Mens Rights Thread

py2006

Tarzana2 wrote: »

You do know that's a show made by bottom-feeders for bottom-feeders, right? The notion of men's rights or any rights would be far from the producers' thoughts, I imagine.

The audience will also likely be instructed when to respond and how. Or encouraged at the very least.

Well yes, I agree. But I don't believe the reaction (or lack of) is something only associated with "bottom-feeders". I think its a reflection on society in general.

ancapailldorcha

Well, well, well:

A student diversity officer who was caught up in a racism row after posting 'kill all white men' on social media has been summonsed to court to face malicious communications charges.

Bahar Mustafa, 28, of Edmonton, North London, a welfare and diversity officer at Goldsmiths University, will appear at Bromley Magistrates' Court on 5 November, police said.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bahar-mustafa-charged-with-sending-malicious-message-after-tweeting-kill-all-white-men-a6683241.html

Tarzana2

py2006 wrote: »

Well yes, I agree. But I don't believe the reaction (or lack of) is something only associated with "bottom-feeders". I think its a reflection on society in general.

I don't really know if you can extrapolate like that based on a truly awful, tacky TV show.

Like maybe it would be a reflection of society in general, but I don't really think so. It wouldn't be widespread.

I think the main problem men have with speaking out is a fear people will think they are weaklings or that they won't be believed. A huge problem it is too, and that needs to change. But I can't honestly think that if violent domestic abuse of a male was shown to be true and that he was completely faultless in the situation, that people would be cheering his violent female partner. Why would anyone do that?

py2006

Tarzana2 wrote: »

I don't really know if you can extrapolate like that based on a truly awful, tacky TV show.

Like maybe it would be a reflection of society in general, but I don't really think so. It wouldn't be widespread.

I think the main problem men have with speaking out is a fear people will think they are weaklings or that they won't be believed. A huge problem it is too, and that needs to change. But I can't honestly think that if violent domestic abuse of a male was shown to be true and that he was completely faultless in the situation, that people would be cheering his violent female partner. Why would anyone do that?

Well they didn't cheer her, they applauded as she entered as opposed to booing or silence if it were a man.

jackofalltrades

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Well, well, well:



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bahar-mustafa-charged-with-sending-malicious-message-after-tweeting-kill-all-white-men-a6683241.html

Delighted to hear, hopefully she'll end up getting some kind of sanction for terrible behaviour.

masculinist

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Well, well, well:



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bahar-mustafa-charged-with-sending-malicious-message-after-tweeting-kill-all-white-men-a6683241.html

The book should be thrown at this hate monger. Notice she makes the standard misandrist ''defense'' in the last lines of the article of accusing others of saying bad things against her , accusing the public of being racist and sexist. Funnily enough she looks white to me. And you cant get any more sexist than her but the last resort of the feminazi is always the unsubstantiated aka false accusation while seeking to con her way into victim status.

Pawwed Rig

She won't care what sanction she gets from the courts as that will just reinforce her beliefs that she is being opressed by the white patriarchy. The only sanction she would understand would be from within her own movements.

lexmac

Gentlemen, is there any way one can actually put a stop to the stifling sexist hate movement that is feminism? The whole 'mens rights' bull**** drives me bats because it is premised on the notion that men are oppressed more, or at least as much as women are, and quite frankly I don't think men as a gender are wired towards victimising themselves in any way shape or form. There is no doubt we do suffer and struggle...at least in an objective sense...but subjectively, we are blessed with a mentality much stronger than the pathetic 'poor me' downtrodden reaction of the feminists who seems to construe any hardship they perceive as a product of this mythical 'patriarchy' nonsense. In short, the whole "women are sexistly oppressed", men are sexistly oppressive" rhetoric seems to me to be far more a coping mechanism of insecure feminists than reflection of any sort of reality. But what can be done to stop this nonsense in a world so disproportionately concerned with female voices???

Pawwed Rig

lexmac wrote: »

But what can be done to stop this nonsense in a world so disproportionately concerned with female voices???

Feminism does have some valid objectives however the movement or women in general need to police the more extreme elements which they don't seem willing or able to do.
Discussing it here will have no affect on the extremists as threads like this just reinforce the delusion. They KNOW men are privileged and women are oppressed and suffer a pay gap. No amount of logic or reasoning will impact on their group think on this matter. So a group of 'misogynist men' denying what they know as fact is just more oppression.

The scary part is that the extremists are no longer at the periphery and have moved into the mainstream.

The extreme view is a very comfortable place to sit as you do not need to see anyone else's point of view. The extremist is almost immune to logic.

tritium

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Feminism does have some valid objectives however the movement or women in general need to police the more extreme elements which they don't seem willing or able to do.
Discussing it here will have no affect on the extremists as threads like this just reinforce the delusion. They KNOW men are privileged and women are oppressed and suffer a pay gap. No amount of logic or reasoning will impact on their group think on this matter. So a group of 'misogynist men' denying what they know as fact is just more oppression.

The scary part is that the extremists are no longer at the periphery and have moved into the mainstream.

The extreme view is a very comfortable place to sit as you do not need to see anyone else's point of view. The extremist is almost immune to logic.

Unfortunately there's a form of doublespeak, started by the extremists but now part of the mainstream. It holds that (rightly to an extent I think) feminists are not one hive mind and other feminists have no special role or obligation to criticise or disavow the extremists. At the same time it refuses to disavow concepts such as 'all men should be educated not to rape', 'patriarchy and misogyny is the fault of all men' etc. Its actually scary how some of these latter messages have slowly crept into the mainstream. You can also see an element of it in the move to remove any agency from women and cast them as perpetual victims regardless of their role in events

py2006

lexmac wrote: »

Gentlemen, is there any way one can actually put a stop to the stifling sexist hate movement that is feminism? The whole 'mens rights' bull**** drives me bats because it is premised on the notion that men are oppressed more, or at least as much as women are

You will never be able to put a stop to it. Convincing the the normal ones to police or distance themselves from the extremists might be easier. Although, the extreme seem to be influencing the others.

Mens rights is not bull. It wasn't brought about for points scoring against female issues/rights. Its there to highlight that men suffer discrimination, injustices etc too.

lexmac

There has to be some way of putting a stop to all the hate and nonsense, though. The men's rights movement at least attempts to call feminism out on its bullsh*t, which is essential. But the movement itself is based on victimology...highlighting how men also are oppressed. But not only is a victim-narrative so existentially abhorrent to masculinity, it is ultimately futile when it is implemented to counter the feminist victim-narrative: essentially, if the argument is framed as one of "which gender is oppressed more/worse?" it is inevitable that society will flock to the feminist corner to fit the time-conditioned stereotype that women are poor oppressed victims and men are bad sexist oppressors. This stereotype is what's at the root of the whole thing and what makes it impossible for any other form of victim-narrative to compete with the feminist one.

iptba

There was a specific thread on gender quotas but that has been closed so am posting this here:

FF candidate to challenge gender quota law

Saturday, November 07, 2015
Juno McEnroe and Elaine Loughlin

A Fianna Fáil candidate who was backed by Bertie Ahern is taking a High Court case against the State as he believes gender quotas are unconstitutional.

Brian Mohan had hoped to get on the Fianna Fáil ticket in the Dublin but a diktat from party headquarters that a woman be selected ruled him out. He is taking a High Court challenge over gender quotas.

continues at:
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/ff-candidate-to-challenge-gender-quota-law-363680.html

Possibly worth its own thread?

iptba

I notice politics is going to be introduced as a Leaving Cert.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/politics-introduced-as-leaving-cert-subject-next-year-1.2424600

It is understood teachers with a degree or post-graduate qualification in areas such as politics, sociology and anthropology will be considered in the first group of teachers to deliver the course.

Students should also be familiar with thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and UCD academic Kathleen Lynch.

I'm no expert on KL but see she established the UCD Equality Studies Centre.
I wouldn't be surprised if "patriarchy" and the like is taught in this course. I wonder how critical students will allowed be.

ancapailldorcha

Hang on... Are Hobbes and Locke being equated with some nobody from a minor University?

Sleepy

Given that it's likely to be yet another "memorise and regurgitate" subject, the very addition of the course to the Leaving Cert is likely to contribute to the female bias in our education system.

Woodward

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj8883DryKA

Great interview with Erin Pizzey

silverharp

Amnesty International refuse venue for men's rights conference

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRuBi2aCi_s

Wibbs

I have to be honest SH, if that Elam guy told me the sky was blue I'd go outside and look up to double check. He gives the men's rights movement a bad name. A real prick IMH.

silverharp

Wibbs wrote: »

I have to be honest SH, if that Elam guy told me the sky was blue I'd go outside and look up to double check. He gives the men's rights movement a bad name. A real prick IMH.

I don't know anything about him, I'm a divil for subbing to people on YouTube. His topic was neutral enough , conference in London and amnesty saying it conflicted with equality for women so the conference couldn't use their venue. I'll google him later to check him out

Pawwed Rig

Only heard of him through this forum but he seems to oscillate wildly between very reasonable argument and extreme sexism. Not really the figurehead a men's movement needs imo.

Maguined

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Only heard of him through this forum but he seems to oscillate wildly between very reasonable argument and extreme sexism. Not really the figurehead a men's movement needs imo.

A broken clock is right twice a day.

He can make one or two valid points but he is a total nut job and a liar.

iptba

(December 7, 2015 Daily Telegraph article)

Boys should have the right to say no to feminism

The evangelical drive to teach boys to be feminists reached a new high last week with the news that every 16-year-old in Sweden is to be given a free copy of the book “We Should All Be Feminists”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/boys-should-have-the-right-to-say-no-to-feminism/

I have sometimes pondered the comparison of feminism and religion.

If you influence people early in their lives, many can see the world through the vision of the world that has been presented when they were young and impressionable*.

There seems to be some movement away from religion in education but at the same time feminism is still influential.

*I think many people can still be impressionable when they are in third level.

py2006

iptba wrote: »

(December 7, 2015 Daily Telegraph article)

I have sometimes pondered the comparison of feminism and religion.

If you influence people early in their lives, many can see the world through the vision of the world that has been presented when they were young and impressionable*.

There seems to be some movement away from religion in education but at the same time feminism is still influential.

*I think many people can still be impressionable when they are in third level.

I often compare religious people and feminists in terms of, 'we have the moral high ground', 'don't question us', 'those that do are full of hate etc etc'.

iptba

(December 18, Daily Telegraph (UK) article)

Why today could be a turning point in the history of men's rights
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/why-today-could-be-a-turning-point-in-the-history-of-mens-rights/

Now Mark Brooks (chair of the ManKind Initiative), Glen Poole (UK coordinator of International Men’s Day), Dan Bell (features editor, insideMan magazine), Martin Daubney (journalist, broadcaster and committee member, Being A Man Festival) and Ally Fogg (writer and journalist) have composed a letter drawing attention to a range of significant troubles for men and boys.

These include:
1 The high male suicide rate.
2 The challenges faced by boys at all stages of education including attainment.
3 Men’s health, shorter life expectancy and workplace deaths.
4 The challenges faced by the most marginalised men and boys in society (for instance, homeless men, boys in care and the high rate of male deaths in custody).
5 Male victims of violence, including sexual violence.
6 The challenges faced by men as parents, particularly new fathers and separated fathers.
7 Male victims of sexual and domestic abuse, forced marriage, honour-based crime, stalking and slavery.
8 The negative portrayal of men, boys and fathers.

iptba

A difficult case.

Adoption can proceed without consent of father, court rules
Woman (22) persistently refused to identify father of her three-year-old daughter
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/adoption-can-proceed-without-consent-of-father-court-rules-1.2471483

Tigger

am i right in thinking there is an irish times sportswoman of the year but no males need apply
and a rte sportsperson
so whats that about?

iptba

(January 28 article)

http://mrctv.org/blog/university-refuses-grant-recognition-mens-issues-group-after-feminists-say-it-makes-women-feel-unsafe?utm_campaign=naytev&utm_content=56ad1c71e4b0c3719ef4d868

University Won't Recognize Men's Issues Group after Feminists Say it Makes Women Feel Unsafe
Ashley Rae Goldenberg

MIAS has received its major opposition from the school’s Feminist Collective.

In addition to allegedly making women feel unsafe, MIAS has also been attacked for supposedly not promoting equality—despite the existence of a Feminist Collective group dedicated solely to addressing women’s issues.

Another link: http://theeyeopener.com/2016/01/mens-issues-group-fails-to-get-ratified/

iptba

This sort of delay seems unacceptable:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/mother-went-homeless-to-get-on-housing-list-ex-partner-claims-1.2519974

Access application

In a separate case, the judge said if a report, to be supplied by the Child and Family Agency in an access application, was not supplied by the next court date, he wanted someone from the agency before him to explain why. The report had been ordered by a judge, but in a letter to the court, the agency said there was a nine-month waiting list for such reports.

The father involved had not had access to his three children “for a very long time”, pending the production of the report, the court heard. The case was adjourned to May.

goose2005

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Hang on... Are Hobbes and Locke being equated with some nobody from a minor University?

We will also be studying the contributions to English literature of Shakespeare, Joyce and Cecilia Ahern.

johnnyskeleton

goose2005 wrote: »

We will also be studying the contributions to English literature of Shakespeare, Joyce and Cecilia Ahern.

Jaysus.

Cant stand James Joyce.

Pawwed Rig

iptba wrote: »

This sort of delay seems unacceptable:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/mother-went-homeless-to-get-on-housing-list-ex-partner-claims-1.2519974

9 months is a very long time for a child. If the child is of a certain age you would be a stranger coming into the child's life after that time. These delay tactics seem to be a common method of keeping Dad's away from children.

I often wonder do the kids in later years resent the mother for killing any paternal relationship.

Sleepy

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I often wonder do the kids in later years resent the mother for killing any paternal relationship.

IME, by that time the mother will have convinced the child that their father abandoned them and was an all-round bad person.

iptba

(February 9)

It's time we stopped treating all men as sex pests
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/its-time-we-stopped-treating-all-men-as-sex-pests/

py2006

Here's how many women and children suffered domestic violence in 2014

Not one mention of men because as we all know men simply can't be victims.

Here is the article from today

"There were 50,000 helpline calls answered. Now these are shocking figures when you consider that 79% of women in Ireland never disclose serious physical or sexual violence by a partner to anyone."

Apparently 79% of women don't disclose their abuse. How did they come up with the stat then?

Woodward

Excellent opinion piece in the times
[http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/opinion-the-truth-doesn-t-seem-to-matter-very-much-in-ucd-revenge-porn-saga-1.2539997

Wibbs

The line "It has been even more disturbing to witness the wider reaction of people desperate to elevate their preferred narrative about sexual misconduct above the truth" sums it up for me.

The Black Oil

And this one too.

These reactions are representative of a broader debasement of the public discourse where, too often, facts come second to a preferred narrative – a “greater truth”. To minimise the false labelling of people as sexual predators is exceedingly dangerous and a disturbing indication of ideology supplanting clear judgment.

Louise O' Neill has a rather different take on it.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/features/louise-oneill-i-wonder-if-if-my-ex-boyfriends-thought-female-sexuality-was-something-to-be-laughed-at-383021.html

You are either part of the solution or you are part of the problem.

Right so.

Wibbs

I read that "article". Jeeeeesus.

I read it, about the male students who have allegedly created a Facebook group in which to exchange explicit photos of girls they have had sex with and rate them.

I sit there in stunned silence for minutes, hours, days.

I get up, then sit back down then get up and scream; it is guttural, visceral, this scream is coming from some part of myself that I never even knew existed.

I pace the room, what can I do, what can I say, why is this happening again, and again, and again.

She then goes off on some paranoid mind wander about all the men she has known in her life and did they hate women too? Oh and of course she has "never felt this alone". Eh sorry, she's a well educated middle class young white Irish woman, about the single most cosseted, protected and excused group in Ireland.

What in god's name is happening where adolescent hysterics are oddly celebrated in full grown adults? They're certainly not seen as the bloody embarrassment that IMH they should be for an adult. Black and white thinking is a given of course and opinions and emotionals always trump facts. Hell we can all go off on one, but usually dial it back and move on as normal. I can certainly go off on rages, but when I do I am showing a major fault in my character. This kinda thing as a constant is really childish thinking and it should be ignored, better yet improved upon with internal growth, certainly not promoted.

Oh and the fcukwits that decided to go for her on Twitter or wherever are as bad and equally as childish. Though I'd like to see what the majority of said haters actually wrote. The stuff she references are; ‘Not all men!’ ‘Lighten up love!’ ‘It’s just a bit of banter!’ ‘Those girls should have known better.’Not all men is hardly aggressive or beyond reason. The other stuff less reasonable, but hardly triggering hate speech FFS.

But somehow what is worse is the countless young men who tag their friends on the post with smiley faces, their first reaction to my frustration and pain is to go ‘lol’. Arseholery to a point, but again hardly hate speech and sorry if your life is public and online you're going to get that kinda guff. It comes with the territory and always has for public figures. Some of the graffiti scratched into Roman walls was vicious. Nature of the beast. Not nice, but it is what it is.

Again, I reckon we really need to get into a dialogue with people, particularly young kids about this very public world we live in and that it's not even close to all roses and unicorns. TBH I do have a lot of sympathy for people caught up in it, including the author of that piece. They often operate from a naive and ivory tower perspective where they feel their poo don't pong and they can suffer a harsh buzz when they find out the rest of the world doesn't buy into that.

py2006

I would be one SERIOUSLY angry young man if I was a UCD student right now.

Pawwed Rig

py2006 wrote: »

I would be one SERIOUSLY angry you man if I was a UCD student right now.

Maybe they can discuss it in the consent classes.

orubiru

The Black Oil wrote: »

And this one too.

Louise O' Neill has a rather different take on it.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/features/louise-oneill-i-wonder-if-if-my-ex-boyfriends-thought-female-sexuality-was-something-to-be-laughed-at-383021.html

Right so.

What gets me is the comment "you are either part of the solution or you are part of the problem".

Does she simply assume that she is part of the solution? How does she know that she isn't contributing to the problem? Just because she is a woman?

Imagine the sheer hubris of believing that you are automatically part of the solution to societies major problems.

Folks like this always seem to have an issue where they present the idea that "we all need to discuss this" but as soon as someone has a suggestion or an opinion that contradicts their worldview they flip out and shut the discussion down.

When an article states "you are either part of the solution or you are part of the problem" but doesn't fully explain the causes of the problem and offers no real solutions how useful is that article?

The causes of the problem are not explained.
A demonstration of how any proposed solution will work is not given.
Actually, a solution to the problem is not proposed at all.

My conclusion is that this person has no interest in solving the problem.

So why is an article like this written? To raise awareness? To anger people? To make money?

The Black Oil

orubiru, it's the Bush doctrine: You're either with us or against us.

When the UCD story was at its peak, she was complaining that not enough men were speaking out against the allegations. Excluding male trolls and the muppetry on both side of #notallmenz (including sometimes people of her ilk), which is it? How many men would need to speak out? When is a genuine query of her views fair game?

Folks like this always seem to have an issue where they present the idea that "we all need to discuss this" but as soon as someone has a suggestion or an opinion that contradicts their worldview they flip out and shut the discussion down.

Sadly true.

tolosenc

orubiru wrote: »

What gets me is the comment "you are either part of the solution or you are part of the problem".

Does she simply assume that she is part of the solution? How does she know that she isn't contributing to the problem? Just because she is a woman?

I think she sees it as females and solution males on one side and problem males on the other.

Or it's a subtle admission that she is a pervert or a rapist.

mzungu

orubiru wrote: »

What gets me is the comment "you are either part of the solution or you are part of the problem".

If the 'solution' involves tarring sections of the student population as perverts on the basis of hearsay, then I reckon we are entering dangerous times.

When an article states "you are either part of the solution or you are part of the problem" but doesn't fully explain the causes of the problem and offers no real solutions how useful is that article?

The causes of the problem are not explained.
A demonstration of how any proposed solution will work is not given.
Actually, a solution to the problem is not proposed at all.

This is one of many things that troubled me about that article. Lots of generalisations and musings on whether all the men in her life are/were deviants and chauvinists, followed by how angry and upset it made her. Not one mention of regret about an entire faculty of UCD, that will now have a question mark beside it for a couple of years. I suppose they are lads after all, they are the problem regardless, and thus fair game.

My conclusion is that this person has no interest in solving the problem.

So why is an article like this written? To raise awareness? To anger people? To make money?

I have no doubt that Louise O'Neill is genuine. However, as other posters alluded to above, the article sounds more like a surly teenager pulling a strop, than any kind of measured well thought out response. She, along with Una Mullaly, seem to be the go-to feminists for a quote or an article on whatever the gender based story is of any given week. These are complex societal problems, and debates should take place in the public forum. But issues such as these should be spearheaded by people working in the field (intellectuals, RCC workers, psychologists etc) rather than inexperienced journalists and writers who have very obvious axes to grind.

What happened in UCD is (unfortunately) the result of letting ill informed folk push their agenda unchallenged, and quite worryingly the mainstream media lapped it up.

Letree

This last few years has seen journalism debased like no other profession. Nobody i speak to trusts them anymore. Narrative over fact, omission of major news stories because they don't fit, overblowing less newsworthy ones because they do. Clickbaiting has superseded real reporting. Its all about money as we know but the public are on to them now.

Maguined

Letree wrote: »

This last few years has seen journalism debased like no other profession. Nobody i speak to trusts them anymore. Narrative over fact, omission of major news stories because they don't fit, overblowing less newsworthy ones because they do. Clickbaiting has superseded real reporting. Its all about money as we know but the public are on to them now.

We are on to them but we are also to blame. The journalists do this because it sells better than the truth and ethical reporting. The average person is more interested with click-bait trash then they are with decent articles.

Pawwed Rig

That is why tabloids and trashy magazines have always been so popular. What is worrying is that the higher brow publications have started the same thing. Twitter has been the worst thing to happen to journalism since Rupert Murdoch.

Wibbs

Crazy sells clicks. It pretty much boils down to that.

Pepe LeFrits

... and journalism costs money, but too few people are willing to pay for it. That needs to change.