Men's Issues/Masculism DIR

[Titanic]

My only understanding of this is that I am somehow being accused of ciphering my ideas in weighty and pedantic legalese. Perhaps, there is merit in such statements. After all it wouldn't be the first time someone has taken issue with my word choice, tone or voice. All I can do is try to convey meaning. When such meaning is misunderstood, I can try to better communicate my meaning. If however, no one brings such misunderstandings or mis-communications to my attention, I cannot rectify any problems in the communication. Thus, I am left to conclude that any problems are on the interpreters end or they do not care enough about the issue to ask for clarification.

And though I realize some glaze over my words and read, "blah, blah, blah." I have come to accept that many of my words will not reach all audiences. However, rejoice in knowing that this aspect of myself is something I am continuing to ameliorate.

I have a $#%&ed up sense of humor sometimes. My apologies.

 

[Alceste]

In some areas where men need help they are put at a disadvantage specifically because of organizations in place to help women. It is exactly the mindset that men are not the ones who need help, that they are the privileged ones, that makes it so hard for them to get help when they do need it and for them to be taken seriously. It is great that we do have so many programs and efforts in place to help women now, that is wonderful, but a lot of those programs, those efforts, shouldn't be so gender biased. To suggest that to some though, seems to ruffle some feathers.

Hey, I agree. I don't know why sexual assault survivors' advocates don't move beyond the stereotype that a "sexual assault survivor" is by definition a woman or child. And I don't know why some prison reform activists are only trying to reform women's prisons when the criminal justice system places a much more unfair burden on men.

But those organizations and activists weren't there before. They're doing something that wasn't done before. They haven't taken anything from anyone - they've built something new. And while I will readily criticize rape advocates' groups who deny their support to male victims, I can't argue that they are taking support away from male victims by doing so. Before they arrived on the scene there was no support for anyone. Since they built up their networks and influence, there is a little bit of support for some rape victims - but mainly for women and children.

I could ramble, but I hope you get what I'm saying. When you build a new shed and the neighbours haven't got one, it's not like you've taken their one away.

I think the rivalry is stupid. If MRAs were to go to sexual assault survivors' advocacy groups and present their case for expanding further into the field of adult male rape victims, they could make use of the expansive response network, infrastructure and resources that others have built to achieve their ends much more quickly than they can when they start with nothing and on the warpath.

It's like your neighbour is standing in their yard, peering over the fence, kvetching about how unfair it is that you have a new shed, refusing to build one of their own, complaining that all their tools are getting rusty, and never once thinking to ask whether they can keep a few of their tools in your new shed.

 

[Curious George]

I have a $#%&ed up sense of humor sometimes. My apologies.

No worries. I realize I need to be open to criticism or I will mid out on valuable learning opportunities. I try to understand other people's perspectives both of me and the world at large. My response was after analyzation of your post. And I tried to convey the only interpretation to which I could come. If there was an alternative meaning or joke that I missed, I would gladly hear it. And don't worry I certainly do have "thick skin," so thick in fact, that I still have my goat- the very same one with which I was born.

 

[Titanic]

No worries. I realize I need to be open to criticism or I will mid out on valuable learning opportunities. I try to understand other people's perspectives both of me and the world at large. My response was after analyzation of your post. And I tried to convey the only interpretation to which I could come. If there was an alternative meaning or joke that I missed, I would gladly hear it. And don't worry I certainly do have "thick skin," so thick in fact, that I still have my goat- the very same one with which I was born.

I am glad to hear that. I really enjoy most of Revoltingest posts and I kind of just got carried away. Peace.

 

[Alceste]

My only understanding of this is that I am somehow being accused of ciphering my ideas in weighty and pedantic legalese. Perhaps, there is merit in such statements. After all it wouldn't be the first time someone has taken issue with my word choice, tone or voice. All I can do is try to convey meaning. When such meaning is misunderstood, I can try to better communicate my meaning. If however, no one brings such misunderstandings or mis-communications to my attention, I cannot rectify any problems in the communication. Thus, I am left to conclude that any problems are on the interpreters end or they do not care enough about the issue to ask for clarification.

And though I realize some glaze over my words and read, "blah, blah, blah." I have come to accept that many of my words will not reach all audiences. However, rejoice in knowing that this aspect of myself is something I am continuing to ameliorate.

Hey, don't sweat it. You write like I do. It's not your fault that some of the optimum words and sentence structures happen to be excessively eloquent and complex for the average reader. That's just how it comes out. I read too many books with lots of cool words in. I expect you do too.

People often assume I'm upset, or trying to insult them, or intentionally obfuscating my meaning in order to look clever. Really I'm just sitting here procrastinating because I don't feel like doing any work, wondering if I should have another cup of coffee, and feeling a little stressed out because I should probably be doing some work.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Hey, don't sweat it. You write like I do. It's not your fault that some of the optimum words and sentence structures happen to be excessively eloquent and complex for the average reader. That's just how it comes out. I read too many books with lots of cool words in. I expect you do too.

People often assume I'm upset, or trying to insult them, or intentionally obfuscating my meaning in order to look clever. Really I'm just sitting here procrastinating because I don't feel like doing any work, wondering if I should have another cup of coffee, and feeling a little stressed out because I should probably be doing some work.

There you go again, trying to make us all feel dumb with your big, fancy words. What the hell is "work?" Is that even a word?

 

[Titanic]

Hey, don't sweat it. You write like I do. It's not your fault that some of the optimum words and sentence structures happen to be excessively eloquent and complex for the average reader. That's just how it comes out. I read too many books with lots of cool words in. I expect you do too.

People often assume I'm upset, or trying to insult them, or intentionally obfuscating my meaning in order to look clever. Really I'm just sitting here procrastinating because I don't feel like doing any work, wondering if I should have another cup of coffee, and feeling a little stressed out because I should probably be doing some work.

I was joking what I said was just a joke. Like I said I have a #$%&ed up sense of humor sometimes. I guess I read too much Stephen King...

 

[Alceste]

I was joking what I said was just a joke. Like I said I have a #$%&ed up sense of humor sometimes. I guess I read too much Stephen King...

I think I have read all the Stephen King.

 

[Revoltingest]

I was joking what I said was just a joke. Like I said I have a #$%&ed up sense of humor sometimes. I guess I read too much Stephen King...

Your sense of humor is just fine, even if inscrutable at times.
But we really keep you here cuz you're pretty.

 

[Titanic]

I think I have read all the Stephen King.

I believe I have too.

 

[Draka]

The thing is, Alceste, men have gone to some of those women's programs for help and have gotten turned away and why? Because they were men. This is exactly what I was talking about...gender biases.

Certain programs and organizations are exclusively "women only". There are "Victim's shelters" where if a man shows up he is automatically assumed to be one of the residents' abusers, and even if affirmed he's not, they still won't take him because the shelter is for only women. Crisis centers and victim's counseling center around women, abuse shelters set up for just women, and more.

Now, like I said, while these things are great and wonderful to now have, why must they still have the caveat of just being for women on them as the overwhelming majority still do? Is it no wonder then, that sometimes that men, where they can't get certain places to open for them, must try to start places from scratch on their own? And why must this effort be so apparently offensive to some women's rights activists? Are the men asking for anything to be taken away from the women? No. They are merely wanting it to finally be acknowledged that they have some issues as well that they could use some help and support with. Perhaps they are not all the privileged males that some seem to perceive them to be.

Oh, and so what if those things weren't there before? Are you trying to claim that since those programs came about from women's rights activism that they should have full claim and control over who gets to use them? Isn't it enough that the strides were made? Were there no men involved in the movement? Did no men support the movement? I think there were. So why is it so hard to support men now in theirs?

Eventually, one would hope, by seeing that there are programs out there, perhaps doing the same things, that they could come together, work jointly, and in time merge. No longer even needing or seeing two separate women's rights and men's right movements, but human rights. Truly seeing a gender equality movement where we can work in tandem. However as long as we are playing tug of war instead of building each other up...that's never going to happen.

 

[Me Myself]

The thing is, Alceste, men have gone to some of those women's programs for help and have gotten turned away and why? Because they were men. This is exactly what I was talking about...gender biases.

Certain programs and organizations are exclusively "women only". There are "Victim's shelters" where if a man shows up he is automatically assumed to be one of the residents' abusers, and even if affirmed he's not, they still won't take him because the shelter is for only women. Crisis centers and victim's counseling center around women, abuse shelters set up for just women, and more.

Now, like I said, while these things are great and wonderful to now have, why must they still have the caveat of just being for women on them as the overwhelming majority still do? Is it no wonder then, that sometimes that men, where they can't get certain places to open for them, must try to start places from scratch on their own? And why must this effort be so apparently offensive to some women's rights activists? Are the men asking for anything to be taken away from the women? No. They are merely wanting it to finally be acknowledged that they have some issues as well that they could use some help and support with. Perhaps they are not all the privileged males that some seem to perceive them to be.

Oh, and so what if those things weren't there before? Are you trying to claim that since those programs came about from women's rights activism that they should have full claim and control over who gets to use them? Isn't it enough that the strides were made? Were there no men involved in the movement? Did no men support the movement? I think there were. So why is it so hard to support men now in theirs?

Eventually, one would hope, by seeing that there are programs out there, perhaps doing the same things, that they could come together, work jointly, and in time merge. No longer even needing or seeing two separate women's rights and men's right movements, but human rights. Truly seeing a gender equality movement where we can work in tandem. However as long as we are playing tug of war instead of building each other up...that's never going to happen.

Part of the sad part is that those same men would have been embraced when boys, but when they become men, they must go somewhere else.

I am of the stance that gender roles and attitudes of current society oppress everyone. Many feminists agree (some second waves may not). Having a dir focused on the rights for male I dont understand what is the big problem.

 

[Alceste]

The thing is, Alceste, men have gone to some of those women's programs for help and have gotten turned away and why? Because they were men. This is exactly what I was talking about...gender biases.

Certain programs and organizations are exclusively "women only". There are "Victim's shelters" where if a man shows up he is automatically assumed to be one of the residents' abusers, and even if affirmed he's not, they still won't take him because the shelter is for only women. Crisis centers and victim's counseling center around women, abuse shelters set up for just women, and more.

Now, like I said, while these things are great and wonderful to now have, why must they still have the caveat of just being for women on them as the overwhelming majority still do? Is it no wonder then, that sometimes that men, where they can't get certain places to open for them, must try to start places from scratch on their own? And why must this effort be so apparently offensive to some women's rights activists? Are the men asking for anything to be taken away from the women? No. They are merely wanting it to finally be acknowledged that they have some issues as well that they could use some help and support with. Perhaps they are not all the privileged males that some seem to perceive them to be.

Oh, and so what if those things weren't there before? Are you trying to claim that since those programs came about from women's rights activism that they should have full claim and control over who gets to use them? Isn't it enough that the strides were made? Were there no men involved in the movement? Did no men support the movement? I think there were. So why is it so hard to support men now in theirs?

Eventually, one would hope, by seeing that there are programs out there, perhaps doing the same things, that they could come together, work jointly, and in time merge. No longer even needing or seeing two separate women's rights and men's right movements, but human rights. Truly seeing a gender equality movement where we can work in tandem. However as long as we are playing tug of war instead of building each other up...that's never going to happen.

I'm not talking about an individual male going to a women's safe-house and asking for shelter, though. I'm saying that if MRAs want to establish men's safe-houses, their leadership could ask the leadership of the women's safe-house how best to go about it.

In the case of women's shelters, the infrastructure that has been built by others has a specific purpose and admission policy already. Yes, those that have built and maintain the infrastructure certainly do have the right to set the policy. Whether or not it is reasonable depends on a lot of factors. For example, is it a dormitory style shelter or are there private, lockable rooms? I can see why dormitory shelters would prefer not to be coed, ESPECIALLY if they are catering to victims of abuse.

But that doesn't mean that identical shelters for men can't be established my men's groups, using the leadership and guidance of organizations who have already built shelters for women. There's no need to reinvent the wheel, right? Just "What you're doing is amazing - we want to do the same thing for men. What should we do?"

I would point out that some abused or vulnerable men and boys might PREFER a non-co-ed shelter for a wide variety of reasons.

Anyway, what feminist organizations are offended by the idea of men's shelters?? There are men-only shelters for homeless men all over the place. Granted, not enough to meet the demand in most urban centres, but they're extremely common. I've never once seen a band of angry feminists picketing outside a single one.

 

[Apex]

Having a dir focused on the rights for male I dont understand what is the big problem.

There isn't one. All of the "problems" with it are nothing more than personal bias, or (gasp) sexism.

 

[Apex]

It's interesting to see gay folk & feminists flocking to an MRA thread to mock the fact that white folk & men folk would dare show advocacy for their own civil rights concerns. (Preposterous! They're in charge, so they cannot suffer!)

This is the line of thinking has always gotten to me. You see a lot of these same people go on about how straight white males are "privileged". As if we get everything handed to us on a silver platter. When in reality the majority of us are between a rock and a hard place. You get all these programs designed to help minorities and women in a multitude of areas. Usually, regardless of what social class they are in. But where does that leave middle class white males? Take college for an example. We don't have enough money to be able to afford things like a good college education without massive student loans. Yet our families still make too much money to qualify for any significant financial aid. A large number of the scholarships are out of reach because you were born with the wrong skin color and reproductive organs. And even a lot of the support groups on campuses are designed for women and minorities. Because after all, if you white and male then obviously you don't need help with college...

Feminists will cluck approval for our measly issues, but their continual scoffing at MRA doesn't inspire confidence that they'll pursue equal rights for all.
Still, it's a hoot to see that even minority types will display profound bigotry too.

Maybe its the fact that most MRA supporters would like it to be green, thus more inclusive then the "DIR that shall not be named".

 

[Alceste]

T

Maybe its the fact that most MRA supporters would like it to be green, thus more inclusive then the "DIR that shall not be named".

You mean "Conservative Only"?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Hell hath no fury like a DIR scorned.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I know, right? Why doesn't the city make special ramps for entrances into buildings for me? Why are they always taking into consideration people who are chairbound or need a walker to get around anywhere? Why can't *I* have a ramp for a building if I just want one?

I hate how society ignores the walking people like me when we want a ramp.

.

.

.

Sorry...I couldn't resist.

The difference here is - nobody needs a support group like a handicap needs a ramp.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I know, right? Why doesn't the city make special ramps for entrances into buildings for me? Why are they always taking into consideration people who are chairbound or need a walker to get around anywhere? Why can't *I* have a ramp for a building if I just want one?

I hate how society ignores the walking people like me when we want a ramp.

.

.

.

Sorry...I couldn't resist.

Omg! You are so right...I never thought about it like that. You have opened my eyes to the hate crimes committed against walking people. These non walking people claim to believe in equality and yet they won't allow us to have the same treatment that they get! You know what? This is reversed ableism!

 

[Revoltingest]

This is the line of thinking has always gotten to me. You see a lot of these same people go on about how straight white males are "privileged". As if we get everything handed to us on a silver platter. When in reality the majority of us are between a rock and a hard place. You get all these programs designed to help minorities and women in a multitude of areas. Usually, regardless of what social class they are in. But where does that leave middle class white males? Take college for an example. We don't have enough money to be able to afford things like a good college education without massive student loans. Yet our families still make too much money to qualify for any significant financial aid. A large number of the scholarships are out of reach because you were born with the wrong skin color and reproductive organs. And even a lot of the support groups on campuses are designed for women and minorities. Because after all, if you white and male then obviously you don't need help with college...

There is much individual variation in the reaping of injustice & misfortune. Sure, sure, we handsome athletic intelligent healthy white males have some advantages, but I notice that my son (not white though) had to register for the draft, while my daughter did not. Dying in a foreign war hits us randomly, afflicting only about 200,000 killed or hospitalized in the last half century out of a population of dozens of millions. So despite the fact that we do well as a group, those who were killed or maimed have a legitimate gripe. And there are other problems we hav had to face, eg, shorter life span, affirmative action, child custody.