Mens Rights Thread

sam34

py2006 wrote: »

Yet another example of a thread invasion from in 'interesting' poster! Wasn't the existence of this phenomena called into question earlier in this thread?

as always,if you have a problem with a post please report it to bring it to mod-attention.

py2006

sam34 wrote: »

as always,if you have a problem with a post please report it to bring it to mod-attention.

With respect, I think the above is a perfect example of one of the obstacles men face when discussing topics that fall under mens rights. It is often met with negativity and dismissal and viewed as a tool to dismiss the rights of others.

I won't question that particular poster again.

sam34

py2006 wrote: »

With respect, I think the above is a perfect example of one of the obstacles men face when discussing topics that fall under mens rights. It is often met with negativity and dismissal and viewed as a tool to dismiss the rights of others.

I won't question that particular poster again.

If you have a problem with a mod instruction, please discuss it via pm, as is site-policy.

iptba

Interesting development in the UK:

Pro-men party has Harriet in its sights

Male rights campaigners are setting up an anti-feminist political party and plan to stand against Harriet Harman and other prominent feminists at the next General Election.

etc.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2254307/Pro-men-party-Harriet-sights.html

The Corinthian

Not sure if this is the right way to go about this. Single-interest, protest, parties seldom do anything other than take votes off the mainstream parties, with the Greens having been the only example of such a party that actually gets anywhere at election time.

Now, taking votes away from mainstream parties can be effective, but only if it takes votes away from one party, thus forcing it to re-evaluate it's policies in that area - the UKIP being a good example, as it by far effects the Conservatives. A male-rights party would likely steal votes from all the parties; perhaps more from the Conservatives and Lib Dems, but overall the effect on all the parties would likely be similar.

A better approach, IMHO, would be a 'name and shame' tactic at election time. Publish a list of all candidates and assess their 'male-friendly' credentials against their voting histories and stated views.

Lack of information is one of the biggest issues with male rights in politics, with people not even knowing what the position that a candidate may have when they go to vote. If they know, then this may be enough to convince them to vote for another candidate rather than act like a turkey voting for Christmas.

Piliger

Corinthian - I agree mostly. Single issue parties can only be useful if there is a very clear and widespread dissatisfaction among the public about some issue. The Green Party started this way. Others have achieved some success also but only on the back of a long campaign.

As regards Men's Rights - it is a difficult subject not completely understood by even most men and there is a lot of education to happen.

A single Men's Rights organisation is what is needed. One where other existing Men's organisations, who don't wish to dilute their existing campaign, can subscribe and be affiliates. An organisation that can concentrate at first on education - offering an alternate voice in the Media instead of there being NO voice for Men. One that can counter the deeply biased and often misandrous claims of the feminist juggernaut in the Media. Those actions in themselves would be achieving a lot.

The Corinthian

Piliger wrote: »

A single Men's Rights organisation is what is needed. One where other existing Men's organisations, who don't wish to dilute their existing campaign, can subscribe and be affiliates. An organisation that can concentrate at first on education - offering an alternate voice in the Media instead of there being NO voice for Men. One that can counter the deeply biased and often misandrous claims of the feminist juggernaut in the Media. Those actions in themselves would be achieving a lot.

I'd concur. One of the present strengths of Feminism is that it has managed to set itself up, through countless 'politically unaffiliated' support and research groups, as an effective lobby that has cross-party access to promote legislation - at this stage will little or no debate in democratic fora. For bonus points, many of these groups are also publicly funded.

This isn't so much a comparison with Feminism, but with most historical successful movements for democratic reform; the suffragette movement (precursors to Feminism), abolitionists and most notoriously the American prohibition movement used tactical lobbying and PR to great effect in the past.

Unfortunately, I get the impression that men's groups are pretty amateur; often single issue, organizations; run part time and on shoe-string budgets. Any understanding of PR or political lobbying is almost negligible.

None of which is helped by the apathy that most people, especially men (in my experience women are more likely to roll up their sleeves for men's rights than men), have were it comes to the subject. Even here.

Piliger

The Corinthian wrote: »

None of which is helped by the apathy that most people, especially men (in my experience women are more likely to roll up their sleeves for men's rights than men), have were it comes to the subject. Even here.

I regret to have to agree though something in my gut tells me that if a small group of men formed such an organisation, many men would quietly support it and it could achieve quite a lot.

Sometimes the Media is not so much conspiratorial, but downright lazy. Issues arise and they want 'an organisation' that is at the end of a phone for a comment or repost etc. Today there is NO SUCH THING on Men's side and the result is that only the feminist side get's aired. I was involved in the founding of an organisation called IrelandOffline many years ago and despite it only have a handful of people, it achieved just that ... an effective voice at the end of the phone for media and a generator of 'copy' when the subject of Broadband arose in the news.

iptba

One advantage of having a political party stand in an election is the free publicity that can easily follow. So probably not the worst thing when starting from a low awareness base.

The Corinthian

iptba wrote: »

One advantage of having a political party stand in an election is the free publicity that can easily follow. So probably not the worst thing when starting from a low awareness base.

Strategically though, the cons outweigh the pros, IMHO.

Pawwed Rig

A political party whilst not necessarily a bad idea should be more than anti Feminist. This is already going to be a PR disaster. They need to focus on mens rights rather than be anti anything (even if one might lead on from the other).
A men’s movement (I believe) would need to be positive in trying to achieve something rather than negative in trying to attack a formidable force like Feminism.
It would be a tight rope as once a movement is labelled male chauvinist by the media then it has little chance of getting public support.
I actually think the more moderate feminist organisations could be part of a solution rather than part of the problem.

Piliger

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

A political party whilst not necessarily a bad idea should be more than anti Feminist. This is already going to be a PR disaster. They need to focus on mens rights rather than be anti anything (even if one might lead on from the other).
A men’s movement (I believe) would need to be positive in trying to achieve something rather than negative in trying to attack a formidable force like Feminism.

Hence it makes no sense until there is a stable and growing support for such a movement and it's positive agenda.

It would be a tight rope as once a movement is labelled male chauvinist by the media then it has little chance of getting public support.

The counter reaction from the Feminist Movement will be ENORMOUS and VICIOUS. Another reason why a political party makes no sense at this kind of early stage.

I actually think the more moderate feminist organisations could be part of a solution rather than part of the problem.

I find this thought bewildering. Men need to find our own solutions. Are we so incapable that we need to rely on women's good will to stand up for ourselves ?

Pawwed Rig

Piliger wrote: »

I find this thought bewildering. Men need to find our own solutions. Are we so incapable that we need to rely on women's good will to stand up for ourselves ?

Nope. But I did say part of the solution. There are common goals there. Say for example the board room issue/seniority in employment which we always hear about. A shared child responsibility (legally) would come some way to resolving this. If a man could take the 6 months leave instead of the woman so the woman’s career wasn't adversely affected or if the leave could be shared! Moderate feminists would have no issue with that (at least the ones I have spoken to). Also the message comes clearer when there is consensus.

An extreme belligerent men’s movement will get nowhere (imho) and will be seen along the same lines as the BNP in the UK. The way forward is a moderate movement that can organise itself with as much help as possible. How often has iptba posted letters with signatures from 10-20 people in different organisations? That is a strong message to send rather than one from an org that most people see as extremist and crackpot (thinking BNP here) that no other org would associate themselves with.

iptba

Just a random thing that is my head that is vaguely relevant: a parental equality/fathers' rights candidate has stood for election in Ireland in the past. I think his name was something like Liam O Goggain (????) and he lived in Dundalk or somewhere close to it in Co. Louth. He may have stood in more than one constituency - can't remember. Perhaps there were other candidates too - I go through periods where I don't follow Irish politics that closely. Anyway, his experiences might be useful to draw on if anyone was ever interested in this direction. Also, perhaps people have observations on his involvement in elections?

Piliger

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

An extreme belligerent men’s movement will get nowhere (imho) and will be seen along the same lines as the BNP in the UK.

I really find that comparison quite offensive actually. We are talking here about a simple organisation to stand up for Men's Rights and the attack on Men that is happening in society nowadays. WHere you get that comparison is totally beyond me.

The way forward is a moderate movement that can organise itself with as much help as possible. How often has iptba posted letters with signatures from 10-20 people in different organisations? That is a strong message to send rather than one from an org that most people see as extremist and crackpot (thinking BNP here) that no other org would associate themselves with.

You lose me completely with this stuff.

Pawwed Rig

Piliger wrote: »

I really find that comparison quite offensive actually.

You lose me completely with this stuff.

Fair enough. I thought I was quite clear. I am not sure how to explain it more clearly.

The Corinthian

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Fair enough. I thought I was quite clear. I am not sure how to explain it more clearly.

An "extreme belligerent" movement movement of any type is unlikely to gain much mainstream support. How one defines this was not entirely clear in your post - remember, some would argue that a man's movement that is in any way active or proactive, might be seen as "extreme belligerent".

Pawwed Rig

The Corinthian wrote: »

An "extreme belligerent" movement movement of any type is unlikely to gain much mainstream support.

I don't necessarily agree with that. Some would argue that Sinn Fein or the Catholic Church would fall into this category.

But that aside, any men's movement would need to tread very carefully and be very media friendly to gain momentum or risk being branded as the BNP are branded i.e. extremist knuckle draggers. If a representative started shouting on TV how men are victims of everything and how evil feminists are ruling the world then the organisation would not last long. Similar someone who just shouts down opposing opinions rather than educating.
Alternatively a well educated spokesman who can stick to facts and back up facts with statistics is more likely to be well received. This person will also need to be likeable and TV/radio friendly.

The Corinthian

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I don't necessarily agree with that. Some would argue that Sinn Fein or the Catholic Church would fall into this category.

Again this depends on how you define "extreme belligerent" and, for that matter, mainstream support - last time I checked, Sinn Fein doesn't exactly get a major chunk of the middle-class vote.

I presume that by "extreme belligerent", you mean militant to the point of violence and/or serious crime? Or any civil disobedience?

But that aside, any men's movement would need to tread very carefully and be very media friendly to gain momentum or risk being branded as the BNP are branded i.e. extremist knuckle draggers. If a representative started shouting on TV how men are victims of everything and how evil feminists are ruling the world then the organisation would not last long.

Agreed, but that's more to do with being media-savvy and aware (and thus careful) of the fact that there would be groups gunning to discredit such a movement from day one. Problem is that existing men's rights groups are certainly not media-savvy - quite the opposite, I find most of them the most dreadful collection of kitchen-committee-run ejits ever.

Raising awareness is good, but it can suffer a backlash too if badly done. Groups like Fathers4Justice have probably done themselves more harm as good with some of their more militant stunts.

Alternatively a well educated spokesman who can stick to facts and back up facts with statistics is more likely to be well received. This person will also need to be likeable and TV/radio friendly.

Spokesperson - you'd get picked up on that straight away.

Also there's a lot more to being media-savvy; building up relationships with the press and politicians and the ability to churn out copy that can easily be cut-n-pasted into editorials is even more important in many respects.

py2006

The Corinthian wrote: »

Spokesperson - you'd get picked up on that straight away.

I get what you are saying here, but I presume if it a mens rights group the spokesperson will most likely be a man.

I jest, continue...

:P

Pawwed Rig

The Corinthian wrote: »

Raising awareness is good, but it can suffer a backlash too if badly done. Groups like Fathers4Justice have probably done themselves more harm as good with some of their more militant stunts.

I dunno about Fathers4Justice but Yes militant stunts, I think, will turn people off immediately although I can only imagine the desperation some of those guys feel.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Also there's a lot more to being media-savvy; building up relationships with the press and politicians and the ability to churn out copy that can easily be cut-n-pasted into editorials is even more important in many respects.

Exactly

At a new years eve party the other night I we got onto the topic of car insurance where women's policies have been increased as they cannot discriminate based on gender anymore (or some such reason). From there we got onto other issues that we have discussed in these few threads here at length. Most of the people listening commented that they had never even considered the issue. Such is the case with men's issues. Once the issues can be brought to the fore most would not be against them. But if a movement just labelled itself as anti Feminist they are immediately engaging themselves in a battle that realistically cannot be one given the current national thinking and media.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Spokesperson - you'd get picked up on that straight away.

:pac: I did think of that when I wrote spokesman but the anti PC side of me wouldn't allow myself to write spokesperson......... which is why I'd be no good on TV:D

The Corinthian

py2006 wrote: »

I get what you are saying here, but I presume if it a mens rights group the spokesperson will most likely be a man.

Nope, because then it would divide things on gender lines - remember women do have a stake in men's rights too, although this has been drowned out by mainstream Feminism's propaganda machine.

Father's rights, for example, are ultimately the key by which women may finally remove such remaining forms of discrimination that are as a result of the burden / privilege of child care still being seen as "a woman's job".

And lest we forget, men are their brothers, fathers, partners, husbands and sons - what mother wants her child to grow up a second class citizen?

So spokesperson is a far better idea.

iptba

General point, not relating to last few messages:
From what I've picked up from Twitter, many atheists are annoyed by Atheism Plus, which I've seen described as feminists who don't believe in God and other similar ways to describe to say it's mainly about feminism, which many atheists don't buy into, although perhaps have not thought much about, or talked "publicly" e.g. on the internet much, before. I imagine some could even possibly be persuaded to get interested in men's rights with a bit of proding.

Woodward

iptba wrote: »

General point, not relating to last few messages:
From what I've picked up from Twitter, many atheists are annoyed by Atheism Plus, which I've seen described as feminists who don't believe in God and other similar ways to describe to say it's mainly about feminism, which many atheists don't buy into, although perhaps have not thought much about, or talked "publicly" e.g. on the internet much, before. I imagine some could even possibly be persuaded to get interested in men's rights with a bit of proding.

I can see that happening already. Check out thunderfoot's latest video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKKQdJR7F_I

He uses the term professional victim in the video which is a term used widely in the MRM which I havent heard much anywhere else which would suggest his reading into anti feminism has overlapped with MRM material. I wouldnt be surprised if he starts bringing MR issues up

The Black Oil

Ever listen to Woman's Hour on BBC Radio 4? I can't really think of a male equivalent, maybe there are some podcasts, though.

Anyway, they had some interesting discussions on mothers in law yesterday and a few other stories you wouldn't normally notice. Apart from that, before Christmas, there was a short debate about abortion on the Today programme. The female guest, Suzanne Moore, got a bit aggravated 'here I am discussing this issue with two men', or words to that effect. It'll be said that she was emotional, and I don't mean in a 'oh, typical woman being emotional/irrational' way, but I didn't view it that way at all - my issue was that she came across as rigid.

ETA, it was actually Ocotber ish. Here's Moore's write up on it, and the clip.

iptba

The Black Oil wrote: »

Ever listen to Woman's Hour on BBC Radio 4? I can't really think of a male equivalent, maybe there are some podcasts, though.

Anyway, they had some interesting discussions on mothers in law yesterday and a few other stories you wouldn't normally notice. Apart from that, before Christmas, there was a short debate about abortion on the Today programme. The female guest, Suzanne Moore, got a bit aggravated 'here I am discussing this issue with two men', or words to that effect. It'll be said that she was emotional, and I don't mean in a 'oh, typical woman being emotional/irrational' way, but I didn't view it that way at all - my issue was that she came across as rigid.

ETA, it was actually Ocotber ish. Here's Moore's write up on it, and the clip.

Thanks.
When she says: "here I am discussing this issue with two men", she is including the male interviewer.

I tend to be sceptical of many feminists calling for gender balance: they can seem to be quite happy when there are women-only meetings, women-only committees, women-only departments e.g. some gender studies departments and the like, and so don't seem see gender balance as supremely necessary; it seems much more an effort to get more influence.

iptba

Blog about paternity fraud in case anyone is interested:
http://milkmanschild.wordpress.com/

iptba

I've just read some pieces on this story (from 2006) and it sounds interesting.

Norah Vincent has lived as a man. She didn't undergo a sex change or radical hormone treatments. She simply went undercover. In an extraordinary feat of acting, disguise and guts, Vincent lived among men -- as a man -- for 18 months to see what life was like on the other side of the gender divide.

"This wasn't just a stunt. This was about learning. This is a human project. It was about finding something out about the human creature. ... And I learned it the best possible way because I went through it," Vincent told "20/20's" JuJu Chang.

continues at: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Entertainment/story?id=1526982

She describes different ways about how it is hard to be a man.

Book is at:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Self-made-Man-My-Year-Disguised/dp/1843545047

with lots and lots of reviews at:
http://www.amazon.com/Self-Made-Man-Womans-Journey-Manhood/dp/0670034665

Unfortunately I rarely read books but perhaps might be of interest to others.

iptba

Saturday's Irish Independent:
"Lorraine Courtney: Raising girls is hard, but it's boys who really need our help now"
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/lorraine-courtney-raising-girls-is-hard-but-its-boys-who-really-need-our-help-now-3357396.html

(Not sure her point is really to make a competition out of it.)

iptba

iptba wrote: »

Saturday's Irish Independent:
"Lorraine Courtney: Raising girls is hard, but it's boys who really need our help now"
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/lorraine-courtney-raising-girls-is-hard-but-its-boys-who-really-need-our-help-now-3357396.html

(Not sure her point is really to make a competition out of it.)

Letter in reply:
"We teach boys to repress emotion. Of course they're in crisis"
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/we-teach-boys-to-repress-emotion-of-course-theyre-in-crisis-3358328.html