Mens Rights Thread

Calhoun

iptba wrote: »

It's not. But official or unofficial so-called "positive discrimination" in favour of women is something men can rightly complain about.

Not to mention we have international evidence when the shoe was on the otherfoot it caused uproar.

givyjoe

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I wish you were here before when i said it depends on your priorities. If you want to acheive equality in things like parent's rights, education​ etc, then you'll focus on those things. If you want to priorities opposing these fringe elements like the idea that men are rapists and boogymen, then that's fine. Take your place on the fringe, have your scuffle with your opposite number on the feminist side, and be completely ignored by the mainstream and have no impact on parent's rights or any of the other important issues.

Em, didn't one of these prominent figures from the 'fringe' just recently have a documentary aired on Rte 1 labelling all men as potential rapists.. doesn't this 'journalist' have a column in a prominent Irish Newspaper.. doesn't sound very fringe to me.

iptba

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I wish you were here before when i said it depends on your priorities. If you want to acheive equality in things like parent's rights, education​ etc, then you'll focus on those things. If you want to priorities opposing these fringe elements like the idea that men are rapists and boogymen, then that's fine. Take your place on the fringe, have your scuffle with your opposite number on the feminist side, and be completely ignored by the mainstream and have no impact on parent's rights or any of the other important issues.

Issues can be linked together. Misandry can cause men to be treated poorly.

Viewing domestic violence as something men do to women can again mean fathers get treated poorly.

Not doing anything about false claims of domestic violence can mean that more false claims are made and men are treated poorly.

A recent post. Not a perfect match but a real world example of how things panned out for one man
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102859514&postcount=6001

OK. In a previous relationship with 3 children involved I was attacked by my then 15 year old step daughter outside her bedroom. This was due to me questioning her going out at 2am to meet her drug dealing, scourge of the estate boyfriend.

She set about me on the landing with fists and kicks, I held her at arms length and at that point her mother (my partner of 9 years) jumped on my back like a limpet. Legs around my torso, arms around my neck she held me backwards as her daughter punched and kicked me.

This went on for a few minutes until I realised I was very close to the stairs. Afraid of going down the stairs I decided to put an end to this, reached over my head and grabbed my partner by the hair, pulled her off my back at which point she ran into the bedroom where our 4 and 5 year old children were and grabbed them, held them in front of her and started screaming.

I kid you not, I WANTED to punch that woman right in the head. Instead I calmly packed a bag and left the house.

This did not stop her from getting a preliminary protection order. (This is standard upon ANY accusation, you are not there to counter) After a period of time elapsed (28 days) we had sorted our issues and were back together. Had to go to court R.E. protection order and although my partner described exactly what happened as above, protection order was extended against me for a further 28 days.

I didn't contest it, stuff was sorted. Imagine my horror when this was used against me in family court last year to deny me any right to see the children I was a father to for 9 years.

Double standards? Don't even get me started. There are a million stories like mine. Trust me. The campaign is just gathering momentum, see D.A.D.S. on facebook. (Happily protesting) See P.A.P.A. Same story.

El_Duderino 09

iptba wrote:

It's not. But official or unofficial so-called "positive discrimination" in favour of women is something men can rightly complain about.

So you'd equally oppose encouraging men to go into teaching? That's going against a popularly held opinion in this forum.

Calhoun wrote:

You see i dont think the answer is one or the other, we have to be mindful of the rhetoric coming from the other side but at the same time work on other items in between.

Be mindful of whatever you like. If it's part of a concerted effort to address inequality that's one thing. If it's just about setting the men's rights hatchets against the women's rights hatchets, then that's fine too. But it doesn't help address any of the equality issues.

Calhoun wrote:

It's not like the mainstream media are ignoring the so called fringe on the opposite side we have the likes of Una who writes for the times, ...

Ok so imagine your the editor of the Irish times and you want someone to write a column on men's rights in the same vein as Una. What topics would you like them to cover?

Calhoun wrote:

Whats your angle anyway, what do you want from this forum? or you just here to set the cat amongst the pidgeons.

Equality and chats and that. Why? What's your angle?

El_Duderino 09

iptba wrote:

Issues can be linked together. Misandry can cause men to be treated poorly.

Why are you telling me this? I wouldn't support domestic violence against anyone

iptba wrote:

A recent post. Not a perfect match but a real word example of how things panned out for one man

Sounds dreadful. Why are you telling me?

silverharp

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Of course you've never seen me say anything about 'tearing down the Patriarchy and hetronormativity and capitalism with its systems of oppressions oh and white privilege (feminist bingo lol)', but you're assume those are my beliefs. I suggested you just make up my beliefs, and you have. So fair enough.

do you disavow those ideas?, or do you just not wish to declare them as your beliefs? A simple "I like what feminists did in the 60's and 70's but I agree that the feminism has lost its way somewhat" would do

Calhoun

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ok so imagine your the editor of the Irish times and you want someone to write a column on men's rights in the same vein as Una. What topics would you like them to cover?



Equality and chats and that. Why? What's your angle?

I think we could start with the suicide rate for younger men, we could look seriously into the topic of abused men, fathers rights, gender inequality in certain sectors of Irish workforce, pay gap difference for childless females, inherent sexism in our court system, and finally male reproductive rights by that i mean the ability to sign the child over to the mother completely.

Same equality and chats, i am just wondering why your coming at it from a confrontational stand point.

El_Duderino 09

silverharp wrote:

do you disavow those ideas?, or do you just not wish to declare them as your beliefs? A simple "I like what feminists did in the 60's and 70's but I agree that the feminism has lost its way somewhat" would do

Like everyone else on boards, if i have opinions in something, I'll discuss it. I have no intention of listing everything I disavow. I can't help thinking I told you the exact same thing several times on Tuesday. I no more need to disavow the mad yolks of your internet search history, than you need to list everything you don't agree with.

The things I actually do advocate will have to satisfy your curiosity.

El_Duderino 09

Calhoun wrote:

I think we could start with the suicide rate for younger men, we could look seriously into the topic of abused men, fathers rights, gender inequality in certain sectors of Irish workforce, pay gap difference for childless females, inherent sexism in our court system, and finally male reproductive rights by that i mean the ability to sign the child over to the mother completely.

But those are issues of substance. Why would you want to counter someone who is mostly a windup, with actually issues of substance? Why not cut her out of the discussion and just discuss the points you want to discuss? Unless you think LON's ideas are also substantive (which i doubt you do). Or do you think she's effective?

If so many posters think LON is talking rubbish and some even think she does her side a disservice, then why are so many interested in emulating her? Why not just talk about the issues that matter instead of wasting time talking about things that don't matter?

Calhoun

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

But those are issues of substance. Why would you want to counter someone who is mostly a windup, with actually issues of substance? Why not cut her out of the discussion and just discuss the points you want to discuss? Unless you think LON's ideas are also substantive (which i doubt you do). Or do you think she's effective?

If so many posters think LON is talking rubbish and some even think she does her side a disservice, then why are so many interested in emulating her? Why not just talk about the issues that matter instead of wasting time talking about things that don't matter?

Your opinion is that they are of no substance yet they have been given a platform on some prominent media platforms.

This is a discussion forum, people talk about what they want. Normally folk will use some topics as jumping off points to talk about others. If you want to change that apply for mod of this forum and delete the sexism thread. Why do you even care what is discussed anyway?

JRant

py2006 wrote: »

Not sure who is claiming they are. Criticism of some of the more outspoken feminists of today does not equate to a hatred of women. something that feminists struggle to comprehend. God only knows what goes through their head when women and the more 'equality' driven feminist criticise them

Oh I agree with you in that any criticism of feminism seems to be nearly taken as an attack on women. I suppose it was more a general comment in how things seem to be portrayed at present.

JRant

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

But those are issues of substance. Why would you want to counter someone who is mostly a windup, with actually issues of substance? Why not cut her out of the discussion and just discuss the points you want to discuss? Unless you think LON's ideas are also substantive (which i doubt you do). Or do you think she's effective?

If so many posters think LON is talking rubbish and some even think she does her side a disservice, then why are so many interested in emulating her? Why not just talk about the issues that matter instead of wasting time talking about things that don't matter?

Well in an ideal world you may well be correct. There is however a very real discourse in the public sphere that is undermining men on an almost daily basis. To you that may seem overly dramatic but if you take a look at what is actually happening then it is very hard to see it as anything other.

El_Duderino 09

JRant wrote:

Well in an ideal world you may well be correct. There is however a very real discourse in the public sphere that is undermining men on an almost daily basis. To you that may seem overly dramatic but if you take a look at what is actually happening then it is very hard to see it as anything other.

I do see that as over dramatic. Maybe some men are marginalised but I've never felt marginalised in any way by feminism. Have you? Nobody has ever made me out to be a boogeyman because of my gender

A few posts back compared encouraging women into STEM and men into teaching. I predicted some people would see those things as an attacking the other. Someone surely obliged by saying encouraging women into STEM is an attacking on men. I don't see that as an attack on men, nor do i see encouraging men into teaching as an attack on women. Some people see everything as an attack.

I wonder is the same sensitive souls who feel they're being demonised.

iptba

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

A few posts back compared encouraging women into STEM and men into teaching. I predicted some people would see those things as an attacking the other. Someone surely obliged by saying encouraging women into STEM is an attacking on men. I don't see that as an attack on men, nor do i see encouraging men into teaching as an attack on women. Some people see everything as an attack.

I wonder is the same sensitive souls who feel they're being demonised.

I don't see that as an accurate description of what happened:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102935440&postcount=3030

Originally Posted by El_Duderino 09
Take for example how these things are perceived in the reverse. Encouraging women into STEM will inevitably mean women gaining qualifications and taking up positions in STEM jobs. Is that an attack on men?

iptba wrote:

It's not. But official or unofficial so-called "positive discrimination" in favour of women is something men can rightly complain about.

I explicitly said that encouraging women into STEM was not attacking men.

Encouraging females into STEM does not have to take the form of "positive discrimination".

Calhoun

iptba wrote: »

I don't see that as an accurate description of what happened:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102935440&postcount=3030

I explicitly said that encouraging women into STEM was not attacking men.

Encouraging females into STEM does not have to take the form of "positive discrimination".

Don't question his narrative you sensitive soul

El_Duderino 09

iptba wrote:

I don't see that as an accurate description of what happened:

Actually you're right. I missed that you were talking about positive discrimination rather than encouraging people into professions

JRant

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I do see that as over dramatic. Maybe some men are marginalised but I've never felt marginalised in any way by feminism. Have you? Nobody has ever made me out to be a boogeyman because of my gender

A few posts back compared encouraging women into STEM and men into teaching. I predicted some people would see those things as an attacking the other. Someone surely obliged by saying encouraging women into STEM is an attacking on men. I don't see that as an attack on men, nor do i see encouraging men into teaching as an attack on women. Some people see everything as an attack.

I wonder is the same sensitive souls who feel they're being demonised.

Well it could be argued that the "Man Up" campaign marginalises men. Then there are the articles printed in the likes of the Irish Times telling men not to rape.

I'm all for encouraging people to do whatever they want, be that STEM or teaching. What is happening though is we have a huge push to encourage one while nothing is being done to address the other.

El_Duderino 09

JRant wrote:

Well it could be argued that the "Man Up" campaign marginalises men. Then there are the articles printed in the likes of the Irish Times telling men not to rape.

What was the 'man up' campaign about?

On the rape point i think there are incongruous cultural norms around the nature of consent but that's not for here.

JRant wrote:

I'm all for encouraging people to do whatever they want, be that STEM or teaching. What is happening though is we have a huge push to encourage one while nothing is being done to address the other.

The STEM side has actually done something about encouraging women to take an interest in studying those areas. Those achievements owe zero credit to windups like LON. It's​ down to having a serious, coordinated ground game in the form of lobbying government, education and industry.

Pointing out that nobody has solved a different (male teachers) problem is fine but it will remain unsolved unless people actually do something about it. Why begrudge the other side for their success?

Before someone says 'but feminist movement doesn't address men's issues', I'll ask the posters this; if you put aside some of your limited free time to lobby to find solutions to inequalities, which ones would you spend your time on? List your top 5 (in the interest of full disclosure, I'm asking to see how far down the list of priorities would women's issues be)

I see encouraging women into STEM as a success. I'd see encouraging men into teaching as a success. They're don't cancel each other out in my mind.

Pat Mustard

silverharp wrote: »

well tell me who your favourite academic feminist is and Ill check it out?

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If I told you the sky is blue you'd see it and an affront to reason. I have no intention to give a considered treatise on my moral philosophy, because I don't think you have any honest interest in it.

silverharp wrote: »

its a fair question, I dont know what persecution complex you have that I would disagree with you just because. but if you identify as a feminist you must have some influences. for instance as feminists go someone like Camila Paglia is quite interesting but she would be critical of the 3rd wave stuff.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Does anyone in this forum have time to sit around reading men's rights V women's rights philosophy and watch YouTube videos of gender wars all day?

Just make it up yourself. I'm probably​ into anything as long as it's by an angry, blue haired mad-yolk. Or you could take my beliefs from what I advocate.

silverharp wrote: »

you are getting a bit defensive now and only because I was trying to get an idea what "coat hanger" your views hang on. if this was about other religions it would be fair to ask what religion are you, are you catholic or a young earth creationist evangelical.
and sure if you are not prepared to answer then Ill assume that at a minimum you don't disagree with tearing down the Patriarchy and hetronormativity and capitalism with its systems of oppressions oh and white privilege (feminist bingo lol)

You have the patience of a saint, silverharp but it is a wasted effort because there is no such thing as giving a straight answer to a question here.

It is almost as though some ancient Chinese manual on military strategy gave up advice to "be like the fog".

He absolutely refuses to nail his colours to the mast. He adopts no firm positions and does not back up his statements with evidence of any sort, or even links.

It is like arguing with fog.

"just make it up yourself" is one of the replies above. Meaningless, really.

Pointless.

El_Duderino 09

Pat Mustard wrote:

He absolutely refuses to nail his colours to the mast. He adopts no firm positions and does not back up his statements with evidence of any sort, or even links.

My moral philosophy isn't based in either men's rights or women's rights. Why would you need to know my broad philosophy to deal with the narrow topicar hand anyway? I'm not asking for yours because I'm happy to deal with you based on how you present yourself.

I'm not sure why that has upset yourself and the saintly patient Silverharp.

Pat Mustard

I'm suggesting that people shouldn't waste time attempting to engage you in discussion any meaningful way, on account of your dishonest methods of argument and your refusal to back up what you say, all the while insisting that you are attempting to reply honestly.

Echoes of the late Liam Lawlor TD "bending over backwards" to cooperate with the Flood Tribunal.

Calhoun

Pat Mustard wrote: »

I'm suggesting that people shouldn't waste time attempting to engage you in discussion any meaningful way, on account of your dishonest methods of argument and your refusal to back up what you say, all the while insisting that you are attempting to reply honestly.

Echoes of the late Liam Lawlor TD "bending over backwards" to cooperate with the Flood Tribunal.

Sometimes it's better to engage in debate with folk like this early on because you bring to the surface these flaws so folk know not to take them seriously .

El_Duderino 09

Pat Mustard wrote:

I'm suggesting that people shouldn't waste time attempting to engage you in discussion any meaningful way, on account of your dishonest methods of argument and your refusal to back up what you say, all the while insisting that you are attempting to reply honestly.

What are you on about? You want reference to media or academic article to back up that I support addressing inequalities?

Don't engage with any poster you don't want to but don't be so cowardly as to tell others who they should and shouldn't engage with. Surely everyone else can make up their own mind about what they want to post about.

JRant

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

What was the 'man up' campaign about?

On the rape point i think there are incongruous cultural norms around the nature of consent but that's not for here.



The STEM side has actually done something about encouraging women to take an interest in studying those areas. Those achievements owe zero credit to windups like LON. It's​ down to having a serious, coordinated ground game in the form of lobbying government, education and industry.

Pointing out that nobody has solved a different (male teachers) problem is fine but it will remain unsolved unless people actually do something about it. Why begrudge the other side for their success?

Before someone says 'but feminist movement doesn't address men's issues', I'll ask the posters this; if you put aside some of your limited free time to lobby to find solutions to inequalities, which ones would you spend your time on? List your top 5 (in the interest of full disclosure, I'm asking to see how far down the list of priorities would women's issues be)

I see encouraging women into STEM as a success. I'd see encouraging men into teaching as a success. They're don't cancel each other out in my mind.

The man up campaign is easily found online.

STEM is not some hive mind enity that decided to do something. It is a systematic approach taken by feminist think-tanks who have a hand in directing public policy. They decided STEM was sexist, just because. Now we have the media, HR departments and government policy all telling us how we need more women in STEM, despite the fact there were no barriers in place preventing anyone from entering.

I work in the STEM area and I've a massive pain in my hoop being told at nearly every conference how great women are and how brilliant it is to have them working in the STEM environment. How about focusing on getting the best candidate for the job and stop worrying about what bits they have between there legs. It is the height of double standards to on the one hand claim sexism is the reason for the lack of fdmale participation and on the other actively discriminate against men just so you're seen to be "right on".

Pat Mustard

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

What are you on about?

This is a familiar tactic

El_Duderino 09

JRant wrote:

The man up campaign is easily found online.

The Australian mental health campaign? Presumably they chose 'man up' as a juxtaposition with traditional pidgeon-holing of manliness with the idea that it requires bravery and manliness for a man to address mental health as opposed to the opposite. I don't think it would offend me but if it was an ill chosen title, then fair enough. It was however a mental health campaign targeted at addressing men's mental health which, as the ad mentions, is a problem.

JRant wrote:

STEM is not some hive mind enity that decided to do something. It is a systematic approach taken by feminist think-tanks who have a hand in directing public policy. They decided STEM was sexist, just because. Now we have the media, HR departments and government policy all telling us how we need more women in STEM, despite the fact there were no barriers in place preventing anyone from entering.

Of course STEM isn't a hive mind the same way feminism or men's rights aren't hive mines. I think you missed the point i was coming at. It takes action on a number of fronts to acheive something like encouraging people into industries. Whether those groups are lobbying government, education and industry and raising awareness among the public, as part of a coordinated hive mind, a loose confederation of groups playing to their strengths, or by complete coincidence, is beside the point. I'd say you need at least all those elements to acheive real change.

Granted, there's a difference between STEM and teaching as one is mostly private and the other is mostly public.

JRant wrote:

I work in the STEM area and I've a massive pain in my hoop being told at nearly every conference how great women are and how brilliant it is to have them working in the STEM environment. How about focusing on getting the best candidate for the job and stop worrying about what bits they have between there legs.

If they spend conferences going on adnausium about women in science, that would give anyone a pain in the hoop.

JRant wrote:

It is the height of double standards to on the one hand claim sexism is the reason for the lack of fdmale participation and on the other actively discriminate against men just so you're seen to be "right on".

What's the active discrimination against men and why doesn't someone address it?

JRant

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The Australian mental health campaign? Presumably they chose 'man up' as a juxtaposition with traditional pidgeon-holing of manliness with the idea that it requires bravery and manliness for a man to address mental health as opposed to the opposite. I don't think it would offend me but if it was an ill chosen title, then fair enough. It was however a mental health campaign targeted at addressing men's mental health which, as the ad mentions, is a problem.



Of course STEM isn't a hive mind the same way feminism or men's rights aren't hive mines. I think you missed the point i was coming at. It takes action on a number of fronts to acheive something like encouraging people into industries. Whether those groups are lobbying government, education and industry and raising awareness among the public, as part of a coordinated hive mind, a loose confederation of groups playing to their strengths, or by complete coincidence, is beside the point. I'd say you need at least all those elements to acheive real change.

Granted, there's a difference between STEM and teaching as one is mostly private and the other is mostly public.



If they spend conferences going on adnausium about women in science, that would give anyone a pain in the hoop.



What's the active discrimination against men and why doesn't someone address it?

No, it's an Irish campaign calling on men to stop domestic violence.

http://www.safeireland.ie/2015/man-up-and-stand-against-domestic-violence-says-ufc-fighter-cathal-pendred/


You've actually hit on a very salient point regarding STEM being private and teaching being public. If anything we should have a greater emphasis on more male participation in teaching exactly because it is publicly funded. I believe the public sector is heavy skewed in female employee numbers but I'l need to double check the statistics to be sure.

The active discrimination is women only fast track and training programs many companies in STEM are now actively pursuing.

El_Duderino 09

JRant wrote:

No, it's an Irish campaign calling on men to stop domestic violence.

Not much about male victims of domestic violence in that link. If men are as often victims of domestic violence it deserves an equal mention. It's a topic ripe for activism.

JRant wrote:

You've actually hit on a very salient point regarding STEM being private and teaching being public. If anything we should have a greater emphasis on more male participation in teaching exactly because it is publicly funded...

So in the public sector, you'd be equally in favour of supporting men getting into female dominated professions like teaching as women getting into male dominated professions like engineering?

JRant wrote:

The active discrimination is women only fast track and training programs many companies in STEM are now actively pursuing.

Whike it's not something I feel passionate about, I think sometimes time limited and goal orientated positive discrimination can be effective. It needs to be realistic and only accepting candidates who meet the minimum standards. Even if they're not the best candidate they're still well able to do the job and you get the benefit of changing traditional jobs/gender precedent. Once the time limit has expired or goals have been met, let people sink or swim as normal.

Let's not get drawn into that particular argument though. It's been done enough before so free to give your side and we'll leave positive discrimination alone.

JRant

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Not much about male victims of domestic violence in that link. If men are as often victims of domestic violence it deserves an equal mention. It's a topic ripe for activism.



So in the public sector, you'd be equally in favour of supporting men getting into female dominated professions like teaching as women getting into male dominated professions like engineering?



Whike it's not something I feel passionate about, I think sometimes time limited and goal orientated positive discrimination can be effective. It needs to be realistic and only accepting candidates who meet the minimum standards. Even if they're not the best candidate they're still well able to do the job and you get the benefit of changing traditional jobs/gender precedent. Once the time limit has expired or goals have been met, let people sink or swim as normal.

Let's not get drawn into that particular argument though. It's been done enough before so free to give your side and we'll leave positive discrimination alone.

personally I would be of the opinion that people should be encouraged to do whatever it is they choose. I have a huge problem though when one or two areas are singled out and a fuss is made out of getting more women into that area.

the hypocrisy coming out of some government bodies banging on about a lack of women here or there when the public sector is the exact opposite. Maybe they would be best to focus on equality (as they see it) closer to home.

I won't go too much further on "positive" discrimination only to say it is patently a nonsense. It's discrimination and needs to called out for exactly what it is.

El_Duderino 09

JRant wrote:

personally I would be of the opinion that people should be encouraged to do whatever it is they choose. I have a huge problem though when one or two areas are singled out and a fuss is made out of getting more women into that area.

If people were purely rational actors then they would weigh up the options free from interference. In reality​, culture and history play their part too. I don't see a problem with encouraging men into teaching or women into engineering. You seem happy to find reasons for men to be encouraged into teaching but find difficulty in articulating reasons to encourage women into male dominated professions. Maybe I just haven't asked the right questions.

JRant wrote:

the hypocrisy coming out of some government bodies banging on about a lack of women here or there when the public sector is the exact opposite. Maybe they would be best to focus on equality (as they see it) closer to home.

But you said there was good reason to encourage men into teaching. Is that part of the hypocrisy you're taking about?