it’s time to do that for men, to take them beyond the role of aggressor and breadwinner.

[Frank] said that many problems specific to young men, such as suicide, bullying and risky behaviour leading to injury and health issues, can be traced back to the pressure on boys to act appropriately masculine. Boys enforce this pressure by harassing their peers who behave effeminately.

Absolutely agree.

“If you were a C student way back in the day, and you were a white male, you just kind of cruised into a good job. And now, you can't do that anymore,” Smith said.

Good.

He runs a Tumblr blog where he argues against statistics about the gender wage gap and systemic gendered violence. More controversially, he also writes about his disbelief in rape culture (cultural norms the implicitly tolerate rape and shame victims), asserts that drunk sex is not necessarily rape and defends what many would call victim blaming. He also rejects the traditional notions of patriarchy and male privilege.

Sullivan says that the core set of principles that feminist work from — patriarchy, male privilege and the systemic oppression of women — are just plain wrong. He says that feminists have incorrectly based their actions of the premise “that society was somehow organized by a shadowy cabal of men to oppress women.”

This guy doesn't get it.

In his work with young men, Perera talks about the pressure on males to “man up” – to be that aggressive, unflinching pillar of strength and manliness and to bottle up any emotions that pop up along the way. Perera attributes these problems to the patriarchy, the same system that feminists have been fighting since the beginning. He worries that men’s rights activists are playing the “oppression Olympics” and ignoring how gender issues are inherently linked.

Perera wants boys and men to be liberated from the confines of traditional gender roles too, but he said men’s rights activists need to acknowledge root causes – namely patriarchy – and work toward healing, rather that simply blame women or feminism.

This guy gets it.

 

[depths20XX]

At first I gave the MRM movement the benefit of the doubt but honestly I can't see them as anything but an uneducated group of dudes who don't understand feminism and feel attacked by it.

 

[squidyj]

I keep hearing about extreme feminists in these kinds of threads but nothing concrete. Just links to old shit like SCUM or Dworkin.

no allecto, no sale.