Feminism and the emasculation of men

hatrickpatrick

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Where are you getting that from? Most guys I know find it appalling, it's been written about extensively.



But not enough to put out ad campaigns about it like those which define abusive teenage relationships as exclusively "male abuser / female victim"? :rolleyes:

Well, I haven't heard about it so obviously they're not speaking loud enough about it. Which makes them all a bunch of hypocrites.
That's how this argument goes, right?

No, I haven't put out any ad campaigns. I'm sorry that I don't have the time or money to put out ad campaigns to satisfy people on the internet who never care about men's rights except when they want to shout down feminists. Rolleyes to you too.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

They are also strangely reluctant to discuss the fact that these discriminatory laws were written and enacted by men in the first place.

Men enacted laws which unfairly penalise men in certain situations and the bad feminists are not doing enough to combat these laws....:rolleyes:

I actually wish they would change a lot of those laws. Like the underage nonsense, the mother=custody stuff (as stupid as father=custody in the other extreme, I think we've swung enough the other way by now) and so on

Potatoeman

Bannasidhe wrote: »

They are also strangely reluctant to discuss the fact that these discriminatory laws were written and enacted by men in the first place.

Men enacted laws which unfairly penalise men in certain situations and the bad feminists are not doing enough to combat these laws....:rolleyes:

These are laws that are pretty outdated now but would be difficult to change. Even people that say they believe in equality will frequently admit that the mother should always get custody. I cant see a politician wanting to try and change that.

kunst nugget

Potatoeman wrote: »

These are laws that are pretty outdated now but would be difficult to change. Even people that say they believe in equality will frequently admit that the mother should always get custody. I cant see a politician wanting to try and change that.

So people are automatically going to say the child should go to the mother even if she's a junkie and the father has a decent, stable home environment to provide for the child?

Bannasidhe

Potatoeman wrote: »

These are laws that are pretty outdated now but would be difficult to change. Even people that say they believe in equality will frequently admit that the mother should always get custody. I cant see a politician wanting to try and change that.

No. They wouldn't be difficult to change at all.

Funny - I believe in equality and I certainly don't think the mother should always or automatically get custody. I know mother's who couldn't care for a packet of crisps - I also know father's who are the most amazing parents I have ever met.
I think the parent who can best care for the child should have primary care but custody should be shared by both parents unless one is proven to be unsuitable - regardless of the gender.

I also think that a man's name on a child's birth certificate should grant him equal status with the mother.

Foxtrol

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Feminism is not a political party.

It is a broad spectrum political philosophy.

Have you actually looked for feminists speaking out against it?

Millions of people identify as feminist in the UK and US - do you seriously expect us to believe not one of those millions disagreed with this campaign? Not one???

That should be in the Guinness Book of Records if it's true....

Care to actually respond to the questions in my post rather than shifting the goal posts again?

I was responding to the poster that made the comparison to feminism and a political party, I did not bring it into the discussion. Just like the other examples that other feminists have brought into the fray here, like the soccer fan or the Muslim, the political party one highlights the issue with the feminist logic of them being coloured by the extremes of their ideology having no connection with the apathy of the rest.

I have read and watched a lot of news coverage on it and haven’t once seen someone who is a high profile feminist, or someone even claiming to be a feminist, voicing their disapproval with the campaign. Many high profile feminists are well able to get their voice in the media when they want but they all seem incredibly quiet every single time there is a ‘looney’ campaign or discussion, sooner or later it gets to the point where it can’t be a coincidence. Boards is probably a good microcosm for this, there’s plenty of very vocal feminists seen on this thread, but when it comes to threads about censorship campaigns, controversial articles by feminists, they never appear in such great numbers or with such intensity to attack the ‘looney’ feminists that the majority supposedly disagree so strongly with.

Femme_Fatale

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

nobody is claiming feminism is the cause of men's issues, merely that it ignores them while pretending to be about equality.

Depends on the feminist. Anyone who thinks no feminist would also be concerned with men's rights, is living in the clouds.

This happens ALL THE TIME.

Women claiming MRAs are misogynistic. Yes, I've no doubt it unfortunately does. So why are you doing the same in relation to all feminists?

And I dispute that the most vocal MRAs are misogynists

Well the most controversial ones is what I mean - that's who the media will focus on. If you don't think Paul Elam and Return Of Kings are misogyny-free zones, you're deluding yourself greatly. I know they do not speak for most MRAs though, and do not consider other MRAs to be as bad as them just because of the association. That would be silly - and indicative of being absolutely gagging to blame the wrong people.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

would you then agree with my statement that Irish guys are discriminated against, in many cases in the actual law of the land?

Lol, you know full well she agrees with it. You seem to be dying for a woman to come along and say she doesn't.

hatrickpatrick

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

You're gagging for a fight, aren't you?

I'm really not, I just love a debate, an I feel very passionately about this particular subject.

I won't oblige. If you're not arsed reading posts and shouting people down in a sarcastic manner while getting your facts wrong in the process, you're hardly showing yourself as someone open to listening.

My sarcasm is in no way designed to be offensive, merely to lighten the mood in what can often become a fairly heated debate. I also highly dispute that I shout people down - my posts always contain questions to be answered rather than conclusions.

You think you're right and that won't change.

Oh the irony

I can give you a long list of examples but something tells me I'd be wadting my time.

In other words, you're not going to cite a single source to back up your claims, unlike myself who provided several earlier and will happily provide more if asked.

I'm still a man-hating feminist

You're very clearly not a man hater, in fact the vast, vast majority of feminists are not and I have literally never claimed they are.

who only cares about feminist issues, no matter how often I've stated the contrary.

Again, this is something I have never claimed.

I couldn't be arsed. I'm not going to be made out to be something I'm not by some stranger on the internet.

I have never made you out to be anything at all. I'm attacking an ideology, not specific individuals - if you want to see me attacking specific individuals have a look at my comments regarding Alan Shatter and Martin Callinan in the GSOC bugging threads.

Read posts and Listen instead of shouting people down.

I read, I listen, I provide rebuttal where necessary - this is how debating works. In what way can I possibly claim to have "shouted anyone down"?

Open your mind just an inch and stop tarring everyone with the same brush.

My mind is wide open. I haven't tarred you with any brush.

In all honesty I wonder if you've got somebody else's posts in the thread confused with mine? Some here have indeed been very vitriolic, I have not (in my view anyway).

Again, if you feel like citing some examples, I'd be more than happy to debate those.

Bannasidhe

Foxtrol wrote: »

Care to actually respond to the questions in my post rather than shifting the goal posts again?

I was responding to the poster that made the comparison to feminism and a political party, I did not bring it into the discussion. Just like the other examples that other feminists have brought into the fray here, like the soccer fan or the Muslim, the political party one highlights the issue with the feminist logic of them being coloured by the extremes of their ideology having no connection with the apathy of the rest.

I have read and watched a lot of news coverage on it and haven’t once seen someone who is a high profile feminist, or someone even claiming to be a feminist, voicing their disapproval with the campaign. Many high profile feminists are well able to get their voice in the media when they want but they all seem incredibly quiet every single time there is a ‘looney’ campaign or discussion, sooner or later it gets to the point where it can’t be a coincidence. Boards is probably a good microcosm for this, there’s plenty of very vocal feminists seen on this thread, but when it comes to threads about censorship campaigns, controversial articles by feminists, they never appear in such great numbers or with such intensity to attack the ‘looney’ feminists that the majority supposedly disagree so strongly with.

Care to provide any of the evidence I have repeatedly asked you to provide?

It's all very vague with you - 'things' you have read, 'things' you have seen on TV, now it's threads on boards.

You are still silent about whether or not you have done any actual research so before you accuse other's of interfering with goalposts how about you introduce some substance to your own opining.

lufties

Here in Hong Kong, men are definately emasculated(not to generalise).It's actually now a cultural thing for a man here to carry his other half's handbag around for her. They also do what they're told and don't tend to talk back, as the link below shows :eek:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3sMIIEmKpw

sad to see this kind of stuff going on.

Bannasidhe

lufties wrote: »

Here in Hong Kong, men are definately emasculated(not to generalise).It's actually now a cultural thing for a man here to carry his other half's handbag around for her. They also do what they're told and don't tend to talk back, as the link below shows :eek:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3sMIIEmKpw

sad to see this kind of stuff going on.

Wow. That is an incredible amount of assumptions to base on a single youtube vid.

Also - who knew Thatcher was a secret feminist and when we thought she was handing Hong Kong back to the Chinese it was really a super secret transfer to Feminism International.

beano345

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Wow. That is an incredible amount of assumptions to base on a single youtube vid.

Also - who knew Thatcher was a secret feminist and when we thought she was handing Hong Kong back to the Chinese it was really a super secret transfer to Feminism International.

Even thatcher said feminism was poison lol

big difference in Hong Kong from Japan were the majority off males are turning their backs on dating and marriage- herbivore men as they are called.

Foxtrol

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Care to provide any of the evidence I have repeatedly asked you to provide?

It's all very vague with you - 'things' you have read, 'things' you have seen on TV, now it's threads on boards.

You are still silent about whether or not you have done any actual research so before you accuse other's of interfering with goalposts how about you introduce some substance to your own opining.

You’re missing the point. Does the general public perform detailed research about every group that they make opinions on? This is what I took up the OP on, the complaint that 'mainstream feminists' are tarred with the same brush as the ‘looneys’ by the public.

Outside of contributing to boards, I read/listen/watch a lot of current affairs shows and, outside of quotas for female politicians (mostly from one voice), I cant recall one feminist disagreeing with another feminist campaign. Many of these media outlets thrive on debate yet despite their ability to muster an endless number of women’s activists for the ‘looney’ perspective they never seem to be able to find any feminist to oppose. Are you actually saying the media is refusing to allow feminists a voice in disagreeing with these campaigns, despite allowing them a voice at every other occasision, or is it much more likely that feminists who disapprove are apathetic when it comes to making their voices heard?

Bannasidhe

beano345 wrote: »

Even thatcher said feminism was poison lol

big difference in Hong Kong from Japan were the majority off males are turning their backs on dating and marriage- herbivore men as they are called.

Even Thatcher...?

Thatcher was the ultimate anti-feminist so I'm am not sure what you mean by 'even'

Bannasidhe

Foxtrol wrote: »

You’re missing the point. Does the general public perform detailed research about every group that they make opinions on? This is what I took up the OP on, the complaint that 'mainstream feminists' are tarred with the same brush as the ‘looneys’ by the public.

Outside of contributing to boards, I read/listen/watch a lot of current affairs shows and, outside of quotas for female politicians (mostly from one voice), I cant recall one feminist disagreeing with another feminist campaign. Many of these media outlets thrive on debate yet despite their ability to muster an endless number of women’s activists for the ‘looney’ perspective they never seem to be able to find any feminist to oppose. Are you actually saying the media is refusing to allow feminists a voice in disagreeing with these campaigns, despite allowing them a voice at every other occasision, or is it much more likely that feminists who disapprove are apathetic when it comes to making their voices heard?

To me, the OP read more like a 'men are being psychologically castrated because feminists and now we aren't allowed to be man manly men because wimmenz 'rights' has cut our balls off' whinge.

If a man's self-worth is measured by how dominant he is over women then that man needs to take a long hard look at himself.

The reverse is also true by the way - women who measure themselves by how men perceive them also need a long hard look at themselves.

ne0ica

Feminism was started by ugly women who weren't asked on dates by hot guys. They were marginalised and want society to change and become gender neutral so they can fit in.

Banned

Foxtrol

Bannasidhe wrote: »

To me, the OP read more like a 'men are being psychologically castrated because feminists and now we aren't allowed to be man manly men because wimmenz 'rights' has cut our balls off' whinge.

If a man's self-worth is measured by how dominant he is over women then that man needs to take a long hard look at himself.

The reverse is also true by the way - women who measure themselves by how men perceive them also need a long hard look at themselves.

I meant the OP that I took issue with. She (presumption) was complaining that feminists are all tarred with the same brush due to the ‘looneys’ and my contention was that if so many of the mainstream disagree with these campaigns etc then they aren’t helping themselves by staying so silent on these was vocal on other issues.

Baze

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

It will be ignored.
Because acknowledgment of it means not being able to say all feminists = man-haters by association/feminism is to blame for all issues men face due to being men.

Can you imagine if women here posted that men's rights activists are all misogynists by association because a tiny minority of them are, and are the most vocal so they drown out the reasonable majority?!

Nobody on the thread has said or implied that "feminism is to blame for all issues men face" and the only person that has used the term "man haters" on the thread so far, has been you, twice.

Bannasidhe

Foxtrol wrote: »

I meant the OP that I took issue with. She (presumption) was complaining that feminists are all tarred with the same brush due to the ‘looneys’ and my contention was that if so many of the mainstream disagree with these campaigns etc then they aren’t helping themselves by staying so silent on these was vocal on other issues.

Ummm - OP is 'original poster' so I am not sure who you mean exactly...

Has it occurred to you that it would be counter-productive to spend all of one's time commenting in the media - and you are talking about mainstream media which does like to sensationalise - on disagreements when there are far more important issues to address?

Just because it is not on TV3/RTE/Sky News/CNN does not mean it is not taking place. It just means that people are not feeding the anti-feminism frenzy by making a media show of disagreements.

If it was discussed in the mainstream media do you doubt we would have threads saying 'see - feminism is all infighting an bitching. They can't agree on anything and they are demanding equality...HA!'

beano345

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Even Thatcher...?

Thatcher was the ultimate anti-feminist so I'm am not sure what you mean by 'even'

Of course she was.it was completely in her interest to be! you don't s**t on your own doorstep

Bannasidhe

beano345 wrote: »

Of course she was.it was completely in her interest to be! you don't s**t on your own doorstep

I am struggling to see your point...

strobe

I saw a feminist once. Apparently they settle disputes by clashing necks and their spots are as unique as human fingerprints.

Femme_Fatale

Thatcher was a woman-hating woman so obviously she hated feminism.
The irony is, she wouldn't have gotten where she got all those decades ago without feminism. But she still ignorantly bitched about it. Presumably due to her assuming that they're all unattractive and could never get a man.

I'll avoid engaging with any "Registered: Feb 2014" posters btw, seeing as they'll be banned soon anyway.

Foxtrol, to be suspicious of moderate feminists or people who have some feminist views because of them not shouting from the rooftops against the crazier ones is narrow-minded and unfair.
I've already said I've had dealings with two MRAs who were great guys. I don't care if they don't criticise John Waters or worse again Return Of Kings et al; they don't need to criticise them. Most people aren't that irrational/hate-filled.
I don't get your logic about not seeing people on this thread defending feminism speaking out against fanatics on other threads. Have you done a comparison between threads or something?
I'm not searching to see whether you've spoken out against fanatics in the MRA movement elsewhere on Boards, as I'm confident you're not like those people. There's no requirement for you to "prove" yourself.
I'd have thought it best to judge people by what they do, not what they don't do.

Nodin

lufties wrote: »

Here in Hong Kong, men are definately emasculated(not to generalise).It's actually now a cultural thing for a man here to carry his other half's handbag around for her. They also do what they're told and don't tend to talk back, as the link below shows :eek:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3sMIIEmKpw

sad to see this kind of stuff going on.

Did you bother reading the text beneath that video, or is this just trollery?

Foxtrol

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Ummm - OP is 'original poster' so I am not sure who you mean exactly...

Has it occurred to you that it would be counter-productive to spend all of one's time commenting in the media - and you are talking about mainstream media which does like to sensationalise - on disagreements when there are far more important issues to address?

Just because it is not on TV3/RTE/Sky News/CNN does not mean it is not taking place. It just means that people are not feeding the anti-feminism frenzy by making a media show of disagreements.

If it was discussed in the mainstream media do you doubt we would have threads saying 'see - feminism is all infighting an bitching. They can't agree on anything and they are demanding equality...HA!'

Who said ‘all of one’s time’? If the massive majority of feminists disagree with these campaigns, as is claimed, then it should be no work at all.

Well for at least the original poster I responded to, they feel that feminism is being tarred with the same brush as the extremes, so clearly for them the current plan seems to already be failing.

I think the bolded part of your post is the key issue with your mindset and that of many feminists. You simply don’t care what sort of ridiculous things are thrown out by other feminists and yet expect the general public to somehow assume that most feminists don’t think this way. I struggle to think of any other area of society where a group has gotten away with totally ignoring the actions of their peers and preserved their public image, why do you think feminism could/should be a special case?

In any aspect of life, I personally find it very hard to trust or respect the words of anyone if they only attack outward, afraid to be self-critical of themselves or those who they stand under the same banner as them. It’s the sign of a person who only cares about one thing and it certainly isn’t ‘equality’.

eviltwin

Foxtrol wrote: »

Who said ‘all of one’s time’? If the massive majority of feminists disagree with these campaigns, as is claimed, then it should be no work at all.

Well for at least the original poster I responded to, they feel that feminism is being tarred with the same brush as the extremes, so clearly for them the current plan seems to already be failing.

I think the bolded part of your post is the key issue with your mindset and that of many feminists. You simply don’t care what sort of ridiculous things are thrown out by other feminists and yet expect the general public to somehow assume that most feminists don’t think this way. I struggle to think of any other area of society where a group has gotten away with totally ignoring the actions of their peers and preserved their public image, why do you think feminism could/should be a special case?

In any aspect of life, I personally find it very hard to trust or respect the words of anyone if they only attack outward, afraid to be self-critical of themselves or those who they stand under the same banner as them. It’s the sign of a person who only cares about one thing and it certainly isn’t ‘equality’.

I cringe when I read or hear some of the things that are said by some "feminists" or man haters as I call them. Take that "sex is always rape" blog someone linked to earlier in the thread, utter rubbish and I wouldn't give it oxygen by talking about it. Tbh I would assume most people would know that kind of thing is way out of left field and that very few feminists would agree with it just like I don't think those nutty Americans who believe all women should be kept in the kitchen are representative of most men. There is always someone with a cause who is radical, they don't have any connection to the wider group and shouldn't be dragged into the debate because all they do is derail it.

hatrickpatrick

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Depends on the feminist. Anyone who thinks no feminist would also be concerned with men's rights, is living in the clouds.

They are indeed. Luckily for me, it's something I never said.

Women claiming MRAs are misogynistic. Yes, I've no doubt it unfortunately does. So why are you doing the same in relation to all feminists?

I have never done the same in relation to all feminists. But the pro censorship ones do seem to comprise a sizable amount, if not the majority. Otherwise they have some incredibly impressive skills at convincing people to join campaigns they don't actually support.

Well the most controversial ones is what I mean - that's who the media will focus on. If you don't think Paul Elam and Return Of Kings are misogyny-free zones, you're deluding yourself greatly.

All I'm asking you to do is to cite even one or two examples. I in this thread have cited many, all I'm asking for is just one or two. That's all. With regard to Paul Elam for example, can you link me to something I should be objecting to? I've seen many insightful articles on AVFM, mainly regarding father's getting screwed tbh, and I'm looking at his Twitter right now and fail to spot anything extremist. If you would cite one or two examples I'd be more than happy to comment, but I can't comment on something I'm not intimately familiar with unless such examples are glaringly obvious and common, which they don't seem to be.

I know they do not speak for most MRAs though, and do not consider other MRAs to be as bad as them just because of the association. That would be silly - and indicative of being absolutely gagging to blame the wrong people.

Have they ever succeeded in doing something such as silencing a TV personality for simply airing a controversial opinion, or getting a song banned in numerous venues, or getting t shirts removed from Topman, or getting an ad for Hunky Dorys pulled from TV?

Lol, you know full well she agrees with it. You seem to be dying for a woman to come along and say she doesn't.

Actually I don't know full well she agrees with it until she says she does, I personally know feminists who insist that women have it far worse in Ireland and that discrimination against men is so rare as to not be worth talking about.

B0jangles

I don't want to link directly to anything on AVfM since don't want to give them the pageviews, so here's a article quoting some of the worst things Elam has said, with links to the pieces quoted if you want to check the context:

http://manboobz.com/2013/10/18/paul-elam-of-a-voice-for-men-in-his-own-words/

hatrickpatrick

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I'd have thought it best to judge people by what they do, not what they don't do.

"Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing." - John Stuart Mill

That was written sometimes in the 1700s, hence the sexism. But it holds true today as ever - if the majority are good people but stay silent as the minority do awful things, of course everyone is going to assume that the minority opinion is far more prevalent than it really is. You see this everywhere in society, not just with regard to gender. It's not even almost unreasonable - people can only make judgements on what they see and hear, not make assumptions based on the absence of it.

Foxtrol

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Foxtrol, to be suspicious of moderate feminists or people who have some feminist views because of them not shouting from the rooftops against the crazier ones is narrow-minded and unfair.

I’m not suspicious; I just don’t think feminists can complain about being tarred with the same brush as those ‘extremists’ who run sizable campaigns on issues if they stay quiet every time.

I've already said I've had dealings with two MRAs who were great guys. I don't care if they don't criticise John Waters or worse again Return Of Kings et al; they don't need to criticise them. Most people aren't that irrational/hate-filled.

Can you highlight a campaign by any ‘looney’ MRAs have had on a scale of those against hunky dory, blurred lines? These are sizeable campaigns with a large amount of media attention so if such a ‘looney’ MRA campaign existed I’d be very disappointed if there weren’t several MRAs that came out to point out how ridiculous they were.

I don't get your logic about not seeing people on this thread defending feminism speaking out against fanatics on other threads. Have you done a comparison between threads or something?
I'm not searching to see whether you've spoken out against fanatics in the MRA movement elsewhere on Boards, as I'm confident you're not like those people. There's no requirement for you to "prove" yourself.

It’s an observation from what I’ve seen. Posters who have been strongly defending feminism on this thread know themselves how often they’ve involved themselves in threads disapproving of other feminists. I don’t regularly get involved in threads on MRAs or Feminism, I only started to post on this thread when I saw that complaint earlier, as it’s something I’ve heard before outside of boards and was a line of thinking I couldn’t understand and I still don’t get.

I'd have thought it best to judge people by what they do, not what they don't do.

Me too, I’d love to hear a feminist come out against ridiculous campaigns when they’re being discussed, as it would be a clear sign that it doesn’t have the support of others in the feminist community. The issue is that, like every other aspect of society, when people continuously don’t act you’re left with nothing to point to the fact they don’t agree with an issue.