Family courts "do not just happens" to disadvantage men. There is duluth model and other literature produced mainly by feminists largely responsible for that. On any proposal such as child payments to be accountable or visitation rights enforceability, feminists screams rape.
MRA are making many efforts to cooperate with feminism. Many MRAs are feminists shamed and kicked out for not being radical enough. So far we got only acknowledgement that "men has issues too", that is kind of success.
I will not comment on article itself. I could go on any feminist conference and cherry-pick many statements.
Many MRAs are feminists shamed and kicked out for not being radical enough.
Is feminism an institution? I was not aware anyone could be "kicked out" of feminism for not being sufficiently radical. I would know, being a not-particularly-radical feminist myself.
At any rate, this is quite dubious. The only MRAs I know of are not even close to being merely "insufficiently radical feminists," except perhaps in the same sense in which Catholics are insufficiently radical atheists.
Note that by "MRAs" I mean people who self-identify as part of the MRA movement. There are, I'm sure, many people out there who are aware of and interested in men's issues who could also qualify as feminists. Such people, such as myself, choose not to be identified with the MRA movement because of all the misogyny that travels with it.
I suppose you might make the argument: "why not refuse to be identified with the feminist movement for the same reason"? There are (at least) two reasons. First, feminism is less associated with a small particular people and institutions than MRA. This may just be because feminism is bigger. But, whatever the cause, I don't feel that identifying myself as a feminists as closely associates me with objectionable activities at the fringes. More to the point, I simply don't think most feminists generally are as virulently anti-man as MRAs are anti-woman. Again, maybe this is attributable to the size of the movement. I know that there are feminists who are virulently anti-man, but I think they make up a small fringe of the overall feminist movement. Ultimately, though, this is just a question of what labels one is or is not comfortable taking on.
Yes, feminism is pretty much religion today. You can be "kicked out" for being men or not agreeing with some 'axioms' such as rape culture or patriarchy. One link for demonstration:
Next time I see a "radical feminist" posting on HN I'll be sure to give him or her a piece of my mind.
Also, you'll need to do better than an article from, of all places, avoiceformen.com that merely assumes the existence of a feminist institution that you can be kicked out of and blames it for a man's suicide.
I'm certainly not aware of any such institution and I'm a feminist! Perhaps my membership card has just been lost in the mail? Or gasp! maybe it's because I'm a man and the mother ship is just not giving me the time of day? That explains a lot, actually...
There are many feminists institutions, that guy got kicked out from FEMEN Sweden. Others got kicked out from campus groups or web forums. If you want go to MRA forum and just ask.
Perhaps you have no membership card because you never applied anywhere. But some people are more involved.
Ah ha. There are, of course, organizations that identify themselves as feminist. And yes, you can get kicked out of them, I suppose. But this is not at all the same thing as getting kicked out of "feminism," as you have been alleging to have been the case.
This is more than a mere semantic distinction since any arbitrary feminist group can have whatever arbitrary rule or prejudices it likes without those views' being imputable to all feminists. I certainly don't accept that FEMEN Sweden speaks for all (or even many) feminists or that being kicked out of FEMEN means you can't be or aren't a feminist.
On any proposal such as child payments to be accountable or visitation rights enforceability, feminists screams rape.
It is hard to take MRAs seriously because they include people who say things like this.
This sort of language discredits any actual argument that feminists might actually have by reducing them to contentless, stereotyped feminine shreiks. That's seriously sexist. And at the same time, it mocks women's legitimate fears of being, you know, actually raped.
I am saying that every time some practical problem is brought up, authors gets shamed and discussion gets derailed to irrelevance. So 'screams rape' fits.
And men have legitimate fears of being raped as well.
1) You're making some incredible generalizations; this happens "every time"?
2) You started out by claiming "feminists" do that and when pressed, you immediately retreat to "Radfems". So it turns out that even by your own admission, it's not feminists who scream rape every time; it's only the radical ones.
3) Since you're presenting this hypothetical anecdote and using it as evidence, I'll introduce my own and point out that I just checked the faculty list for my old school (5th grade to 12th) and the teacher faculty was maybe 40 percent male. Thinking back to when I was in middle and high school, the current ratio seems about the same as it was back in the early 2000s. So I'm not seeing your claim about the absence of male teachers or babysitters.
Comments
Family courts "do not just happens" to disadvantage men. There is duluth model and other literature produced mainly by feminists largely responsible for that. On any proposal such as child payments to be accountable or visitation rights enforceability, feminists screams rape.
MRA are making many efforts to cooperate with feminism. Many MRAs are feminists shamed and kicked out for not being radical enough. So far we got only acknowledgement that "men has issues too", that is kind of success.
I will not comment on article itself. I could go on any feminist conference and cherry-pick many statements.
Also, what does this mean?
Is feminism an institution? I was not aware anyone could be "kicked out" of feminism for not being sufficiently radical. I would know, being a not-particularly-radical feminist myself.
At any rate, this is quite dubious. The only MRAs I know of are not even close to being merely "insufficiently radical feminists," except perhaps in the same sense in which Catholics are insufficiently radical atheists.
Note that by "MRAs" I mean people who self-identify as part of the MRA movement. There are, I'm sure, many people out there who are aware of and interested in men's issues who could also qualify as feminists. Such people, such as myself, choose not to be identified with the MRA movement because of all the misogyny that travels with it.
I suppose you might make the argument: "why not refuse to be identified with the feminist movement for the same reason"? There are (at least) two reasons. First, feminism is less associated with a small particular people and institutions than MRA. This may just be because feminism is bigger. But, whatever the cause, I don't feel that identifying myself as a feminists as closely associates me with objectionable activities at the fringes. More to the point, I simply don't think most feminists generally are as virulently anti-man as MRAs are anti-woman. Again, maybe this is attributable to the size of the movement. I know that there are feminists who are virulently anti-man, but I think they make up a small fringe of the overall feminist movement. Ultimately, though, this is just a question of what labels one is or is not comfortable taking on.
Yes, feminism is pretty much religion today. You can be "kicked out" for being men or not agreeing with some 'axioms' such as rape culture or patriarchy. One link for demonstration:
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&sl=auto&tl=en&u=h...
Feminism is not just 'bigger' it is multi-billion dollar industry. MRA is just a few web forums which barely managed to organize single conference.
If you disagree with some radical feminists, perhaps it is time to tell them, instead of bashing on MRAs.
Next time I see a "radical feminist" posting on HN I'll be sure to give him or her a piece of my mind.
Also, you'll need to do better than an article from, of all places, avoiceformen.com that merely assumes the existence of a feminist institution that you can be kicked out of and blames it for a man's suicide.
I'm certainly not aware of any such institution and I'm a feminist! Perhaps my membership card has just been lost in the mail? Or gasp! maybe it's because I'm a man and the mother ship is just not giving me the time of day? That explains a lot, actually...
There are many feminists institutions, that guy got kicked out from FEMEN Sweden. Others got kicked out from campus groups or web forums. If you want go to MRA forum and just ask.
Perhaps you have no membership card because you never applied anywhere. But some people are more involved.
Ah ha. There are, of course, organizations that identify themselves as feminist. And yes, you can get kicked out of them, I suppose. But this is not at all the same thing as getting kicked out of "feminism," as you have been alleging to have been the case.
This is more than a mere semantic distinction since any arbitrary feminist group can have whatever arbitrary rule or prejudices it likes without those views' being imputable to all feminists. I certainly don't accept that FEMEN Sweden speaks for all (or even many) feminists or that being kicked out of FEMEN means you can't be or aren't a feminist.
It is hard to take MRAs seriously because they include people who say things like this.
This sort of language discredits any actual argument that feminists might actually have by reducing them to contentless, stereotyped feminine shreiks. That's seriously sexist. And at the same time, it mocks women's legitimate fears of being, you know, actually raped.
I am saying that every time some practical problem is brought up, authors gets shamed and discussion gets derailed to irrelevance. So 'screams rape' fits.
And men have legitimate fears of being raped as well.
Trivializing a discussion by reducing it to "screams rape" mocks the legitimate fear that both men and women have of being raped.
Ok, one more time:
- Someone suggest that men could have more visitation rights to his children.
- Radfems answer that most men are rapists and they could rape their own children.
- Author answers that it is not true, and gets shamed as rape apologist etc.
Any more questions?
Men teachers or baby-sitters practically does not exist anymore, exactly for this reasons. So "screams rape" fits like a glove.
A few things jump out at me here.
1) You're making some incredible generalizations; this happens "every time"?
2) You started out by claiming "feminists" do that and when pressed, you immediately retreat to "Radfems". So it turns out that even by your own admission, it's not feminists who scream rape every time; it's only the radical ones.
3) Since you're presenting this hypothetical anecdote and using it as evidence, I'll introduce my own and point out that I just checked the faculty list for my old school (5th grade to 12th) and the teacher faculty was maybe 40 percent male. Thinking back to when I was in middle and high school, the current ratio seems about the same as it was back in the early 2000s. So I'm not seeing your claim about the absence of male teachers or babysitters.
I will be very surprised if you can document for us a single time that this has ever happened.