The Men's Rights Movement: I Just Don't Get It.

[FlyingNarwhal]

This has never been women against men, I have never made that claim. I have not been trying to argue for who carries the blame of male oppression, just that there is male oppression. But again that you think that that is the point I am trying to make is indicative of part of the problem I am talking about. I'm not trying to call you out, I'm just trying to show you the thought process being made here. I have never once blamed the problems men have on woman at all in any of my posts.

Call me crazy, but this quote:

Personally, I think the main reason for this is because we used to be the oppressors. But we are not anymore and have not for a few generations, save for a few assholes. And there is this idea that it is
impossible for the previous oppressor to become the oppressed.

certainly implies that women have turned the tables on men and now oppress them. If this is not what you meant to imply, then of course I retract any comments to that effect.

This wasn't about women oppressing men. It was about how I feel as though most people do not believe that a group that was previously an oppressor can become oppressed themselves.

It would be easier to give me one issue to start with that you think women are afforded that men are not.

There are so many that have already been mentioned here. For one as I already mentioned the fact that it has been primarily men that have fought and died in all of history's wars, women have been spared this. Also again, previously mentioned, the conscription policy If I accidentally get a woman pregnant and don't want to have a child I am forced to be a legal guardian and to pay for the child, yet a woman has complete control over her own destiny in regards to whether or not she wants to have a child and subsequently pay for it. If I marry a woman and we later divorce, she is entitled to half of my money and even possibly alimony, yet it is much harder for me to get the same deal. Also if I have a child with that woman I divorced, she almost always gets custody and gets to choose the days that I get visitation, and on top of it the man is usually required to pick the child up meaning I have to incur whatever travel expenses that entails and if I don't have a viable for of transportation I may not get to see my kids. Also as I mentioned in my first post when I was talking about my father's divorce fiasco, if I fail to make one payment (despite a record of previous on time payments) my accounts can be frozen. If I am not able to make enough money to pay my child support I can then be thrown in prison where, get this, I have to pay the child support that built up while I was in prison! Speaking of prison, men are consistently given harsher sentences than woman. There are so many to choose from.

What makes you think I don't work for it? I've worked my tail off educating young men about their predicament with birth control. I'm just not buying that men are, as a group, oppressed.

I am curious, what would it take for you to think that men are in fact oppressed?

EDIT: We are routinely and ritualistically sent to our deaths at every war. Just in the short history of the United States we have been at war for almost every single year with the exception of about 15 years. War is constantly occurring worldwide. What other group is sacrificed in such a manner? The facts about men and war should alone justify being called an oppressed group. We march to our deaths every year.

Perhaps there are class elements to your argument that you're not elucidating, but I am related to some of most rich white male elitist assholes ever, and I'll tell you that they're not oppressed- at all (unless you count their whining about getting their millions taxed as oppression).

Class effects everything of course, but most of these problems can come in to contact with any man. Hell some of them can actually get worse in your higher classes as well. If a man with $100 million dollars gets divorced his ex-wife gets $50 million. Then she can get alimony, and especially with these rich guys that alimony can be very expensive because they may have to pay her enough so she can "live according to the means you are accustomed to." And again with the child support if there were children involved a man has to pay even more. The end result being if your a rich man getting a divorce it can end up being extremely expensive.

EDIT: And if I go broke, I still gotta pay out that huge alimony.

OK. This is specific and is a valid complaint. Most people I know think the draft is pure BS- and anyway, in the US I don't think it would fly anymore. You've got a beef with the warpigs of the US government, and it's a clear gender disparity. Are men at large being oppressed by the US government right now? Modern war has been fought mostly by our poorer classes (college boys get out of it). Is it a gender oppression, or a class oppression? I have to think about it. And unless you have been forced to go to war, are you oppressed?

It's not just poorer classes, it is also the middle class as well. Our conscription policy is a lot more sinister then it already seems. First off it is oppression even if I don't go to war because my hand is forced. If I don't register for the draft I don't get certain federal benefits. I can't get any federal job if I am not registered for the draft and some states have adopted this policy as well. They just won't hire you. Some states also won't issue you a driver's license if you are not registered. I can't receive any federal loans either. If I need a federal loan to buy a house, too bad. Same goes for federal student loans as well, if I'm not registered I don't get them. And surprise! Some states will also not give loans to non-registered men. And if you are a man coming from another country that is looking to become a United States citizen, guess what you are required to do to become a citizen? Sign up for the draft. Signing up for the draft is literally like making a deal with the devil. If I don't do it, it severely limits my options in my life. And if I do sign it I get those benefits, but I may have to go to war. I have to sign my life over to my government for the same rights afforded to women.

And further (the evil conscription policy becomes more evil) do not be fooled into thinking that college men can stay safe in college if the draft is enacted. Being able to stay in college was the rule before the Vietnam War and even then it had a hidden dagger. Most men take student loans to afford college, and so before the Vietnam War men would purposefully stay in school and further put themselves in debt to avoid being drafted. However now current policy says that a college male can finish his semester (or a senior can finish the year) but after that they are off to war. Essentially if you are a freshman in college now and the draft is enacted, you only get to stay till the end of the fall semester. You don't get to finish your degree. This was due to outcries that the higher class students were being protected from the draft.

As to my earlier dismissal of you, I thought you were claiming that women were oppressing men (and re-reading your post, I STILL think it reads like that). That's an asinine claim which I wasn't going to argue with you about, as I said. If it's one you don't hold, then this misunderstanding has been resolved.

I can assure you I was not ever trying to make that claim. Men are oppressed by the gender roles assigned by all of society, not just women.

As to high risk jobs: that's a class issue, too. Women work in high-risk factory jobs ALL THE TIME. Poor people are forced to do dangerous shit work.

Yes women work in high risk jobs now. But not at that rate that men do. Men still consistently work in careers that put them at a higher risk for physical harm and death.

Well, I personally know several men who were stay-at-home dads. It's harder for men to do it because they don't have milk-filled breasts. That's not oppression, it's biology. And I have never seen any men at any level of education mocked. Fewer men go into K-12 education, period (partly because it used to be female-associated, but more often now because of the shitty pay)- although that's changing rapidly. My niece's pre-K teacher was a man, and he rocked.

But men that are stay at home dads are still looked down upon by a large portion of our society. A lot of people still believe that a man should provide, and when he fails to do so he is seen as a failure. It's not that we can't be stay at home dads, it's that we are perceived as failed men if we do so.

As far as educational jobs are concerned men have really made progress. But we are given second glances if we take positions working with younger children. This is also an issue for women as well, because it is expected that women are "supposed to be" good with young children while it is expected that men are not.

Again, it's not a competition, but you are callously under- and mis- representing the huge problem of male-on-female violence, which is still a VERY big problem everywhere in the world. Just because you're a nice guy with nice friends does NOT mean that women don't get kept down all the time. Try looking at WHO's statistics for worldwide violence against women.

Yes, male-on-female violence is definitely a problem. But again, I'm talking Western culture. Your average man in a first world country is not beating women on the daily.

This is naive as hell. If one in 3-4 women is being raped in her lifetime, what does that say about the number of men raping? Is it a handful of bad guys doing all that raping? Nope. If you keep claiming this, we're going to continue to clash.

Fortunately I know about that statistic, unfortunately we are going to continue to clash it appears. That statistic is misleading because you really have to look at the question that was asked. Plus I have also seen varying percentages quoted.

Now I prefer to go with RAINN's data, I'm not sure where you got yours from but I consider them to be a good source for this.

http://www.rainn.org/get-information/sta...lt-victims

Now they say one out of six women have experienced rape on RAINN's site, but again you have to look at the question that was asked. They asked the women if they had experienced rape in their lifetime, which means that child abuse is being included in this percentage. The link I provided also shows that about 50% of these assaults happen while these women are minors. Not to say that those aren't horrible, but I consider child abuse separate from rape regardless of gender. They are separate problems involving separate types of offenders. A pedophile is targeting specifically children, where as a rapist targets women. So what you essentially get is 1 out of 12 women that are 18 or older experiencing rape, which is still a scary number.

However if you think that there is a large portion of men that are rapists then I think it is you who is being callous. Your statement seems to imply that you think that the amount of male rapists is at or close to the amount of women that you believe are being raped (1 out of 4). So do you think it is 1 out of 4 men? 1 out of 8? Out of 16? What percentage of men do you really think are out there raping women? You are severely underestimating men and making us out to be evil.

So far, the only thing I've been convinced is a real issue here is the war issue- something I'd be happy to sign petitions about to end the forced conscription of men. Will I take to the streets for it? My chosen battle for boys and men (and girls and women) is birth control.

I've listed plenty of other "real" issues for you in this post, I really hope you reconsider.

Now you're putting words in MY mouth. Where did I say you hate women? I think your stance on the "average nice guy joe" is terribly naive, but not hateful.

It was the being told four times that I blame women for the oppression of men when I didn't do so that led me to that conclusion.

---

Also Stue got to it before me, but it is in fact true that the FBI's definition of forcible rape does not include men. Just another reason.