MRA's: Fighting for Men or Fighting Against Women?

[Jocabia]

Don't you get it. Calling a woman a slut is just like calling a man a dad. He already told us this.

See, no one would object to calling a woman a deadbeat mother if she put the burden of raising the child entirely on the father. It would be correct. But to him, when a women is irresponsible and it's not enough to call her a deadbeat or irresponsible like we do with the father. We need to call him a slut. Because in his mind, woman and slut are interchangeable.

In this context, yes. Just like "dad" and "slut" are interchangable in this context, because the definition behind "dad" and "mom" in this context is equivalent to "slut".


Of course, you can contonue to ignore that point I brought up several pages ago, and continue to present your straw man. But if you ever feel like being honest, let us know.

Irresponsible and deadbeat mean the same thing. For you, it's not enough to simply call a woman irresponsible or a deadbeat though. You need to use a misogynistic term, because, in fact, you are misogynistic. And it doesn't seem disproportionate to you at all, because you don't really care if it is. We are talking about women, after all, and it's not like they're people or anything.

[Llamalandia]

So, how do you propose we address this power imbalance between males and females.
You don't.
You have no solution for it.

I don't have a solution that isn't stupid and mistreats children. Neither do you.

Nor can you fix the power the other power imbalance that is unavoidable as a result of females being the part of our species that gives birth. Unless you have a solution for the power imbalance of women dying in child birth and men not dying. Or the problem that women's bodies are damaged by pregnancy and men's bodies are not. Or the plethora of other consequences of pregnancy and abortion that you're choosing to ignore because they don't affect you.

So does that mean, that every mother who drops off her kid at the fire station is "mistreating them"? I mean, haven't you ever heard of adoption?

[Satanic Socialist States]

Are people here honestly arguing that men should have to pay child support even if they did not want anything to do with the child? And you complain of a war on women? Women have many, many chances to abort the pregnancy. If the man doesn't want anything to do with the child, why should he have to pay?

[Fartsniffage]

:roll:

Do tell?

You do recall that I brought up calling people "irresponsible sluts" in response to you calling people "deadbeat dads", yes?

If my calling mothers who abort or legally abandone their children "irresponsible sluts" is supposedly telling, then what does that say about you, the individual who openly calls men who don't want to be fathers "deadbeat dads" and "pricks"?

That my lad is where the irony lay.

That you can't see that even trying to insult women by implying that their sexual habits are bad is pretty terrible then I really hope your not the best example of an MRA.

[Ostroeuropa]

In this context, yes. Just like "dad" and "slut" are interchangable in this context, because the definition behind "dad" and "mom" in this context is equivalent to "slut".


Of course, you can contonue to ignore that point I brought up several pages ago, and continue to present your straw man. But if you ever feel like being honest, let us know.

Irresponsible and deadbeat mean the same thing. For you, it's not enough to simply call a woman irresponsible or a deadbeat though. You need to use a misogynistic term, because, in fact, you are misogynistic. And it doesn't seem disproportionate to you at all, because you don't really care if it is. We are talking about women, after all, and it's not like they're people or anything.

No.
It's because those two are the common terms used as an insult against those actions.
He isn't a misogynist, he's quoting a misogynistic culture. This was a pathetic attempt on your part.
He's pointing out that to use the hate-filled term against males is similar to using the one for females. You also seem to think there is something insulting about being called a slut. Divorce yourself from this view, it speaks very poorly of you.

Someone may be a slut. They may be a whore.
So what. It doesn't matter. Their choice to be so, and I won't judge them for it. But it does not change what they are.

[Forsher]

Note how often 4chan actually encourages it. I see a request just about once or twice a day. And YouTube, there's enough bad eggs on that site that doxxing may be against the rules but there's too many people out there doing it anyways. Of course, 4chan's the guys who tend to do the dirty work for any number of groups. They'll dox both feminists and MRAs alike just because they can.

So, they're mercenary doxxers? Don't you see how there's a fundamental difference between that sort of behaviour and what has gone on with AVFM?

To be a hate anything there needs to be some actual hatred directed towards the group. From what you've said doxxing would happen in those places regardless of the groups that the victims are identified as belonging to (as with genocide, it is the identification applied to the victim that matters). In my view, this is not the case with AVFM.

[Jocabia]

See, this is the point. Women are more involved in the reproductive process. They have more opt outs, but they also can be killed in the process. You want to even out the part about more "opt outs" as you call them, but you don't want to correct for anything else. You don't want to make it more equal. You want to make it more unequal.

Um.
We do have medicine to address the women dying thing you know. We do actually try to remove those consequences for her. So yeh, this, again, is nonsense masquerading as an argument you are using.
You are arguing for malice based revenge legislation against males. It's creepy.

No, we don't. Women still die during childbirth. They are still harmed. They still have to go through the process of pregnancy.

And there is no malice. It is not malicious to make people take responsibility for their actions. Only you think that. Because the mother and father are both responsible for the existence of the child, they are both responsible for the care of that child for as long as it is dependent on care, unless an advocate for the child determines the child is better served by someone else taking that responsibility. Notice how none of that is malicious.

[Ostroeuropa]

:roll:

You do recall that I brought up calling people "irresponsible sluts" in response to you calling people "deadbeat dads", yes?

If my calling mothers who abort or legally abandone their children "irresponsible sluts" is supposedly telling, then what does that say about you, the individual who openly calls men who don't want to be fathers "deadbeat dads" and "pricks"?

That my lad is where the irony lay.

That you can't see that even trying to insult women by implying that their sexual habits are bad is pretty terrible then I really hope your not the best example of an MRA.

Where did he imply their sexual habits are bad. Are you sure you aren't revealing you think sluts are bad? That's your prejudice, not his.

[Ostroeuropa]

Um.
We do have medicine to address the women dying thing you know. We do actually try to remove those consequences for her. So yeh, this, again, is nonsense masquerading as an argument you are using.
You are arguing for malice based revenge legislation against males. It's creepy.

No, we don't. Women still die during childbirth. They are still harmed. They still have to go through the process of pregnancy.

And there is no malice. It is not malicious to make people take responsibility for their actions. Only you think that. Because the mother and father are both responsible for the existence of the child, they are both responsible for the care of that child for as long as it is dependent on care, unless an advocate for the child determines the child is better served by someone else taking that responsibility. Notice how none of that is malicious.

Ok. So suppose the dad says "The state would do a better job than me."
So what if the mother disagrees?

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

Now I'd want this poll to change, because a part of the movement is truly cancer and the other side I don't think is just a bad influence

[The Serbian Empire]

Note how often 4chan actually encourages it. I see a request just about once or twice a day. And YouTube, there's enough bad eggs on that site that doxxing may be against the rules but there's too many people out there doing it anyways. Of course, 4chan's the guys who tend to do the dirty work for any number of groups. They'll dox both feminists and MRAs alike just because they can.

So, they're mercenary doxxers? Don't you see how there's a fundamental difference between that sort of behaviour and what has gone on with AVFM?

To be a hate anything there needs to be some actual hatred directed towards the group. From what you've said doxxing would happen in those places regardless of the groups that the victims are identified as belonging to (as with genocide, it is the identification applied to the victim that matters). In my view, this is not the case with AVFM.

It would mean the reach of terror from Anonymous would be far greater than AVFM as the guys from 4chan aren't fussy on who they strike. Both in reality are dangerous, just that one will attack as if they were the content of /b/, which is random.

[Fartsniffage]

That you can't see that even trying to insult women by implying that their sexual habits are bad is pretty terrible then I really hope your not the best example of an MRA.

Where did he imply their sexual habits are bad. Are you sure you aren't revealing you think sluts are bad? That's your prejudice, not his.

Please. What does "slut" mean to you then? Do MRAs have some new definition of the word not yet in common usage?

[Llamalandia]

Well then why not pass alas banning abortion for the good of the child then? Or more practically, requiring pregnant women not eat too much fish, or take prenatal vitamins etc etc to ensure a healthy baby? I mean he'll I'm pretty sure it's not even illegal for women to drink alcohol despite fetal alcohol syndrome. If we're going to be so "concerned with the children" fine the. I'm taking it all he way.

Actually, the latter part is a much more interesting argument. There is a healthy debate about it, actually. However, given that we don't require parents to feed their children vitamins or to not feed them too much fish, that bit is moot.

However, the fetal alcohol bit is under much debate and should be. The child, once it exists, is very much harmed through the actions of the mother and the child should have the right to made whole, in my opinion. However, that's a separate debate and still doesn't justify a paper abortion.

And how is mercury poisioning, (a result of too much fish consumption in pregnancy) not a source of harm to children?

Also, here's the thing, if the childs rights were paramount, which they aren't for better or worse, (keep in mind for instance the USA has never ratified the UN rights of Child treaty for example ), then your arguments would likely carry the day. But Children's rights are far from paramount, if they weren't we'd have ended no fault divorce or at least given children a say in parental divorce ie vetoing it. Likewise we would require that all biological parents live together and parent together as that's usually in a childs best interest, but guess what we do don't do any of that.

[Aurora Novus]

I have answered, repeatedly. That you don't like my answer really doesn't matter. I'm not repeating it again.

You've not answered the question. You've avoided it, repeatedly.

Men may have a shorter time to make the decision but it certainly isn't a single point.

When you consider that the reproductive process is not the same thing all the way throguh, but happens in stages, yes, it is a single point. That you don't want to conceptualize it that way doesn't change that it IS that way.

If biological consent isn't consent, then what is?

A consistent "Yes, I want to be a mother/father" up until the moment after the child is born. You of course recognize this for women. After all, you wouldn't dream of proposing that a woman having sex is consent to pregnancy and childbirth thereafter. Sex is not consent to parenthood.

And I know, I know, you'll come back and say "dur, but men finish der part afdur sex." Yes, we know, but that's not what determines parenthood. It's not the end of the reproductive cycle that determines when you're a parent, it's when the child is born. The difference being, a child isn't born while it's still growing inside the mother. That's why we allow abortions, and that's why fathers should be able to, like mothers, make the choice to not be a parent before the child is born.


And by the way, I know you keep saying that we should conceptualize reproduction as one continuous event, but you're being hypocritical when you say that. Because even you don't conceptualize it that way. Otherwise you would have no problem with men abdicating resppnsibility during pregnancy, because that's just "during the reproductive process." This whole "male vs female" part of the process is you trying to catagorize different sections of the process. That you refuse to recognize "pre/post-conception" as a part of catagorizing that process is nothing short of hypocrisy on your part. Hypocrisy inspired by bigotry.

Fartsniffage, why do you want to deny the existence of fertilization? Can abortion happen before conception?

I never denied that it did exist.

No?

Well then, you certain recognize that there is a time when an egg is not fertilize, and a time when it is fertilized. In otherwords, pre-conception and post-concpetion. Glad we're on the same page.

Now, why don't you want men to have the same rights as women, post-conception?

[Ostroeuropa]

Where did he imply their sexual habits are bad. Are you sure you aren't revealing you think sluts are bad? That's your prejudice, not his.

Please. What does "slut" mean to you then? Do MRAs have some new definition of the word not yet in common usage?

A slut is someone who is sexually promiscuous. Nothing more. Some people may decide that's a bad thing, but that's their prejudice showing.
That was the point of the slutwalks.

[Jocabia]

Irresponsible and deadbeat mean the same thing. For you, it's not enough to simply call a woman irresponsible or a deadbeat though. You need to use a misogynistic term, because, in fact, you are misogynistic. And it doesn't seem disproportionate to you at all, because you don't really care if it is. We are talking about women, after all, and it's not like they're people or anything.

No.
It's because those two are the common terms used as an insult against those actions.
He isn't a misogynist, he's quoting a misogynistic culture. This was a pathetic attempt on your part.
He's pointing out that to use the hate-filled term against males is similar to using the one for females. You also seem to think there is something insulting about being called a slut. Divorce yourself from this view, it speaks very poorly of you.

Someone may be a slut. They may be a whore.
So what. It doesn't matter. Their choice to be so, and I won't judge them for it. But it does not change what they are.

Deadbeat is a reference to someone who leaves a child they are responsible without adequate support. It's not a slight on his position as a man. Man isn't inherent in the term.

You want an indicator that male isn't part of deadbeat. That's why we include "dad" in there.

So deadbeat = someone who leaves someone financially harmed as a result of their actions
Dad = male with a child

So the equivalent term would be deadbeat mom or deadbeat mother. See how that works?

I'll ignore the rest of that drivel. It's silly and I can't make it look more so by explaining why.

[Jocabia]

Please. What does "slut" mean to you then? Do MRAs have some new definition of the word not yet in common usage?

A slut is someone who is sexually promiscuous. Nothing more. Some people may decide that's a bad thing, but that's their prejudice showing.
That was the point of the slutwalks.

He intended it for it be an insult. He said so.

[Aurora Novus]

In this context, yes. Just like "dad" and "slut" are interchangable in this context, because the definition behind "dad" and "mom" in this context is equivalent to "slut".


Of course, you can contonue to ignore that point I brought up several pages ago, and continue to present your straw man. But if you ever feel like being honest, let us know.

Irresponsible and deadbeat mean the same thing. For you, it's not enough to simply call a woman irresponsible or a deadbeat though. You need to use a misogynistic term, because, in fact, you are misogynistic. And it doesn't seem disproportionate to you at all, because you don't really care if it is. We are talking about women, after all, and it's not like they're people or anything.

That's a nice straw man you've got there.

As I said though, whenever you feel like being honest and addressing my actual points, feel free to.

[Ostroeuropa]

No.
It's because those two are the common terms used as an insult against those actions.
He isn't a misogynist, he's quoting a misogynistic culture. This was a pathetic attempt on your part.
He's pointing out that to use the hate-filled term against males is similar to using the one for females. You also seem to think there is something insulting about being called a slut. Divorce yourself from this view, it speaks very poorly of you.

Someone may be a slut. They may be a whore.
So what. It doesn't matter. Their choice to be so, and I won't judge them for it. But it does not change what they are.

Deadbeat is a reference to someone who leaves a child they are responsible without adequate support. It's not a slight on his position as a man. Man isn't inherent in the term.

You want an indicator that male isn't part of deadbeat. That's why we include "dad" in there.

So deadbeat = someone who leaves someone financially harmed as a result of their actions
Dad = male with a child

So the equivalent term would be deadbeat mom or deadbeat mother. See how that works?

I'll ignore the rest of that drivel. It's silly and I can't make it look more so by explaining why.

So you didn't even address any of it.
As I said, he's quoting the common terms from society for those two people. He didn't make them. And whining about how you dislike that our culture has double standards?
Sure. I'm betting he agrees. But blaming him for those double standards is just intellectually dishonest.

[Ostroeuropa]

A slut is someone who is sexually promiscuous. Nothing more. Some people may decide that's a bad thing, but that's their prejudice showing.
That was the point of the slutwalks.

He intended it for it be an insult. He said so.

In as much as deadbeat dad is an insult, yes. So why are you derailing and whining like this? I think it's hilarious you people constantly derail any discussion on anything into "Wut about the wimminz."

[Fartsniffage]

Please. What does "slut" mean to you then? Do MRAs have some new definition of the word not yet in common usage?

A slut is someone who is sexually promiscuous. Nothing more. Some people may decide that's a bad thing, but that's their prejudice showing.
That was the point of the slutwalks.

slut
Line breaks: slut
Pronunciation: /slʌt /
NOUN

• derogatory
1A woman who has many casual sexual partners.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... glish/slut

Notice that word in there? Derogatory?

[Llamalandia]

Um.
We do have medicine to address the women dying thing you know. We do actually try to remove those consequences for her. So yeh, this, again, is nonsense masquerading as an argument you are using.
You are arguing for malice based revenge legislation against males. It's creepy.

No, we don't. Women still die during childbirth. They are still harmed. They still have to go through the process of pregnancy.

And there is no malice. It is not malicious to make people take responsibility for their actions. Only you think that. Because the mother and father are both responsible for the existence of the child, they are both responsible for the care of that child for as long as it is dependent on care, unless an advocate for the child determines the child is better served by someone else taking that responsibility. Notice how none of that is malicious.

That's pretty rear in 1st world countries, or at least without having already warned the mother of the possible risks of because of some special conditions she may have. But a healthy woman of normal childbearing age rarely just up and dies in childbirth in the 1st world, I mean, it happens but it's largely de minimis here.

Also, epiderals exist now. Plus none of that suppose potential harm to which women are subjected as a result of biology negates the argument for equality between male and female parents, because we can remedy harm to unwilling fathers we should, likewise if we could remedy the harms to pregnant women that you cite we would do that as well. The harm mitigations here can be treated seperately from their underlying cause, ie an unwanted child.

[Jocabia]

Actually, the latter part is a much more interesting argument. There is a healthy debate about it, actually. However, given that we don't require parents to feed their children vitamins or to not feed them too much fish, that bit is moot.

However, the fetal alcohol bit is under much debate and should be. The child, once it exists, is very much harmed through the actions of the mother and the child should have the right to made whole, in my opinion. However, that's a separate debate and still doesn't justify a paper abortion.

And how is mercury poisioning, (a result of too much fish consumption in pregnancy) not a source of harm to children?

Also, here's the thing, if the childs rights were paramount, which they aren't for better or worse, (keep in mind for instance the USA has never ratified the UN rights of Child treaty for example ), then your arguments would likely carry the day. But Children's rights are far from paramount, if they weren't we'd have ended no fault divorce or at least given children a say in parental divorce ie vetoing it. Likewise we would require that all biological parents live together and parent together as that's usually in a childs best interest, but guess what we do don't do any of that.

It is a source of harm to children, once they exist. It's also a source of harm to children when you give it to them after birth.

You're incorrect. The children don't get a say unless they are deemed to be old enough to make a decision regarding the divorce. Otherwise the court acts as an advocate for the children and determines how they are best served.

The rest of your stuff is just completely made up. Are you claiming you can prove that a child's interests are served by forcing parents to live together? Source that please.

[Aurora Novus]

:roll:

You do recall that I brought up calling people "irresponsible sluts" in response to you calling people "deadbeat dads", yes?

If my calling mothers who abort or legally abandone their children "irresponsible sluts" is supposedly telling, then what does that say about you, the individual who openly calls men who don't want to be fathers "deadbeat dads" and "pricks"?

That my lad is where the irony lay.

That you can't see that even trying to insult women by implying that their sexual habits are bad is pretty terrible then I really hope your not the best example of an MRA.

First of all, where did you come to the conclusion that I'm an MRA? I'm not. Pay closer attention next time.

More importantly though, the fact that you recognize calling prospective mothers who choose to opt of out motherhood "irresponsible sluts" as offensive, but don't recognize calling prospective fathers who choose to try and opt out of fatherhood "deadbeat dads" as offensive, is the wonderful irony and hypocrosy I was pointing out in you. Thank you for only reaffirming that.

I'm not misogynist. I've only used the term as a parallel to you calling certain men "deadbeat dads." You, however, have just self-admittedly called yourself a misandrist. Congrats.

[Ostroeuropa]

A slut is someone who is sexually promiscuous. Nothing more. Some people may decide that's a bad thing, but that's their prejudice showing.
That was the point of the slutwalks.

slut
Line breaks: slut
Pronunciation: /slʌt /
NOUN

• derogatory
1A woman who has many casual sexual partners.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... glish/slut

Notice that word in there? Derogatory?

So it's fairly obvious you missed the point of the slutwalks then. Prudes might consider it derogatory, because they are prudes and think sex is bad. Given that we're debating political implications of the word, I don't think the dictionary is a very good source. You could try a sociology book or something, that might work.