Men's Issues/Masculism DIR

[Revoltingest]

And yeah, I'd prefer different colours. Red, orange, green.
Hell, or even Red (Only), Orange (Only similar faiths can ask questions), Yellow (Questions only), Blue (Answers from similar faiths/ex-adherents, or questions only), then Green (Everyone).

I claimed that red, yellow & green are more intuitive, but it occurs to
me that some Europistanian will scream that they use pink, indigo & plaid.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Personally, I think we should go with red, scarlet, and crimson.

 

[Revoltingest]

I wonder if staff is concerned that some wag in a Masculinist Only forum might troll feminists with threads like "Smearing Masculinism"?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I wonder if staff is concerned that some wag in a Masculinist Only forum might troll feminists with threads like "Smearing Masculinism"?

As long as no specific group is being targeted, such threads are acceptable.

 

[Rakhel]

*looks innocent* Oh goodness! Why are people saying such horrible mean things? We aren't bashing feminism. We're just not liking it very much and we want a place where we can not like it a lot in peace.[/sarcasm]

UMMM Excuse me!!! I was asking a genuine question that would have been asked in a more "knuckle dragging" way anyway.
Have you seriously not look at the way the Feminism DIR came about? Do you seriously not see the feminists raising up to say, "We demand a DIR and we demand one NOW!!!. Then the "Well, we will discuss male issues but you can only post about those male issues in the Feminist DIR IF you identify as a Feminist. So stick that in your craw and eat it!!"
This forum is full of the matriarchal system and the men see it. They don't want to ask questions about male issues to a bunch of feminists that will cry "BOO-HOO why don't you grow a pair"

This is what drives me nuts about Feminism. IT is never about equality no matter how big the cookie is.

 

[ignition]

I gotta say, it occurred to me this morning that I actually view everything that ISN'T a feminist DIR as basically a "masculinist DIR". This is, after all, a patriarchal society. It's like when I go to the book store. There's a "history" section that is absolutely huge and entirely focused on the achievements of men. Then, any history by or about women is packed into a much, much smaller "women's studies" section (one shelf right at the bottom, half filled, nowhere near the history section). The history books there are mixed together with feminist philosophical work and even some fiction.

Oh c'mon. There's a reason for that if you study history

 

[Aquitaine]

I don't really care if there is a masculinist forum or not.

I have a question though, to those masculinists out there, do you guys believe the majority of the world is a matriarchy?

I'm not a "Masculinist" whatever that actually is, but I would imagine most Masculinists recognize the world is a Patriarchy, and since Patriarchy can negatively affect Men too (think Gender Roles etc) I'd bet they're essentially on the same side as the Feminists, just looking at it through a Male lens instead of a Female one.

 

[ignition]

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?.

You raise good points but I'm extremely biased when it comes to these kind of things like child custody, marriage, divorce, inheritance etc. because of my religious affiliation. For example, I believe that the mother is entitled to raise the child until the child hits puberty, and then the father has the right. It makes sense to me also because it's the mother that's been carrying the thing around for 9 months and giving birth to it, it's kind of unfair for her to give it up to the father right away, who let's face it did jack all compared to the mother.

 

[ignition]

I originally thought the idea of feminism and masculism forums was silly and unnecessary. However, if continues to bring out peoples' underlying problems and issues with the opposite gender and continues to feed growing tension and conflict, then at least it will make things a bit more interesting around here. Heck, maybe we should set up some other forums while we're at it - how about "man-hating lesbianism," "white supremacism," and "asian schoolgirl fetishism?"

I think we should just give in to what we all really want to see; an out-and-out men vs women thread where each side bashes the other continously. Men and self-hating women on one team, women and self-hating men on the other team.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think we should just give in to what we all really want to see; an out-and-out men vs women thread where each side bashes the other continously. Men and self-hating women on one team, women and self-hating men on the other team.

You mean we don't already have.......never mind.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

UMMM Excuse me!!! I was asking a genuine question that would have been asked in a more "knuckle dragging" way anyway.
Have you seriously not look at the way the Feminism DIR came about? Do you seriously not see the feminists raising up to say, "We demand a DIR and we demand one NOW!!!. Then the "Well, we will discuss male issues but you can only post about those male issues in the Feminist DIR IF you identify as a Feminist. So stick that in your craw and eat it!!"

Nope. Not even close to how the Feminism DIR came about.

This forum is full of the matriarchal system and the men see it.

"The men"? Which men? Not all the men. There are plenty of male feminists who for all intents and purposes don't identify with anything that you're saying.

They don't want to ask questions about male issues to a bunch of feminists that will cry "BOO-HOO why don't you grow a pair"

Again, you obviously have not read a single iota of what I and other feminists have stated repeatedly here at RF. Care to back up that claim with any posts by any of us that cried, "BOO-HOO why don't you grow a pair"?

This is what drives me nuts about Feminism. IT is never about equality no matter how big the cookie is.

Horse hockey. It's about gender equality against a patriarchal system and has been since I helped my mother stuff envelopes back in the 1970s for the Equal Rights Amendment.

Now, care to point to feminist writings that cry to men that they just need to grow a pair? I'd love to see which feminists actually say this and are quoted repeatedly by other feminist writers. Did Simone de Beauvoir say that? Or was it Naomi Wolf? Or was it Gloria Steinem? Was it anyone here (because that really escaped me seeing any feminists crying to men that they just need to grow a pair)?

You're just ticked off because I hit a nerve with you with my sarcasm. I support a Masculist Only forum and a Feminist Only forum. I don't support patriarchy since it is inherently sexist. And I don't support matriarchy either since I believe it's inherently sexist, too (again, you obviously haven't read my posts on the subject of how horrific I find matriarchy, too [re:The Wicker Man]).

I feel the Feminism Only forum is a good place for feminists to discuss issues without having to constantly defend feminism itself over and over and over again by people who don't like feminism, whether it's the name itself or various aspects of the movement. It went on for YEARS, Rakhel. Not some overnight sob-fest of not being able to withstand criticism and wanting special privileges. I've been here for a long time, and after many years being in one hijacked thread after another is extremely tiresome.

 

[Revoltingest]

To so stridentlly defend feminism far far more than it was attacked is itself a big part of the problem in discussing it.
(And again, I speak generally of all those who were so hostile towards our sincere questions....which were so long ignored.)
But these circumstances, right or wrong, are good reason for a Feminist Only forum.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

To so vigorously defend feminism far far more than it was attacked is itself a big part of the problem in discussing it.

I'm defending the Feminist Only forum decision, and I offer up misconceptions and misrepresentations of feminism itself.

You may not call it attacks, but much the same, many people don't see it as an attack if they say homosexuals are no better than murderers or pedophiles since it's all a sin in the eyes of God. They don't see it as an attack, but if it is a gross misrepresentation of the queer community, I speak up about it.

It's the same with feminism.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

To so stridentlly defend feminism far far more than it was attacked is itself a big part of the problem in discussing it.
(And again, I speak generally of all those who were so hostile towards our sincere questions....which were so long ignored.)
But these circumstances, right or wrong, are good reason for a Feminist Only forum.

Oops. Cross-posting.

It's a good thing we continue to civilly agree to disagree. I saw some sincere questions, but not generally speaking from those who don't like feminism. It typically derailed into wanting to debate whether the name of feminism is sexist, whether it's needed at all, whether feminists are man-haters, whether feminists shave their legs or not, whether feminists should just shut up, whether feminists only want special privileges, and on and on and on.

If those are sincere questions, I'm a monkey's uncle.

 

[Pagan_Patriot]

Sure why not.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's a good thing we continue to civilly agree to disagree. I saw some sincere questions, but not generally speaking from those who don't like feminism. It typically derailed into wanting to debate whether the name of feminism is sexist, whether it's needed at all, whether feminists are man-haters, whether feminists shave their legs or not, whether feminists should just shut up, whether feminists only want special privileges, and on and on and on.
If those are sincere questions, I'm a monkey's uncle.

Well, I don't claim all sincere questions are sincere...only the sincere ones.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm defending the Feminist Only forum decision, and I offer up misconceptions and misrepresentations of feminism itself.

I don't argue against it at all. But I'd prefer that it be green for sympathetic non-feminists.
They can still give the boot to rabble rousers. (I'll understand if I don't get my way.)

You may not call it attacks, but much the same, many people don't see it as an attack if they say homosexuals are no better than murderers or pedophiles since it's all a sin in the eyes of God. They don't see it as an attack, but if it is a gross misrepresentation of the queer community, I speak up about it.
It's the same with feminism.

No one compared it with murder, pedophilia, or sin....although I'm OK with sin.
But you'll recall that my lack of reading was attacked by those who never even asked
what it is that I read....all because of sincere questioning & opining. (Not you, btw.)
It was very hostile ad hom derailment.

 

[Rakhel]

Nope. Not even close to how the Feminism DIR came about.

Yes it is.

"The men"? Which men? Not all the men. There are plenty of male feminists who for all intents and purposes don't identify with anything that you're saying.

My bad. It's all the men(unless you want to call them boys) who don't identify themselves as feminist.

Again, you obviously have not read a single iota of what I and other feminists have stated repeatedly here at RF. Care to back up that claim with any posts by any of us that cried, "BOO-HOO why don't you grow a pair"?


Horse hockey. It's about gender equality against a patriarchal system and has been since I helped my mother stuff envelopes back in the 1970s for the Equal Rights Amendment.

Now, care to point to feminist writings that cry to men that they just need to grow a pair? I'd love to see which feminists actually say this and are quoted repeatedly by other feminist writers. Did Simone de Beauvoir say that? Or was it Naomi Wolf? Or was it Gloria Steinem? Was it anyone here (because that really escaped me seeing any feminists crying to men that they just need to grow a pair)?

oh gee. guess I'm not feminist enough because I haven't read any of those authors. Not that I care for any of them. Stanton is a personal favorite of mine and I am beginning to like Stuart Mill.
You really have been hiding behind your rose-colored glasses haven't you?
you really have been ignoring rev rick haven't you

Boo Friggin Hoo

You're just ticked off because I hit a nerve with you with my sarcasm. I support a Masculist Only forum and a Feminist Only forum. I don't support patriarchy since it is inherently sexist. And I don't support matriarchy either since I believe it's inherently sexist, too (again, you obviously haven't read my posts on the subject of how horrific I find matriarchy, too [re:The Wicker Man]).

No what ticked me off is the attitude that any talk of Feminism is an attack on Feminism and ,therefore, should be nipped in the bud.

I feel the Feminism Only forum is a good place for feminists to discuss issues without having to constantly defend feminism itself over and over and over again by people who don't like feminism, whether it's the name itself or various aspects of the movement.

I don't wholly disagree. But neither do I see a need to constantly state that men have no issues unless a woman says he has issues.

It went on for YEARS, Rakhel. Not some overnight sob-fest of not being able to withstand criticism and wanting special privileges. I've been here for a long time, and after many years being in one hijacked thread after another is extremely tiresome.

I have been on this forum for YEARS. This recent battle is the only battle I have seen concerning feminism. And you want to know what I have seen? NO? Well I'm going to tell you anyway.
What I have seen is one side asking questions and the other side saying "deal with it." (Yes, I have said it myself). I have seen no understanding in the questions. Only sarcasm and condemnation that such a question dared to be ask and "'you' should know the answer anyways, so shut up and stop attacking us." Just as you did to me and my question concerning the male ego and radical feminism.

 

[Rakhel]

No one compared it with murder, pedophilia, or sin....although I'm OK with sin.
But you'll recall that my lack of reading was attacked by those who never even asked
what it is that I read....all because of sincere questioning & opining. (Not you, btw.)
It was very hostile ad hom derailment.

^There was this too.

 

[Debater Slayer]

To sum up my opinion on this whole thing:

• I personally don't really care whether or not there's a Masculist DIR, and I don't see myself posting there much (if at all). However, if enough members want one, then I support creating it for them.

• I don't think it's "unmanly" to want to talk about men's issues in a restricted or exclusive forum. I believe that's completely fine as long as the DIR isn't used to bash others outside the DIR, as I have repeatedly stated in this thread.

• My concern had to do with some posts that seemed to bash feminism in this thread. If the proposed Masculism DIR is used to post similar things rather than discuss men's issues and is mainly perceived to be a "response" to the Feminist Only forum, then I can foresee problems both with its usefulness and productivity.

So, I'm not opposed to the idea of the DIR itself, and I don't know how having a concern that it might be used to bash feminism based on posts I've read in this thread translates to "I don't want the DIR because feminism already covers those things" or "Men shouldn't be able to discuss their issues or voice their opinions in a new DIR."