Feminism and the emasculation of men

Wibbs

lufties wrote: »

whats a piv?

Penis In Vagina. And the bloggist and her tiny minority of appreciative commenters are nutters, so safely disregard.

clairefontaine

Deleted User wrote: »

No - that's what some nutcase believes.

I could link to some crazy study written by men and claim it to be what all MRAs believe, but I won't because that adds nothing to the discussion except to rile those taking part.

It's inflammatory nonsense and well you know it.

Don't dismiss nutcases. It's a slippery slope. Just look at the Salem Witch Trials, the McCarthy Era, and Ireland's theocratic age.

They can have a profound influence, and often use and manipulate more moderate supporters to get their way.

Mike747

lufties wrote: »

whats a piv?

Penis in vagina. The 'all men are rapists' concept taken to a new level of insanity.

mariaalice

An interesting statistic I came across for The ESRI, is that 34% of woman now have a higher education level that their male partners which is a big change from the past, patterns of male/female interaction in Irish society are changing, however that has nothing to do with feminism.

kunst nugget

clairefontaine wrote: »

Don't dismiss nutcases. It's a slippery slope. Just look at the Salem Witch Trials, the McCarthy Era, and Ireland's theocratic age.

They can have a profound influence, and often use and manipulate more moderate supporters to get their way.

They can only have a profound influence if people in power allow it. That woman is a nutter on a blog that is visited by a tiny minority of crazy feminists and crazy mra's. She has no influence in the mainstream for her crazy views. The Iona Institute on the other hand…

Muise...

Mike747 wrote: »

Penis in vagina. The 'all men are rapists' concept taken to a new level of insanity.

as insane as your 'all today's feminists believe this' concept.

clairefontaine

clairefontaine wrote: »

Don't dismiss nutcases. It's a slippery slope. Just look at the Salem Witch Trials, the McCarthy Era, and Ireland's theocratic age.

They can have a profound influence, and often use and manipulate more moderate supporters to get their way.

And the best way to stop that, is to dismiss them as nutcases and ignore them.

tigger123

Mike747 wrote: »

This is what today's feminists believe:

http://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/

This is what I (and others) were referring to earlier. It's not what today#s feminists believe, it's what that woman believes.

clairefontaine wrote: »

Honestly, I would be reluctant to vote for a woman of childbearing age or who had a family, simply because of over commitment. Politics is a hard game with long hours.

I don't and never did buy the line of having it all, everything comes with a price.

While everyone picked on Sara Palin for various reasons, the main reason I would not vote for her is all the kids she has, including a new baby. I know what having ONE child is like, how it absorbs your focus, never mind 8 or nine.

While its all nicey nicey to talk about maternity leave rights, in politics you need to make hard decisions and sometimes under extreme time pressures, especially if its part of a global military player like the US.

Call me a sexist, I really don't care. I am practical at the bottom line.

And would you vote for a man who has kids? If so, why a man and not a woman? Is it because a woman's place is in the home, looking after the childer?

clairefontaine

kunst nugget wrote: »

They can only have a profound influence if people in power allow it. That woman is a nutter on a blog that is visited by a tiny minority of crazy feminists and crazy mra's. She has no influence in the mainstream for her crazy views. The Iona Institute on the other hand…

Look, I went to college in the US, they are everywhere. We got rape whistles in our welcome packs.

Mike747

Wibbs wrote: »

Penis In Vagina. And the bloggist and her tiny minority of appreciative commenters are nutters, so safely disregard.

Are they a tiny minority though? And remember young women are growing up with this stuff. It's warping their minds, creating the perception that men, somehow, are the enemy.

TheLastMohican

Mike747 wrote: »

This is what today's feminists believe:

http://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/

This is one sick puppy. A neurotic, bullying lesbian with an awful take on life. Her site reminds me of the far right crap that you get in xenophobic publications. This is what makes her tick
comments
You’re on my blog, so it’s my rules.

This is a woman-only and radfem-only space. All women interested in forwarding radical feminist discussion and thought are invited to comment.

Men, don’t even try commenting on my blog, because I’m not going to publish it.

Nor am I going to publish any trolly anti-feminist ****e, threats and personal attacks, ****e that evinces basic comprehension of radical feminism, derailing ****e and reading comprehension failures. Seriously what did you think?

I include as anti-feminist ****e, all woman-silencing and guilt-tripping tactics that pass as feminism, such as intersectionality; butch/fem; infinite number of “phobias”; reformism; liberalism; het-bashing; radical lesbianism; queer & gender & pomo, etc etc

Bannasidhe

Wibbs wrote: »

I'd kinda disagree here M. Throughout history and cultures men, particularly young men had such frameworks. From huntergatherer tribal types being initiated into adulthood, to men going through apprenticeships, even mandatory military service, being instructed by men who weren't their fathers. While women have some of this, it doesn't seem to be nearly as built in as men across time and culture. It seems men do need, or might benefit from some sort of framework to get through this phase of their lives. Effed if I know how that would work today though. An interesting study for someone might be to compare Israeli men who have mandatory military service with men from a similar western culture who don't and play spot the diffs in things like mental illness, delinquency, etc. I wonder would any effect be present?

While I agree there was a structure for men I disagree that women's lives did not have the same level of structure and expectation.

Women had no choices - unlike men who at least had some depending on socio-economic status. Marry, have children (often a death sentence itself) , work if it was an economic necessity but above all hand over all legal rights to either Father or husband regardless of 'class'. In a class ridden society a woman from a wealthy background had less legal rights and protections that a man from the poorest background - he could at least take the King's schilling or strike off in search of fame/fortune. Women never had that option unless they passed as men (Anne Bonney/Dr James Barry to name two Irish women who took that option).

For a long time for a woman to dress as a man in order to 'pass' was punishable by death - because she had dared to step outside the boundaries set for her gender.

clairefontaine

Deleted User wrote: »

And the best way to stop that, is to dismiss them as nutcases and ignore them.

You can't when they have inflitrated academia, legislators, lobbiests and the judiciary.

kunst nugget

Mike747 wrote: »

We never should have legalized it.

Haha, go way out of that.

the_syco

Devils advocate;

FTA69 wrote: »

What percentage of the parliament are women?

What percentage of women vote for women?

FTA69 wrote: »

Why do women on average earn less than men for similar work?

You're either comparing like for like or you're not.

FTA69 wrote: »

Why are women under-represented for promotion in the professions?

Which professions? Can they work overtime if needed?

FTA69 wrote: »

Why is maternity constantly seen as a barrier for a woman's career?

Being out of work for a couple of months can do that alright.

FTA69 wrote: »

Why is domestic violence still prevalent?

No idea on this one. Domestic violence still happens to men and women.

jaja321

clairefontaine wrote: »

Honestly, I would be reluctant to vote for a woman of childbearing age or who had a family, simply because of over commitment. Politics is a hard game with long hours.

I don't and never did buy the line of having it all, everything comes with a price.

While everyone picked on Sara Palin for various reasons, the main reason I would not vote for her is all the kids she has, including a new baby. I know what having ONE child is like, how it absorbs your focus, never mind 8 or nine.

While its all nicey nicey to talk about maternity leave rights, in politics you need to make hard decisions and sometimes under extreme time pressures, especially if its part of a global military player like the US.

Call me a sexist, I really don't care. I am practical at the bottom line.

That's not really practical, but in fact sexist. Why punish women for having families? Male politicians have families too?

Muise...

Mike747 wrote: »

Are they a tiny minority though? And remember young women are growing up with this stuff. It's warping their minds, creating the perception that men, somehow, are the enemy.

Yes, yes they are a tiny minority. Today's feminists are more concerned that young women think being feminist means men will dislike them. And you're not helping.

Mike747

seenitall wrote: »

You're being serious, aren't you?

Yes. Men get screwed over when it comes to divorce. If the referendum was held today I would vote no.

SamAK

TheLastMohican wrote: »

This is one sick puppy. A neurotic, bullying lesbian with an awful take on life. Her site reminds me of the far right crap that you get in xenophobic publications. This is what makes her tick

I wasn't going to post here again, but that woman's views on PIV = rape has boggled my little mind.

What sort of life does she lead? An enjoyable one? Doubtful. So much hate....


Ugh...what a disgusting blog. :mad:

hatrickpatrick

Domestic violence happens to both men and women, and as a guy who was formerly in a horrific relationship involving constant harassment, stalking and blackmail, it makes me sick to my stomach to see those ads on TV with a lad checking his girlfriend's phone or whatever and then saying that lads need to take it easy. Everyone knows a guy who was treated like absolute sh!t by a girlfriend when he was a teenager - why are we always portrayed as the villain in such ad campaigns?

It's absolutely sickening, and it DOES pile evidence on to the idea that lads in general are being demonized on a constant basis, while women are painted as great and innocent. Equality means equality in everything, not just in the things which you are at a disadvantage in. You know, it also means things like "a girl treating a lad like crap will be regarded just as harshly as the reverse", and "a woman who attacks somebody will be treated the same way in court as a lad" etc etc etc.

TheLastMohican

jaja321 wrote: »

That's not really practical, but in fact sexist. Why punish women for having families? Male politicians have families too?

Why do you think women have breasts? To keep the bra makers in business? Just analyse what you've just said and ponder for a while.

kunst nugget

TheLastMohican wrote: »

Why do you think women have breasts? To keep the bra makers in business?

I don't know… to stop gay hens pecking them while they're trying to whistle?

hatrickpatrick

Oh and one other thing - what's up with feminists demanding censorship so often recently? It doesn't matter if a song's lyrics piss you off or someone wears a t shirt that pisses you off - their freedom of expression doesn't end the second somebody gets offended, you have every right to criticize it all you want but calling for everything offensive to be banned, restricted or censored is repressive, and from my own experience debating this issue with women I know IRL, is seriously putting them off. Most of them don't want to be part of a movement which campaigns for the songs they dance to on Friday nights to be banned from radio stations and college campuses. :rolleyes:

Bannasidhe

TheLastMohican wrote: »

Why do you think women have breasts? To keep the bra makers in business? Just analyse what you've just said and ponder for a while.

Why do you think there are handy little pumps available for the last ohhhh 50 years or so....

And special bottles for feeding babies - they have been around for centuries!

Have a ponder about that for a while....

Bannasidhe

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Oh and one other thing - what's up with feminists demanding censorship so often recently? It doesn't matter if a song's lyrics piss you off or someone wears a t shirt that pisses you off - their freedom of expression doesn't end the second somebody gets offended, you have every right to criticize it all you want but calling for everything offensive to be banned, restricted or censored is repressive, and from my own experience debating this issue with women I know IRL, is seriously putting them off. Most of them don't want to be part of a movement which campaigns for the songs they dance to on Friday nights to be banned from radio stations and college campuses. :rolleyes:

I am a feminist and I have NEVER called for ANYTHING to be censored EVER.

What's up with all of these feminists all do this/that/the other comments lately?

Muise...

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Oh and one other thing - what's up with feminists demanding censorship so often recently? It doesn't matter if a song's lyrics piss you off or someone wears a t shirt that pisses you off - their freedom of expression doesn't end the second somebody gets offended, you have every right to criticize it all you want but calling for everything offensive to be banned, restricted or censored is repressive, and from my own experience debating this issue with women I know IRL, is seriously putting them off. Most of them don't want to be part of a movement which campaigns for the songs they dance to on Friday nights to be banned from radio stations and college campuses. :rolleyes:

Feminism isn't a card-carrying party-line type organisation. I disagree with other feminists on this one - because I think it's more efficient to flush ignorant types out in the open with rapey lyrics. Good to know who to avoid.

jaja321

TheLastMohican wrote: »

Why do you think women have breasts? To keep the bra makers in business? Just analyse what you've just said and ponder for a while.

Clearly they stop womens ability to function as politicians.

Breast pumps, bottles, and supporting partners be handy yo.

hatrickpatrick

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I am a feminist and I have NEVER called for ANYTHING to be censored EVER.

What's up with all of these feminists all do this/that/the other comments lately?

It's hard to ignore it when it makes news headlines around the world, feminist groups calling for Blurred Lines to be banned in various venues and boycotting Facebook advertisers to pressure them into removing "offensive" Facebook pages.

Again, I don't want to impede their freedom of expression, if they want to engage in such activities they have every right to do so, but it has certainly ensured that I will never apply the label to myself despite being an ardent believer in egalitarianism for all humans, and as I said from talking to women I know, is something that is actually pissing a lot of people off, not just myself.

kunst nugget

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I am a feminist and I have NEVER called for ANYTHING to be censored EVER.

What's up with all of these feminists all do this/that/the other comments lately?

It's probably in relation to the famous case of Blurred Lines being banned in many student unions because of pressure from women's groups within the colleges. A move that was completely ridiculous imo.

seenitall

Mike747 wrote: »

Yes. Men get screwed over when it comes to divorce. If the referendum was held today I would vote no.

Hmmm... something tells me that if it were women being screwed over in divorces currently, you'd not have half as much a problem with it. Just a guess.

Anyway, let's go back to the good old times of having to be legally tied til death to someone you can't stand, rather than fixing the system so that the dissolution is more balanced and equitable. Makes perfect sense.