Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Loud Whispers]

-snip-

I really didn't hear a lot of that...

Then you weren't listening.

I wouldn't put it beyond myself ~o.o~

[Leafsnail]

Dear god please summarise.  I don't want to listen to 8 minutes of boring misogyny (2 minutes was enough to tell me it isn't ever going to get interesting).

[Agdune]

There isn't much to summarise. He bitches about things and makes some generalisations, throws in some Obama hate for whatever reason... to be completely honest most of it was so unremarkable I forgot it almost immediately. Anything else was just pointless ranting.

Yeah, nothing much to the "essay". Still, I'd be interested in hearing some differing opinions on what I wrote earlier. If anything it's at least more coherent than the 'brother unite and stop those feminist lefties' guy.

edit: Also why the hell are people opposed to transcripts nowdays? Seems like every fucking thing that gets linked to nowdays is just a video clip with absoloutely no option of just reading it. Not all of us love hearing people fuming into microphones. I'm a visual learner and don't really remember all that much of what I hear, only what I see or read.

[Glowcat]

Yeah, nothing much to the "essay". Still, I'd be interested in hearing some differing opinions on what I wrote earlier.

Men do tend to suffer a lot due to social stigma surrounding certain behaviors but all the feminists I've heard oppose that kind of oppression as well. Those who attack men for being effeminate likewise denigrate the female as being weak and inferior, associating female roles with other undesirable traits. In many places where homosexuality in condemned, the active partner is given more leniency than the passive partner because he is seen as not deviating as strongly as the latter from male social roles. Most homophobic hatred is directed at the "flamboyant" gays. Feminists tie it all together under one word which refers to an ancient model of family which has perpetrated much of the inequity in the world: The Patriarchy. Oligarchical units where the oldest male is dominant. Expectations are placed on how men and women should act and behave in accordance to these values and end up hurting the many for the benefit of the few.

[palsch]

I hate radical feminism as much as any sane person (radical feminism being a specific category of feminist ideology; the militant branch who DO think all men are evil and are serious when they say they want genetic engineering to make men obsolete so that all men can be euthanised without the species dying)

Just to be clear, this isn't the radical feminist theory which is today core to most feminist schools of thought.

Radical feminism is, at it's core, based on the concept of the patriarchy. The idea that men have structured society men having authority over women and that inherent power structures greatly favour men. The term radical comes from the civil rights movement, whose methods and structures were borrowed by certain groups of 60's feminists. Most of the serious social pushes in feminism came out of the radical movement, including things like the Equal Rights Amendment and abortion rights movement, broadening the focus of earlier groups that had concentrated on economic matters.

I doubt you will meet any feminist who doesn't hold views representative of at least some factions of the radical movement, especially in the more popular modern mainstream feminist movement. The movement has evolved (especially on issues of sexuality and gender identity), but many of the core ideas are now fundamental building blocks of the wider social justice movement.

The term does not apply to fringe cranks. While there were radical elements who advocated replacing the patriarchy with a matriarchy that is not representative of the radical movement as a whole and the term is way too useful as a political label to marginalise it that way.

[RevolutionaryDorf]

Radical feminism being a specific category of feminist ideology; the militant branch who DO think all men are evil and are serious when they say they want genetic engineering to make men obsolete so that all men can be euthanised without the species dying)

This is a strawman, plain and simple. I suggest that people actually learn about REAL, credible feminism (not the conservative-spread stereotypes meant to support their social values). Here's a good start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

The idea of misandry is so absurd.
It's a little like "reverse racism". That somehow, the dominant group is being so cruelly oppressed and held back in society by some group attempting to achieve equal rights. It's such a self-serving concept, and shows a fundamental inability to see the context-- women have been pushed into subordinate roles for HUNDREDS OF YEARS, and there are still all sorts of attitudes that hurt them: look at Rush Limbaugh's 'slut' comments. There are problems with male sexual identity, but for some reason women are blamed, as if equal rights are something we have to divide like a pie.

Another thing: why are feminists blamed for male-identity issues? Male gender roles existed long before feminism did. The "anti-misandry" movement latches onto feminists as some sort of cultural bogeywoman, talking about them in hushed whispers without ever actually researching what feminism is or talking to one. Their irrational fear of the mythical "man hating feminist" gives much more insight into their own personal bias and insecurity than the real issues at hand.

[Eagleon]

Radical feminism being a specific category of feminist ideology; the militant branch who DO think all men are evil and are serious when they say they want genetic engineering to make men obsolete so that all men can be euthanised without the species dying)

This is a strawman, plain and simple. I suggest that people actually learn about REAL, credible feminism (not the conservative-spread stereotypes meant to support their social values). Here's a good start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

The idea of misandry is so absurd.
It's a little like "reverse racism". That somehow, the dominant group is being so cruelly oppressed and held back in society by some group attempting to achieve equal rights. It's such a self-serving concept, and shows a fundamental inability to see the context-- women have been pushed into subordinate roles for HUNDREDS OF YEARS, and there are still all sorts of attitudes that hurt them: look at Rush Limbaugh's 'slut' comments. There are problems with male sexual identity, but for some reason women are blamed, as if equal rights are something we have to divide like a pie.

You're confusing oppression with prejudice. Racism (and misogyny, misandry, etc) is a form of prejudice, expressible by anyone, no matter their social situation. Poor people are a socially disadvantaged group - does that mean they can't be racist? You don't have to be oppressed to be affected by prejudice, and the effects it has are crippling to a society all by itself.

I also don't think Agdune denies men have a large role in maintaining problems with male sexual identity. He's merely saying that the feminist movement had nothing to say about male identity, and the shifts it created in common power structures left many men searching and alienated. And if you haven't met women who hate or distrust men, you haven't been trying to make friends with them - for most, the preconception if you're male is that you want something from them. If that's not prejudice, the term is meaningless.

[Kilroy the Grand]

No offense but this is the... fourth? thread you've begun on the subject of "male oppression" and I'm beggining to perceive an agenda

Oh, you mean pissed? Yeah I'm pretty pissed. I'm not against women bettering themselves, I'm not against equality. In fact I'm for equality, equality for everyone. But what do I know? You don't see men walking around saying "that women's center should be shut down, it's just a bunch or bitches painting thier nails", but it is perfectly okay for people to do the opposite.

On May 1st, my friend Josh Dehaas wrote an article on this website about a Simon Fraser University student named Keenan Midgley who wanted to start a “Men’s Centre” to complement his university’s “Women’s Centre”–the kind that exists on nearly every Canadian university campus today.

Like the women’s centre, the men’s centre would provide a safe space for its respective gender, one in which to discuss (to quote former SFSS president Jeff McCann) “men’s issues and mental wellness and all the different things that come along with that.” As Keenan Midgley pointed out to Dehaas, suicides, alcoholism, and drug use, are more prominent among young men than they are among women.  Not that it’s a competition.

Or maybe it is…

That’s the impression I got from the video below, created, I suspect, by some of the most unsympathetic and over-educated people on the planet (I actually lost count of how many times one of the interviewees uses the phrase “hegemonic patriarchy.”) At no time did Midgley or McCann (who was on the CBC this morning promoting his cause) suggest that their proposed men’s centre would curb women’s rights or extract funds from the school’s existing women’s centre, but the people in this video—and those opposed to the very idea of a men’s centre in general—are under the impression that a safe space for men is a dangerous place for women. Or as some of the video’s contributors warn, “a highly masculinized space… a room with a PS3 and a bunch of douche bags playing video games”…

Radical feminism being a specific category of feminist ideology; the militant branch who DO think all men are evil and are serious when they say they want genetic engineering to make men obsolete so that all men can be euthanised without the species dying)

This is a strawman, plain and simple. I suggest that people actually learn about REAL, credible feminism (not the conservative-spread stereotypes meant to support their social values). Here's a good start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

The idea of misandry is so absurd.
It's a little like "reverse racism". That somehow, the dominant group is being so cruelly oppressed and held back in society by some group attempting to achieve equal rights. It's such a self-serving concept, and shows a fundamental inability to see the context-- women have been pushed into subordinate roles for HUNDREDS OF YEARS, and there are still all sorts of attitudes that hurt them: look at Rush Limbaugh's 'slut' comments. There are problems with male sexual identity, but for some reason women are blamed, as if equal rights are something we have to divide like a pie.

The thing is, society still treats women as if they are poor delicate little flowers, in need of constant protection. Feminists want "equal" rights, they want the perks with none of the down sides. If a woman hits me, assaults me, want to know what society expects me to do? Take it like a man. If a woman accuses me of rape, without any proof, society will overwhelmingly take her side, even withholding information that could proof my innocence. Do you see any feminists saying women should have to sign up for the draft? No, you don't.

The idea of misandry is so absurd.
It's a little like "reverse racism".

Yes, the idea that people can discriminate against males, or white people is completely absurd and never happens, I feel just ever so privileged.

[Leafsnail]

Why do you keep linking boring videos from this guy.  He's a guy who rants against feminists not a source for citation.  If you do then at least summarise the videos and explain what their significance is rather than expecting us to watch these long incoherent rants.

[kaijyuu]

For the record, this sort of stuff is probably best in the progressive thread, not in a new topic.

You wanna push for men's rights? Go for it. But let's not make a new topic all the time. Also give your own opinions on what you link, when you link it, rather than just giving us something and saying "discuss."

[Kilroy the Grand]

]What the one about Mary Kellett? Sorry if 1:49 seconds was too long for you, or listening to a video of an ex-counselor talking about how poorly men where treated.

ELLSWORTH, Maine — A Blue Hill man is arguing in court that charges against him of criminal threatening, terrorizing and assault should be dismissed because, contrary to what prosecutors told the victim in his case before trial, he did not kill his previous wife.

Keovilaisack Sayasane, 44, is accused of threatening to harm his current wife last summer with a hammer and ax at their home on Kingdom Road. Earlier this month, Sayasane filed an appeal with the state supreme court arguing that, because of the inaccurate information and the effect it had on his current wife, he cannot get a fair trial.
http://bangordailynews.com/2011/08/18/news/hancock/blue-hill-man-seeks-case-dismissal-over-bad-information-from-prosecutors/

I've only posted 2 videos, good job on ignoring everything else though.

For the record, this sort of stuff is probably best in the progressive thread, not in a new topic.

You wanna push for men's rights? Go for it. But let's not make a new topic all the time. Also give your own opinions on what you link, when you link it, rather than just giving us something and saying "discuss."

The topic is already made, and I'm slow to start.

[Loud Whispers]

But people (largely men) look at feminists and go 'OH MAH GAWD! THEM ARE BITCHES THAT WANT ENSLAVEZ US MEN!'

Contrary to popular belief, most people don't point at feminists and shout 'OH MAH GAWD! THEM BITCHES WANT TO ELSAVEZ US MEN AND TOOK AR JAWBS!' unless they're trying to do what's on the tin. And when it comes down to occasions when it is what's on the tin, you get an equal level of disgust from both sexes. Seen the femithiest blogspot?

[RevolutionaryDorf]

The thing is, society still treats women as if they are poor delicate little flowers, in need of constant protection.

...um, yeah, those are exactly the sort of gender roles that feminists want ended.

Feminists want "equal" rights, they want the perks with none of the down sides.

Strawman. You have built an enemy in your mind, one that does not reflect reality.

If a woman hits me, assaults me, want to know what society expects me to do? Take it like a man.

You keep citing the same youtube user: one with a clear agenda. "The Happy Misogynist"? That is hardly credible.

Do you see any feminists saying women should have to sign up for the draft? No, you don't.

How is that the fault of feminism? The reason that females are exempt from the draft is because people believed that women were unfit to serve in the military. And besides, you're just plain wrong: The feminist National Organization for Women passed a resolution in 1980, stating: "We oppose any registration or draft that excludes women as an unconstitutional denial of rights to both young men and women". More and more it becomes clear that you have no idea what feminism really is.

Yes, the idea that people can discriminate against males, or white people is completely absurd and never happens, I feel just ever so privileged.

Did I even use the world privilege once in my post?

[Leafsnail]

]What the one about Mary Kellett? Sorry if 1:49 seconds was too long for you, or listening to a video of an ex-counselor talking about how poorly men where treated.

Well apart from them being boring the other part of the problem is that we were only hearing his side of the story.  Unlike an actual news article there was no attempt to inform, just an attempt to use the story to put across his agenda.  If you think the news story is interesting then link a news story about it and provide your analysis.

ELLSWORTH, Maine — A Blue Hill man is arguing in court that charges against him of criminal threatening, terrorizing and assault should be dismissed because, contrary to what prosecutors told the victim in his case before trial, he did not kill his previous wife.

Keovilaisack Sayasane, 44, is accused of threatening to harm his current wife last summer with a hammer and ax at their home on Kingdom Road. Earlier this month, Sayasane filed an appeal with the state supreme court arguing that, because of the inaccurate information and the effect it had on his current wife, he cannot get a fair trial.
http://bangordailynews.com/2011/08/18/news/hancock/blue-hill-man-seeks-case-dismissal-over-bad-information-from-prosecutors/

Well... that's a start.  Now we know it's a thing that happened a year ago.  Can you now explain how this ties into the "male rights" theme that this thread is developing?  It seems to be a case of prosecutorial misconduct screwing up a trial.

I've only posted 2 videos, good job on ignoring everything else though.

You posted three videos in that post alone (one of them framed by an opinion piece), I advise you to recount.

Other than that there was a broken link and a site that seems to be providing useful support for male victims of domestic violence.  I'm not sure what I'm meant to say about either.

[Glowcat]

But people (largely men) look at feminists and go 'OH MAH GAWD! THEM ARE BITCHES THAT WANT ENSLAVEZ US MEN!'

Contrary to popular belief, most people don't point at feminists and shout 'OH MAH GAWD! THEM BITCHES WANT TO ELSAVEZ US MEN AND TOOK AR JAWBS!' unless they're trying to do what's on the tin. And when it comes down to occasions when it is what's on the tin, you get an equal level of disgust from both sexes. Seen the femithiest blogspot?

No, people, especially those who fight for "Men's Rights", do demonize feminists. That Femitheist Blogspot is so obviously a troll that it's painful you believe it to be real.

To prevent the violence of men incensed by their testosterone... she wanted to kill and murder people. Do you really think that this not either a) a troll or b) somebody so insane that treating their positions seriously is ludicrous? It is so clearly constructed with such absurd self-deprecating humor that only somebody who goes 'OH MAH GAWD! THEM BITCHES WANT TO ELSAVEZ US MEN AND TOOK AR JAWBS!' would take it seriously.