Men's Issues/Masculism DIR

[Debater Slayer]

Okay, I'm honestly confused here.

Why is feminism being discussed in a thread about a potential Masculism DIR? This doesn't seem very promising to me. I thought the Masculism DIR was proposed to discuss men's issues rather than bash feminism.

 

[Me Myself]

Any position that goes against the idea of gender equality automatically disqualifies someone from being feminist in my mind.

The first feminists came up as a movement that fought for rights for women.

Feminism may have become broader than that, but originally, believing women needed more rights was enough.

 

[Breathe]

What's next, a forum for collectors of late 19th century dinnerware?

This is the only interenet forum that has twice as many forums, sub-forums, and sub-sub-forums as actual members who post on a regular basis. Maybe we could just give every member their own sub-forum or two and be done with it.

I think RF needs a serious purging of inactive DIRs and areas. They should be made as and when necessary.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think RF needs a serious purging of inactive DIRs and areas. They should be made as and when necessary.

Makes sense to me. It seems we're awash in complicated color coding, undefined categories, & too many of them.
If a posters without a DIR still desire a thread limited to their own ilk, then this could be specified in the OP.

Oh well, there goes my chance for a 19th century industrial design DIR.

 

[freethinker44]

I don't know if it made the men less competitive, they came off as "she's just another mechanic." But I felt I had to prove I belonged there. It made me more competitive.

This isn't just a phenomenon for women, men have to prove themselves to other men too. It's annoying and stupid for sure, but it is something men do for some reason. If you want to be treated as an equal among men, you will have to compete to prove you belong there, just like every other man.

 

[Draka]

Okay, I'm honestly confused here.

Why is feminism being discussed in a thread about a potential Masculism DIR? This doesn't seem very promising to me. I thought the Masculism DIR was proposed to discuss men's issues rather than bash feminism.

I honestly don't know.

Men, singularly, have their own issues. Child custody is a huge one. So often you will see in a divorce where you have to go about proving the mother completely unfit before there is any possible chance a father will be considered as a recourse for raising his own children. The mother doesn't have to go about proving the father unfit before she is considered for custody. How on earth is that fair?

There are domestic violence issues that are completely brushed under the rug. Men will not come forward to admit abuse, and why? Why would they? They are ridiculed. There is this sick line of thought that if a woman beats on a man he must have "had it coming" or "deserved" it. And just forbid if he actually did say something or complain because then he's a damn weakling and ***** for not only letting his woman beat on him, but not "taking it like a man".

There are other issues as well. This is not the same as feminism. They do not cover all the same things. At least, they certainly don't in my eyes.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Okay, I'm honestly confused here.

Why is feminism being discussed in a thread about a potential Masculism DIR? This doesn't seem very promising to me. I thought the Masculism DIR was proposed to discuss men's issues rather than bash feminism.

You noticed that, too, right?

My thought is if Masculinists are to bash anything, they should bash matriarchy. I do become a little suspicious if it's merely a counter to Feminism and what people simply don't like about Feminism.

 

[Revoltingest]

Okay, I'm honestly confused here.

Why is feminism being discussed in a thread about a potential Masculism DIR? This doesn't seem very promising to me. I thought the Masculism DIR was proposed to discuss men's issues rather than bash feminism.

This points out a problem with discussing feminism, ie, that unless we're relentlessly positive about some idealized version of feminism, it's "bashing". Tis as though it's a special club, & outsiders shouldn't challenge any aspect of it. I also get an impression that some feminists dismiss masculinism as a mere subset of feminism. Hey, if these guys want to discuss male oriented issues without feminist accusations of "bashing", why not let'm?

Ain't nobody can tell me I hate feminism after getting a score of 40 as a "liberal feminist" on Rakhel's test.
And I ain't gonna shut up about what I observe either....until I'm banned anyway.

 

[Draka]

This points out a problem with discussing feminism, ie, that unless we're relentlessly positive about some idealized version of feminism, it's "bashing". Tis as though it's a special club, & outsiders shouldn't challenge any aspect of it. I also get an impression that some feminists dismiss masculinism as a mere subset of feminism. Hey, if these guys want to discuss male oriented issues without feminist accusations of "bashing", why not let'm?

Ironically, I'm actually much more comfortable discussing men's issues than "feminism" and I'm a woman. I took the little test, and while I scored a 43 in liberal feminism, I didn't do too hot in the other categories. There are some aspects to what is included under the branding of "feminism" that I am simply not comfortable with. I think it an "iffy" term that has come to mean different things to different people. No wonder it comes under scrutiny.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

This points out a problem with discussing feminism, ie, that unless we're relentlessly positive about some idealized version of feminism, it's "bashing". Tis as though it's a special club, & outsiders shouldn't challenge any aspect of it. I also get an impression that some feminists dismiss masculinism as a mere subset of feminism. Hey, if these guys want to discuss male oriented issues without feminist accusations of "bashing", why not let'm?

Ain't nobody can tell me I hate feminism after getting a score of 40 as a "liberal feminist" on Rakhel's test.
And I ain't gonna shut up about what I observe either....until I'm banned anyway.

Observe away. But RF doesn't allow DIR's or private forums to be used as covers to bash other groups.

 

[Draka]

I honestly don't think a men's forum to be a cover for bashing feminism. There are honest-to-goodness men's issues and I just don't think they should have to drag them into the feminism area to discuss them.

 

[Me Myself]

Its simple, any thread that becomes a bash can be closed.

I honestly dont see why iteeds to go that way, and the reason the discussion started to happen here started honestly with... Was it Ricks comments? Pretty much it started as a bash towards the idea of the DIR and it was in a very "bully" "man up" "grow a set" kind of way.

I think it's kinda sad.

 

[Debater Slayer]

This points out a problem with discussing feminism, ie, that unless we're relentlessly positive about some idealized version of feminism, it's "bashing". Tis as though it's a special club, & outsiders shouldn't challenge any aspect of it.

That's not what I mean. I'm talking about how the discussion seems to have devolved into one about feminism and its supposed shortcomings (or supposed shortcomings of some feminists) instead of focusing on the merits of the movement for which a DIR was proposed. That doesn't make me very optimistic about how threads in the proposed DIR might turn out.

 

[Revoltingest]

Observe away. But RF doesn't allow DIR's or private forums to be used as covers to bash other groups.

That is the rule, it is obvious, it applies to all, & I have repeated it myself.
Do you believe this is not moot?

 

[Debater Slayer]

I honestly don't think a men's forum to be a cover for bashing feminism. There are honest-to-goodness men's issues and I just don't think they should have to drag them into the feminism area to discuss them.

Agreed.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Ironically, I'm actually much more comfortable discussing men's issues than "feminism" and I'm a woman. I took the little test, and while I scored a 43 in liberal feminism, I didn't do too hot in the other categories. There are some aspects to what is included under the branding of "feminism" that I am simply not comfortable with. I think it an "iffy" term that has come to mean different things to different people. No wonder it comes under scrutiny.

Feel free to discuss Masculinism with other like-minded people. I don't judge people's qualifications on whether or not they're feminists based on their genitalia. But I've rarely heard other feminists say that they do.

And....again.....for the 100th time....if you don't self-identify as a feminist, you don't have to. But feel free to read any of the threads in the Feminist Only forum to get a picture. And better yet, read some books written by feminists in years past to get an even bigger picture.

I will continue to object, however, to knee-jerk reactions that feminism is equivalent to misandry. It isn't. Never has been. Never will be. Misandry is it's own definition. Feminism fights patriarchy, not men.

 

[Me Myself]

That's not what I mean. I'm talking about how the discussion seems to have devolved into one about feminism and its supposed shortcomings (or supposed shortcomings of some feminists) instead of focusing on the merits of the movement for which a DIR was proposed. That doesn't make me very optimistic about how threads in the proposed DIR might turn out.

Reasons were given, but some people came in and said "feminism is on it, we dont need more about it" and then it all started.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's not what I mean. I'm talking about how the discussion seems to have devolved into one about feminism and its supposed shortcomings (or supposed shortcomings of some feminists) instead of focusing on the merits of the movement for which a DIR was proposed. That doesn't make me very optimistic about how threads in the proposed DIR might turn out.

The rules should be enforced in any DIR. Moreover, the mere possibility that there might be misbehavior could be applied to any DIR, & shouldn't be a standard applied solely to this one. But as you see, to discuss feminism & men's issues could be problematic for masculinists when feminists are so quick to take offense at any challenge by perceived outsiders.

 

[Revoltingest]

I will continue to object, however, to knee-jerk reactions that feminism is equivalent to misandry. It isn't. Never has been. Never will be. Misandry is it's own definition. Feminism fights patriarchy, not men.

Why object to something which no one here is claiming?
This happens too often when discussing feminism, & derails the conversation.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Reasons were given, but some people came in and said "feminism is on it, we dont need more about it" and then it all started.

I don't see that as a challenge to masculism; just an opinion as to why we don't need a DIR for it. You have every right to believe otherwise and explain why without bashing other movements, too.