-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The flaw in the argument that feminism is bad because it ignores men's issues
- Thread starter Riverwolf
- Start date
This post perfectly explains why masculinism is not a mere subset of feminism, which cannot be relied upon to defend the rights of men...or gay folk, black folk, transgenders children, Amer Indians, etc. Their primary focus is females (which is to be expected for such an eponym), & is good. To approve of rights for another is admirable, but ain't nobody more motivated than when advocating for one's own, especially when 2 movements conflict.
Last edited:
Good post. Feminism, both by definition and composition is focused on female rights. Male rights advocacy requires a separate banner to rally under. And that's okay. Human beings can only generate a limited amount of empathy/sympathy and it makes sense that amount will be focused toward things that they identify with - gender and sex based problems.
It would be amazing if some huge feminist organizations like NWO were to protest a men's issue, however this just isn't going to happen. For all the cries of 'feminism covers male problems' and 'to fix male problems you need more feminism' - the opposite seems to be rearing it's ugly head.
Feminism isn't bad for ignoring men's issues, but it is heavily questionable and deserving of scrutiny for its response to men's issues.
I'll add the peacifying caution that some individual feminists really work for all.
(Don't want no more feminine products tossed at me head!)
But they can legitimately be doubled for cat toys. :angel2:
Remember that I don't throw used ones. That would be bad.
DallasApple
Depends Upon My Mood..
Alceste
Vagabond
Why does your "men's rights" activism have to centre on "scrutinizing feminism", though? Can't you just go ahead and lobby for men's rights? Who's stopping you? Leaving aside for the moment the issue of trying to go on a speaking tour on university campuses to promote your ideology that rape is exciting, I mean. Where the right you are lobbying for is not the right to date rape women with impunity, who is stopping you from pursuing it? Surely spending your days contemplating "the flaws of feminism" is a huge distraction from dealing with serious issues that negatively impact the lives of men
Here's a good example: disastrously inadequate support services for male-on-male rape victims in conflict zones.
I brought that up myself and not one "men's rights advocate" on RF was willing to take a break from contemplating the flaws in feminist philosophy to even acknowledge my post.
This is a serious men's issue that I'd certainly be willing to contribute my time, money and effort into:
Male rape: the last human rights taboo? | Global Development Professionals Network | Guardian Professional
What are your MRAs doing about this problem, and how can I help?
InformedIgnorance
Do you 'know' or believe?
Well actually it would make sense for those involved with MRA to scrutinize anything that would attempt to implement change; feminism is one of those things that would attempt to implement change, thus it would be scrutinized in much the same way as globalization. But particularly given that feminism inspired changes are intended to benefit one gender (females) primarily, thus has the significant potential to be a threat to MRA in terms of overreach / over compensation etc, thus yes, it is entirely appropriate for MRA to place additional emphasis on scrutinizing feminism (as seem to be the case in reverse, since so many feminists seem to feel the need to evaluate MRA - understandably so).
'promote your ideology that rape is exciting'
This is insulting. Not only have you blatantly lied about what the talk was about, instead picking on a quote by the speaker uttered (i think) years ago - but you have also egregiously assosiated such a view not only with me, but with mens rights.
This is utterly disgusting argumentation. It's dishonest. You have willfully lied to try and lower my position. Its sickening. I thought the feminists on this website were far more accepting and open to discussion, but you just used the brutal, generalizing, dishonest bully tactics that the most radical feminists use, the ones you claim to be against.
Lets not even start that I have already addressed your points before.
Me Myself
Back to my username
I agree, but there is so much poo flinging between this two groups by now that its just poo on everyone's faces, and the poo just smells awfully bad.
Also, there is a problem when MRA talk about "feminists" and feminists talk about "MRA" as if it was one single evil block doing the worst stuff around all as one sungle block.
I ve noticed a lot of what I disagree with feminism and have problems with is part of the second wave, and that the third wave has many thinkers that also disagree with e same things I disagree with.
Likewise, you get a bit of everything from MRA and judging all as if it was the same thing is as useless.
Me Myself
Back to my username
Alceste
Vagabond
It's not dishonest. That dude truly did say that date rape "used to be" exciting, and was consequently accosted by angry rape activists. That's why I want to leave it aside. Leave it aside. Not argue about it. It's a pointless diversion from the important subject. Let's talk about men's rights, and what you're doing about serious issues like the fact that there are appallingly inadequate support services for male victims of conflict rape by other men. What are men's rights organizations doing about that, and how can I help? I don't have much, but I'll contribute what I can if you'll just point me in the right direction.
Studies of refugees in African conflict zones found that while only 80% of the women and girls who had been captured by militants had been raped by their captors, the figure was - incredibly - 100% for captured men. Not just one incident either. The men were gang raped daily by groups of militants, causing extreme psychological trauma and permanent physical damage, such as incontinence, bleeding, terrible pain and chronic infection. They suffer in silence, from a fear that telling anyone about their horrific story will make them appear less manly. They can't even tell their spouses, because in many cases the spouse will leave, thinking "if he can't protect himself, how can he protect me?" NGO's spend a disproportionate amount of their funding on services to be used exclusively by female victims and children. 70% or more.
I'm really keen to do something to help these men. The whole situation is totally unacceptable to me. Please tell me what I can do, and which MRA's are working on this issue.
'instead picking on a quote by the speaker uttered (i think) years ago - but you have also egregiously associated such a view not only with me, but with mens rights.' My statement still stands, and the fact you amended the quote to 'used to be' shows that. In addition you said it was 'your ideology', not his. So yes, it was dishonest, and not accepting that continues to make you look bad.
Also if you look at the context, Farrell is using the quote in context of literature, not his own personal opinion. So your entire point about the speaker himself is totally wrong. And thus my stance of the mindless blocking and protesting and hate speech by the feminists in that situation remains.
As for your paragraph about helping male rape victims. Good luck for anyone getting any significant change in African conflict zones, which are notoriously unstable. Even the full power of feminism wouldn't change that if they so desired. Let alone the much smaller MRA sphere. Look at the national coverage KONY 2012 got, didn't do anything to help. If you desire to focus on male rape victims, then search for one of the few male shelters there are and donate, perhaps write an article or two about it. I have explained why there is so much anti-feminism in the MRA and this also counts towards why most of the activism is concerned in the 1st world society of perceived feminist imbalance. And in all honesty, considered the size of MRA, the small campaigns in local ground is the best we can do at the moment.
I admit that there is less activism in MRA, but that's okay because not only is it small and growing, but I have also given examples in the other thread of where activism is being blocked. The most recent being the Edmonton poster campaign.
Last edited:
This is a reasonable description.
Some seek to win a debate by any means necessary,
instead of enjoying a discussion by any means civil.
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
Should have just told him "Welcome to RF!".
That came to mind too!
If I may, I met with a local men's group because they knew I was a feminist activist, and they wanted to offer their voice. Not as male feminists, but as a men's group. I had read Warren Farrell's book 'The Myth of Male Power", and felt there was merit in some things but disagreed with some of his points in another.
My roundtable with the men's group spent maybe just a few minutes on how they don't like feminism, maybe just a few minutes about Farrell's book, but more about where we could find common ground. They offered how my generation can do things differently as feminists (they were men over 55), but I wouldn't call their thoughts "anti-feminist." And I didn't get the sense from them that their men's group was focused on what some might think is feminist oppression. They were more concerned with how men are disenfranchised by society.
There are factions within the umbrella of feminism that I find myself in disagreement with as I am a bisexual woman who identifies as a sex-positive feminist. I disagree, though, with a contention that the problems men's groups face are from the feminist movement itself. Articles and books that I have read in regards to the marginalization of males IMO stem from a patriarchal paradigm that places gender binary roles in contention with each other and emphasizes a male stereotype that benefits a propagation of idealized property ownership acquired through violent means.
However, I realize that not everybody sees the world that way. There are some who see the marginalization of men from a strong and oppressive matriarchal element that privileges women at the expense of male protection and rights. I disagree, but that doesn't mean I respect them less. However, I disagree that feminism itself is warranted to be targeted with the kind of hostility when people don't even see it as holding political office in identification. There is no Feminist Party. Politicians identify as Christian, or Pro-Life, or support Head Start, or advocate for protecting "traditional marriage between one man and one woman." I don't believe I've ever heard a politician say they are running on a Feminist platform.
I could be wrong, though, since I tend to be rather bitter myself about politics in general.
Finally, my definition of an oppressive heavily populated female political, cultural, familial, and theological decision-making power that actively disenfranchises males is not feminism, but matriarchy. If we are to define who might be an oppressive power, I think it's important to make that distinction since I would fight against it as well.
Alceste
Vagabond
Can you suggest who I might donate to? What site can I publish on to galvanize the MRA community to do something about male on male rape so that I can contribute my money or time to it? I write a pretty good article.
Alceste
Vagabond
If I may, I met with a local men's group because they knew I was a feminist activist, and they wanted to offer their voice. Not as male feminists, but as a men's group. I had read Warren Farrell's book 'The Myth of Male Power", and felt there was merit in some things but disagreed with some of his points in another.
My roundtable with the men's group spent maybe just a few minutes on how they don't like feminism, maybe just a few minutes about Farrell's book, but more about where we could find common ground. They offered how my generation can do things differently as feminists (they were men over 55), but I wouldn't call their thoughts "anti-feminist." And I didn't get the sense from them that their men's group was focused on what some might think is feminist oppression. They were more concerned with how men are disenfranchised by society.
There are factions within the umbrella of feminism that I find myself in disagreement with as I am a bisexual woman who identifies as a sex-positive feminist. I disagree, though, with a contention that the problems men's groups face are from the feminist movement itself. Articles and books that I have read in regards to the marginalization of males IMO stem from a patriarchal paradigm that places gender binary roles in contention with each other and emphasizes a male stereotype that benefits a propagation of idealized property ownership acquired through violent means.
However, I realize that not everybody sees the world that way. There are some who see the marginalization of men from a strong and oppressive matriarchal element that privileges women at the expense of male protection and rights. I disagree, but that doesn't mean I respect them less. However, I disagree that feminism itself is warranted to be targeted with the kind of hostility when people don't even see it as holding political office in identification. There is no Feminist Party. Politicians identify as Christian, or Pro-Life, or support Head Start, or advocate for protecting "traditional marriage between one man and one woman." I don't believe I've ever heard a politician say they are running on a Feminist platform.
I could be wrong, though, since I tend to be rather bitter myself about politics in general.
Finally, my definition of an oppressive heavily populated female political, cultural, familial, and theological decision-making power that actively disenfranchises males is not feminism, but matriarchy. If we are to define who might be an oppressive power, I think it's important to make that distinction since I would fight against it as well.
That is the impression I'm getting. The little I've read seems to indicate that MRAs generally misattribute their difficulties attaining their objectives to feminists and feminism. Qhost's links are a good example. The ones I could open were about politicians doing politics, not feminists interfering with the objectives of MRAs.
What were the specific men's rights issues the group you were talking to were working on, just out of curiosity?
There never was a name for them, actually. They were very informally organized, and I met some of them through a meditation group I led. A few random chats over coffee led to the invitation. We met at a park under a tree and dished. What was very sad was that the group themselves felt rather powerless, and that the only thing they could do was act as more of a support group for themselves than for activism.
I can find a couple of them again (thank you FB). Since we had known each other for years, and see how their group is doing. They gave advice on what feminism can be offering differently, but after thinking about it, I think it's much more empowering to create and act not by piggybacking off another group, but to learn from another group on what they did and to repeat it for themselves.
I know back then, my first desire was understanding. It then became a discussion of awareness. I wouldn't mind offering more information on how change has occurred for women's rights from grassroots to government policy so that they feel like they're not stagnating on men's issues.
Oh, and when it comes to male victims of rape, I believe this ought to be at the top if not close to it for their and other men's groups. There are way too many male survivors that have absolutely nowhere to go.