Men's Rights Ireland

iptba

KyussBishop wrote: »

Earlier on in this thread (or perhaps it was another), I noticed that people don't seem to even bother denying when they make or back generalizations either: Just try to engage in whataboutery to distract from it, or fallacious attempts at justifying generalizations.

I think it's worth challenging you given the large number of posts you made on the last thread making the very one point. Then you pop up on this thread and do the very same thing. You set the bar that people can't talk about feminists without statistics but don't do use statistics when talking about male rights activists.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to come up with statistics about feminists' view when such statistics most likely don't exist anywhere. Indeed, I asked you previously where we might find such stats and you'd didn't provide any links.

I do accept your right to call people if they describe something as true for all feminists when you believe it is not.

tsiehta

Seriously? wrote: »

I think women are starting to distance themselves from feminism as it has become more radical (or at least it's public image has).

I actually think the opposite is true - especially among those in their 20s. With the rise of the Web 2.0 era, the rapidly increasing number of people participating in mass online communication (notably, demographics have shifted away from being so male dominated), as well as the increasing number of number of online platforms with which people can air their views to a wide range of people with ease, I think interest in social justice and feminism is increasing.

One reason behind it, I think, is that everything is so out in the open now. There's little censorship online. When you post something on boards, or reddit, or facebook, or tumblr, it's potentially seen by millions of people. When people post things which involve casual homophobia, or sexist jokes etc., many others see them and perceive them as offensive, and a lot of people (and not just women, or members of minority groups) are uniting around the idea that these sorts of things are not ok. Internalized prejudices which previously were confined to private interactions are now clearly visible in the public domain of the internet, and as a result, they're also being challenged.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

I think interest in MRA groups is increasing for somewhat similar reasons. It's a very interesting time.

iptba

tsiehta wrote: »

It's a very interesting time.

Yes, an interesting time.

Asynchronous discussions like on boards.ie also have the potential for more thoughtful and more in-depth discussion and examination of issues. Sound bites have less importance.

Also, they facilitate a closer analysis of points made: parts of the reasons given for (or against) something can be extracted and put under the (metaphorical) microscope more easily.

py2006

KyussBishop wrote: »

If this starts down the 'attempting to justify unbacked generalizations' path, I'm going to hold people to that and again start demanding stats (not assertion or anecdote, but stats...) to back it.

Nobody is labeling all feminists, but it is certainly part of the package for some. Feminists themselves will tell you that:

Writers such as Camille Paglia, Christina Hoff Sommers, Jean Bethke Elshtain, Elizabeth Fox-Genovese and Daphne Patai oppose some forms of feminism, though they identify as feminists. They argue, for example, that feminism often promotes misandry and the elevation of women's interests above men's, and criticize radical feminist positions as harmful to both men and women. Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge argue that the term "anti-feminist" is used to silence academic debate about feminism

As for your stats, well I am not sure if a lot of these people have filled out questionaires for data gathering purposes. All I can go on is my own experiences and those of others.

KyussBishop

Piliger wrote: »

When people have a regular knee jerk reaction to refer to opponents as hysterical, it usually means they have nothing better to say in their argument.
And credibility comes with strength of argument - not from people who oppose men's rights.

Sadly today's Feminism has developed a deeply held and consistent misandrous and aggressive man hating streak and it justifies it using the old childish mantra of you did it to us and now we can do it to you. It manifests itself all over the internet, facebook, twitter and particularly in newspapers like the Guardian.

Eh, you said this while referring to me, and it's precisely hysterical in your exaggerated claims of a 'vicious' attack', and of misandry:

Piliger wrote:

11. Aggressive misandrous feminism.
When men campaign for their rights and for gender balance, the immediate result is a vicious attack by feminists who resent anyone else usurping their role as victims - exemplified by the immediate attack in this thread. The goals of modern misandrous feminism is not equality or balance, but preferential treatment and a preferential legal status.

Your rush to slander people as 'misandrous', while proclaiming you are under 'vicious attack', fits precisely, the description 'hysterical'.

KyussBishop

iptba wrote: »

Earlier you said

Where were the stats backing up these claims?

If you can say that, I don't see why some people can't say:

That isn't saying all feminists are misandrous.

Except you're not comparing like with like - this is a generalization about feminists:
"There is a lot of misandry among feminists."

This is not:
"There is misandry among a lot of (by no means all) feminists."

py2006 was also replying to contest this, my criticism of the website:

KyussBishop wrote:

When the first port of call from people supporting an organization, is to hysterically accuse critics of being misandrous (without any backing), it doesn't bode well for their credibility.

Why is he defending the website, when I am criticizing it for making such sweeping generalizations, if he doesn't himself support that?

If he doesn't support that, perhaps he should make that clear by actually reading the website, and saying what he thinks of their sweeping generalizations...

Pawwed Rig

Mod note - Please attack the post not the poster.
Also please bear in mind this is a men's rights threads so lets keep the posts about men's rights rather than an in depth analysis of the minutae of the exact wording used in each post.
Keep generalisations to a minimum.

py2006

KyussBishop, this isn't the first time somebody has jumped into a Mens Rights thread (or some similar) with multiple posts not related to the topic.

Can we have your honest thoughts on why (or why not?) there is a need to raise awareness of mens rights, to highlight issues in society/media etc where men are on the negative end?

KyussBishop

EDIT: Missed warning.

py2006

KyussBishop wrote: »

py2006 was also replying to contest this, my criticism of the website:

Why is he defending the website, when I am criticizing it for making such sweeping generalizations, if he doesn't himself support that?

If he doesn't support that, perhaps he should make that clear by actually reading the website, and saying what he thinks of their sweeping generalizations...

What are you talking about? I haven't even looked at any website? I was responding to your comments in relation to mens rights and feminists etc.

KyussBishop

py2006 wrote: »

What are you talking about? I haven't even looked at any website? I was responding to your comments in relation to mens rights and feminists etc.

This topic is about the website in the original post - the starting 'Launch of Mens Rights Ireland' blog post gives a good idea of what the site is about.

py2006 wrote: »

KyussBishop, this isn't the first time somebody has jumped into a Mens Rights thread (or some similar) with multiple posts not related to the topic.

Can we have your honest thoughts on why (or why not?) there is a need to raise awareness of mens rights, to highlight issues in society/media etc where men are on the negative end?

Well, my posts have been about the topic (either directly/indirectly, that website), all the way through - I think mens right issues are as valid as any other societal subgroups issues, and I recognize many of the mens rights issues, such as in the family courts - I'd consider myself both a supporter of mens rights, and of feminism (and of pretty much any other 'rights' group acting on valid issues).

py2006

KyussBishop wrote: »

This topic is about the website in the original post - the starting 'Launch of Mens Rights Ireland' blog post gives a good idea of what the site is about.

So that individuals blog about the site is what you are going by? I get the impression that you have a general opinion on any site/comment on mens rights hense your appearance here.

KyussBishop

py2006 wrote: »

So that individuals blog about the site is what you are going by? I get the impression that you have a general opinion on any site/comment on mens rights hense your appearance here.

Yes to the former, no to the latter: I was criticizing the site, based on the specific arguments it was putting forward.

py2006

Just had a quick glance at IFN. Their front page is quite fluffy and generic and its all equality for all etc which is wonderful. Yet when you go to the Our Work section you will see a contradiction:

Research and Publications: The IFN intends to publish a number of research documents pertaining to issues facing women in Ireland. These will be released on periodical basis and uploaded to our 'Publications' page.

So not equality for all as they will be focusing on women.

Where relevant the IFN will align itself with sister campaigns, activism and initiatives in Ireland which promote gender equality and deal specifically with feminist issues.

So gender equality is separate issue to a feminist issue?

The IFN is concerned with engaging women, especially young women in Ireland.

So while the opening page suggests they are about equality for all there is an immediate contradiction in the very next page I look at.

You see this is the problem a lot of people (including women) have with feminism as it solely promotes/advocates issues for women or leads us to believe that only women have issues in society or they are blatantly ignoring others. Now if they say from the offset that they are only concerned with issues affecting women then fine.

The infuriating thing from a male perspective is that issues such as domestic abuse (including violence) is very much an issue for men too. A lot more so than the '90% of abuse victims are women' nonsense you here banded about by certain people.

KyussBishop

This is anecdote-based whataboutery though - that avoids the criticisms I put forward of Men's Rights Ireland (which is the topic of the thread), with a distraction (a distraction I can't really contest directly without getting a warning).

Piliger

py2006 wrote: »

The infuriating thing from a male perspective is that issues such as domestic abuse (including violence) is very much an issue for men too. A lot more so than the '90% of abuse victims are women' nonsense you here banded about by certain people.

Unfortunately it is almost impossible to discuss these issues here because of people who come solely to disrupt the discussion. Of all of the issues that are critical to Men's Rights, how many have we actually discussed ? Even the one you point to has had little comment despite the fact that more than 40% of domestic abuse is against men and men are 50% as likely to report it. Men also have no where to go to get respite or shelter. Yet so many men are completely oblivious to this issue because they have been so brainwashed by the feminist movement throughout their lives. Only when they or their friend experiences this do they suddenly wake up and see what is happening out there.

Piliger

iptba wrote: »

I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to come up with statistics about feminists' view when such statistics most likely don't exist anywhere. Indeed, I asked you previously where we might find such stats and you'd didn't provide any links.

Statistics are useful in some cases but not in most. We call it like we see it. We see feminism taking control of the media and of university campuses and we see the agenda that is driven by this new form of very aggressive and man hating feminism. They have no interest in equality whatsoever. They want privilege. This is how we now get the disgusting misandrous "Manup" campaign and the 77% women's pay lie being propagated across all of the media.

LegacyUser

banquo wrote: »

The smart Mens' Rights group will not mention feminism.

No true Scotsman will oppose reign of an English king over Scotland.
Whee!

laoch na mona

Piliger wrote: »

We see feminism taking control of the media and of university campuses and we see the agenda that is driven by this new form of very aggressive and man hating feminism. They have no interest in equality whatsoever. They want privilege.

Im a uni student and I have had multiple lectures on feminism as well as various other theories, and I can tell you any literature we have read (or been asked to) has been concerned with equality, and has much to offer support for mens rights because it is a theory fundamentally opposed to a gendered society. The problems faced by men are the result of the gender roles which exist in society which feminism criticises.

Naturally feminism is going to be to the fore as women has historically suffered more from a gendered society (its a mans world)

I would love to see MRA's that could and want to do more then deride feminism and women in general

Pawwed Rig

laoch na mona wrote: »

Naturally feminism is going to be to the fore as women has historically suffered more from a gendered society (its a mans world)

2 World Wars would say differently.

laoch na mona wrote: »

I would love to see MRA's that could and want to do more then deride feminism and women in general

banquo wrote: »

The smart Mens' Rights group will not mention feminism.

I think I am leaning towards this opinion now. It seems to be so fixated with the evils of Feminism that the actual issues are getting lost in the fog. Thread after thread on this forum has gone down the same route. Rather than arguing in in a coherent way the discussion is derailed by those who equate Feminism with equality and those who don't.
The issues affecting men should be to the forefront and when challenged on other aspects a few statistics is all the engagement that is needed.

Piliger

laoch na mona wrote: »

I would love to see MRA's that could and want to do more then deride feminism and women in general

Which MRAs are these then ?

Piliger

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I think I am leaning towards this opinion now. It seems to be so fixated with the evils of Feminism that the actual issues are getting lost in the fog. Thread after thread on this forum has gone down the same route. Rather than arguing in in a coherent way the discussion is derailed by those who equate Feminism with equality and those who don't.
The issues affecting men should be to the forefront and when challenged on other aspects a few statistics is all the engagement that is needed.

I disagree. The reason why these issues arise at all - these issues that are causing men to experience prejudice and sexism at the hands of courts, Gov agencies etc. - is that they have been brought about directly by feminist campaigns. They have not arrived out of nowhere.

It is impossible to expect any discussion about the prejudices that are experienced by men NOT to include mention of feminism along the way.

The reason thread after thread has been derailed into a slanging match about feminism is because feminists are allowed carte blanche to do so. We all know it and many of us have shared many PMs on the topic.

If it were not for this carte blanche intervention there would be no undue concentration on feminism and discussion of the issues would quickly emerge.

iptba

Piliger wrote: »

Which MRAs are these then ?

Best to ignore such comments and discuss issues I think.

Standman

Piliger wrote: »

I disagree. The reason why these issues arise at all - these issues that are causing men to experience prejudice and sexism at the hands of courts, Gov agencies etc. - is that they have been brought about directly by feminist campaigns. They have not arrived out of nowhere.

It is impossible to expect any discussion about the prejudices that are experienced by men NOT to include mention of feminism along the way.

The reason thread after thread has been derailed into a slanging match about feminism is because feminists are allowed carte blanche to do so. We all know it and many of us have shared many PMs on the topic.

If it were not for this carte blanche intervention there would be no undue concentration on feminism and discussion of the issues would quickly emerge.

I haven't really noticed where feminists are given "cart blanche" to derail threads on this forum. If the issue of feminism is brought up then people from all sides of the fence should be allowed chime in.

iptba

The sexism thread, where feminism has rarely if ever (?) been mentioned, has probably been one of the more interesting ones alright.

Standman

iptba wrote: »

The sexism thread, where feminism has rarely if ever (?) been mentioned, has probably been one of the more interesting ones alright.

In fairness I haven't seen it happen in that thread that often for it to be a big issue.

iptba

Standman wrote: »

iptba wrote:

The sexism thread, where feminism has rarely if ever (?) been mentioned, has probably been one of the more interesting ones alright.

In fairness I haven't seen it happen in that thread that often for it to be a big issue.

That was my point. (I wasn't replying to your previous point - just making a general observation).

tsiehta

Piliger wrote: »

I disagree. The reason why these issues arise at all - these issues that are causing men to experience prejudice and sexism at the hands of courts, Gov agencies etc. - is that they have been brought about directly by feminist campaigns. They have not arrived out of nowhere.

I hear this a lot, but never actually hear about what these feminist campaigns actually were.

iptba

tsiehta wrote: »

I hear this a lot, but never actually hear about what these feminist campaigns actually were.

Some campaigns and education programmes around domestic violence have probably negatively impacted men:
e.g. "Man Up" campaign by SafeIreland

In Ireland, nearly 8,000 women and over 3,000 children looked for support from a domestic violence support service in just one year. This is a horrific statistic.

This means that at least 8,000 men were assaulting, raping or bullying women and children in that year.

This is not just a horrific statistic. This is a horrific crime.

Pawwed Rig

Piliger wrote: »

The reason why these issues arise at all - these issues that are causing men to experience prejudice and sexism at the hands of courts, Gov agencies etc. - is that they have been brought about directly by feminist campaigns. They have not arrived out of nowhere.

I agree completely but highlighting the issue is an educated way instead of finger pointing at the Feminist would be a more constructive way of debating. I always imagine these things as a panel discussion. A man getting into a idealogical debate with a Feminist will rarely get public opinion on his side whereas if the bating is ignored and a clear message is sent then people are more likely to listen.

swanronson

iptba wrote: »

Some campaigns and education programmes around domestic violence have probably negatively impacted men:
e.g. "Man Up" campaign by SafeIreland

Or the posters from here http://moveireland.ie/ that are put up alongside the posters for all the help that is available for women in domestic abuse situations in my local hospital, sickening really

Piliger

iptba wrote: »

Some campaigns and education programmes around domestic violence have probably negatively impacted men:
e.g. "Man Up" campaign by SafeIreland

A truly disgusting campaign.

Piliger

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I agree completely but highlighting the issue is an educated way instead of finger pointing at the Feminist would be a more constructive way of debating. I always imagine these things as a panel discussion. A man getting into a idealogical debate with a Feminist will rarely get public opinion on his side whereas if the bating is ignored and a clear message is sent then people are more likely to listen.

Well my question is why is this a panel game with feminists on it ? This is The Gentleman's Club after all. Can't men have a tiny bit of Boards to discuss men's issues without having to deal with this.
However this is my last comment on this as the last time this issue arose I got banned for contrasting with the Ladies Lounger where men are regularly booted for disruption. I'm not going there again.

laoch na mona

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I agree completely but highlighting the issue is an educated way instead of finger pointing at the Feminist would be a more constructive way of debating. I always imagine these things as a panel discussion. A man getting into a idealogical debate with a Feminist will rarely get public opinion on his side whereas if the bating is ignored and a clear message is sent then people are more likely to listen.

also there is no need for MRAs to oppose feminism both (should) work for equality
the only ideological opposition to feminism would be arguing that women are not equal, you can argue tactics and policy but i don't think you can disagree with feminist Ideology and claim to support human rights

py2006

laoch na mona wrote: »

also there is no need for MRAs to oppose feminism both (should) work for equality
the only ideological opposition to feminism would be arguing that women are not equal, you can argue tactics and policy but i don't think you can disagree with feminist Ideology and claim to support human rights

I am not sure if MRAs oppose feminism. They may voice objections to certain feminists. They may highlight some of the issues some feminists portray as 'only women are victims of'. e.g Domestic Abuse. Or the appalling unfairness of the legal system when it comes to family and the sentencing of women for similar crimes etc

iptba

laoch na mona wrote: »

the only ideological opposition to feminism would be arguing that women are not equal, you can argue tactics and policy but i don't think you can disagree with feminist Ideology and claim to support human rights

One can disagree with patriarchy theory and the like and support human rights.

KyussBishop

py2006 wrote: »

I am not sure if MRAs oppose feminism. They may voice objections to certain feminists. They may highlight some of the issues some feminists portray as 'only women are victims of'. e.g Domestic Abuse. Or the appalling unfairness of the legal system when it comes to family and the sentencing of women for similar crimes etc

The site which is the topic of this thread certainly does - it doesn't limit its criticisms to any specific feminist groups at all, seems to be general opposition.

KyussBishop

iptba wrote: »

One can disagree with patriarchy theory and the like and support human rights.

There's also kyriarchy, which isn't patriarchy - I don't think feminism automatically implies views about patriarchy, think that can be replaced with kyriarchy.

EDIT: Actually, it makes perfect sense for mens rights groups (and well, rights groups in general) to incorporate views on kyriarchy.

py2006

KyussBishop wrote: »

The site which is the topic of this thread certainly does - it doesn't limit its criticisms to any specific feminist groups at all, seems to be general opposition.

Well I haven't really looked at it but from what I saw there was a bit of excessiveness alright.

The necessity for discussion and the creation of organisations that promote/highlight issues relating to men has been brought about (in my mind anyway) because there was was none and men historically find it hard to discuss such topics. It was also brought about as most campaigns that highlight abuse/violence etc focus on women. There is a 'boys are bad, girls are victims' mentality in society and the media. Negative depictions of men and female violence towards men in entertainment and advertising is viewed as a non issue or well just funny. Often dismissed and/ignored by those who by their own volition should oppose such things.

Feminism (as far as I see it) in a modern sense is still pretty one sided even though it's official definition refers to equality for all. Unfortunately critique and disagreement with feminist views is met with hostility and accusations of misogyny. As some of us here in tGC have experienced. There is also a level of pandering from authorities which is worrying to say the least.

jackofalltrades

laoch na mona wrote:

Naturally feminism is going to be to the fore as women has historically suffered more from a gendered society (its a mans world)

I don't like this kind of statement for two reasons.
1. How do you quantify this suffering?
2. I find this leads to victim qualifying, e.g. someone will only accept a group being discriminated against if it's qualified by the discrimination not being as bad as the discrimination that they suffer. I don't feel this is helpful to anyone.

Pawwed Rig wrote:

It seems to be so fixated with the evils of Feminism that the actual issues are getting lost in the fog....The issues affecting men should be to the forefront...

I'd agree with you there. I'd like to see a site/group that just focuses on men's inequality.
I'd like to see representations to politicians and governmental groups.
I'd like to see press releases on important issues and a strong organisation that's listened to when complaints go in after the next Man Up style campaign comes out.

laoch na mona wrote:

also there is no need for MRAs to oppose feminism both (should) work for equality

It's hard to take feminists assertions that feminism work for equality. Especially when two prominent feminists in the Oireachtas had a women only meeting to discuss how incarceration should only be applied to men.

tsiehta

iptba wrote: »

Some campaigns and education programmes around domestic violence have probably negatively impacted men:
e.g. "Man Up" campaign by SafeIreland

Sure. That is a misguided campaign which uses a toxic phrase as its title.

There will always be those who will get on board with parts of an ideology or movement, but fail to think about what it means in a holistic sense, and don't challenge aspects of their worldview in other areas.

While domestic violence against women is a feminist issue, everything about the phrase "man up" is completely non-feminist.

These sorts of pseudo-feminist campaigns exist and are harmful. At a higher level, there are lots of social justice groups, commentaries, campaigns etc. which end up marginalizing others or perpetuating problematic things.

However, the general thesis that feminist, or even these pseudo-feminist campaigns are directly responsible for all the prejudice and sexism men experience is simply untrue. The common enemy is gender roles and perceptions of gender. Feminism is not going to solve the male side of things, but feminists will generally not oppose activism of this nature unless it's done in an explicitly anti-feminist manner.

Piliger wrote: »

Well my question is why is this a panel game with feminists on it ? This is The Gentleman's Club after all. Can't men have a tiny bit of Boards to discuss men's issues without having to deal with this.
However this is my last comment on this as the last time this issue arose I got banned for contrasting with the Ladies Lounger where men are regularly booted for disruption. I'm not going there again.

I'm a male supporter of feminism. It's The Gentlemen's Club, not The MRA's Club.

py2006

tsiehta wrote: »

Feminism is not going to solve the male side of things, but feminists will generally not oppose activism of this nature unless it's done in an explicitly anti-feminist manner.

You are right, feminism will not solve the 'male side of things', this equality for all movement will solely focus on female issues or make issues solely female.

Anti feminism is not solely a male thing either nor is it wrong to oppose certain aspects of feminism.

iptba

Feminism can cause problems for men with so-called positive discrimination/quotas and the like which give advantages to women over men. Some such initiatives are explicit but also sometimes it's accepted unofficially that it "would be good to have more women" and the like.

Piliger

tsiehta wrote: »

I'm a male supporter of feminism. It's The Gentlemen's Club, not The MRA's Club.

I was always a supporter of the original feminism too. But I am not a supporter of modern feminism or the recent version of man hating prejudiced feminism. Feminism is no long the old fashioned equal rights movement. Feminism has morphed into a very sexist movement and people who insist that 'true' feminism is a soft cuddly equality based movement are simply no longer correct imho.

I am not aiming this at you at all .... but I wish we could move on from our collective definitions of feminism are and discuss the actual issues at stake here. There are serious issues that effect huge numbers of men that need to be discussed and awareness needs to be spread among men that these issues are real and can affect them tomorrow.

tsiehta

py2006 wrote: »

Anti feminism is not solely a male thing either nor is it wrong to oppose certain aspects of feminism.

Of course. Hell, there're huge disagreements within feminism on many issues. Personally, there are many things I've seen written or said by feminists that I disagree with.

The fact that most men's rights groups seem to be predicated on opposition to a hyperbolic misrepresentation of feminism in general makes it hard to take them seriously. It makes me sad in a way, because as a man myself, I care deeply about many issues affecting men, but I can't get on board with groups like this because of the level of vitriol and scapegoating they direct towards feminism in place of discussing the actual issues and the real reasons behind them.

py2006

tsiehta wrote: »

The fact that most men's rights groups seem to be predicated on opposition to a hyperbolic misrepresentation of feminism in general makes it hard to take them seriously.

The reason for the emergence of men's rights movement in recent times is because of feminism and the need for men to be aware of and discuss issues. The one sidedness (is that a word?) and the complete and utter ignorance that a lot of issues affect men too or promotion of women over men. If feminism was replaced with egalitarianism (or indeed if right minded feminists replaced their tag with 'egalitarian') there would possibly be no need for an organisation to highlight men's issues.

Any men's rights movement/discussion is going to bring up feminism to some degree as the hypocrisy and double standards promoted by a lot it's advocates provide the perfect example of issues related to men.

What should sadden you is the amount of men who do not realise the issues relating to men, who do not realise they are in an abusive relationship and that the feminist campaigners of such issues focus primarily (if not solely) on women in those situations.

tsiehta

Piliger wrote: »

I was always a supporter of the original feminism too. But I am not a supporter of modern feminism or the recent version of man hating prejudiced feminism. Feminism is no long the old fashioned equal rights movement. Feminism has morphed into a very sexist movement and people who insist that 'true' feminism is a soft cuddly equality based movement are simply no longer correct imho.

So I'm relatively young (mid 20s), don't have much experience with original feminism beyond reading history books, so feminism to me is modern feminism, particularly in the online realm.

I've seen the good, the bad, the ugly, and the ridiculous sides of it, and feel I've gained somewhat of an insight into what divides and unites the various subgroups within it. There are many things from certain feminist groups which I've read which are bizarre, extreme, and quite frankly ****ty. However, overall, I think it has been a very helpful tool for me in terms of how I view the world and how I empathize with others, and it's help me see and understand a lot of the issues affecting women which they speak out about.

It's true that it's not soft and cuddly, but I don't think it should be. Any movement which challenges mainstream social perceptions is going to involve anger and backlash.

I also think it's helped me more deeply understand men's issues, which I've cared about for much longer than I've ever had any time for feminism. It's true that men's issues are not a super frequent discussion topic within feminism, but the discussions I have had, and the articles I have read about men's issues from a feminist angle have been insightful.

Now of course, you likely think this is all hogwash, and that's fine, you are entitled to your opinion. I completely agree with your next point, that we shouldn't be squabbling about definitions or the legitimacy of feminism, but rather focusing on the actual issues men face.

Piliger

tsiehta wrote: »

The fact that most men's rights groups seem to be predicated on opposition to a hyperbolic misrepresentation of feminism in general makes it hard to take them seriously.

I personally do not accept or agree with any of this characterisation.

iptba

As well as the meeting in NUI Maynooth on Sat May 3, I see Men’s Rights Ireland has other events (provisionally) planned:
http://mensrightsireland.wordpress.com/events-page-mri/

“Where’s My Daddy”

An event that addresses the issue of Parental Alienation and the abuses of not just Fathers’ Rights, but the rights of Children to have the love, companionship and ongoing care of both their parents.

Proposed location of this event – Athlone, Co. Westmeath.

Proposed date of this event – Saturday the 26th July 2014.

---

“Big Boys Don’t Cry”

Men comprise almost half of all victims of Domestic Violence, yet receive a miniscule amount of attention, funding for services, or even provision of services – women who assault and attack and abuse their intimate partners are rarely prosecuted, rarely jailed, and in an ironic and insulting abuse of Men’s Human Rights to be protected from such attacks – are offered “counselling” – men go to jail, women go to therapy!

Men are invariably prosecuted for such actions – go to jail – get kicked out of their homes – lose their children – in fact lose everything.

To add salt to these egregious wounds – Domestic Violence perpetrated against men is perceived as “funny”, as “a joke” because – “Big Boys Don’t Cry” – while Domestic Violence against women saturates the airwaves and the media – in effect telling ONLY half the story.

Domestic Violence is a human problem – perpetrated by violent human beings, who comprise only a very small percentage of the general population – within that small percentage – people who DO attack and abuse their intimate partners are just as likely to be women as men – in some cases MORE likely to be women.

Proposed location of this event – Dublin

Proposed date of this event – Saturday, September 27th 2014.

---

In the run up to this event – I propose to give a voice to Irish Men who have experienced Domestic Violence – and with an acknowledgement and due respect to Dr. Tara Palmatier, of Shrink4Men – to run a month- long series – in August – called – “In His Own Words”

http://www.shrink4men.com/

If you feel you can share your story as a male victim of Domestic Violence, please get in touch at:

mensrightsireland@gmail.com

You can share your story anonymously, or you can write it under your own name – but it is YOUR story, YOUR voice that I personally want to hear and see, in whatever way you want YOUR VOICE TO BE HEARD.

---

Finally – I propose to conduct a National Survey called Men in Ireland – to be launched in August 2014 – to bring together in one Report and Study, the actual lived experiences of Men and Boys in Ireland AS men, as Fathers, as Boys, as Human Beings – details of this will be posted in early July 2014.

Playboy

laoch na mona wrote: »

also there is no need for MRAs to oppose feminism both (should) work for equality
the only ideological opposition to feminism would be arguing that women are not equal, you can argue tactics and policy but i don't think you can disagree with feminist Ideology and claim to support human rights

So could you please explain Feminism to me then? Could you explain the thread in the TLL which talks about why women need feminism and you have a spectrum of ideas so broad you might as well swap the word feminism for any other equally vague concept?

The problem with feminism is that everybody has a different idea of what it is. There is no consensus ideologically or practically. Sure feminists talk about equality but do high profile feminists practice what they preach? It's a bit like communism, great in theory but the practical application leaves a lot to be desired and is unfortunately corrupted by people with their own agenda and biases.

Feminism (from a male perspective) is not concerned with equality, it is concerned with women's issues and advancing women's rights even when men are unfairly impacted. Add to this the extreme over intellectualisation of feminist theory which makes it inaccessible to a lot of women it claims to want to help. To be honest modern feminism in the western world has become a big post modern mess and the world would be a better place if people just scrapped the word, agreed a new word with a strict definition on focused on the practical issues of gender discrimination in our society today for the benefit of both sexes.