Male Feminists

whatsamsn

The way later10 described his views in his post. I wouldnt look at him like he had two heads because he explained himself.

Its just when a man says "I support feminism" in a social setting ... It can automatically sound like the man is whipped something terrible. Or is a little weasel who is always the 'friend' never the boyfriend type of person (trying to build a picture here to describe :pac:)

And besides, woman aint being held back in Ireland these days. Its not the 50s anymore. Sure we have female bus drivers, postmen, doctors, judges etc.

Millicent

token101 wrote: »

Yes

Why?

later12

Johnny Foreigner wrote: »

Male feminists=Eunuchs.

It saddens me that you feel this way, Johnny.

Altogether now! Sister suffragette!

Da Shins Kelly

Feminism at its core is simply the promotion of equality between the sexes. It's come to mean something different due to more radical people adopting the term, but when it comes down to it that's what feminism means. In theory, every reasonable person is a feminist. It's almost become a dirty word at this stage, but it's not and shouldn't be seen as such.

Mr Benevolent

snubbleste wrote: »

There is no feminism in the nursing or primary school teaching professions.
Maybe we need a more equality-friendly word to describe what you say, rather than some gender-orientated word beginning with F or M.

Genderism.

token101

Millicent wrote: »

What's wrong with that? Would black rights' groups be better off chasing equal rights for Asians, Hisanics, Caucasians etc.?

Millicent wrote: »

Why?

Because they are chasing equal rights, which should be for everyone, not just blacks. Otherwise they're a hypocrisy.

southsiderosie

token101 wrote: »

Because they are chasing equal rights, which should be for everyone, not just blacks. Otherwise they're a hypocrisy.

The way the civil rights legislation was written, it does guarantee universal rights for all minority groups, not just blacks. So I'm not sure what you are complaining about here?

Millicent

token101 wrote: »

Because they are chasing equal rights, which should be for everyone, not just blacks. Otherwise they're a hypocrisy.

But specific issues pertaining to different races differ and require differing approaches. So too do gender issues. Just because someone is a feminist or fights for the rights of a articular race, does not mean that they are not also egalitarian. They're not mutually exclusive terms.

ETA: It's not a hypocrisy either. Just because somebody works for the rights of one gender or ethnic group, does not mean they are seeking to oppress the rights of anyone else. I don't see how you can class it as hypocrisy.

Millicent

I hadn't seen this post before but I'll answer it now.

token101 wrote: »

Exactly. They don't complain when they're getting cheap car insurance or more money for working less (Tennis). You never hear a complaint saying the hospitals are dominated by female nurses. You never hear a peep about gender quotas in primary teaching or nurseries. No it's a one way street. It's only inequality when it doesn't favour women.

There is a marked and sizeable disparity between the professions men and women are encouraged towards. More women are encouraged towards "caring" professions such as nursing or teaching. The recent CSO statistics back that up. There has been a wealth of feminist writing on this topic. Just because you haven't read up on it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

token101 wrote: »

Then you'll see gowls like Ivana Bacik crawl from under the bridge with the 'Womens Council'.

Gowls? That's lovely.

token101 wrote: »

Christ, do we have a f***ing Men's Council? No. Why? Because we don't need one and they'd just be another gravy train quango full of idiots trolling the world.

So because (in your opinion) men don't need a Men's Council, women shouldn't have one? That's a logical fallacy. FWIW (and I'm a feminist), I'd have no problem with a men's council if it could deal with fathers' rights in this country. Just because one is a feminist, doesn't mean one does not support other gender movements.

token101 wrote: »

I've yet to see a job spec that says men will earn more.

Oh yeah, to catch those stupid sexists. They're hardly going to advertise pay disparity.

token101 wrote: »

Women can vote, drive and protest. They can, and do, run for election. We don't need more of these bored gob****es telling us things aren't equal and women are oppressed. We don't need quotas. People can vote for who they like, not based on their gender. Here's an idea: f*** off to Saudi and tell the House of Saud about your first world non problems. At least there you'll have legitimate complaints.

Who's advocating for quotas? And as to election: remember that handy little point you made earlier about the propensity of women towards nurturing roles? The other side of that coin is lack of encouragement towards roles like politics and law, so women still remain woefully under-represented in the Dáil and Seanad.

Nobody is saying women's rights here are on a par with women's rights in Saudi Arabia. The problems in the first world exist on the same spectrum, though farther down the scale than the problems in Saudi Arabia. One doesn't negate the existence of the other.

Sindri

What's the only thing a woman can be an expert on?:)



Feminism. That's why they invented it.:D

woodoo

When i think feminist i think big ball busting hallions with a strong dislike of men and poor attention to their own appearance.

Scanlas The 2nd

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Sindri wrote: »

I agree with you completely, but some feminists wouldn't. Ultra Feminists and they're not just lesbians.

However, I will not tolerate some guy thinking he is automatically 'better' then I am just because he has a penis. I also won't tolerate some guy refusing to do a particular task just because they have a penis)

It is everyone's right to view themselves as better than anyone they want, people are entitled to their opinions and there's nothing you can do about it.

Some people "don't tolerate" that you view yourself as better than animals. Some people regard animals as equals.

finality

Millicent wrote: »

I hadn't seen this post before but I'll answer it now.



There is a marked and sizeable disparity between the professions men and women are encouraged towards. More women are encouraged towards "caring" professions such as nursing or teaching. The recent CSO statistics back that up. There has been a wealth of feminist writing on this topic. Just because you haven't read up on it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.



Gowls? That's lovely.



So because (in your opinion) men don't need a Men's Council, women shouldn't have one? That's a logical fallacy. FWIW (and I'm a feminist), I'd have no problem with a men's council if it could deal with fathers' rights in this country. Just because one is a feminist, doesn't mean one does not support other gender movements.



Oh yeah, to catch those stupid sexists. They're hardly going to advertise pay disparity.



Who's advocating for quotas? And as to election: remember that handy little point you made earlier about the propensity of women towards nurturing roles? The other side of that coin is lack of encouragement towards roles like politics and law, so women still remain woefully under-represented in the Dáil and Seanad.

Nobody is saying women's rights here on a par with women's rights in Saudi Arabia. The problems in the first world exist on the same spectrum, though farther down the scale than the problems in Saudi Arabia. One doesn't negate the existence of the other.

Young women are not being encouraged to pursue jobs in nursing or teaching. Women are simply more likely to want to fill those roles. There are fundamental differences between the sexes and men are more likely to be interested in politics, etc. It's hardly some sort of borderline conspiracy to keep women out of government. If women don't want to be involved in politics then 'encouraging' them towards careers in that area just because they're underrepresented is a move in the wrong direction.

Eric Cartman

feminism tries to bring equality using quotas and restrictions , effectivley giving men the same disadvantages to keep everyone on the same level.

A man saying he is a feminist is laughable at best.

Im all for equality , but the femenist movement and its ideals are the equivalent of gaining black rights in the US by bringing mugabes army to new york.

Scanlas The 2nd

Millicent wrote: »

token101 wrote: »

Because they are chasing equal rights, which should be for everyone, not just blacks. Otherwise they're a hypocrisy.

But specific issues pertaining to different races differ and require differing approaches. So too do gender issues. Just because someone is a feminist or fights for the rights of a articular race, does not mean that they are not also egalitarian. They're not mutually exclusive terms.

ETA: It's not a hypocrisy either. Just because somebody works for the rights of one gender or ethnic group, does not mean they are seeking to oppress the rights of anyone else. I don't see how you can class it as hypocrisy.

I do think it's hyprocisy when someone claims to how important equality is to them but never campaign to lose rights in the name of equality. It's nonsense a lot of the time. Nearly all campaigning is done to increase relative rights, very rarely to decrease relative rights which would bring closer the so called goal of equality. Equality in the western world is largely a gambit to advance one's own interests.

finality

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

It is everyone's right to view themselves as better than anyone they want, people are entitled to their opinions and there's nothing you can do about it.

Some people "don't tolerate" that you view yourself as better than animals. Some people regard animals as equals.

She was referring specifically to sexism, and yeah a man can be a sexist and feel he's automatically better than all women, but that doesn't mean that should be tolerated. When an opinion is blatantly wrong and offensive it should not be simply accepted.

Sindri

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

It is everyone's right to view themselves as better than anyone they want, people are entitled to their opinions and there's nothing you can do about it.

Some people "don't tolerate" that you view yourself as better than animals. Some people regard animals as equals.

Cannae make hide no tale o' this wee lad?

K-9

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

Personally, I think it's bullsh!t to not allow a new Dad the opportunity to have an extended period with his baby free from the hassles of work. I don't think it should be compulsory, but I do think the option should at least be there.

Also, yeah, clothes shops?

I think Sweden was one of the first countries to being long parental leave which was aimed at men taking a good part of it, didn't work socially and they had to force men to take it. Eventually it became generally acceptable for men to take decent parental leave.

later10 wrote: »

Yes I suppose egalitarianism is a better word indeed. But I am not so much concerned about mens' rights as I am about women's equality. There are only a relatively small number of cases where men suffer from discrimination on the basis of their gender (and particularly as fathers), but there is (in my opinion) an entire culture of sexism against women, even in our society.

I think this culture of the denigration of women is more overwhelming than the important issue of fathers' rights, which can be fixed with sensible lawmakers passing the appropriate legislation. The treatment of women in society is not so easily fixed.

I really don't get this entire culture of sexism you are on about. I just don't see it as a widespread thing, maybe if you outlined the areas you think it exists I might have a better idea.

Men definitely do suffer in family law, then again women do as well in some ways, its often a society thing and men and women contribute to the problems just as much.

Bannasidhe

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

It is everyone's right to view themselves as better than anyone they want, people are entitled to their opinions and there's nothing you can do about it.

Some people "don't tolerate" that you view yourself as better than animals. Some people regard animals as equals.

So because someone holds the view that they are better then another person that gives them the right to treat that other person as inferior?

Are you sure that is an argument you really want to make?

My name is URL

Eric Cartman wrote: »

feminism tries to bring equality using quotas and restrictions , effectivley giving men the same disadvantages to keep everyone on the same level.

A man saying he is a feminist is laughable at best.

Im all for equality , but the femenist movement and its ideals are the equivalent of gaining black rights in the US by bringing mugabes army to new york.

That's exactly what it isn't, and is probably the main misconception that people have about feminism.

Sure there will be people who want to bring about balance in the way you describe, but they are a minority, and their views go against the grain of what feminism is supposed to represent.

token101

southsiderosie wrote: »

The way the civil rights legislation was written, it does guarantee universal rights for all minority groups, not just blacks. So I'm not sure what you are complaining about here?

I'm not complaining, I was answering a question. Read the thread before you post.

later12

K-9 wrote: »

I really don't get this entire culture of sexism you are on about. I just don't see it as a widespread thing, maybe if you outlined the areas you think it exists I might have a better idea.

It exists down the pub, in bathroom urinals, across workstations, in the street, at restaurants... it's popular attitudes to women - those of both women and men - to women's role in society or in married or personal life, that I am talking about.

The expectation that a woman will earn less than her partner, or change her name after marriage, or that she will take the more active part in raising the children, or that men can treat women like objects and talk about them cruelly and be quite serious about it. Obviously we are all capable of sexist jokes, or pretending to objectify women, but I have never heard a woman speak about men in the same way that I have heard some men speak about women, and I would be quite shocked if I did, too.

I openly admit I have found myself taking women less seriously than my male colleagues. Of course I know this is totally irrational, and when I realise i am doing it I stop it. But it is indicative of the way society still treats women as second class citizens, and it is unacceptable.

Men definitely do suffer in family law

That's true, but you can legislate for that.

You can't legislate against irrational opinions. Which is the shape that sexism against women usually takes these days.

Eric Cartman

My name is URL wrote: »

That's exactly what it isn't, and is probably the main misconception that people have about feminism.

Sure there will be people who want to bring about balance in the way you describe, but they are a minority, and their views go against the grain of what feminism is supposed to represent.

i wish that were true.

Any time this topic comes up, this thread included, people talk about using quotas in politics, using grands and incentives in science/engineering education, employment advantages etc.. just to get women in the door.

There is no reason in Ireland a woman cant enter any sector of education, work or politics, a lot of women just choose not to, and trying to artificially create diversity hurts everyone.

BBDBB

Im a big fan of feminists

especially the ones with nice tits

Millicent

finality wrote: »

Young women are not being encouraged to pursue jobs in nursing or teaching. Women are simply more likely to want to fill those roles. There are fundamental differences between the sexes and men are more likely to be interested in politics, etc. It's hardly some sort of borderline conspiracy to keep women out of government. If women don't want to be involved in politics then 'encouraging' them towards careers in that area just because they're underrepresented is a move in the wrong direction.

Attitudes like this are why feminism exists. Are you seriously trying to tell me that there is no nurture aspect in society towards women viewing themselves as the caregivers of society?

whatsamsn

86 posts about this? :pac:

women aint being held back in todays Ireland. Although, certain people wish to believe they are which is very very confusing.

Millicent

whatsamsn wrote: »

86 posts about this? :pac:

women aint being held back in todays Ireland. Although, certain people wish to believe they are which is very very confusing.

Hang on till I ring Germaine Greer and tell her the struggle is over; a poster on the internet said so. :pac:

blatantrereg

Equal balanced relationships and roles are the logical way. Taking a couple as a unit, the whole will be a lot stronger if both contribute and support each other in a balanced manner. The same logic can be extrapolated to society in a larger sense too imo.

I dont think roles should be identical. Men and women are wired differently and are generally suited to different roles. However again the balance is a positive thing. I've heard of studies which show that the most effective teams consist of a combination of men and women together.

Generally speaking I think that there are at least as many women as there are men who push chauvinistic views. A lot of apparently chauvinistic or domineering men are responding to the influence of females encouraging them to act that way, for whatever reason. There are plenty of women who use this sort of dynamic to manipulate guys for their own ends. Taken as a whole, I think that men benefit more from egalitarian ideals than women do (on a personal level at least), since such ideas neutralise protect against such connivery really.

Incidentally, I've avoided using the term feminist here because in my mind that suggests imbalanced views in favour of women, rather than egalitarian ideas.

stovelid

later10 wrote: »

I openly admit I have found myself taking women less seriously than my male colleagues. Of course I know this is totally irrational, and when I realise i am doing it I stop it. But it is indicative of the way society still treats women as second class citizens, and it is unacceptable.

Go sister!

whatsamsn

Millicent wrote: »

Hang on till I ring Germaine Greer and tell her the struggle is over; a poster on the internet said so. :pac:

we have women:

- doctors.
- judges.
- solicitors.
- politicians.
- presidents.
- bus drivers.
- postmen.
- CEO's.
- etc.

How are women being 'held back' today?