The Mens Rights /Issues "debate"?

[Me Myself]

Part of ourature is to change our nature.

Xenophobia is absolutely ingrained in us, we still dont just kill people from other countries cause us vs them mentality.

Or at least we try not to and truly look for an escuse before doing it o.o.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes it does in the same sense if I worked in an emergency room I will in fact address first and pay more attention to a person with head trauma over someone with a badly sprained ankle.They are both injuries but I would not give them the exact same amount of attention or urgency.

Of course, this analogy ought not suggest that men should avoid their own problems until the more severe problems of women are fully addressed. And we also shouldn't presume that some of men's problems aren't severe for the affected men. (When I was planning to leave the country to avoid being drafted into the Viet Nam war, helping women achieve equality in intramural sports at my university took a back seat.) Similarly, we wouldn't expect women to put their problems on hold until more pressing LGBTXQR or racial violence issues are addressed. People will work to fix that which concerns them personally first.

The only reason that matters is it perplexes me why MRA seem to look at women and specifically feminist to do something for them about male on male crime.Instead of each other.
If women were largely responsible for all rapes against other women as well as men I would be pointing at women .Educating women and men .

This seems a sign of the times, ie, that some MRA & some feminists have rough emotional issues with each other. But that needn't affect how dispassionately we less encumbered advocates may discuss things. I don't care if an injustice is perpetrated by male or female malefactors...what needs to be fixed needs to be fixed.

Of course not.The problem is it seems you need to justify your self if you are concerned about women's rights but not at the same time up in arms about men's rights.

I don't justify myself at all. The reasons things concern me are not up for debate or objection.

This is a COMMON theme.If you identify your self as feminist you will be questioned in lightening speed time by any (most) MRA guys I have encountered WHAT are you doing about men's issues???One by one.Why do I have to justify myself if I'm concerned about women's issues or explain if so what am I doing for the MRA? My entire OP was based off of encounters (dozens of them) I have had with men who are members of the MRA. As well as many other women who have had similar encounters.Its the exception to the rule if that is not your experience.

I cannot speak for others you've met...only for myself. I'm neither feminist nor MRA...just a libertarian...or, given recent feuds, a minarchist.

Im sorry Rev I'm not familiar with the term MRE?

"meal ready to eat"....military & survivalist types seem to love'm

As to fringe? I am sorry I have seen it as the mainstream.Please someone send me a site to an MRA group that is not mainly talking about women in offensive terms. That isn't more discussion about anti feminism than dissussing the actual issues men have and what to do about it.And even then its then plopped in the feminist laps to do something .Just do a google search on MRA. Many men and women alike are getting the same vibe.

Moreover, men are diverse lot, so even if the group fares well on the whole (despite a shorter life span), individuals have vexing concerns, eg, fathers who lose child custody rights, military draftees. Let's not cull what's easy to pick on in some on the other side, & then generalize that to all.]

Please understand I am NOT generalizing "all men" .In the least.Its more like Most MRA members.Which even by Qhost admission is a "small group".But large enough that they are pretty well known if you are on the internet for any length of time.No matter how well meaning some of them are they have allowed their group to be infiltrated apparently overwhelmed with woman hater speakers.And anti feminist speech.So much so that is there reputation.
Oh and the fathers who lose custody of children? I have said repeatedly here and everywhere the default/assumption at the start should e 50/50 in a divorce.The men and women who are seriously working on that not just ******** about their ex wives and the courts are in fact making headway.

So despite all the drama between some players, we've much in common.

 

[freethinker44]

Yes it does in the same sense if I worked in an emergency room I will in fact address first and pay more attention to a person with head trauma over someone with a badly sprained ankle.They are both injuries but I would not give them the exact same amount of attention or urgency.

This analogy is flawed. A better analogy would be if two people came in with the exact same injuries and you decide which one to help based solely on their gender or race. Doesn't sound so noble when you put it like that huh? Actually sounds kind of sexist and racist.

 

[DallasApple]

This analogy is flawed. A better analogy would be if two people came in with the exact same injuries and you decide which one to help based solely on their gender or race. Doesn't sound so noble when you put it like that huh? Actually sounds kind of sexist and racist.

How is the analogy flawed when its my analogy?Wait how is my analogy flawed just because you disagree ?

 

[Revoltingest]

Slightly related breaking news!
Women’s groups blast Spitzer as unfit for comptroller because of hooker scandal - NYPOST.com

Women’s groups blasted Eliot Spitzer yesterday, saying his hooker scandal should disqualify him from being city comptroller.
“Eliot Spitzer is not above the law. Prostitution is not a victimless crime. Why vote for a guy who used women as objects?” asked Sonia Ossorio, president of the New York City chapter of the National Organization for Women.

The guy deserves scorn for violating the law & getting a pass because of his political power.
But this shows the authoritarian side of some feminist organizations who view women as
inherently victims, & seek to prosecute parties to a victimless crime. Of course, there are
also feminists who take a more liberal view.

 

[DallasApple]

Slightly related breaking news!
Women’s groups blast Spitzer as unfit for comptroller because of hooker scandal - NYPOST.com

The guy deserves scorn for violating the law & getting a pass because of his political power.
But this shows the authoritarian side of some feminist organizations who view women as
inherently victims, & seek to prosecute parties to a victimless crime. Of course, there are
also feminists who take a more liberal view.

Oh my God what horrible "discrimination and oppression" ! The poor man!

 

[DallasApple]

Its standards.Not "discrimination" ..This guy is not "entitled" for me to support him.Or elect him and keep him in office.

 

[freethinker44]

How is the analogy flawed when its my analogy?Wait how is my analogy flawed just because you disagree ?

Just because you thought it up doesn't mean it is automatically logical perfection.

And it isn't flawed because I disagree. It is flawed because favoring womens rights over mens rights isn't the same as helping a victim with the most severe injuries over less severely injured people. If men and women are fighting for the same rights, in a triage analogy they would have the same injuries. So your analogy is flawed, not because I say it is, but because they are two very different scenarios.

We can make it into a, kind of, math problem to illustrate.

a) Women are fighting for right (x). Men also want right (x).

You compare that to:

b) A triage situation, patient 1 needs help and has (x) injuries, but patient 2 needs the same help and has (y) injuries.

In situation a) x = x. In situation b) y =/= x. Therefore the situations are not comparable, thus the analogy fails.

 

[Alceste]

Some of those links where really crazy, but I think a constructive discussion or debate could be had if you made a thread (in the general debates section) talking about one specifical case at the time.

Most of them didn't work on my phone, but the two that did were completely misrepresented in his summary. One was an article about reducing prison sentences for women that didn't mention men at all, let alone suggest that feminists were fighting against reducing prison sentences for men, as he claimed. The other, about anonymity for people accused of sexual assault, he gave a very misleading summation of what actually happened. The measure was quietly slipped into a bill without discussion, and the opposition party kicked up a fuss. Politics as usual. The criticism is very understandable, too: why should people accused of sexual assault be the only alleged criminals to enjoy anonymity until conviction? That makes absolutely no sense to me. Either anonymity for everybody until conviction for every crime, or anonymity for nobody. THAT makes sense. Anonymity for alleged rapists, and ONLY alleged rapists? Totally ridiculous.

 

[Alceste]

I'm hesitant to post, since I have limited interest in the OP. But I'm not sure I agree with this. I've definitely read of First Nations 'laws' where social norms of the culture were maintained through violence, and specifically patriarchal violence against women.

BUT...that's off the top. The thing I can't be sure of is when said 'laws' were implemented, and whether it is pre-European contact or not, and what impact Euro settlement had on these laws.

Not the place for a long discussion on this, but I'd be interested in looking at gender roles and patriarchy/matriarchy in indigenous cultures.

My supposition (completely unsupported and off the top of my head) is that you could find decent evidence of patriarchy in primitive cultures. Whether this equates to an 'evolutionary trait' is not something I've ever even thought about, though. Not the kind of term I find helpful.

Suffice to say I support the rational mind over the evolutionary trait in any case, in a general sense.

Well, there definitely is a huge amount of regional variation. I've been focusing on Canada. Even in this one country there were dozens of distinct language groups and cultures, with a broad range of customs. Coastal tribes were generally pretty peaceful and egalitarian (on both coasts), especially compared to Europeans. The prairies and central Canada, maybe a little less so. During the fur trade, it seemed from a European perspective that the women did everything, but the ideal of feminine attractiveness in that culture was being really, really strong and capable. Don't know if that was because they had to carry everything, or where they carried everything to show off how sexy they were.

It's an interesting topic, that's for sure. Nice to take a little break. If you start a thread, let me know.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Well, there definitely is a huge amount of regional variation. I've been focusing on Canada. Even in this one country there were dozens of distinct language groups and cultures, with a broad range of customs. Coastal tribes were generally pretty peaceful and egalitarian (on both coasts), especially compared to Europeans. The prairies and central Canada, maybe a little less so. During the fur trade, it seemed from a European perspective that the women did everything, but the ideal of feminine attractiveness in that culture was being really, really strong and capable. Don't know if that was because they had to carry everything, or where they carried everything to show off how sexy they were.

It's an interesting topic, that's for sure. Nice to take a little break. If you start a thread, let me know.

Actually, the coastal thing is REALLY interesting. Never thought about it too much, and the majority of reading on First Nations that I've done is centred on the Plains tribes (or...the tribes that became the Plains tribes, perhaps).

But having lived in PNG, there is a clear and undeniable difference in culture between the coastal and mountainous regions. I suspect scarcity of resource is the factor there, but not sure how that would apply to a North American setting.

I'll start a thread some time in the next...I wanna say week, but I'll be honest and say 'year'.
Interesting topic. I'm becoming increasingly time poor. Stupid business is generating too much stupid work.

 

[crossfire]

Well here is the NOW protesting a bill that applies to male sperm donors who have openly identified the child as their own, who have accepted the child into their home, who have played active roles in the child's upbringing, and have supported the child emotionally and financially. The bill would allow these men to go to court to assert their paternity in the case that mother suddenly decides to no longer allow them access to the child.

There you go, an example of a feminist organization protesting a male issue fix. That's what you wanted, right?

Your link is bad. Here's the story you linked to:

Jason Patric custody case inspires sperm-donor-rights legislation - Los Angeles Times

I'm thinking that the backlash around this case just might be related to this one:

Kansas hits up sperm donor for child support - CNN.com

In both of these cases, the men involved are getting the short end of the stick. Unfortunately, common sense and discernment often gets tossed out of the window when political agendas are involved.

 

[Qhost]

Some of those links where really crazy, but I think a constructive discussion or debate could be had if you made a thread (in the general debates section) talking about one specifical case at the time.

Perhaps it's time for a MRA DIR? Or maybe we need to make more threads to show that there is interest...

Most of them didn't work on my phone, but the two that did were completely misrepresented in his summary. One was an article about reducing prison sentences for women that didn't mention men at all, let alone suggest that feminists were fighting against reducing prison sentences for men, as he claimed. The other, about anonymity for people accused of sexual assault, he gave a very misleading summation of what actually happened. The measure was quietly slipped into a bill without discussion, and the opposition party kicked up a fuss. Politics as usual. The criticism is very understandable, too: why should people accused of sexual assault be the only alleged criminals to enjoy anonymity until conviction? That makes absolutely no sense to me. Either anonymity for everybody until conviction for every crime, or anonymity for nobody. THAT makes sense. Anonymity for alleged rapists, and ONLY alleged rapists? Totally ridiculous.

If you were aware of the witch-hunts that are performed when someones name is published as an alleged rapist, then you would change your mind. It ruins peoples life, makes people scared to leave their house in fear of being attacked, they lose their jobs very frequently. It makes perfect sense that alleged rapists should be anon until a conviction - for their own safety. My summaries were not misleading. I stated something men desire to fix an issue, and then an example of feminist groups protesting something that would fix said issue. With the prison sentence link, I admit I should have found a better one, but it is an example of actively suggesting and advocating for an even further imbalance in the justice system. I consider advocating woman to not spend time in jail to be fighting against the existing imbalance. Thus the original points remain, I was asked to show examples of feminist groups protesting/blocking what would be progress for mens issues, and I have done just that.

I also believe the links are fixed now.

Please someone send me a site to an MRA group that is not mainly talking about women in offensive terms.

I have done this, why would you still ask the same question?

Oh my God what horrible "discrimination and oppression" ! The poor man!

You are putting words into his mouth and misrepresenting the discussion. A classic strawman. Please stop being so intellectually dishonest in debate, you continue to lose respect. Mocking opposing points as you do in such a knee-jerk reaction is sickening.

A couple things I'd like to discuss in an MRA DIR:
"Cougars" of age 35+ grooming and entrapping developing young men.
Fathers' rights and fatherhood in general in state child welfare systems.
Sexual harassment of young men by older female and male supervisors at work.

Qhost, I haven't been active or even aware of much in the way of MRA, but since it has come up, I'm more than ready to explore this.

I would love there to be a MRA DIR. I feel many people would find a home there where they cannot elsewhere.

Your link is bad. Here's the story you linked to:

Jason Patric custody case inspires sperm-donor-rights legislation - Los Angeles Times

I'm thinking that the backlash around this case just might be related to this one:

Kansas hits up sperm donor for child support - CNN.com

In both of these cases, the men involved are getting the short end of the stick. Unfortunately, common sense and discernment often gets tossed out of the window when political agendas are involved.

Thanks for the heads-up.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Most of them didn't work on my phone, but the two that did were completely misrepresented in his summary. One was an article about reducing prison sentences for women that didn't mention men at all, let alone suggest that feminists were fighting against reducing prison sentences for men, as he claimed. The other, about anonymity for people accused of sexual assault, he gave a very misleading summation of what actually happened. The measure was quietly slipped into a bill without discussion, and the opposition party kicked up a fuss. Politics as usual. The criticism is very understandable, too: why should people accused of sexual assault be the only alleged criminals to enjoy anonymity until conviction? That makes absolutely no sense to me. Either anonymity for everybody until conviction for every crime, or anonymity for nobody. THAT makes sense. Anonymity for alleged rapists, and ONLY alleged rapists? Totally ridiculous.

Hmm..I wonder.
But for the sake of argument, would you go along with anonymity for everybody until conviction for every crime?

 

[Revoltingest]

Oh my God what horrible "discrimination and oppression" ! The poor man!

It isn't about the ly'n cheat'n scumbag, Spitzer. (Unfair to bags of scum?)
It's about the fact that many feminists are socially authoritarian, & see women
in prostitution as inherently victims, no matter how free their decision to bimbize.
(Some think women can only be free when they give it away for free.)
Now, don't go & make me post an Eliot Spitzer limerick, woman!

 

[crossfire]

It's about the fact that many feminists are socially authoritarian

This is certainly true.

 

[Revoltingest]

This is certainly true.

Note: I don't begrudge social authoritarians for being who they are.
But it illustrates diversity of thought in the evolving movement we call "feminism".

 

[crossfire]

Note: I don't begrudge social authoritarians for being who they are.
But it illustrates diversity of thought in that diverse movement we call "feminism".

I'd be worried more about a lack of diversity of thought within any movement!

 

[Revoltingest]

I'd be worried more about a lack of diversity of thought within any movement!

If someone thinks exactly as I do, then I'm OK with uniformity of thought.
But otherwise, I agree with you. It keeps things dynamic & interesting.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Hmm..I wonder.
But for the sake of argument, would you go along with anonymity for everybody until conviction for every crime?

I would prefer the right to privacy be extended into law enforcement. It would be ridiculously difficult for high-profile people simply because of their existing media presence. But when somebody is charged with rape, murder, arson, etc., media will protect the identity of minors but not legal adults.