Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
"Men's Rights Movement" and Misogyny
Okay, so I've noticed that there are quite a few tropers (and internet denizens in general) who identify themselves as "Men's Rights Activists" or something like that. While some of them have legitimate complaints, a lot of them either
1) Don't understand what most feminists actually believe, or
2) Spout off how men actually have it worse than women in this world.
I consider myself to be a feminist because I believe that there is no reason for women and men to be treated differently; their worth and value are equal. Furthermore, there are still certain attitudes and prejudices in our society that I feel prevent women and men from having equal opportunities to do what they want. This doesn't just apply to American society, which is unbelievably progressive compared to some other nations which still practice female genital mutilation and have rampant domestic abuse. Feminism isn't about women totally pwning men all the time, feminism is about men and women having equal opportunities to do the same things and reap the same rewards.
The thing is, in the feminist movement, there is every so often an odd duck (coughAndreaDworkincough) who preaches something patently ridiculous, such as her conviction that all porn is evil and demeaning to women. These rabid misandrists are quickly rooted out and exposed for the bigots they are. The vast majority of feminists disapprove of them and consider them counterproductive to the movement.
Now, I've stumbled across some "Men's Rights" sites, and I can't exactly say the same about the consistency there in weeding out the st00pid. While I'm sure I'm not speaking for all "men's rights activists", as they like to call themselves, the vast majority have views ranging from "There are double standards in society that favor women and need to be corrected" to "All women are nagging harpies who should stay in the kitchen, pop out babies, and have their voice boxes removed at birth." (I'm not making the last thing up... http://www.somethingawful.com/d/weekend-web/spearhead-forum-misandry.php)
And the latter seem to be much more common than the former. In general, the label of "men's rights" seems to be a hygienic label for "misogyny," similar to how "Holocaust revisionist" is what Holocaust denialists like to call themselves to sound more "proper."
Begun, the flame war has...
Comments
I mentally facepalmed at that as it should be, if anything, called something like equalism
the label of "men's rights" seems to be a hygienic label for "misogyny,""
The same of which can be said about Feminism. Considering how much publicity is taken up by radical feminist newspaper columns and websites like Jezebel.
"2) Spout off how men actually have it worse than women in this world."
I certainly can't speak for this in regards to the world. But in the US men are certainly worse off then women.
* Lack of any paternity fraud laws.
* Lack of laws protecting men from domestic abuse.
* Lack of serious consideration for male victims of female abuse, esp by police.
* Sexist divorce and child custody courts.
* Distinct criminalization of men before being proven guilty.
As well as others. Those are simply the most glaring and worst offenders in our sexist justice system.
* However. Requesting a paternity claim is still a complicated business. Courts can and often do deny these claims to establish paternity.
* Wrong. Domestic abuse is JUST as commonly perpetrated by women, as by men, in fact, statistically, a slight margin higher by women. The is no Violence Against Men Act. The laws are 'generally worded' however, in any domestic dispute, women will be assumed to be the victim, especially with the propagation of that bogus claim that men are domestic abusers more often.
This is the most WTF one for me. I just dont even get the rationale behind it.
A lot of the double standards against men have their roots in sexism against women. For instance, the disinclination to believe women are domestic abusers or commit violent crimes is not so very far removed from the notion that women are weak, delicate flowers who need to be protected. With that in mind, masculists and feminists who are seriously in favour of equality really ought to be on the same side.
When I was visiting the bedouins, the women were relatively sheltered. They had few rights and had to cover up everywhere. But the punishments for a man so much as looking at a woman who was someone else's wife were severe. The assumption that "men can't help themselves when they see a provocatively dressed woman" were in full swing there, and it led to negative consequences for men and negative consequences for women in equal measure.
dangerous creatures (again, according to society), for example.
I'd say this is quite true, except for weak men. Unless they have a conscience instilled by their cult(ure), men of means (primordially, physical strength) selfishly take whatever they can get away with.
Has there ever been a time when there weren't bands of armed men who would rape women? Perhaps you should consider the possibility that those Bedouin customs are finely adapted to their environment, and any change in sex roles would be for the worse unless their socioeconomic conditions or cult(ure) changed.
It's true that men need conscience instilled in them by society, but so do women. And ideally, this conscience would tell them that people of equal worth and value should be treated as having such, by being given equal rights and opportunities.
do women. And ideally, this conscience would tell them that people of
equal worth and value should be treated as having such, by being given
equal rights and opportunities.
So ideally, Bedouins would be converted from Islam to a cult that preaches gender equality. Being converted, they would regard women equally fit for economic activities like herding camels and sheep by themselves, because they are equal in the abstract quality "worth". No herdsmen would ever overpower and rape them.
Well frankly, I'm skeptical that changing nomads' religion would eradicate the realities of force inherent in that lifestyle.
Worth isn't an abstract quality. A person's worth is in their impact on the world. Women are equal in worth to men because if either men or women were removed from the world, the impact would be the same: death of the species. Women are also equal to men in worth, in that, all other things being equal, women have the same capacity to do good as men, and the same capacity to do evil.
And I think that herdsmen who believed women to be their equals wouldn't rape a woman. This is based on the fact that one of the biggest risk factors for perpetrating sexual assault is living in a society that is heavily male-dominated:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_sexual_violence#Social_norms
their traditions reformed, not their religion overhauled or suppressed.
Then you need to go back and dispute my point that their customs are finely adapted to their cult(ure) and socioeconomic conditions, such that the only way to change a custom without making life worse is to leave the nomadic herding lifestyle or leave their religion.