The NationStates Feminism Thread IV: Fight Like A Girl!

[Cekoviu]

So, first off, I've got way more than 5. I've got at least 30, but some are more important than others, and I do tend to focus on the most important ones. Perhaps you haven't noticed some of the others.

i vaguely remember there being a point where you made a list of like 12 or 15 or somewhere around that number of issues although i might be remembering something different and getting it mixed up but i definitely do not remember you ever bringing up 30 potential issues so i would be very intrigued to hear them all in one place if you would care to just Rattle them off or at least the ones you've got off the top of your head

And you did point out a major problem - it's very hard for men to understand the true scope of women's issues, just like it's very difficult for women to understand the true scope of men's issues. If you can't see A from B, you also can't see B from A.

i'm going to get to this in a second but i want to play a little hypothetical game with you - this should be an easy question to answer, i just want to make sure we're on the same page.

so let's say we've got a guy, damian, who's dating carla. carla has spent virtually every day of their relationship harming and abusing damian; she repeatedly hits him and threatens him with weapons if he doesn't adhere to specific demands, prevents him from leaving the house at certain times of the day, has even sexually assaulted him, all while gaslighting him into believing he's the one in the wrong. damian develops severe mental issues because of this treatment and can't function normally in his day-to-day life, and one day he finally gets fed up and hits her back. suddenly carla is calling every single one of damian's friends telling them he assaulted her. is carla right to claim that damian assaulted her?

And your dismissal of literal rape as an example (which you are going to talk about again below) in favor of child care and coke snorting is emblematic of this fact - you can't even engage with these types of problems without minimizing them because you can't understand what it's like to be a man who has been raped and been laughed at and mocked about it.

i've tried to sidestep the rape example not because i don't care about male rape victims but because it's one of the most convoluted MRA traps used to make the other side look bad. since you so desperately want to hear what i think, though (pretty flattering, in a way), here are my thoughts on that:

you act as though the delegitimization of rape is something specific to men, but it isn't even. society in general has enormous issues with how rape is approached. this does manifest differently in men than women, but that doesn't mean it's a men-specific problem, it just means you have tunnel vision. with women, of course victims are still regularly blamed for being raped/sexually assaulted/sexually harassed because they "asked for it", but that's not even the extent of it. y'all are constantly overlooking the fact that pornography exists. you know, pornography, one of the most profitable and massive industries on earth. which is quite literally formulated upon selling rape as entertainment, with women as the vast majority of victims. so no, actually, having read and taken to heart stories from victims of the pornography trade, i can very easily extend their stories about how their experiences get minimized because of the circumstances onto men who experience the same thing because they were raped by women. i perfectly well empathize with male rape victims but i do refuse to see that as an issue of society oppressing men, because again, like everything else MRAs care about, it's not a "men's issue," it's a particular manifestation of a society-wide issue that MRAs have tried to co-opt into something solely about men in order to advance their sexist agenda.

It's very likely a large proportion of the disparity in sex offenders is driven by social mores regarding women being more innocent and justice system treatment reflecting the same. Similar to the men/women gap, minorities are more likely to be convicted sex offenders than white people, and for the same reason - they're viewed by society as more suspicious and less trustworthy, and thus are investigated, tried, and convicted more. This is yet another area where men face substantial discrimination in the justice system very similar to racist discrimination.

i'm going to tread into some very "Politically Incorrect" waters here but i will try to phrase the point as delicately as possible to avoid getting b*nned for r*cism... frankly the reason that ethnic minorities are more likely to be on the sex offender registry is fundamentally that cultural mores within a large number of communities of some of the most populous ethnic minorities are significantly more lax in terms of how negatively they view what we consider unforgivable sex offenses. that initial sentencing disparity didn't come out of nowhere. now, this isn't to imply that certain ethnicities are like, biologically inherently more likely to be sex offenders or whatever, but socioeconomic and historical cultural factors are absolutely not out of the question in explaining why that disparity ended up there in the first place.

the same is true of men; that disparity doesn't happen in a vacuum, you're just pretending like it does because you're very clearly uncomfortable with admitting that men could possibly be in any way collectively worse about something than women. in the case of men though i am actually going to propose that biological factors lead to that in part, because men are simply wired to have a higher libido on average than women and therefore would be at higher risk of committing sexual crimes just because they'd be having more sex. i mean, you really can't explain men being 4-ish times as likely to have committed a child sexual offense just by
"waaa police bias."

Now, notably, I've never espoused to be an MRA. You'll find that in my history going way back.

i've never claimed to be a radical feminist. sure, i might openly believe that women are oppressed by a historically entrenched patriarchy which has been propped up essentially worldwide throughout history by a male ruling class, with men continuing to assert patriarchal power through the modern day via direct sexual and physical violence as well as the production of media which depicts the same sexual and physical violence and encourages that male consumers reenact the content with other women, all the while flaunting their power by rebranding clear oppression as liberation and even pretending as though they are actually the oppressed ones. but that doesn't mean that i'm a radical feminist, seeing as i've occasionally criticized the rhetoric used by certain subsets of radical feminists and therefore i am not one, regardless of whether i have repeatedly independently endorsed every opinion which is required for one to consider herself a radical feminist.

look, i get it because i'm in the same boat, but this just isn't a battle you want to fight. if you fundamentally agree with every principle of a movement and simply dislike its rhetoric, you're still effectively part of the movement. i'm not thrilled about identifying myself as a radfem either, but it's true and i'd rather spend my time fighting for my beliefs than fighting against a label. you can be "one of the good ones" if you want but simply accept it and move on.

But, and I think what you said above is important, the notion that actually addressing the issue of rape for half the population harms women is entirely the problem in your rhetoric - there is literally no level of oppression, even though we have documented sexist justice system oppression (as both victims and suspects), voter suppression, lack of support for victims of rape and domestic violence, lack of bodily autonomy, the selective service, school discrimination (both disciplinary and education based), lack of social support for aspects of harm and difficulty, lower taught language skills, additional beatings from parents, lack of early childhood reading, that you would agree to address.

LOL this isnt even worth responding to, i've already made it clear what my views are on these

Even though the statistics are bulletproof that women being raped is NOT an order of magnitude above men being raped, and in fact the numbers are eerily close, you choose to minimize this fact in the guise of promoting women's equality.

this is true - unless statistics are based on numbers instead of Feelings and Vibes. which, honestly, it would be cool if they were. but they arent so when ur entire basis for this claim as far as i know is one (1) survey from 2010 and a whole lotta Feelings, i'm not inclined to take it that seriously, especially given that the vast majority of reputable sources consistently place the difference as much more significant.

I wish you were abnormal. The thing is, you're not - we've seen people like you explicitly change the law so that men who are raped by women are legally unable to get any kind of justice. We have seen people like you actively work to protect rapists and domestic abusers because you want to empower abusers and rapists based on their genitals, regardless of whether they are rapists and abusers or not.

if that's what we want to call it, ok.

It's a certain supremacist ideology, and that's what you've espoused here. There's no level of discrimination I could bring to the table - you aren't interested in equality.

You're interested in empowering women. Whatever that means, and no matter who gets hurt.

well, that's true in a sense. men will get hurt. your massive egos, mostly. and maybe a few testes if the revolution Really goes the way i'd like...

We're done here. Goodbye.

LOL u dont get to give urself the last word, u can choose not to respond if u want but that isnt how this works

[Cekoviu]

LMAO

If one wants an ideological label that’s free of many negative connotations you’re going to wait a long time. No one is safe from judgement.

yeah well exactly because the label "egalitarian" itself is literally just associated with being an MRA so like its not like he's putting himself in Between or whatever

[Uiiop]

snip

The issues with rape sure sounds like there's different reason for the same conclusion depending on the sex of the victim even if both are screwed over. Someone's Anti-black racism doesn't stop being anti-black racism if someone can get mad at Asians for different reasons. To spin on your response to my quote "I'm not racist, I hate everyone equally" literally just associated with being an bigot and not like an "in Between misanthropy" or whatever.
Galloism doesn't think female vics have it any where near good even if it's better than male vics in his views. While it's a fair question to ask if only focusing on some victims of something is a good idea even if they're underrepresented even in current victim support structures doing that is not the dismissing those other victims and saying their post-rape life is a beach walk even in comparison.

[Cekoviu]

snip

The issues with rape sure sounds like there's different reason for the same conclusion depending on the sex of the victim even if both are screwed over. Someone's Anti-black racism doesn't stop being anti-black racism if someone can get mad at Asians for different reasons. To spin on your response to my quote "I'm not racist, I hate everyone equally" literally just associated with being an bigot and not like an "in Between misanthropy" or whatever.
Galloism doesn't think female vics have it any where near good even if it's better than male vics in his views.

really because you sure can't tell that from literally anything he says; i've never seen him express even an inkling of caring about female victims of anything, much less rape. either u have a fantastic memory of something from long ago that i never saw or u can read minds; either way, thats impressive & can u teach me how?

While it's a fair question to ask if only focusing on some victims of something is a good idea even if they're underrepresented even in current victim support structures doing that is not the dismissing those other victims and saying their post-rape life is a beach walk even in comparison.

i really don't think there's a whole lot of sexual trauma clinics/counselors/etc. out there advertising themselves as FEMALE CLIENTS ONLY . of course, there might be a big cabal plot so i did double check and the top 5 sexual trauma organizations that pop up for me on a google search all use gender neutral language for victims, one explicitly states on its front page that sexual assault can happen to both men and women, the closest any of them come to female exclusivity is simply stating a statistic about the majority of rape victims being female, but it still doesn't use gendered language for the victims. i'm wondering, where's the exclusion here?

[Stellar Colonies]

I miss when it was seemingly easy to distinguish overdone satire and genuine positions.

[Cekoviu]

I miss when it was seemingly easy to distinguish overdone satire and genuine positions.

i really don't think any of the recent posts in this thread have been difficult to figure out? what r u struggling with in particular

[Galloism]

So, first off, I've got way more than 5. I've got at least 30, but some are more important than others, and I do tend to focus on the most important ones. Perhaps you haven't noticed some of the others.

i vaguely remember there being a point where you made a list of like 12 or 15 or somewhere around that number of issues although i might be remembering something different and getting it mixed up but i definitely do not remember you ever bringing up 30 potential issues so i would be very intrigued to hear them all in one place if you would care to just Rattle them off or at least the ones you've got off the top of your head

Here's what I have off the top of my head, and keep in mind this is no particular order besides the order I thought of them:

1) Rape equality. Getting treatment by the justice system at least as "good" (i put that in quotes) as women have it, although ideally getting both to a better state.
2) Domestic violence equality (1). Getting treatment by the justice system at least as "good" (i put that in quotes) as women have it, although ideally getting both to a better state.
3) Domestic violence equality (2). Getting treatment by domestic violence services at least as "good" as women have it, although ideally getting both to a better state (common reaction by domestic violence services is to accuse the abused man of being the abuser).
4) Domestic violence equality (3). Getting treatment by society (friends, relatives, etc) at least as "good" as women have it, although ideally getting both to a better state (common reaction by society is to accuse the abused man of being the abuser).
5) Voter suppression repeal. Men have had a minority of political power due to voter suppression for decades - women have wielded the majority of the political power through their vote due to the effects of voter disenfranchisement. This is felt especially hard in minority communities, but broadly affects men as a class as well.
6) Bodily integrity rights. Get men to have at least much bodily integrity rights as women have. Ideally, both need improvement.
7) Reproductive rights. Give men the same legal reproductive rights (regarding choosing to become a legal parent or not) that women currently have.
Birth control rights. Give men the guaranteed legal right over their own reproduction at least to the extent women have it. This means guaranteeing birth control coverage for insurance in the same way women's birth control is guaranteed covered, at a minimum.
9) Repeal the selective service, leaving men with the same lack of legal requirements as women.
10) Fix the discrimination against boys in school when it comes to education. We know boys are marked down compared with girls for comparable work, and this needs to end. I'm a fan of blind grading to help deal with these kinds of biases. This is probably a major component for the significant enrollment gap into college based on sex.
11) Fix the discrimination against boys in school when it comes to discipline. Boys are disciplined harder for similar offenses. This is especially true among minorities, and is a major component of the school to prison pipeline that disproportionately affects boys and even moreso minority boys.
12) Fixed the investigation/conviction/sentencing gap between men and women. We know women are less likely to be charged, convicted, less likely to serve jail time if convicted, and receive substantial sentence discounts for equivalent crimes compared with men. This is especially noticeable in black men vs black women, but affects men of every race.
13) Fix training for law enforcement regarding domestic violence to recognize the wealth of data that's on the subject now regarding male victims. Old models (like I was taught) where you must arrest the man no matter the circumstances do not stand up to scrutiny and just perpetuate inequality.
14) Fix the police killing gap between men and women by treating men more like women. Somewhere around 96-97% of police killings are of men, despite making up only 49% of the population. It's time police be taught to deescalate and not kill their target just because their target is a man.
15) Fix early childhood home education by educating their parents not to beat their boys from an early age. Boys even by the time they are 1 year old have significantly more beatings than girls, and this creates significant issues throughout childhood and adulthood.
16) Encourage parents to read with their boys. Girls are far more likely to be read to by their parents as very small children compared with boys. This likely affects boys early childhood development and leads to lifelong lower language skills for boys (one of many factors, no doubt).
17) End the whole white knight bullshit. Boys should not be taught from birth that they have to put themselves at risk to protect random strange women/girls. It harms them and gets them killed. #NotYourShield
18) Equal child custody. Shared custody should be the standard, with a specific legally articulable reason or mutual consent needed for a variance from that standard. Prior to the breakup, shared custody was the default, so it should remain so afterward.
19) Stop beating boys for showing emotion. It stunts them for life, and it's a very standard practice.
20) Actually work with little boys, the way we currently do with little girls, on how to classify and talk about their emotions. Many men and boys can't put words to their emotions - this is because they were never taught.
21) Equalize (de jure) the rape laws where they are currently unequal. Quite a few states have done this, but not all have. We did an analysis some time back and IIRC there were a dozen states where raping a man as a woman is quite literally a lesser crime than the reverse. It shouldn't be.
22) End discrimination against men in the workplace when it comes to taking time off for family matters. Right now, men are punished far more heavily than women for taking time off for family. This should not be the case.
23) Teach women not to cut off men in their lives from friends. One of the most common things that follows in marriage is that men lose all of their friends (this does not happen to women who get married, by and large), so their only support "network" (if you can call it that), is their wife. This causes really bad problems if the marriage ever breaks up for any reason, not to mention does bad things to the wife (if it stays together) when she's her husband's only support network.
24) Teach everyone that hitting men is just as wrong as hitting women. Men suffer the lion's share of violence, and this is because violence against men is considered more acceptable than violence against women.
25) Stop the idea that men need to be the ones "bringing home the bacon". This is a common thing that men suffer, especially at the hands of women, who seem to be the primary enforcers of this gender role. Men can be just as good of homemakers or child carers or part time-worker plus those things as women can.
26) Stop forced labor of prisoners (this disproportionately affects men). It's really just slavery that we're ok with as a society, and we shouldn't be.
27) Get the UN to stop denying male war rape victims support. Currently, most UN aid explicitly excludes giving any rape medical aid to male war rape victims, despite war rape against men being very common.
28) Recognize that men are disproportionately killed by COVID based on their gender, and research needs to go into why and what we can do about it.
29) Recognize that men disproportionately die sooner that women, and look into what we can do medically and support wise to correct this imbalance and extend their lifespan out to match women's.
30) Rethink how we approach psychology. It disproportionately doesn't work as well for men because men (statistically speaking) do not respond as well to talk therapy (this may be due to the language skills issue mentioned above). There's been some suggestions on this front, but it's not been as concrete.
31) Pursuant to 31, end the stigma against men especially in seeking mental help, which is a much worse stigma based on their gender.

Ok, that's what you get at midnight after a few beers. There's probably a few I missed, but that's just off the top of my head.

And you did point out a major problem - it's very hard for men to understand the true scope of women's issues, just like it's very difficult for women to understand the true scope of men's issues. If you can't see A from B, you also can't see B from A.

i'm going to get to this in a second but i want to play a little hypothetical game with you - this should be an easy question to answer, i just want to make sure we're on the same page.

so let's say we've got a guy, damian, who's dating carla. carla has spent virtually every day of their relationship harming and abusing damian; she repeatedly hits him and threatens him with weapons if he doesn't adhere to specific demands, prevents him from leaving the house at certain times of the day, has even sexually assaulted him, all while gaslighting him into believing he's the one in the wrong. damian develops severe mental issues because of this treatment and can't function normally in his day-to-day life, and one day he finally gets fed up and hits her back. suddenly carla is calling every single one of damian's friends telling them he assaulted her. is carla right to claim that damian assaulted her?

Incidentally, this is a really common scenario. As a person who has worked with a number of male domestic violence victims after I discovered this stuff, I'll tell you right now this is a really common scenario.

So, as you hit on, it's not a lie. It is of course self serving and lacks nuance, and she's using it in order to further her abuse by isolating him from his friends. Most domestic violence situations are mutual (as in, different spouses are the violent aggressor at different times). Now, you didn't specify whether he hit her back in self defense (Ie, she hit him and he hit her right back) or if it was sometime later it got to him and he hit her while she wasn't hitting him at the time (aggressor at that moment).

It's not right for her to use this as a method to isolate him from his friends and further her abuse, if that's the question.

And your dismissal of literal rape as an example (which you are going to talk about again below) in favor of child care and coke snorting is emblematic of this fact - you can't even engage with these types of problems without minimizing them because you can't understand what it's like to be a man who has been raped and been laughed at and mocked about it.

i've tried to sidestep the rape example not because i don't care about male rape victims but because it's one of the most convoluted MRA traps used to make the other side look bad. since you so desperately want to hear what i think, though (pretty flattering, in a way), here are my thoughts on that:

you act as though the delegitimization of rape is something specific to men, but it isn't even. society in general has enormous issues with how rape is approached. this does manifest differently in men than women, but that doesn't mean it's a men-specific problem, it just means you have tunnel vision. with women, of course victims are still regularly blamed for being raped/sexually assaulted/sexually harassed because they "asked for it", but that's not even the extent of it. y'all are constantly overlooking the fact that pornography exists. you know, pornography, one of the most profitable and massive industries on earth. which is quite literally formulated upon selling rape as entertainment, with women as the vast majority of victims. so no, actually, having read and taken to heart stories from victims of the pornography trade, i can very easily extend their stories about how their experiences get minimized because of the circumstances onto men who experience the same thing because they were raped by women. i perfectly well empathize with male rape victims but i do refuse to see that as an issue of society oppressing men, because again, like everything else MRAs care about, it's not a "men's issue," it's a particular manifestation of a society-wide issue that MRAs have tried to co-opt into something solely about men in order to advance their sexist agenda.

I'm not going to go into the pornography thing because that's a whole nother discussion with a lot of difficult problems.

But when it comes to rape, while I acknowledge - and agree - women have a lot of problems when it comes to rape, there is a differential in societal treatment of men raped by women vs women raped by men (and men raped by men and women raped by women). Women raped by men are, to your point, victim blamed an uncomfortable portion of the time. This is true! It's unconscionable.

Men are charged with wasting police time, filing a false report, or threatened with such if they try to report it. This happened so commonly in my support team that we now advise men who are raped to take an attorney (if they can afford one) or a savvy relative (if they can't) with them when they try to report to make sure they can actually make it through the reporting stage without getting arrested.

Put another way: if you said "hey, we need to do something to improve how victims are treated by police", that would be a positive act that relatively few people could disagree with. If you said "hey, we need to do something to improve how black victims are treated by police", that would be a positive act that mostly only racists would disagree with. If you said "hey, we need to do something about how white victims are treated by police", there would naturally be a lot of suspicion. This is because although white victims are sometimes treated badly by police, focusing on the group who already receives better treatment to get even better treatment is... weird and possibly racist/sexist.

It's very likely a large proportion of the disparity in sex offenders is driven by social mores regarding women being more innocent and justice system treatment reflecting the same. Similar to the men/women gap, minorities are more likely to be convicted sex offenders than white people, and for the same reason - they're viewed by society as more suspicious and less trustworthy, and thus are investigated, tried, and convicted more. This is yet another area where men face substantial discrimination in the justice system very similar to racist discrimination.

i'm going to tread into some very "Politically Incorrect" waters here but i will try to phrase the point as delicately as possible to avoid getting b*nned for r*cism... frankly the reason that ethnic minorities are more likely to be on the sex offender registry is fundamentally that cultural mores within a large number of communities of some of the most populous ethnic minorities are significantly more lax in terms of how negatively they view what we consider unforgivable sex offenses. that initial sentencing disparity didn't come out of nowhere. now, this isn't to imply that certain ethnicities are like, biologically inherently more likely to be sex offenders or whatever, but socioeconomic and historical cultural factors are absolutely not out of the question in explaining why that disparity ended up there in the first place.

the same is true of men; that disparity doesn't happen in a vacuum, you're just pretending like it does because you're very clearly uncomfortable with admitting that men could possibly be in any way collectively worse about something than women. in the case of men though i am actually going to propose that biological factors lead to that in part, because men are simply wired to have a higher libido on average than women and therefore would be at higher risk of committing sexual crimes just because they'd be having more sex. i mean, you really can't explain men being 4-ish times as likely to have committed a child sexual offense just by
"waaa police bias."

So, notably, while there certainly could be a disparity here, the data isn't clear enough to know for sure due to extreme confounding variables. It's really hard to study kids. I will take it as likely you are correct on this point though, as studies that have found equal or near equal perpetration include things like the female person "knowingly allowing" the abuse to occur, and although that's also reprehensible, I don't really think we should count it the same way.

I'd have to dig it up again, be we actually studied this and children frequently actually change the identity of their abuser from a woman to a man as they grow up in order to avoid the "shame" of being sexually abused by a woman.

However, you are not wrong that across multiple cultures and studies men consistently report a higher sex drive.

Now, notably, I've never espoused to be an MRA. You'll find that in my history going way back.

i've never claimed to be a radical feminist. sure, i might openly believe that women are oppressed by a historically entrenched patriarchy which has been propped up essentially worldwide throughout history by a male ruling class, with men continuing to assert patriarchal power through the modern day via direct sexual and physical violence as well as the production of media which depicts the same sexual and physical violence and encourages that male consumers reenact the content with other women, all the while flaunting their power by rebranding clear oppression as liberation and even pretending as though they are actually the oppressed ones. but that doesn't mean that i'm a radical feminist, seeing as i've occasionally criticized the rhetoric used by certain subsets of radical feminists and therefore i am not one, regardless of whether i have repeatedly independently endorsed every opinion which is required for one to consider herself a radical feminist.

look, i get it because i'm in the same boat, but this just isn't a battle you want to fight. if you fundamentally agree with every principle of a movement and simply dislike its rhetoric, you're still effectively part of the movement. i'm not thrilled about identifying myself as a radfem either, but it's true and i'd rather spend my time fighting for my beliefs than fighting against a label. you can be "one of the good ones" if you want but simply accept it and move on.

I actually don't agree with every principle. There's several things I think are off base.

But, and I think what you said above is important, the notion that actually addressing the issue of rape for half the population harms women is entirely the problem in your rhetoric - there is literally no level of oppression, even though we have documented sexist justice system oppression (as both victims and suspects), voter suppression, lack of support for victims of rape and domestic violence, lack of bodily autonomy, the selective service, school discrimination (both disciplinary and education based), lack of social support for aspects of harm and difficulty, lower taught language skills, additional beatings from parents, lack of early childhood reading, that you would agree to address.

LOL this isnt even worth responding to, i've already made it clear what my views are on these

Yeah. You have.

Even though the statistics are bulletproof that women being raped is NOT an order of magnitude above men being raped, and in fact the numbers are eerily close, you choose to minimize this fact in the guise of promoting women's equality.

this is true - unless statistics are based on numbers instead of Feelings and Vibes. which, honestly, it would be cool if they were. but they arent so when ur entire basis for this claim as far as i know is one (1) survey from 2010 and a whole lotta Feelings, i'm not inclined to take it that seriously, especially given that the vast majority of reputable sources consistently place the difference as much more significant.

So, this is a lie. The one I just linked to you was the average of three studies (2010, 2011, and 2012), all of which got very similar (but no the same) results. I also did separate reports on 2010 and 2011 when they came out. Come on, at least read it.

When the same result gets repeated multiple times showing (roughly) the same thing, you should know reproducibility implies reliability.

I wish you were abnormal. The thing is, you're not - we've seen people like you explicitly change the law so that men who are raped by women are legally unable to get any kind of justice. We have seen people like you actively work to protect rapists and domestic abusers because you want to empower abusers and rapists based on their genitals, regardless of whether they are rapists and abusers or not.

if that's what we want to call it, ok.

It's a certain supremacist ideology, and that's what you've espoused here. There's no level of discrimination I could bring to the table - you aren't interested in equality.

You're interested in empowering women. Whatever that means, and no matter who gets hurt.

well, that's true in a sense. men will get hurt. your massive egos, mostly. and maybe a few testes if the revolution Really goes the way i'd like...

Yeah, I'm talking about rape and abuse victims you're hurting. Deliberately.

[Stellar Colonies]

I miss when it was seemingly easy to distinguish overdone satire and genuine positions.

i really don't think any of the recent posts in this thread have been difficult to figure out? what r u struggling with in particular

The intentionally simplified spelling is another odd facet.

[Galloism]

i really don't think there's a whole lot of sexual trauma clinics/counselors/etc. out there advertising themselves as FEMALE CLIENTS ONLY . of course, there might be a big cabal plot so i did double check and the top 5 sexual trauma organizations that pop up for me on a google search all use gender neutral language for victims, one explicitly states on its front page that sexual assault can happen to both men and women, the closest any of them come to female exclusivity is simply stating a statistic about the majority of rape victims being female, but it still doesn't use gendered language for the victims. i'm wondering, where's the exclusion here?

So, just so you know, we've studied this when it comes to male access to resources in the DV space, where, keep in mind, a strong plurality of men are raped - by an intimate partner. Keep in mind, this discussion started because such things were exclusive to women in California, and it took a lawsuit to get them open to men.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3175099/

DV Hotlines, Agencies, and Online Resources
Men seeking help from DV agencies, hotlines, and via the Internet answered questions that addressed the reception they received when seeking help. The results are displayed in Table 3. Between 25–33% reported being referred by a DV hotline or an online resource to a local program that was helpful. The remaining experiences were not as positive. A large proportion of those who sought help from DV agencies (49.9%), DV hotlines (63.9%), or online resources (42.9%) were told, “We only help women.” Of the 132 men who sought help from a DV agency, 44.1% (n=86) said that this resource was not at all helpful; further, 95.3% of those men (n=81) said that they were given the impression that the agency was biased against men. Some of the men were accused of being the batterer in the relationship: This happened to men seeking help from DV agencies (40.2%), DV hotlines (32.2%) and online resources (18.9%). Over 25% of those using an online resource reported that they were given a phone number for help which turned out to be the number for a batterer’s program. The results from the open-ended questions showed that 16.4% of the men who contacted a hotline reported that the staff made fun them, as did 15.2% of the men who contacted local DV agencies. Qualitative accounts provide a more in-depth understanding of their experiences with these resources.

“They didn’t really listen to what I said. They assumed that all abusers are men and said that I must accept that I was the abuser. They ridiculed me for not leaving my wife, ignoring the issues about what I would need to do to protect my 6 children and care for them.” (Experience with a DV agency)

“[T]hey offered to listen if I wanted to recount what had happehed [sic], but indicated that no support services were available.” (Experience with DV hotline)

“I was mostly just doing research after the occurrence [sic] to find out what I should do. I found mostly female help sites and was turned down by several so I gave up.” (Experience using online resources)

[New haven america]

why engage with them if they refuse to argue in good faith

[Proctopeo]

so this is a whole crock of shit - really just a rabid, sexist, supremacist diatribe - but it's a fascinating insight into your thoughts nonetheless

you see the advocacy for actual gender equality, or even the affording of men some of the same privileges as women, to be "insidious" because of a self-reinforcing victim complex about how an invisible bogeyman (pun not intended) is actively trying to oppress you

also, you're still parroting talking points and bare rhetoric - but three years ago, it was only trite, instead of actively (and possibly intentionally) supremacist and bigoted as it is today

you're smart, so I hope one day you wake up and realize that the radfem cult indoctrinated you into being an impressively hateful person... though I'm not holding out hope

This is why I will always call myself an egalitarian, “feminist” has too many connotations of female supremacy

Aye. It also helps that "egalitarian" is rather open-ended, with there being no established dogma associated with the term.

i've tried to sidestep the rape example not because i don't care about male rape victims but because it's one of the most convoluted MRA traps used to make the other side look bad.

It's neither convoluted nor a trap. You're mad about it because it outs a very damning fact that you're trying fruitlessly to deny: you don't actually care about male rape victims.

If one wants an ideological label that’s free of many negative connotations you’re going to wait a long time. No one is safe from judgement.

yeah well exactly because the label "egalitarian" itself is literally just associated with being an MRA so like its not like he's putting himself in Between or whatever

Only seems to be feminists who associate the label "egalitarian" with being an MRA, and even then, only some of 'em.

I miss when it was seemingly easy to distinguish overdone satire and genuine positions.

i really don't think any of the recent posts in this thread have been difficult to figure out? what r u struggling with in particular

I believe his point is that many of your opinions have found themselves squarely within Poe's Law. That is to say, your posts read like a parody of feminist beliefs.

[Uiiop]

The issues with rape sure sounds like there's different reason for the same conclusion depending on the sex of the victim even if both are screwed over. Someone's Anti-black racism doesn't stop being anti-black racism if someone can get mad at Asians for different reasons. To spin on your response to my quote "I'm not racist, I hate everyone equally" literally just associated with being an bigot and not like an "in Between misanthropy" or whatever.
Galloism doesn't think female vics have it any where near good even if it's better than male vics in his views.

really because you sure can't tell that from literally anything he says; i've never seen him express even an inkling of caring about female victims of anything, much less rape. either u have a fantastic memory of something from long ago that i never saw or u can read minds; either way, thats impressive & can u teach me how?

Along with what he said Gallo history shows that when pressed he's pretty critical of the MRA movement. I don't believe you can launder something either intentionally you actually call hypocritical and misogynists despite how otherwise similar your beliefs are.

However, One shouldn't ignore the ties to activists who at best either frames actions of misogynists(Istanbul convention repeal and something that happened in Poland) or treat organizations who make targets of opposite gender vics as merely a problematic. You wanna talk about stuff that one acts like there's an order of magnitude when it's not. How is doxxing rape victims any better than gatekeeping them for them to say "Well the good they did outweighs the bad " for the NCFM and not the institutions that has done plenty for women victims while being shitty to others?

Regardless of how Cek's right that how the idea of men's rights is stupid that doesn't mean you act like the actual reality of gender rights is actually zero-sum.
Even if there are ideological forces that enforce that onto reality that doesn't mean one just accepts that.

So, this post was a little confusing but I think part of that was directed at me regarding my callousness yesterday.

I accept you’re right. I thought about this a lot last night when I was NOT sleeping. Was going to do an effort post when I got home. Since you rightly called me out though, I feel compelled to respond now. So you get me typing on my cell.

I got too caught up in the gains of the forest (getting millions of Californians access to domestic violence resources) and glossed over/ignored/minimized some very very diseased trees. And that was wrong of me. I recognize that. Got too tied into things to look objectively.

For that I apologize.

Unless the Istanbul and/or the NCFM turned out to be just attacking trans men i don't see how this isn't an example of what you're asking.

While one can certainly argue that "It's wrong to only focus on the people you think recvie less treatment when everyone else experience of this problem are still pretty shit"(Heck i do think even if have to be separate groups an hypothetical not-shit men rights group would have to work with it's opposite at least with how activists groups on many topics work together nowadays. So in that sense you're actually correct) but to do that isn't inherently being dismissive or not of everyone else's problems.

As for your other bits....the definition double standard is something even Ex-writers for feminist frequency implitcly call out on and it's not like modern bigotry of any stripe has an secret cabal and advertise their discrimination without dog-whistles like that. Even trump narrows his hatred and even ostro gives lip service to being anti-weinstein and getting DV places funded.

Edit: In fact to bring up a point from your last post: Isn't the issue of police brutality multiracial that seems about equal when looking at the bare numbers but has police departments still acting racist against black people? It's honestly been a while so i could be wrong about the data.

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

The reality of Turkey as a Middle Eastern country. A cashier was beaten up by men for saying sanitary pads were on sale. It should not be difficult to guess which political party the people who use violence against the cashier voted for.

[New haven america]

This is why I will always call myself an egalitarian, “feminist” has too many connotations of female supremacy

Aye. It also helps that "egalitarian" is rather open-ended, with there being no established dogma associated with the term.

i've tried to sidestep the rape example not because i don't care about male rape victims but because it's one of the most convoluted MRA traps used to make the other side look bad.

It's neither convoluted nor a trap. You're mad about it because it outs a very damning fact that you're trying fruitlessly to deny: you don't actually care about male rape victims.

yeah well exactly because the label "egalitarian" itself is literally just associated with being an MRA so like its not like he's putting himself in Between or whatever

Only seems to be feminists who associate the label "egalitarian" with being an MRA, and even then, only some of 'em.

i really don't think any of the recent posts in this thread have been difficult to figure out? what r u struggling with in particular

I believe his point is that many of your opinions have found themselves squarely within Poe's Law. That is to say, your posts read like a parody of feminist beliefs.

There is actually!

Feminists and a lot of groups that focus on intersectionality say that egalitarianism is bad because it doesn't focus on the nitty-gritty details of oppression or the individual experience, instead choosing to take a utopian view on human behavior and plight. Also, a lot of feminists are of the idea that egalitarianism=feminism, no ifs ands or buts about it.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

The National Service is the biggest issue, from my perspective... it’s months of essentially forced labour that women aren’t required to perform.

The United States doesn’t maintain peacetime conscription, though, so it’s probably a smaller issue there than it is here.

[Galloism]

The National Service is the biggest issue, from my perspective... it’s months of essentially forced labour that women aren’t required to perform.

The United States doesn’t maintain peacetime conscription, though, so it’s probably a smaller issue there than it is here.

Well, we are not currently forcing young men into slavery for the state on account of their gender, that’s true. Although we reserve the right to do so at literally any time.

There are still issues with enforcing selective service though, especially if you fail to register (for those born male only). This includes denial for job training, federal jobs, higher education grants, and you can be referred for prosecution (website still threatens it, but I can’t recall the last time it happened). Some states also have additional penalties, like being completely denied higher education, access to state jobs, access to state student financial aid, etc.

[Galloism]

Edit: In fact to bring up a point from your last post: Isn't the issue of police brutality multiracial that seems about equal when looking at the bare numbers but has police departments still acting racist against black people? It's honestly been a while so i could be wrong about the data.

This is one of things you can slice the data 8 ways from Sunday.

If you go by police encounter, in a given police encounter, black people are slightly less likely to die than white people.

White people are also killed more by police in absolute terms.

However when one adjusts for relative population (which I argue you should), as a proportion of population, black people are killed a lot more than any other race.

But even that can be resliced - black men are really the ones getting killed in obscene relative numbers. Black women are barely above white women. Their lines are so compressed you may need glasses to see the difference if you don’t have 20/20 vision.

And the real driver of that discrepancy is that black men have a lot more encounters with police than white men. “Driving while black” isn’t just a meme. It’s real.

[Ostroeuropa]

The normalization of violence against men can also be outlined in media portrayals and the hypergamic nature of feminist activism there reveals the flaws in their movement and its mindset.

You can even pop over to twoX right now and see a thread full of hundreds of feminists displaying their total lack of awareness. (Woman watches action movie with man with women heroes, man says it is "Too feminist" and dislikes it. She asks why having female action heroes is too feminist. He laughs at her. Thread is full of confused women lacking self awareness or awareness of gender dynamics, displaying their hypergamous tendencies that lie at the root of feminist theory, confused as to why a man would say this, and concluding it has to be misogyny).

So... that movie?

Guess the sex of the waves and waves of faceless goons. Now look at films that have been pushed with female action stars on the basis of progress and realize this is all of them. (A notable exception being Kill Bill).

This is also an example of the constant drip feed of "Histrionic misandry" I talked about that feminist women gorge themselves on.

So you have two types of movies.

Movies about Men being gunned down. And movies about Men being gunned down.

But, ahah, you see, it is progress. Because the perpetrators of that violence can be of either sex. Nonetheless, the cultural forces driving the normalization of violence against men are fairly apparent if you take a moment to actually consider and recognize men who aren't at the peak of social status. (Status which they notably attain through mass violence against men in this context.).

This is somewhat similar to the glut of "Black" representation in films that basically amounted to constant spam of drug dealers and criminals for decades. (Notably, the men were this. Black women were portrayed differently, and not in a way to justify violence against them).

Thus, black men in particular face two (at least, there are others) cultural depictions that dehumanize and legitimize violence against them. The reason the male one appears to have more impact is fairly straightforward.

Because even if the only depictions black men get are as drug dealers and criminals, this still involves interacting with and humanizing them, even if as villains, before the violence occurs. Compare to the thoughtless violence directed at men without even the barest hint of characterization and humanization.

Even spending time with a black person who says their motivation is "Money" and that's why they do all this horrible shit humanizes them. It's a motive we can comprehend and even relate to on some level. Even one who just straight up says "Because I like to hurt people" is humanized compared to a faceless goon. It also diffuses the reasons for the violence against them, albeit not entirely.

[Cekoviu]

i vaguely remember there being a point where you made a list of like 12 or 15 or somewhere around that number of issues although i might be remembering something different and getting it mixed up but i definitely do not remember you ever bringing up 30 potential issues so i would be very intrigued to hear them all in one place if you would care to just Rattle them off or at least the ones you've got off the top of your head

Here's what I have off the top of my head, and keep in mind this is no particular order besides the order I thought of them:

1) Rape equality. Getting treatment by the justice system at least as "good" (i put that in quotes) as women have it, although ideally getting both to a better state.
2) Domestic violence equality (1). Getting treatment by the justice system at least as "good" (i put that in quotes) as women have it, although ideally getting both to a better state.
3) Domestic violence equality (2). Getting treatment by domestic violence services at least as "good" as women have it, although ideally getting both to a better state (common reaction by domestic violence services is to accuse the abused man of being the abuser).
4) Domestic violence equality (3). Getting treatment by society (friends, relatives, etc) at least as "good" as women have it, although ideally getting both to a better state (common reaction by society is to accuse the abused man of being the abuser).
5) Voter suppression repeal. Men have had a minority of political power due to voter suppression for decades - women have wielded the majority of the political power through their vote due to the effects of voter disenfranchisement. This is felt especially hard in minority communities, but broadly affects men as a class as well.
6) Bodily integrity rights. Get men to have at least much bodily integrity rights as women have. Ideally, both need improvement.
7) Reproductive rights. Give men the same legal reproductive rights (regarding choosing to become a legal parent or not) that women currently have.
Birth control rights. Give men the guaranteed legal right over their own reproduction at least to the extent women have it. This means guaranteeing birth control coverage for insurance in the same way women's birth control is guaranteed covered, at a minimum.
9) Repeal the selective service, leaving men with the same lack of legal requirements as women.
10) Fix the discrimination against boys in school when it comes to education. We know boys are marked down compared with girls for comparable work, and this needs to end. I'm a fan of blind grading to help deal with these kinds of biases. This is probably a major component for the significant enrollment gap into college based on sex.
11) Fix the discrimination against boys in school when it comes to discipline. Boys are disciplined harder for similar offenses. This is especially true among minorities, and is a major component of the school to prison pipeline that disproportionately affects boys and even moreso minority boys.
12) Fixed the investigation/conviction/sentencing gap between men and women. We know women are less likely to be charged, convicted, less likely to serve jail time if convicted, and receive substantial sentence discounts for equivalent crimes compared with men. This is especially noticeable in black men vs black women, but affects men of every race.
13) Fix training for law enforcement regarding domestic violence to recognize the wealth of data that's on the subject now regarding male victims. Old models (like I was taught) where you must arrest the man no matter the circumstances do not stand up to scrutiny and just perpetuate inequality.
14) Fix the police killing gap between men and women by treating men more like women. Somewhere around 96-97% of police killings are of men, despite making up only 49% of the population. It's time police be taught to deescalate and not kill their target just because their target is a man.
15) Fix early childhood home education by educating their parents not to beat their boys from an early age. Boys even by the time they are 1 year old have significantly more beatings than girls, and this creates significant issues throughout childhood and adulthood.
16) Encourage parents to read with their boys. Girls are far more likely to be read to by their parents as very small children compared with boys. This likely affects boys early childhood development and leads to lifelong lower language skills for boys (one of many factors, no doubt).
17) End the whole white knight bullshit. Boys should not be taught from birth that they have to put themselves at risk to protect random strange women/girls. It harms them and gets them killed. #NotYourShield
18) Equal child custody. Shared custody should be the standard, with a specific legally articulable reason or mutual consent needed for a variance from that standard. Prior to the breakup, shared custody was the default, so it should remain so afterward.
19) Stop beating boys for showing emotion. It stunts them for life, and it's a very standard practice.
20) Actually work with little boys, the way we currently do with little girls, on how to classify and talk about their emotions. Many men and boys can't put words to their emotions - this is because they were never taught.
21) Equalize (de jure) the rape laws where they are currently unequal. Quite a few states have done this, but not all have. We did an analysis some time back and IIRC there were a dozen states where raping a man as a woman is quite literally a lesser crime than the reverse. It shouldn't be.
22) End discrimination against men in the workplace when it comes to taking time off for family matters. Right now, men are punished far more heavily than women for taking time off for family. This should not be the case.
23) Teach women not to cut off men in their lives from friends. One of the most common things that follows in marriage is that men lose all of their friends (this does not happen to women who get married, by and large), so their only support "network" (if you can call it that), is their wife. This causes really bad problems if the marriage ever breaks up for any reason, not to mention does bad things to the wife (if it stays together) when she's her husband's only support network.
24) Teach everyone that hitting men is just as wrong as hitting women. Men suffer the lion's share of violence, and this is because violence against men is considered more acceptable than violence against women.
25) Stop the idea that men need to be the ones "bringing home the bacon". This is a common thing that men suffer, especially at the hands of women, who seem to be the primary enforcers of this gender role. Men can be just as good of homemakers or child carers or part time-worker plus those things as women can.
26) Stop forced labor of prisoners (this disproportionately affects men). It's really just slavery that we're ok with as a society, and we shouldn't be.
27) Get the UN to stop denying male war rape victims support. Currently, most UN aid explicitly excludes giving any rape medical aid to male war rape victims, despite war rape against men being very common.
28) Recognize that men are disproportionately killed by COVID based on their gender, and research needs to go into why and what we can do about it.
29) Recognize that men disproportionately die sooner that women, and look into what we can do medically and support wise to correct this imbalance and extend their lifespan out to match women's.
30) Rethink how we approach psychology. It disproportionately doesn't work as well for men because men (statistically speaking) do not respond as well to talk therapy (this may be due to the language skills issue mentioned above). There's been some suggestions on this front, but it's not been as concrete.
31) Pursuant to 31, end the stigma against men especially in seeking mental help, which is a much worse stigma based on their gender.

Ok, that's what you get at midnight after a few beers. There's probably a few I missed, but that's just off the top of my head.

i haven't slept in 36 hours so i'm not gonna try to refute all of these (i dont even disagree with all of them in principle anyway) but i do appreciate that U actually did manage to come up with the number u said, very well estimated of u. i will make notes on a couple ones that i agree with and want to expand more on, or ones that i want to describe disagreement in more detail.
1/21. sure, obviously rape of men should still be recognized as rape under the law.
5. sorry, this is retarded, and bear with me for a moment as i get Class Reductionist - the whole issue with this boils down to class issues, no disenfranchisement is caused by being a man, minority men are simply most commonly lower-class and the lower-class is the most likely to be unable to fulfill whatever measures are required by disenfranchising laws. im sure you can come up with some oppression narrative for that but if u magically took every one of the men who gets disenfranchised by these voter id laws and retroactively made them women while changing nothing else literally nothing would be different about it.
8. sure! but keep in mind that birth control equality also means men and women should be sharing about the same amount of the burden in the birth control process, so you'd better be prepared to also start having to take pills that completely wreck your natural hormones juuuust like women have to. equality ain't all picnics and, uh, uncircumcised kids? that seems to be what you want, yeah?
9. personally i think that the selective service should be expanded to include women but i suppose that's really just a difference in political perspective, we do share the same fundamental goal of equalizing its application so i'll count that as an "agree"
11. school to prison pipeline would be a good name for a band
13. yeah ok that seems fair
14. i'm going to victim blame here, honestly i think part of the blame is on men for this and some of the other law enforcement stuff you're up in arms about. men often intentionally try to present themselves as threats in ways that women simply don't, and also just commit more crimes. i guess u shouldn't stereotype but that's sort of what you have to do in on-the-spot life-or-death evaluations, from my understanding (ur the former cop though so if u say im wrong on that ill accept it). like, tranquilizations of lions vs. house cats, obviously lions are going to win even if half the time the lion wasn't actually doing any harm. because lions r simply more likely to do serious harm on average.
15. ummmm could we maybe encourage parents to not beat any of their children? because the way u worded this leaves an enormous awful gaping loophole
17. so true #EnsureZeroEmpathyFromDay1 #YourMurderIsNotMyProblem
22. yep im in full agreement with this, parental leave should 100% be able to be shared (and should be fully paid)
23. i have never heard of this being a large scale phenomenon outside of abusive relationships, are you sure this is a thing. it seems very counterintuitive to me - like, personally, i certainly don't intend to do that when/if i get married. in fact, i'd much rather my husband have male friends than not, cuz i do Not want to have to listen to facts about sports or whatever male hobby he might be into. i'm fairly certain most women would share that perspective.
26. like the disenfranchisement thing this really has absolutely nothing to do with being male at all whatsoever like absolutely it should be ended but it also isn't oppression against men, it's oppression which primarily men happen to experience due to another common factor. these are two different things and it seems like u have trouble distinguishing those.
27. sure yep i have never heard about that but absolutely shouldnt be the case
30. im very glad you brought this up because i actually have a massive vendetta against psychology and psychiatry. i've got general criticisms up the wazoo and, incidentally, i also feel like a couple aspects of the fields are detrimental to women's rights - i've written a whole article about this, actually. my criticisms are mostly focused on diagnoses and attempts at medical treatment for psychological problems, though, and i haven't though a whole lot about therapy, but i do think you raise a valid point there, so i may add that to my repertoire of Arguments Against Psychology.
31. ehhh i think thats sort of true but also it depends on what they're seeking help for. mental/neurological diseases that result from Doing something aren't stigmatized for men, like nobody's going to criticize a veteran for getting help for PTSD. it's more diseases that are considered Nuisances which dont contribute from anything and dont have any real origin like depression and anxiety that it's stigmatized. now i do think it's a problem that that's stigmatized for men and not for women, because anxiety and depression should be stigmatized for both genders actually. simply go outside and lift a weight or drink some chamomile tea (btw i'm allowed to say this because i'm diagnosed with both major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder yet i keep them in Check most of the time because im not a Loser).

ok that's all i have to say on those. everything else can be inferred, you know basically what i believe.

i'm going to get to this in a second but i want to play a little hypothetical game with you - this should be an easy question to answer, i just want to make sure we're on the same page.

so let's say we've got a guy, damian, who's dating carla. carla has spent virtually every day of their relationship harming and abusing damian; she repeatedly hits him and threatens him with weapons if he doesn't adhere to specific demands, prevents him from leaving the house at certain times of the day, has even sexually assaulted him, all while gaslighting him into believing he's the one in the wrong. damian develops severe mental issues because of this treatment and can't function normally in his day-to-day life, and one day he finally gets fed up and hits her back. suddenly carla is calling every single one of damian's friends telling them he assaulted her. is carla right to claim that damian assaulted her?

Incidentally, this is a really common scenario. As a person who has worked with a number of male domestic violence victims after I discovered this stuff, I'll tell you right now this is a really common scenario.

well aware of that. that's precisely why i picked it. you took that juicy delicious bait and swallowed it hook, line, and sinker!

So, as you hit on, it's not a lie. It is of course self serving and lacks nuance, and she's using it in order to further her abuse by isolating him from his friends. Most domestic violence situations are mutual (as in, different spouses are the violent aggressor at different times). Now, you didn't specify whether he hit her back in self defense (Ie, she hit him and he hit her right back) or if it was sometime later it got to him and he hit her while she wasn't hitting him at the time (aggressor at that moment).

It's not right for her to use this as a method to isolate him from his friends and further her abuse, if that's the question.

i think you're approaching this from more of an analytical/legal perspective rather than an ethical one, which i probably should have anticipated. i was hoping more for the latter, but i'll work with it.

so then, let's recap in more general terms. given a party A which has consistently and over a long period of time abused a party B in multiple ways and party B having abused back in at least one relatively smaller incident following a long period of exposure to party A's abuse, for party A to claim party B was the primary aggressor while omitting details about the overall context of the situation in order to weaken the trust of party B's support system in party B and continue the pattern of abuse is in general unethical, though party B's action may or may not have been appropriate.

i'm very glad we seem to agree on this principle; this axiom is in fact an easy (if somewhat contrived) means of demonstrating the ethical problem with the arguments you and other MRAs propagate, party A being {men} as a general unit represented by any arbitrary man to which the relevant conditions apply and party B being {women} as a general unit represented by any arbitrary woman to which the relevant conditions apply; B's support system would of course be all those concerned with the well-being of the women around them. thus:
given men, a party which has consistently and over a long period of time abused women in multiple ways and any arbitrary woman having abused back in at least one relatively incident following a long period of exposure to male-perpetrated abuse, for any arbitrary man to claim women or any arbitrary woman are or is the primary aggressor while omitting details about the overall context of the situation in order to weaken the trust of those concerned with the well-being of the women around them in women and continue the pattern of abuse is in general unethical, though any arbitrary woman's action may or may not have been appropriate.

now of course, you may always invalidate the original axiom and fix this whole logical conundrum if you'd simply like to say that the female abuser actually wasn't in the wrong. i would LOVE to hear you say that.

and no point in arguing over this. it doesn't really mean anything in terms of the discussion at hand. i just thought it would be really fun to reassert my hatred of what you stand for using your own logic (maybe a liittle tiny bit stretched, but still). and it was!

I'm not going to go into the pornography thing because that's a whole nother discussion with a lot of difficult problems.

oh so my refusal to discuss female-on-male rape, that was indicative of me not having empathy for the male victims. but you expect me to just let this slide? no no no, my friend. you aren't off the hook. either you don't care about the victims or pornography or you're going to talk about this issue. which is it, buster brown?

But when it comes to rape, while I acknowledge - and agree - women have a lot of problems when it comes to rape, there is a differential in societal treatment of men raped by women vs women raped by men (and men raped by men and women raped by women). Women raped by men are, to your point, victim blamed an uncomfortable portion of the time. This is true! It's unconscionable.

Men are charged with wasting police time, filing a false report, or threatened with such if they try to report it. This happened so commonly in my support team that we now advise men who are raped to take an attorney (if they can afford one) or a savvy relative (if they can't) with them when they try to report to make sure they can actually make it through the reporting stage without getting arrested.

Put another way: if you said "hey, we need to do something to improve how victims are treated by police", that would be a positive act that relatively few people could disagree with. If you said "hey, we need to do something to improve how black victims are treated by police", that would be a positive act that mostly only racists would disagree with. If you said "hey, we need to do something about how white victims are treated by police", there would naturally be a lot of suspicion. This is because although white victims are sometimes treated badly by police, focusing on the group who already receives better treatment to get even better treatment is... weird and possibly racist/sexist.

and if the whole idea were "we need to make sure male victims of rape are treated fairly just like female victims" that'd be great. my point isn't and has never been that that idea is wrong. the point is that as i've already said, this is a red herring, hinging itself on the acceptance of a number of much less trivial and much more totally and completely wrong ideas.

I actually don't agree with every principle. There's several things I think are off base.

which ones. you've got to say which ones otherwise you're just doing empty weasel words. its not like its a secret... or is it?

So, this is a lie. The one I just linked to you was the average of three studies (2010, 2011, and 2012), all of which got very similar (but no the same) results. I also did separate reports on 2010 and 2011 when they came out. Come on, at least read it.

When the same result gets repeated multiple times showing (roughly) the same thing, you should know reproducibility implies reliability.

what in the world do you mean just linked to me ?? i feel like i vaguely remember u linking some at some point but that had to have been like weeks ago and also i think i ended up busy with something else and forgetting to read them so honestly i had no idea that that was the case. i also have some issues with my memory and things tend to fall through the cracks pretty often so its also possible i may have read them and forgotten. can you do me the favor of simply linking again and then i will take a Look.

Yeah, I'm talking about rape and abuse victims you're hurting. Deliberately.

i'm rubber you're glue

The intentionally simplified spelling is another odd facet.

how do u still have an issue with people saying "u" on the internet in 2021 go back to last decade

and if u mean typing in lowercase with less punctuation that is my proposed english spelling reform and it's orthophobic for you to be criticizing it

i really don't think there's a whole lot of sexual trauma clinics/counselors/etc. out there advertising themselves as FEMALE CLIENTS ONLY . of course, there might be a big cabal plot so i did double check and the top 5 sexual trauma organizations that pop up for me on a google search all use gender neutral language for victims, one explicitly states on its front page that sexual assault can happen to both men and women, the closest any of them come to female exclusivity is simply stating a statistic about the majority of rape victims being female, but it still doesn't use gendered language for the victims. i'm wondering, where's the exclusion here?

So, just so you know, we've studied this when it comes to male access to resources in the DV space, where, keep in mind, a strong plurality of men are raped - by an intimate partner. Keep in mind, this discussion started because such things were exclusive to women in California, and it took a lawsuit to get them open to men.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3175099/

DV Hotlines, Agencies, and Online Resources
Men seeking help from DV agencies, hotlines, and via the Internet answered questions that addressed the reception they received when seeking help. The results are displayed in Table 3. Between 25–33% reported being referred by a DV hotline or an online resource to a local program that was helpful. The remaining experiences were not as positive. A large proportion of those who sought help from DV agencies (49.9%), DV hotlines (63.9%), or online resources (42.9%) were told, “We only help women.” Of the 132 men who sought help from a DV agency, 44.1% (n=86) said that this resource was not at all helpful; further, 95.3% of those men (n=81) said that they were given the impression that the agency was biased against men. Some of the men were accused of being the batterer in the relationship: This happened to men seeking help from DV agencies (40.2%), DV hotlines (32.2%) and online resources (18.9%). Over 25% of those using an online resource reported that they were given a phone number for help which turned out to be the number for a batterer’s program. The results from the open-ended questions showed that 16.4% of the men who contacted a hotline reported that the staff made fun them, as did 15.2% of the men who contacted local DV agencies. Qualitative accounts provide a more in-depth understanding of their experiences with these resources.

“They didn’t really listen to what I said. They assumed that all abusers are men and said that I must accept that I was the abuser. They ridiculed me for not leaving my wife, ignoring the issues about what I would need to do to protect my 6 children and care for them.” (Experience with a DV agency)

“[T]hey offered to listen if I wanted to recount what had happehed [sic], but indicated that no support services were available.” (Experience with DV hotline)

“I was mostly just doing research after the occurrence [sic] to find out what I should do. I found mostly female help sites and was turned down by several so I gave up.” (Experience using online resources)

mmm ok yeah dv is a different beast from just plain sexual trauma clinics. alright i do see the problem.

This is why I will always call myself an egalitarian, “feminist” has too many connotations of female supremacy

Aye. It also helps that "egalitarian" is rather open-ended, with there being no established dogma associated with the term.

are you larping as scottish now or what

i've tried to sidestep the rape example not because i don't care about male rape victims but because it's one of the most convoluted MRA traps used to make the other side look bad.

It's neither convoluted nor a trap. You're mad about it because it outs a very damning fact that you're trying fruitlessly to deny: you don't actually care about male rape victims.

(i do, but for the sake of argument) so what if i dont? what r u gonna do about it?

yeah well exactly because the label "egalitarian" itself is literally just associated with being an MRA so like its not like he's putting himself in Between or whatever

Only seems to be feminists who associate the label "egalitarian" with being an MRA, and even then, only some of 'em.

"only seems to be people who are correct who do [correct thing]"
well and i mean obviously there are other contexts to the word but in the context of gender issues it's pretty universally understood that egalitarians r simply MRA lite. im pretty sure MRAs who self-identify as such would tell u the same. though that's an assumption; i haven't asked any. perhaps we need to get ostro in here?

i really don't think any of the recent posts in this thread have been difficult to figure out? what r u struggling with in particular

I believe his point is that many of your opinions have found themselves squarely within Poe's Law. That is to say, your posts read like a parody of feminist beliefs.

or maybe he is simply autistic(-adjacent) (or an aquarius?) and doesnt actually know what's going on or really understand the foundations of feminist theory. at least, that's the explanation i'm going with.

Aye. It also helps that "egalitarian" is rather open-ended, with there being no established dogma associated with the term.


It's neither convoluted nor a trap. You're mad about it because it outs a very damning fact that you're trying fruitlessly to deny: you don't actually care about male rape victims.


Only seems to be feminists who associate the label "egalitarian" with being an MRA, and even then, only some of 'em.


I believe his point is that many of your opinions have found themselves squarely within Poe's Law. That is to say, your posts read like a parody of feminist beliefs.

There is actually!

Feminists and a lot of groups that focus on intersectionality say that egalitarianism is bad because it doesn't focus on the nitty-gritty details of oppression or the individual experience, instead choosing to take a utopian view on human behavior and plight. Also, a lot of feminists are of the idea that egalitarianism=feminism, no ifs ands or buts about it.

the "feminists" who will tell u that are libfems who will also tell you that they read theory because they read "women don't owe you pretty." that idea and its pop feminism friends are a load of semantic garbage with no theoretical backing or real meaning and the people peddling it dont even deserve to be given the moniker "feminist" honestly

The reality of Turkey as a Middle Eastern country. A cashier was beaten up by men for saying sanitary pads were on sale. It should not be difficult to guess which political party the people who use violence against the cashier voted for.

CHP? :^)

The normalization of violence against men can also be outlined in media portrayals and the hypergamic nature of feminist activism there reveals the flaws in their movement and its mindset.

the only thing that i can picture reading this sentence is you putting on more and more clown makeup with each word

[Cekoviu]

oh, sorry, that was really long. i didn't want to multi post. but look, now i've gone and done it...

[Ostroeuropa]

i'm very glad we seem to agree on this principle; this axiom is in fact an easy (if somewhat contrived) means of demonstrating the ethical problem with the arguments you and other MRAs propagate, party A being {men} as a general unit represented by any arbitrary man to which the relevant conditions apply and party B being {women} as a general unit represented by any arbitrary woman to which the relevant conditions apply; B's support system would of course be all those concerned with the well-being of the women around them. thus:
given men, a party which has consistently and over a long period of time abused women in multiple ways and any arbitrary woman having abused back in at least one relatively incident following a long period of exposure to male-perpetrated abuse, for any arbitrary man to claim women or any arbitrary woman are or is the primary aggressor while omitting details about the overall context of the situation in order to weaken the trust of those concerned with the well-being of the women around them in women and continue the pattern of abuse is in general unethical, though any arbitrary woman's action may or may not have been appropriate.

If i'm understanding you correclty, you're suggestign that men are always the aggressor because women live in a misogynistic society. Tthere is a shift going on here between the individuals involved and a grand social narrative. You're essentially arguing that feminist theory legitimizes violence against men, all men, as a class, while denying it's a hate movement.

Your rationale for why the "man" is the aggressor here even if he individually has not in fact harmed the woman can be moved out of the domestic violence realm and applied to women assaulting any man they happen to come across.

Furthermore, your argument is reliant on suggesting that a womans constant violent abuse of a partner is comparatively minor to the systemic issues women face. If that were the case and not merely feminist delusion indulged in to justify violence, we would expect women, all women, to face psychological consequences in excess of what is faced by male domestic violence survivors. Are you in fact claiming this is the case, and if so, where is your evidence of it? As such, your analogy would be more akin to;

"Woman hits man once a day. Man grabs a knife, locks her in a cupboard, cuts off all her extremities over a period of months, rapes her, and buries her alive. Argues that she was the primary aggressor and what she experienced was comparatively minor.".

The extremely disproportionate response enacted on the individual in question invalidates your argument here, and furthermore, there is a substantially different characterization between an act of violence occurring in a moment, and a sustained campaign of violence.

Finallly, you act as though societal sexism is something women are subjected to by men. This ignores that it is in fact perpetrated by both sexes, and harms both sexes.

[Ostroeuropa]

well and i mean obviously there are other contexts to the word but in the context of gender issues it's pretty universally understood that egalitarians r simply MRA lite. im pretty sure MRAs who self-identify as such would tell u the same. though that's an assumption; i haven't asked any. perhaps we need to get ostro in here?

I am more than happy for egalitarians to be counted as MRAs.

[Crysuko]

well and i mean obviously there are other contexts to the word but in the context of gender issues it's pretty universally understood that egalitarians r simply MRA lite. im pretty sure MRAs who self-identify as such would tell u the same. though that's an assumption; i haven't asked any. perhaps we need to get ostro in here?

I am more than happy for egalitarians to be counted as MRAs.

I cannot for the life of me understand why feminists have such a beef with egalitarians, trying either to smear or assimilate us, as if you have the monopoly on liberation ideology.

[Ostroeuropa]

I am more than happy for egalitarians to be counted as MRAs.

I cannot for the life of me understand why feminists have such a beef with egalitarians, trying either to smear or assimilate us, as if you have the monopoly on liberation ideology.

Why do you not identify as an MRA out of interest?

[Crysuko]

I cannot for the life of me understand why feminists have such a beef with egalitarians, trying either to smear or assimilate us, as if you have the monopoly on liberation ideology.

Why do you not identify as an MRA out of interest?

I oppose supremacists, be they gender/sexual, race, religion, whatever.