Print

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

[DJ]

Just dismissing everyone out of hand like that is just plain prejudiced IMO, and it implies that men don't have any real discrimination issues.

[Ogdibus]

.

[Vector]

No, what it implies is that much like I don't implicitly trust anyone who identifies as a second-wave feminist, I don't implicitly trust people who identify with the MRA label.  And I question the wisdom of their doing so, given the vast majority of people who do that.

If some group exists that calls itself an MRA group and does not have those features, then I will gladly offer a retraction.

MensLine Australia. While suicide rates are higher among men here, it was found they were receiving the least amount of mental help services. As such, Mens Help Line, later rebranded MensLine was established to provide support to men who could not find it otherwise and help fight stigma that seeking help for emotional problems in men is a sign of weakness. They save many lives each year and identify as a mens rights group.

Well, good.  I'm really glad they do that and that someone is reclaiming the title from those shitbags who usually grab it.

MRA's have acquired a reputation similar to that of White Pride groups.  There are plenty of people that fight for men's rights and that celebrate white heritage, and they rarely get associated with these labels.

Yeah.  This one.  Thank you.

[Max White]

Well if that is what you call a retraction, I am satisfied.

Actually this might, once again be a cultural difference thing. I'm not going to say Australia doesn't have its problems with sexism, but they are far less institutionalized. We have more rational, productive groups than hate groups. "Mens Rights" is an issue rather than a shield for bigotry, as a general rule.
I don't know what it is like in the USA, but it seems it isn't as bad here.


Might be why I consider "The Patriarchy" such a joke. The head of state and richest Australian are both women. True, after that the list is somewhat slim for women, especially as far as wealth goes, but the point is that it isn't impossible for a woman to make it. There is no patriarchy.

[Vector]

*shrug*

Look, the MRA people I know of happily call men who don't conform to a particular ideal "manginas."  They don't just hate women.  They hate men, too.  I have a very hard time calling these people anything other than "fuckwad."  I'm glad if someone else just happens to use that name and does good work, but I question the choice to continue to use that title when there are so many others that aren't overwhelmingly associated with the aforementioned fellows.

I don't know what it is like in the USA, but it seems it isn't as bad here.

Possibly not... I really wouldn't know.

Might be why I consider "The Patriarchy" such a joke. The head of state and richest Australian are both women. True, after that the list is somewhat slim for women, especially as far as wealth goes, but the point is that it isn't impossible for a woman to make it. There is no patriarchy.

Yeah, well.  As aforementioned, things are different here.

[DJ]

I'm sure that the early feminists met with similar dismissal, and when people discussed feminism they insisted that the crazies are the only kind there is. As far as MRA is concerned, yeah, I've seen a fair share of crazies on YouTube, but I've also seen quite a few perfectly reasonable people.

[Max White]

I'm pretty sure current feminists get met with the same dismissal these days. It is why I get so annoyed when people claiming to be feminists say some stupid and hateful things.
You would not believe just how rational some people become when they don't think they are talking to a feminist, but rather a "normal" person. The phrase "Well yea, I totally agree that is a problem!" or something similar tends to come up. But then when somebody introduces themselves as a feminist suddenly "FUCK RATIONALITY! I GOTTA PROTECT MA MANHOOD!"

[Loud Whispers]

Unless you've got evidence of feminists literally advocating rounding up men and sticking them in gas chambers, I'd recommend not using that word, yes.

We really don't need to do that. All you who tumblr, let no hope survive.

I've had folks at the dinner table randomly bring up the fact that they don't think a woman can withdraw consent mid-act.  People don't have that good of an understanding, unfortunately.  There's lots of folks, also, who think that folks are obligated to have sex in a relationship on demand, too.

Legally obligated even.

This is one from Einstein:

"He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be a part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder."

What's so abhorrent, other than the vehement words? He is criticizing the seemed waste of intelligence on war.

I've always wondered if Einstein actually said this or not it was just something attributed to him. He helped develop the atomic bomb and encouraged it be used, so it'd seem pretty hypocritical for him to say something like this. You could argue humanity would have been better off if Einstein only ever used his spinal cord as well.

Einstein only signed the proposal to give it publicity, he didn't work on it.

Loud whisper's, you were saying across the ocean to a American, on a board primarily consisting of Americans followed i think by the British. Hence statement.

The latter part about exploitation was what got me confused. I was talking about how it's men who are expected to never speak their problems, as a stoic, silent sex. Of course, now it's increasingly the stoic, suicide sex...

[Hár]

Look, the MRA people I know of happily call men who don't conform to a particular ideal "manginas."  They don't just hate women.  They hate men, too.  I have a very hard time calling these people anything other than "fuckwad." 

Change it around, and sounds like a lot of feminists. All men are pigs, telling other women that they aren't feminist enough in a certain way, clear hatred for any one that doesn't share each nuance of their beliefs, etc.

Fact is, women make up 60% of college students, and not because we magically discovered that women are smarter as a whole. There are a host of societal issues harming men today, but some rather ugly people that identify as feminists don't want those problems addressed. I won't call those feminists fuckwads, but if they have no concern left over to spare for men's problems in society, they are ugly spiteful creatures indeed.

[Max White]

Legally obligated even.

Oh you are fucking with me. There is no way that is the entire story. Something must have been mistranslated.
I mean seriously? Seriously? Seriously? I'm not even annoyed, just in disbelief. That can't be a thing. No judge in their right mind would basically open the door to anybody being able to demand sex of their spouse any time or else get sued.

[Ogdibus]

.

[Loud Whispers]

Legally obligated even.

Oh you are fucking with me. There is no way that is the entire story. Something must have been mistranslated.
I mean seriously? Seriously? Seriously? I'm not even annoyed, just in disbelief. That can't be a thing. No judge in their right mind would basically open the door to anybody being able to demand sex of their spouse any time or else get sued.

Not demand, expect.

[Hár]

"It should also be noted that the national male-female ratio for 18-24 year olds is actually 51-49, meaning there are more (traditionally) college-aged males than females."

Older women are going to college more than older men.  I'm not sure what the statistic is supposed to reveal, though, particularly in the context of hating men.

Reading comprehension failure. You clearly didn't get the meaning in the article right. There are more college-aged males, but not college-attending males. That continues to be 60-40 in favor of women as I just said. Be more careful when reading next time.

Now that we've moved past the misreading, clearly something is harming male school performance. The point is that men face issues in society, just like women, but have no voices willing to speak for them... People who try to silence and dismiss any advocacy of men's issues at all in the name of winning a zero-sum game are very ugly-spirited.

And no, men are not simply stupider.

[Frumple]

If you're actually looking for a reason (if undoubtedly not all the reasons, of course*), you might check out the employment rate. (2010 numbers... would be interesting to see what latest numbers are, but that's close enough, really.**) It's not uncommon for folks that can't get work to go back to school, and when there's a pretty noticeable gap between male and female employment rates, well...

And to preempt it, no, you (general you, to everyone) don't want to be looking at unemployment in this case. Unemployed is a specific thing which leaves out quite a bit of the picture. What you particularly want to compare is the labor force and not in labor force numbers; that would include the total employment numbers and the folks who are not currently looking for work but are, say, going through training. Also nets in stay-at-home folks, but yeah.

60-40 split starts looking a bit less unsurprising when you see a 58-70 split going the other direction. Less males in school because, hey, they don't need it quite as much.

If you want a more detailed picture, you could check the data here. Bounce back and forth between the male and female data sets, particularly in relation to total numbers in the workforce vs. total numbers at varying levels of education. What holds true across nearly all of them (with the only exception being at the doctoral level, and then by less than a percent?)? A higher percentile of males end up working, when compared to the total number of individuals who obtain that particular level of education. Interesting bit: You don't really start seeing a noticeable gap close until you start getting into masters+, and even then there's a ~10% difference between professional degree holders in the workforce (though only ~4% in masters and, as noted, <1% in female favor with doctorates). You want to account for stay at home stuff, compare across 'not in labor force'. At least at first glance, no, the numbers wouldn't explain the difference.

Now, can solid conclusions be drawn from that? Well, about as solid as those drawn from the difference in college enrollment, hrm.

*As with all this kinda' shit, multivariate problem is multivariate like goddamn.
**Actually, they've got the 2012 numbers up, silly me. Let's take a gander... E: Looks like the trend's mostly exaggerated. Women now have a notable lead in doctoral job acquirement, have closed the gap a bit on professional level, and made some gains in the some college bracket, but are otherwise worse off.

[kaijyuu]

Is anyone ACTUALLY claiming men don't have social problems negatively affecting them?

I don't think I've actually seen any misandrists here, so some of the vitriol and heightened emotions might be ill applied.