(November 7, 2013 at 5:09 pm)Esquilax Wrote:You are confusing me. You seem to have been arguing throughout this thread that feminists do support equal rights for men, and the men's rights movement is effectively pointless (my interpretation of your words).(November 7, 2013 at 4:50 pm)Rationalman Wrote: No one is blaming women for mens problems. I just think feminists should be equally concerned with inequality on the mens part as they are with their own.And I'm wondering why you think that is, at a functional level: can you name another special interest group where the expectation is that they'll take up causes based around literally the opposite of their group? Do racial equality groups need to start solving the problems white people have? Should gay rights groups start dealing with straight person issues?
You said: "properly executed feminism basically is egalitarianism"
If this is true, then I'm afraid that by that statement, we should expect feminists to take up causes based around inequality of men.
I also take issue with your statement that the inequality of men in society is "literally the opposite of their group" when talking about feminists. I'm sorry, but the 'literal' opposite of feminism is the oppression of women, not the men's rights movement.
One more nit-pick:
Quote:Do racial equality groups need to start solving the problems white people have?Yes, of course they should. A racial equality group by definition should be trying to solve all the problems associated with racial equality, regardless of the race. I believe you probably meant "<insert-non-white-race-here> equality groups".
