Men's Rights Movement

[Fireball]

I'm tired now and could sure use a sugar mamma. Not sure how much of a trophy I'll make.

Takers?

My wife still works.   She doesn't have to, though. I really wish she'd just give it up. She's dealing with some prime grade assholes at work. But she wants to get her SSA up to a better number before she retires. I took it at 62, when I retired. The crossover for those curves is 81 years old, moneywise. I'm in uncharted territory for my family. No one lived beyond 64. The rest died at 58 or younger. I don't expect to be alive at 81.

[Shell B]

Given the history of oppression against women, CL, I doubt it's as simple as all that. Remember, white guys hated us more than black people, whom the white-wigged white guys really hated. So much so, that we only got the vote in the last century. There's no denying the oppression's there.

IMHO women are oppressed more by their biology than by evil men trying to keep women in their place. One could argue that the misguided efforts of many good men, in their desire to protect their women and children, resulted in inadvertent oppression. Times were different and I'm very reluctant to demonize people that lived before penicillin was discovered and latex invented. Rather than being a complete evil motivated by the desire to dominate, maybe patriarchy actually served a necessary purpose in past societies in which war, famine, and disease were daily threats. People, both men and women, had different sensibilities that seemed entirely reasonable to them, but to us sound oppressive - like being forced to marry the woman you knocked up. Perhaps someday, maybe sooner rather than later, people will consider it an act of oppression to knock up a women and NOT marry her.

I'm not buying it. We're in the first generation or two where it's actually not okay or totally ignored when you beat the shit out of your wife.

---

I have absolutely zero interest in mollifying those who insist on defining feminism by its fringe elements. So I will continue to support mainstream feminist efforts and causes, and thus will continue to identify as a feminist.
 
I also refuse to re-package my support of feminism by summarily shooing it under the vaguely generic umbrella of egalitarianism, due to the fact that every time I hear someone cawwing  "Feminism Bad...Egalitarianism More Appropriate!" it immediately brings to mind the charmingly DISMISSIVE exclamations of "buh..bu...bu...But...ALL Lives Matter, don't they?!" in response to protests over police shootings.

Yeah...We all know this, dipshits. 

In context, "egalitarianism" is a bullshit, cop-out term tossed around by those who are disinterested in really getting to the heart of a given matter; a cheap, meaningless concession offered up with the intent of shutting legitimate feminist dialogue down. 

"Feminist" is just one of MANY labels which accurately define my worldview. And as a position, it is perfectly reasonable.
I'm not going to be fearful of/shy away from using it, because doing so allows the assholes of the world to succeed in changing the narrative.

Tough titty. People have evolved. You're just selling a "No true feminist" argument that no one has to buy. The day I have a rational conversation with a woman who calls herself a feminist, I might feel differently. Until then, I'm just not going to align with that title, even if I agree with some of the definitions of feminism. I'll never align with an -ism that isn't clearly defined. Feminism isn't.

Edited to add: I want to make it clear that I don't dislike feminists out of hand. I just take umbrage to this post that demonizes anyone who doesn't want the tainted label.

[Tiberius]

In context, "egalitarianism" is a bullshit, cop-out term tossed around by those who are disinterested in really getting to the heart of a given matter; a cheap, meaningless concession offered up with the intent of shutting legitimate feminist dialogue down.

In what context is that even remotely true?

Egalitarians are feminists. The whole point of being egalitarian is that you support equal rights for everyone, that includes women's rights.

Seems maybe you are the dipshit here.

[Shell B]

In context, "egalitarianism" is a bullshit, cop-out term tossed around by those who are disinterested in really getting to the heart of a given matter; a cheap, meaningless concession offered up with the intent of shutting legitimate feminist dialogue down.

In what context is that even remotely true?

Egalitarians are feminists. The whole point of being egalitarian is that you support equal rights for everyone, that includes women's rights.

Seems maybe you are the dipshit here.

Egalitarians are feminists? Shit, guess I'm not that either.

[Athene]

I feel like there aren't more women CEO's or whatever because less women than men are interested in that sort of thing, and/or they put more priority in motherhood. It's faulty to point to the lack of women in high powered career fields and assume it's because women aren't given the same opportunity simply for being female.

LOL...What's faulty is the way you ignorantly offer up YOUR personal lack of motivation, drive, ambition, and apparent contentment with chronic unemployment/underemployment, as being the general mindset of "most women"....and therefore the "real" answer.

You don't speak for most women, CL. I daresay there exist many women out there who literally cannot afford having your mindset.

[Rev. Rye]

IMHO women are oppressed more by their biology than by evil men trying to keep women in their place. One could argue that the misguided efforts of many good men, in their desire to protect their women and children, resulted in inadvertent oppression. Times were different and I'm very reluctant to demonize people that lived before penicillin was discovered and latex invented. Rather than being a complete evil motivated by the desire to dominate, maybe patriarchy actually served a necessary purpose in past societies in which war, famine, and disease were daily threats. People, both men and women, had different sensibilities that seemed entirely reasonable to them, but to us sound oppressive - like being forced to marry the woman you knocked up. Perhaps someday, maybe sooner rather than later, people will consider it an act of oppression to knock up a women and NOT marry her.

I'm not buying it. We're in the first generation or two where it's actually not okay or totally ignored when you beat the shit out of your wife.

Perhaps patriarchy had a good (read: not asinine or oppressive) purpose once upon a time, like back in the days of the Old Testament. That may have been the case when people were living a hardscrabble existence in the desert. Key word being may have been. Sadly for NS, whatever benefits may have had for the days of Ancient Israel, the fact remains that we no longer live in the days of Ancient Israel. The situation has changed, the strict gender roles simply aren't working, and women are less and less willing to accept a system that treats them as property either explicitly or implicitly. Christ, even MODERN Israel, for all its many, MANY, flaws, at least tries to give its women a fighting chance to succeed.

[Catholic_Lady]

I feel like there aren't more women CEO's or whatever because less women than men are interested in that sort of thing, and/or they put more priority in motherhood. It's faulty to point to the lack of women in high powered career fields and assume it's because women aren't given the same opportunity simply for being female.

LOL...What's faulty is the way you ignorantly offer up YOUR personal lack of motivation, drive, ambition, and apparent contentment with chronic unemployment/underemployment, as being the general mindset of "most women"....and therefore the "real" answer.

You don't speak for most women, CL. I daresay there exist many women out there who literally cannot afford having your mindset.

I hate it when I'm open here about something I feel insecure about only to have it used against me in a personal attack.

Anyway, women abstaining from the more demanding, cut throat sort of jobs, and having a desire to be a bigger part of their children's upbringing has been an observation I've made. Nothing to do with my own personal shortcomings.

[Athene]

In context, "egalitarianism" is a bullshit, cop-out term tossed around by those who are disinterested in really getting to the heart of a given matter; a cheap, meaningless concession offered up with the intent of shutting legitimate feminist dialogue down.

In what context is that even remotely true?

Egalitarians are feminists. The whole point of being egalitarian is that you support equal rights for everyone, that includes women's rights.

Seems maybe you are the dipshit here.

Singing "Everybody hurts.....sometimes" from the rafters ain't a fucking solution.

Seems maybe you are the dipshit here.

Ooh. Burn.

[Tiberius]

Singing "Everybody hurts.....sometimes" from the rafters ain't a fucking solution.

Did I say it was?

[Shell B]

I hate it when I'm open here about something I feel insecure about only to have it used against me in a personal attack.

That will always happen when you open up on the Internet. Don't worry too much about it. While I agree with Thena that your approach is not as typical as you might think these days, I think it's perfectly respectable to prioritize family and make that a job. Plenty of women feel insecure about not doing that. There is no right way.

Anyway, women abstaining from the more demanding, cut throat sort of jobs, and having a desire to be a bigger part of their children's upbringing has been an observation. Nothing to do with my personal shortcomings.

It might be because I grew up around women who mostly had to work for a living or only stayed home because they had young children, but most women I know work while raising kids. Few have the luxury of staying home.

---

Singing "Everybody hurts.....sometimes" from the rafters ain't a fucking solution.

Did I say it was?

Isn't that what egalitarians do? Better update your business cards.