The mens right movements exist because feminism exists. You have to have a balance. Now let me make this clear, I agree that women should be equal in every way to men (except maybe physical sport for obvious reasons). But the mens rights movements exist because of the unending hypocrisy in the feminist movement. Sure they claim they want equality and they make a fuss (and rightly so) when there is prejudice against women, but, I have never heard a feminist argue over the fact that men get more jail time for the same crime than women. Neither have I heard them calling for child custody to be equal.
Have a look at the amazing atheist, one of his videos shows a group of women who interrupt a mens rights meeting by pulling the fire alarm. Although he is quite rude and brash, he has the right idea.
And if any of you were thinking of calling me a misogynist (which I have been called in the past) just remember, just because I don't agree with how feminism is getting its job done, doesn't mean I hate women.

---

(November 6, 2013 at 8:20 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Perhaps men are afraid that, as women more and more move into positions of power and influence, they'll undo all the gains that male-dominated society has achieved: over-stocked nuclear arsenals,

Hey, an uneasy true between countries isn't bad considering the alternative.
If women ruled the world, there wouldn't be any wars, but none of the countries would be talking to each other.

(November 6, 2013 at 8:20 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: global pollution, chemical weapons, execrable film and television, the notion that professional sports are important, all that sort of thing.

Boru

I don't think men have 100% of the blame for these.

What men should get more concerned about and march for is more proactive healthcare/screenings.

(November 6, 2013 at 8:46 pm)Captain Colostomy Wrote: I can pee standing up. (All the superiority I require.)

I can pee standing up, too. It's just not very controllable, so get out of my fucking way.

(November 6, 2013 at 9:34 pm)Zazzy Wrote:

(November 6, 2013 at 8:46 pm)Captain Colostomy Wrote: I can pee standing up. (All the superiority I require.)

I can pee standing up, too. It's just not very controllable, so get out of my fucking way.

I reckon your snow writing looks horrendous.

Well I can see why there is a men's rights movement, especially with the biase in the work place and courts, Here in Canada this could easily happen to you.
Say you run a restaurant, that you built from the ground for 20 years. now one day one of your wait staff moves away so you need to hire someone new. So this girl cute little girl from a local university. Now right from the start this girl is a issue, she crews order and is rude to the other staff and after a few weeks you decide enough is enough and she has to go. So you fire her. then what?
Well what happens if she goes to the labor board and claims that you tried to suck your cock in the office, even if it is a total lie?
Here in Canada your ruined by that, because even if the labor board does not shut down your restaurant, the legal fees very well could and you even if your found innocent you will likely be called a pervert for the rest of your life. Also you better hope your family believes you when you say she's lying because it can ruin your family life too.

Hi.

I'm a supporter of men's rights. I think men should be treated fairly in society. I'm also a feminist. I think women should be treated fairly in society. I actually prefer the term "egalitarian". I think everyone, regardless of their gender, age, skin color, etc should be treated fairly in society.

There are plenty of ways in which women are still at a disadvantage, however there are also plenty of ways men are too. For instance, men almost never get as much custody as women in divorces. Men almost always get harsher jail sentences than women for the same crimes. Men who see a lost child are afraid to approach said child for fear of being accused of trying to abduct them by society. A man who is raped by a woman has a social stigma against him, to the point where many people still believe that male rape is impossible unless it is anal penetration. The whole "no means no" only applies to women apparently. Conversely, a man accused of rape is more likely to be thought of as guilty before the trial has even started, and even if they are found not guilty, they can have a social stigma for the rest of their lives.

Please don't think all MRAs are misogynists. It's exactly the same as thinking all feminists are the man-hating kind, the "feminazis" if you will. The MRM focuses on men's rights, but does not exclude members from supporting women's rights. There are legitimate issues facing both women and men that need to be solved.

(November 6, 2013 at 9:11 pm)Rationalman Wrote: Sure they claim they want equality and they make a fuss (and rightly so) when there is prejudice against women, but, I have never heard a feminist argue over the fact that men get more jail time for the same crime than women. Neither have I heard them calling for child custody to be equal.

Have you been looking? There's another amazing atheist video- I can't remember which it is right now, but I'll look it up when I get home- that has a feminist woman reading from an article (in a very hostile tone, I'll say right now) that argues that the feminist movement, free from the extremes of radical feminism, strives for all of those things.

This is an unfortunate part of human nature, both the Men's Rights jerks and the Radfem assholes; we see an issue, and for some of us the first instinct is to dig in one's heels and go for the extreme the moment you're met with opposition. Your position ceases to be about the issue, but about being correct. You (the general you, not you specifically, Rationalman ) get too invested, to the point where conceding any point at all feels like an outright loss. And of course, all the while when that's happening, your opposition is getting just as riled up.

Men's Rights Activism exists because radical feminism exists, because male privilege exists, because... well, a whole host of reasons. The extreme ends of the spectrum should be just as laughable as fundamentalist religious dudes are to us atheists, but in this case neither men's rights nor radfeminism needs to exist at all, because regular feminism sort of comes in and does the job of both groups, without coming across as a bunch of rabid picketers, foaming at the mouth.

If only that job wasn't made so much harder by having to stand in the shadow of the attention grabbing bullies on both sides.

Quote: because regular feminism sort of comes in and does the job of both groups, without coming across as a bunch of rabid picketers, foaming at the mouth.

I do see the regular feminists advocating for and supporting particular subgroups of men, such as homosexuals, I'll grant you that. Not that those aren't issues, but mind showing a few examples of regular feminism* doing anything for the issues that members on this forum have suggested are other legitimate complaints that men more broadly have, such as education or custody?

Quote: There's another amazing atheist video- I can't remember which it is right now, but I'll look it up when I get home- that has a feminist woman reading from an article (in a very hostile tone, I'll say right now) that argues that the feminist movement, free from the extremes of radical feminism, strives for all of those things.

It's one thing to say that it's for those things, actually doing something, devoting some resources to it, that's another. Quite frankly I don't see it, I think its mostly egalitarians who are in the middle doing the work of both groups, with the regular feminists being closer to (but by no means at) the centre than the radical feminists. But then, what would be the opposite of a regular feminist?

*are equity feminism and individualist feminists part of, and a major part of, regular feminism? If so you may have a point. It's my understanding they are mavericks who argue that mainstream feminists aren't doing this stuff.

Then again, maybe I've been poisoned by exposure to feminism at uni, some of those people are completely nuts and hysterical (gettit?).

I reject both sides, bunch of collectivist numptys in my opinion.

I suppose I got the impression that radical feminists were the majority because they are the ones always making the news.

(November 7, 2013 at 6:19 am)Rationalman Wrote: I suppose I got the impression that radical feminists were the majority because they are the ones always making the news.

That's what I (finally) came to realise; if 1 person is screaming like a lunatic, it's much harder to hear others that are talking rationally