Feminism?

[huskeR32]

Listen up son

Oh, this will be fun.

I never got a job because of the color of my skin or my gender.

I didn't say that you did.

I got a good job because I went to school and worked hard.

I didn't say that you didn't.

I accept that there are disadvantages...

Then why are you so dismissive of them?

...but they are easily overcome.

Are they? How do you know?

Perhaps we should listen to those who actually face those disadvantages about how difficult they can be to overcome.

Success can be accomplished if you want to succeed.

Sure. And that road is longer and more obstacle-filled for some people.

For example, a person wanting to take out a loan to start a small business has a harder time doing so if they're not white.

And how is having racial quotas for minorities in schools and jobs NOT a form of discrimination?

I didn't say that they aren't.

--

Citation needed.

I suppose you can start with the lending article above, at least for the race aspect. On the gender front, the US Bureau of Labor provides a pretty clear picture of the wage gap between men and women in the US.

 

[Danoff]

I suppose you can start with the lending article above, at least for the race aspect. On the gender front, the US Bureau of Labor provides a pretty clear picture of the wage gap between men and women in the US.

The "wage gap" between men and women is not inherently evidence of sexism or disadvantaged people. I've posted a viable explanation for it that has neither.

 

[Spurgy 777]

I suppose you can start with the lending article above, at least for the race aspect. On the gender front, the US Bureau of Labor provides a pretty clear picture of the wage gap between men and women in the US.

Neither of which prove white privilege or male privilege. As the article you linked about lending pointed out, there is no evidence that the difference in difficulty is due to racist bias, and that it could be due to other factors not accounted for. Same applies for the gender pay gap, most of it can be factored out (pretty sure it goes down to around 4% after taking into account most factors) and what remains can't automatically be put down to sexism, it needs to be proven. Now yes, some % will be down to sexism and racism because there are racist and sexist people in the world who won't give you a job or a promotion or won't lend you as much money simply because of who you are, but I'd guess that it is a negligible factor in the difference.

 

[ryzno]

chutzpah

I haven't heard that since my grandfather was alive.

 

[huskeR32]

The "wage gap" between men and women is not inherently evidence of sexism or disadvantaged people. I've posted a viable explanation for it that has neither.

I'll grant that the entirety of the wage gap can't be explained by sexism alone, but I've yet to read any credible study that concludes sexism is entirely absent from the equation. And until it is, I don't think angry white men reducing all of feminism to "hatred of men" does anybody any good.

--

Neither of which prove white privilege or male privilege. As the article you linked about lending pointed out, there is no evidence that the difference in difficulty is due to racist bias, and that it could be due to other factors not accounted for.

It's just as foolhardy to ascribe it entirely to "other factors" as it is to ascribe it entirely to racism/sexism. The truth usually lives somewhere in the middle of the extremes. To the extent that either racism or sexism continues to be an obstacle for people, it's something that should be discussed. A callous dismissal of it from the group(s) who have long been on the enjoyable end is about the least effective method I can think of to working towards more equitable society for us all.

Same applies for the gender pay gap, most of it can be factored out (pretty sure it goes down to around 4% after taking into account most factors) and what remains can't automatically be put down to sexism, it needs to be proven.

Again, it can't automatically be put down to "other factors" either. Claiming that our society, which does have a sexist past, is now completely free of it would also "need to be proven."

Now yes, some % will be down to sexism and racism because there are racist and sexist people in the world who won't give you a job or a promotion or won't lend you as much money simply because of who you are, but I'd guess that it is a negligible factor in the difference.

As long as this is true, what's wrong with looking to address it? Why do so many react with anger to the suggestion that we try and do better?

 

[Danoff]

I'll grant that the entirety of the wage gap can't be explained by sexism alone, but I've yet to read any credible study that concludes sexism is entirely absent from the equation. And until it is, I don't think angry white men reducing all of feminism to "hatred of men" does anybody any good.

I posted an explanation in this thread that does not require sexism for any of it. Here. It comes down to motivation, if your spouse is highly likely to make money, you will be less motivated to chase every last dollar.

 

[huskeR32]

I posted an explanation in this thread that does not require sexism for any of it.

I know, I read it. And to be honest, it did adjust my viewpoint to be a bit more moderate on the topic. But what makes your explanation any more inherently true than the opposite extreme? As I already said, the truth usually lies somewhere in the murky middle.

 

[Danoff]

I know, I read it. And to be honest, it did adjust my viewpoint to be a bit more moderate on the topic. But what makes your explanation any more inherently true than the opposite extreme? As I already said, the truth usually lies somewhere in the murky middle.

I guess I don't start from the position that sexism is the cause until proven otherwise. I need all viable explanations that do not involve sexism to be debunked before I'll conclude that that's the cause. Just optimistic I guess, but also I don't want to throw that around as the conclusion until I'm sure.

 

[huskeR32]

I guess I don't start from the position that sexism is the cause until proven otherwise.

Seems a bit of a presupposition, but fair enough.

I need all viable explanations that do not involve sexism to be debunked before I'll conclude that that's the cause.

I differ in that I don't view sexism as a somehow unviable factor in the equation. Misogyny is undeniably a part of our past, so I don't see grounds for just dismissing it outright. Acting like it's gone before we know for sure that it is can only serve to alienate and anger those who are disadvantaged by it.

Just optimistic I guess, but also I don't want to throw that around as the conclusion until I'm sure.

I place my optimism on the idea that we are always capable of doing better if we're just willing to listen and talk about it.

 

[Danoff]

I differ in that I don't view sexism as a somehow unviable factor in the equation. Misogyny is undeniably a part of our past, so I don't see grounds for just dismissing it outright. Acting like it's gone before we know for sure that it is can only serve to alienate and anger those who are disadvantaged by it.

Also so far in my life my experience is about 9-1 in favor of seeing women benefit from workplace sexism vs. be held back. Most of the negative sexism I see is either perpetrated by women, or "benevolent" - which is not really benevolent. So personal experience is driving me a bit as well.

I place my optimism on the idea that we are always capable of doing better if we're just willing to listen and talk about it.

Listen and talk is different from assuming it's happening and taking action to correct based on that assumption.

 

[Spurgy 777]

I'll grant that the entirety of the wage gap can't be explained by sexism alone, but I've yet to read any credible study that concludes sexism is entirely absent from the equation. And until it is, I don't think angry white men reducing all of feminism to "hatred of men" does anybody any good.

--



It's just as foolhardy to ascribe it entirely to "other factors" as it is to ascribe it entirely to racism/sexism. The truth usually lives somewhere in the middle of the extremes. To the extent that either racism or sexism continues to be an obstacle for people, it's something that should be discussed. A callous dismissal of it from the group(s) who have long been on the enjoyable end is about the least effective method I can think of to working towards more equitable society for us all.



Again, it can't automatically be put down to "other factors" either. Claiming that our society, which does have a sexist past, is now completely free of it would also "need to be proven."



As long as this is true, what's wrong with looking to address it? Why do so many react with anger to the suggestion that we try and do better?

I agree that we can't automatically put it down to other factors and that was precisely my point that we don't know how much of the differences are down to racism/sexism, which is why you can't claim the gender pay gap, etc, are proof of male/white privilege.

I don't think people get angry about addressing racism and sexism still in society, they get angry about how much a lot of main stream feminists exaggerate the issues. Quite often you get the picture that the entire country is working against women and non-white people, with claims that the entire pay gap is due to sexism. And their solutions usually just involve discriminating against white men, by suggesting arbitrary quotas and other nonsense, that and they only really seem interested in proportional representation in well paying, relatively safe jobs, and never say anything about dirty, life threatening jobs that are overwhelmingly done by men.

 

[Com Fox]

So the movie The Red Pill has been released recently and I've heard about it with Feminists even trying to close it down here in Australia for having "mysongynistic" views.

While that parts a lie as the movie is about men's issues and how they aren't as "privilege" as what society thinks as well as some Feminists view on men's issue (though it might be a bit biased against the feminists since they chose people like Big Red). Fun Fact: this movie was actually made by a Feminist after she accidentally stumbled upon a MRA website after researching rape culture.

I really reccomend watching this movie, its great and I think its a bit tear-jerking, it was a great reminder to me why I am not a feminist or nor will I ever call myself one.

 

[jake2013guy]

So the movie The Red Pill has been released recently and I've heard about it with Feminists even trying to close it down here in Australia for having "mysongynistic" views.

While that parts a lie as the movie is about men's issues and how they aren't as "privilege" as what society thinks as well as some Feminists view on men's issue (though it might be a bit biased against the feminists since they chose people like Big Red). Fun Fact: this movie was actually made by a Feminist after she accidentally stumbled upon a MRA website after researching rape culture.

I really reccomend watching this movie, its great and I think its a bit tear-jerking, it was a great reminder to me why I am not a feminist or nor will I ever call myself one.

I watched the same film a few days ago and it was a really well done documentary. She highlighted how the MRA had reasons to exist and that it's nowhere near as popular due to being (In my opinion) shot down by the feminists on abuse and nothing factual. When 20 people is a "big turnout" and feminism is getting millions, I think that there is an obvious disparity.

Even when she interviewed the MRA members, they came with facts and kept calm. The guy that was being hurled abuse at and asked where he could go where she couldn't hurl abuse at him. The others using "rape culture" and things like that. I believe in freedom of speech as much as the next guy but when your arguments are neither thought through nor intelligent, don't chuck a load of buzzwords in there. I'm completely turned off by any argument when they use "rape culture," "cis," "misogynist" or "white/male privilege." .

Taking that article completely out of context (Beat a Woman month or something like that) was really a key point in the film and the article was a response to a female alternative and that highlights the problem. If men say something controversial x and a woman says something equally as controversial y, this example just proves that abuse will be hurled. Big Red and co shouted and hurled abuse at the MRA people and received no backlash. Shrieking and insulting at them. I would never want to even be associated with a movement like that and I was skeptical of it before watching that.

If it's about equality, why call it feminism? Why not call yourself egalitarians?

 

[Com Fox]

I watched the same film a few days ago and it was a really well done documentary. She highlighted how the MRA had reasons to exist and that it's nowhere near as popular due to being (In my opinion) shot down by the feminists on abuse and nothing factual. When 20 people is a "big turnout" and feminism is getting millions, I think that there is an obvious disparity.

Even when she interviewed the MRA members, they came with facts and kept calm. The guy that was being hurled abuse at and asked where he could go where she couldn't hurl abuse at him. The others using "rape culture" and things like that. I believe in freedom of speech as much as the next guy but when your arguments are neither thought through nor intelligent, don't chuck a load of buzzwords in there. I'm completely turned off by any argument when they use "rape culture," "cis," "misogynist" or "white/male privilege." .

Taking that article completely out of context (Beat a Woman month or something like that) was really a key point in the film and the article was a response to a female alternative and that highlights the problem. If men say something controversial x and a woman says something equally as controversial y, this example just proves that abuse will be hurled. Big Red and co shouted and hurled abuse at the MRA people and received no backlash. Shrieking and insulting at them. I would never want to even be associated with a movement like that and I was skeptical of it before watching that.

If it's about equality, why call it feminism? Why not call yourself egalitarians?

What I found funny was that Big Red said "start your own movement" when she was apart of a group of feminists that stopped an MRA meeting by pulling a fire alarm.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

If it's about equality, why call it feminism? Why not call yourself egalitarians?

You could ask the same question about men's rights activism. The answer for both would probably be much the same.

 

[Com Fox]

You could ask the same question about men's rights activism. The answer for both would probably be much the same.

Actually there is a difference.

Mens Rights Activism is clearly about what it says in the name, mens rights, it clear from the get-go that it is all about Mens issues, it has nothing to do with Women.

Feminism is not, especially since a lot of them have the mentality of "if you believe in gener equality than you're a feminist", there are a lot that still say that Feminism isn't just about Womens rights but about equality of the gender even though there is evidence for the contrary.

 

[jake2013guy]

Actually there is a difference.

Mens Rights Activism is clearly about what it says in the name, mens rights, it clear from the get-go that it is all about Mens issues, it has nothing to do with Women.

Feminism is not, especially since a lot of them have the mentality of "if you believe in gener equality than you're a feminist", there are a lot that still say that Feminism isn't just about Womens rights but about equality of the gender even though there is evidence for the contrary.

Exactly. They don't call themselves masculinists or whatever the term is. They call themselves MRAs which is about men's rights. They don't call themselves leading equality and it wasn't said by them in the film which is why I haven't picked up on anything of the like.

What I found funny was that Big Red said "start your own movement" when she was apart of a group of feminists that stopped an MRA meeting by pulling a fire alarm.

Absolutely. Forgot about this completely but it points out the aggressive nature of modern feminism that people don't want to be a part of despite having millions of followers.

 

[huskeR32]

Exactly. They don't call themselves masculinists or whatever the term is. They call themselves MRAs which is about men's rights.

Not sure that's really all that different.

You're really stretching here to avoid answering a perfectly logical question from @TRGTspecialist

 

[Com Fox]

Not sure that's really all that different.

You're really stretching here to avoid answering a perfectly logical question from @TRGTspecialist

It wasn't even a question, I see no question mark or any other indication of a question, besides:

Actually there is a difference.

Mens Rights Activism is clearly about what it says in the name, mens rights, it clear from the get-go that it is all about Mens issues, it has nothing to do with Women.

Feminism is not, especially since a lot of them have the mentality of "if you believe in gener equality than you're a feminist", there are a lot that still say that Feminism isn't just about Womens rights but about equality of the gender even though there is evidence for the contrary.

 

[PeterJB]

My favourite part of the criticisms of The Red Pill is that most of the feminists criticising it admit to not even having watched it!

Feminism is nuts. I'll never be able to take them seriously as long as they keep glorifying Islam.

 

[huskeR32]

It wasn't even a question, I see no question mark or any other indication of a question

Okay.

You're really stretching here to avoid answering addressing a perfectly logical question counterpoint from @TRGTspecialist

Better?

besides:

That doesn't address it either.

 

[Com Fox]

Okay.



Better?



That doesn't address it either.

He says that calling Feminism, Feminism when it wants "equality" is the same reason MRA call themselves MRA, which is not the case as Feminism and MRA are not the same just different genders. MRA isn't the male version of Feminism.

 

[jake2013guy]

Not sure that's really all that different.

You're really stretching here to avoid answering a perfectly logical question from @TRGTspecialist

Was a statement where he said that you "could" ask the question but I see that's already been noted.

Yes, I see where he is coming from. However, the MRA does not. In fact, here's a quote from the http://mensrightsassociation.org about page.

Men’s Rights Association (MRA) is an organization whose sole purpose is to fight for the elusive Men’s Rights. MRA is very revolutionary in its concepts.

I see nothing regarding equality here. What I see is a focus on male rights. Their achievements (As quoted below) follow the same pattern.

Below are some of the important work done by MRA

• Provide free legal help and counseling to Men in distress.
• Create awareness about anti-male laws and attitude.
• Remove negativity against male, and spread positive thoughts.
• Work towards reducing suicides of male.
• Sensitize law making bodies about Men’s issues.
• Help reduce violence against Men.
• Help Men live a fulfilling life.
• Work towards a healthier life for Men.
• Celebrate various events connected to male gender, e.g. International Men’s Day

Yes, you can argue that it follows the same initial ideas as feminism and I agree with that. However, they do not hide behind a definition based on equality because there isn't one stating equality.

OED defines masculism as "An advocate of the rights or needs of men" which is what many argue is what feminism should be defined as replacing men for women of course. Feminism is defined as "The advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes" and that's where some of the issue stems from allowing feminists to hide behind this.

I wouldn't be surprised if people would be happy to change the definition to become essentially the female version of the masculism definition.

 

[Northstar]

Better?

That doesn't address it either.

His answer made sense to me, perhaps you are just stretching things because you want to take issue with it?

Feminism is not about equality, yet generally claims to be.
MRA is not about equality, nor do they claim to be.

There's nothing wrong with feminism, females have every right to fight for various rights they feel they are being deprived of. I see no reason it should be any different for men. However neither group should try arguing that they support "equality" as it's a lie on top of being just overall impossible.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

Mens Rights Activism is clearly about what it says in the name, mens rights, it clear from the get-go that it is all about Mens issues

They call themselves MRAs which is about men's rights.

And why would men's rights issues be fought for? To achieve.......?

 

[Northstar]

And why would men's rights issues be fought for? To achieve.......?

Because some people apparently think we should have none...

I guess I think it's ridiculous that the father by default only gets visitation in a divorce. I guess I find it ridiculous that only males have to sign up for selective service in the U.S. I guess I find it terrifying that my entire life could be destroyed by a rape accusation even if it's fabricated. Or that people don't even believe that a female can rape a male. Plus there far less serious things like males not being allowed on female sports teams and various social stigma's.

Plus all kinds of other crap I don't feel like listing right this second.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

Because some people apparently think we should have none...

I wasn't questioning whether men's rights issues should be fought for, I was asking @jake2013guy why he thinks those issues are fought for. Apologies if that wasn't clear.

But:

I guess I think it's ridiculous that the father by default only gets visitation in a divorce. I guess I find it ridiculous that only males have to sign up for selective service in the U.S. I guess I find it terrifying that my entire life could be destroyed by a rape accusation even if it's fabricated. Or that people don't even believe that a female can rape a male. Plus there far less serious things like males not being allowed on female sports teams and various social stigma's.

That suggests a pursuit of equality* in those areas - which is exactly what I was getting at.


(*of opportunity, not outcome, to be specific)

 

[prisonermonkeys]

They call themselves MRAs which is about men's rights.

No, it's not. These "men's rights" groups are usually only interested in one thing - undoing womens' rights. They feel threatened by women and want to return to the days when men were indisputably the driving force in society. How can you call them interested in equality when some of them (the more extreme ones) advocate the repealing of laws around marital rape?

 

[Northstar]

How can you call them interested in equality when some of them (the more extreme ones) advocate the repealing of laws around marital rape?

Don't you usually argue against judging an entire group based on a few people on the extreme end?

What rule is this one @Imari?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Don't you usually argue against judging an entire group based on a few people on the extreme end?

I do, but the point that I am trying to make is that "men's rights groups" advocate something very different to feminism and that @jake2013guy is wrong to suggest that they are arguing for equality the way feminists do. Spend half an hour on any "men's rights" forum and it will become apparent.