Feminists sabotage yet another talk on men's equality

[Avaerilon]

I think we're talking about Western nations, where laws have been enacted to give women more rights than in the past. It's in these nations that the biggest genuine case for the MRM is, since some of the laws have gone too far in trying to do a good thing, and some laws that protect women don't afford any protection for men. There are also some obviously sexist laws that discriminate against men in numerous Western nations. That said, there are male rights issues in non-Western nations,just as there still are female rights issues in Western nations.

I'm having a "can't look away from the train wreck" moment.

On the one hand, your ideas about laws that have "gone too far," "protect women [but] don't afford any protection for men," and are "obviously sexist...[and] discriminate against men" are likely to make my head hurt. On the other, they're also likely to be pretty funny.

Aw, fuck it, into the train wreck I go. Please cite specific examples of the aforementioned laws.

Ok

I already mentioned the UK's Sexual Offences Act, which fails to recognise that there are cases of women committing rape against men, by defining rape in a more narrow way. I think it's sexist that a law doesn't cover genuine aspects which should be covered. There is also a pilot scheme in the UK, which may well be brought-into law, whereby a man accused of domestic violence can be barred from entering his own home for up to 28 days. If he genuinely did commit the crime, than fair enough. However, what about the men who didn't? Is it ok to force the possibilities of homelessness and suicide upon them? No, it isn't. And what about women who batter their husbands- can they be thrown out too? Nope. Why? The possible law here is incredibly one-sided. Granted though, it is not yet a law. Then there is the Draft law in the US. Women can enter active military service now like men. But women are exempt from the draft, should one ever be implemented. I understand there are also inequalities over registering for draft, whereby men have to sign-up or face severe penalties, but women are not obliged to sign-up. If women did not serve combat roles in the military, this wouldn't be an issue. However, since they now do, the draft law is sexist. I can offer more examples, if you like. I would like to prove to you that sexism against men is genuine, and needs to be addressed.

[Frisivisia]

Violence against women is a big problem.

Do you agree or disagree that it is two words too long, and that given that it contributes to the culture of ignoring male victims of violence, and the culture of viewing women as weak/victims, it is perpetuating sexism?

You also completely ignored the posts where I pointed out that this is in fact, completely on topic.
Arguing why i'm railing against feminism when the topic is...well, you know.

The phrase is a problem too. The mass-use of the phrase is as a result of feminist campaigning and has actively fucked over male victims of violence, as well as perpetuated sexist views of women.

Unfortunately, women bear the brunt of domestic violence far too often.

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/Worldswomen/WW2010%20Report_by%20chapter%28pdf%29/violence%20against%20women.pdf

Violence against everyone is an issue, but violence against women is a very separate dimension of the issue with different challenges to solve and different methods to conquer.

[The Rich Port]

Violence against women is a big problem.

Do you agree or disagree that it is two words too long, and that given that it contributes to the culture of ignoring male victims of violence, and the culture of viewing women as weak/victims, it is perpetuating sexism?

You also completely ignored the posts where I pointed out that this is in fact, completely on topic.
Arguing why i'm railing against feminism when the topic is...well, you know.

The phrase is a problem too. The mass-use of the phrase is as a result of feminist campaigning and has actively fucked over male victims of violence, as well as perpetuated sexist views of women. If you take my G.A view, this is because focusing on one gender when addressing an issue inherently means your going to fuck it up and drop the ball somehow.

Actually, male victims of sexual violence fuck themselves over, for the most part.

The biggest reason male rape is invisible is because males under-report, because men are expected by American society to be able to defend themselves and their wife and children, attitudes older than John McCain's neck vagina that men perpetuate to this way.

I'm not blaming the victim. Quite the opposite, I think men should always do that and that expecting men to be strong and macho is retarded. But you shouldn't blame women or feminists.

[Ostroeuropa]

The phrase is a problem too. The mass-use of the phrase is as a result of feminist campaigning and has actively fucked over male victims of violence, as well as perpetuated sexist views of women.

Unfortunately, women bear the brunt of domestic violence far too often.

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/Worldswomen/WW2010%20Report_by%20chapter%28pdf%29/violence%20against%20women.pdf

Violence against everyone is an issue, but violence against women is a very separate dimension of the issue with different challenges to solve and different methods to conquer.

Worldwide?
Sure.
That isn't what i'm arguing.

[Frisivisia]

How on earth does "end violence against women" contribute to problems facing men, unless you believe that there is some sort of perpetual total amount of violence that must exist in the world, such that any lessening in violence against women necessarily results in more violence against men?

I mean, fuck, I've often advocated against child abuse. I had no idea this meant that I was advocating FOR the abuse of adults!

I've explained how. It contributes to the problem of male invisibility, and it also weaponizes sexist attitudes to achieve a sexist agenda.
/btw, women are victims.
/PROTECT THE WIMMENS

etc.

And stopping violence against children just contributes to the problem of adult invisibility. And stopping violence against animals just contributes to human invisibility.

/btw, children and animals are victims
/PROTECT THE CHILRNS N NMLS

[Ostroeuropa]

The phrase is a problem too. The mass-use of the phrase is as a result of feminist campaigning and has actively fucked over male victims of violence, as well as perpetuated sexist views of women. If you take my G.A view, this is because focusing on one gender when addressing an issue inherently means your going to fuck it up and drop the ball somehow.

Actually, male victims of sexual violence fuck themselves over, for the most part.

The biggest reason male rape is invisible is because males under-report, because men are expected by American society to be able to defend themselves and their wife and children, attitudes older than John McCain's neck vagina that men perpetuate to this way.

I'm not blaming the victim. Quite the opposite, I think men should always do that and that expecting men to be strong and macho is retarded. But you shouldn't blame women or feminists.

They are contributing to the problem of male invisibility. Male victims of abuse need to know it's ok to come forward, and the utter lack of concerted efforts to get this message across to them is appalling, especially when couples with campaigns that explicitly leave them out of "End violence"

[Nailed to the Perch]

Violence against women is a big problem.

Do you agree or disagree that it is two words too long, and that given that it contributes to the culture of ignoring male victims of violence, and the culture of viewing women as weak/victims, it is perpetuating sexism?

You also completely ignored the posts where I pointed out that this is in fact, completely on topic.
Arguing why i'm railing against feminism when the topic is...well, you know.

The phrase is a problem too. The mass-use of the phrase is as a result of feminist campaigning and has actively fucked over male victims of violence, as well as perpetuated sexist views of women. If you take my G.A view, this is because focusing on one gender when addressing an issue inherently means your going to fuck it up and drop the ball somehow.

I disagree, and I really doubt an awful lot of male victims of violence would agree. Violence against anyone is a problem, obviously, but gendered violence is a specific issue within that larger problem. I don't think "end prison rape" ignores the existence of rape outside of prison - I think it recognizes that prison rape is a distinct issue with causes unique to itself, and that simply lumping it in under "end rape" does not adequately address those unique circumstances. The idea that we better address a problem by ignoring significant causative factors in a major subset of cases just doesn't make any sense at all.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

http://equalitycanada.com/

Thanks - wasn't sure if you meant them or A Voice For Men, which I believe was also mentioned earlier as being associated with these events. I am not well-enough informed about Equality Canada to speak as to their agenda without doing some more research first.

I was listening to what the talk was about. It doesn't seem to have any potentially harmful content.

In short, the entire protest has devolved in my mind from "Feminists against MRAs!" which held some sense of legitimacy to the protest being completely staged by a bunch of idiots who failed at researching the topic in question at the meeting and just protested because "OMG! MRAs!". Great.

[Ostroeuropa]

The phrase is a problem too. The mass-use of the phrase is as a result of feminist campaigning and has actively fucked over male victims of violence, as well as perpetuated sexist views of women. If you take my G.A view, this is because focusing on one gender when addressing an issue inherently means your going to fuck it up and drop the ball somehow.

I disagree, and I really doubt an awful lot of male victims of violence would agree. Violence against anyone is a problem, obviously, but gendered violence is a specific issue within that larger problem. I don't think "end prison rape" ignores the existence of rape outside of prison - I think it recognizes that prison rape is a distinct issue with causes unique to itself, and that simply lumping it in under "end rape" does not adequately address those unique circumstances. The idea that we better address a problem by ignoring significant causative factors in a major subset of cases just doesn't make any sense at all.

End Gendered violence is a compromise. It's one you won't see feminist organizations take.
Also, it isn't equivalent to end prison rape. Thats a specific problem.
It's equivalent to end prison rape of half the inmates who suffer it while conspicuously ignoring the other half.

[Cosara]

I've explained how. It contributes to the problem of male invisibility, and it also weaponizes sexist attitudes to achieve a sexist agenda.
/btw, women are victims.
/PROTECT THE WIMMENS

etc.

And stopping violence against children just contributes to the problem of adult invisibility. And stopping violence against animals just contributes to human invisibility.

/btw, children and animals are victims
/PROTECT THE CHILRNS N NMLS

But that adds to the invisibility of abuse against adult male humans.

[The Rich Port]

Actually, male victims of sexual violence fuck themselves over, for the most part.

The biggest reason male rape is invisible is because males under-report, because men are expected by American society to be able to defend themselves and their wife and children, attitudes older than John McCain's neck vagina that men perpetuate to this way.

I'm not blaming the victim. Quite the opposite, I think men should always do that and that expecting men to be strong and macho is retarded. But you shouldn't blame women or feminists.

They are contributing to the problem of male invisibility. Male victims of abuse need to know it's ok to come forward, and the utter lack of concerted efforts to get this message across to them is appalling, especially when couples with campaigns that explicitly leave them out of "End violence"

And how exactly are they doing that?

[Frisivisia]

And stopping violence against children just contributes to the problem of adult invisibility. And stopping violence against animals just contributes to human invisibility.

/btw, children and animals are victims
/PROTECT THE CHILRNS N NMLS

But that adds to the invisibility of abuse against adult male humans.

If we admit that anyone but adult males get abused and try to prevent that, we'll forget that they get abused too! Like if we help black people, we'll forget to help white people!

[Ostroeuropa]

They are contributing to the problem of male invisibility. Male victims of abuse need to know it's ok to come forward, and the utter lack of concerted efforts to get this message across to them is appalling, especially when couples with campaigns that explicitly leave them out of "End violence"

And how exactly are they doing that?

Massive campaigns about ending violence against women while not addressing gendered violence against men, activism diverting funds from all-sex shelters and male shelters to female shelters because
"We're ending violence against women! YAY!!"

I'm not saying they asked for the funds to be diverted. They simply didn't say jack shit when they were, and give the politicians who do so big props.

[The Rich Port]

And how exactly are they doing that?

Massive campaigns about ending violence against women while not addressing gendered violence against men, activism diverting funds from all-sex shelters and male shelters to female shelters because
"We're ending violence against women! YAY!!"

Why don't men's rights groups do the same thing? Massive campaigns to stop sexual violence against men?

[Frisivisia]

And how exactly are they doing that?

Massive campaigns about ending violence against women while not addressing gendered violence against men, activism diverting funds from all-sex shelters and male shelters to female shelters because
"We're ending violence against women! YAY!!"

I've explained how. It contributes to the problem of male invisibility, and it also weaponizes sexist attitudes to achieve a sexist agenda.
/btw, women are victims.
/PROTECT THE WIMMENS

etc.

And stopping violence against children just contributes to the problem of adult invisibility. And stopping violence against animals just contributes to human invisibility.

/btw, children and animals are victims
/PROTECT THE CHILRNS N NMLS

[Cosara]

And how exactly are they doing that?

Massive campaigns about ending violence against women while not addressing gendered violence against men, activism diverting funds from all-sex shelters and male shelters to female shelters because
"We're ending violence against women! YAY!!"

*Nods in agreement*

[Ostroeuropa]

Massive campaigns about ending violence against women while not addressing gendered violence against men, activism diverting funds from all-sex shelters and male shelters to female shelters because
"We're ending violence against women! YAY!!"

Why don't men's rights groups do the same thing? Massive campaigns to stop sexual violence against men?

Well, other than feminist groups consistently decrying them as sexist which effectively kills their ability to recruit and raise funds?
Probably because they would if they could.
I'm arguing both MRA's and feminism are fucked up.

[Frisivisia]

Massive campaigns about ending violence against women while not addressing gendered violence against men, activism diverting funds from all-sex shelters and male shelters to female shelters because
"We're ending violence against women! YAY!!"

*Nods in agreement*

You really just don't have any thoughts of your own. This entire thread you've just been saying how hard you agree with Ostro.

[Cosara]

*Nods in agreement*

You really just don't have any thoughts of your own. This entire thread you've just been saying how hard you agree with Ostro.

I've also made my own points, but I only get noticed when I agree with Ost.

[Frisivisia]

Why don't men's rights groups do the same thing? Massive campaigns to stop sexual violence against men?

Well, other than feminist groups consistently decrying them as sexist which effectively kills their ability to recruit and raise funds?
Probably because they would if they could.
I'm arguing both MRA's and feminism are fucked up.

You're so egalitarian.

[Frisivisia]

You really just don't have any thoughts of your own. This entire thread you've just been saying how hard you agree with Ostro.

I've also made my own points, but I only get noticed when I agree with Ost.

All of your own points have been destroyed.

[Strykla]

ONLY IF said actions were current and made your life a living hell, and only then only to the specific group of people who are doing so, not to a whole group of unknowns.

It's like people feeling vindictive because they have AIDS and they spread it to the entire members of the sex who transmitted it to them. It's not justified to do harm or use these types of actions to others who have nothing to do with you, not in the slightest.

If people want to be respected, they must give respect; it's simple logic.

Women, especially feminists, don't want to be respected by someone else's standards.

They want to be autonomous and respect because of their humanity, and this overwhelming attitude going on in here that these women were "too radical" or "unjustified" are only perpetuating misogyny and misogyny-apologism.

If an anti-woman meeting is going on at a prominent public university, it is as detestable as if it was an anti-Black meeting or an anti-Jew meeting.

Do not criticize or condescend to these feminist protesters, they were justified. Question the group they were protesting.

Right you may be(to yourself) but it doesn't matter how detestable anything like this is; if they were neo-nazis, it would not make any difference. Just as the feminists have the right to protest against perceived ails, the MRAs have every right to talk about what they wish to talk about. As long as it is not harmful to the country, of course. So you can cheer on the feminists as much as you wish, but you cannot say you have the ultimate answer.

[Ostroeuropa]

Well, other than feminist groups consistently decrying them as sexist which effectively kills their ability to recruit and raise funds?
Probably because they would if they could.
I'm arguing both MRA's and feminism are fucked up.

You're so egalitarian.

I don't know what to make of this post.

[Cosara]

Well, other than feminist groups consistently decrying them as sexist which effectively kills their ability to recruit and raise funds?
Probably because they would if they could.
I'm arguing both MRA's and feminism are fucked up.

You're so egalitarian.

Aren't you?

Definition of Egalitarian: Of, relating to, or believing in the principle that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.

[The Rich Port]

You really just don't have any thoughts of your own. This entire thread you've just been saying how hard you agree with Ostro.

I've also made my own points, but I only get noticed when I agree with Ost.

The only points that count are points that make any sense and are logical.

You've made exactly none of those.

You're so egalitarian.

I don't know what to make of this post.

You need to realize the irony of this.

MRA's are receiving no funding mostly because the public at large doesn't care.

This male-dominated, Republican-rising America of ours doesn't care about men's rights because men are macho and cannot be raped, and if they are, they deserved it because they're weak.

Ideas perpetrated by men backfiring on men.

But, I agree MRA's are fucked up and should probably rethink their priorities.

Male rape is a serious issue, as is any rape.