The Statistics of Penis Wielding Oppressors

The Corinthian

the_syco wrote: »

It was there on 10 Feb 2010 06:36:25 GMT according to Google cache.

I posted the day before this. Either way does not change that the entire tone of the article retained the aforementioned bias.

IMO, there are three sides. Mens rights, womens rights, and equality rights.

I agree.

Feminists march for women rights. Women who are feminists can march for mens rights as well. Men march for equality can be seen as a good thing, as marching for more rights for men is seen as a bad thing.

Hold on - marching for more rights for women is good, but marching for more rights for men is bad?

If we accept that men are disadvantaged in terms of rights in some areas, then marching to redress those areas is a good thing. Unless the status quo is in your favour, that is.

Although I don't have a link for it, I've read that some prodiment feminist activists from the 70's and 80's have swung around to supporting mens rights as the pendulum has swung too far back.

I don't think it's as simple as a pendulum, per say.

The 'traditional' system may have favoured men, but that does not mean that women did not have 'special rights' too. Women thus naturally campaigned to redress the disadvantages, but left the advantages alone. Men on the other hand sat on their collective arses until one day we started noticing that things were not quite right.

This is why men marching for more rights, to redress the privileges that women retained, is good and not bad.

taconnol wrote: »

Indeed, but they are in the minority. The third link comes across as very anti-feminist. I don't think that sort of us/them rhetoric helps anyone.

I think those who are vocally against father's rights are probably a minorty, however tacitly the number is far larger. For example, there is broad support from most feminist groups for paternity leave, however when things such as the right to automatic guardianship for fathers or equal rights to custody are added to the mix support quickly vanishes.

Why? Because paternity leave suits women - they get to better share the burden, while not sacrificing any of their monopoly on reproductive rights.

You have yet to prove that it is not.

Nobody can 'prove' anything with statistics. However, I have even without writing a major research thesis on the subject, have demonstrated that there is more than enough evidence to point towards women sacrificing career for home and family as the cause rather than anything inherently discriminatory in the workplace.

There are many small subtle ways for a woman to experience discrimination in the work place. For example, I am a policy intern and in my office I answer the phones, buzz people in, make coffee for my boss and for meetings, file papers, act as receptionist, deal with couriers and am often asked to type up hand-written documents. My male counterpart is never asked to do any of these things and so can devote more time and effort to research and producing impressive papers. Moreover, at meetings and conferences the vast majority assume that I am my boss's PA. But I'm not going to kick up a fuss because a) I'm lucky to have the job and b) I don't think it comes across well.

You'll always get discrimination in workplaces of one type or other. Sometimes it's ageist (the eldest is assumed to be the most senior at a meeting) or sexist (men, typically the younger ones, are always called upon to do any kind of physical work, even though women are more than physically capable of doing it).

The question is not whether these petty little presumptions are what cause women to earn significantly less than men. They're not.

What nonsense. Should we also be campaigning for men to be equally persecuted for their appearance? Should we be campaigning for men to have more eating disorders?

Speaking as a man, I can only say that it is a matter of unending mystery why women are so critical of each other's (and their own) appearance.

Macha

The Corinthian wrote: »

I think those who are vocally against father's rights are probably a minorty, however tacitly the number is far larger. For example, there is broad support from most feminist groups for paternity leave, however when things such as the right to automatic guardianship for fathers or equal rights to custody are added to the mix support quickly vanishes.

Can you show widespread evidence of this?

The Corinthian wrote: »

Nobody can 'prove' anything with statistics. However, I have even without writing a major research thesis on the subject, have demonstrated that there is more than enough evidence to point towards women sacrificing career for home and family as the cause rather than anything inherently discriminatory in the workplace.

Of course home and family are large factors - what exactly do you define as discrimination?

The Corinthian wrote: »

men, typically the younger ones, are always called upon to do any kind of physical work, even though women are more than physically capable of doing it.

Indeed, I am told not to worry about carrying boxes of paper etc up even when I am perfectly capable. It's a bit galling.

The Corinthian wrote: »

The question is not whether these petty little presumptions are what cause women to earn significantly less than men. They're not.

Really? Proof?

The Corinthian wrote: »

Speaking as a man, I can only say that it is a matter of unending mystery why women are so critical of each other's (and their own) appearance.

It is no a mystery at all. When your main route to power and influence for thousands of years has been based on the men in your life i.e. attracting a powerful and influential partner, and society tells you that you are the "fairer sex" and the hundreds of thousands of messages that every person receives every year telling them that women are and should be judged by their appearance more than men (and what your appearance should and should not be) - what do you expect?

I saw similarly bitchy comments in a recent Guardian debate on Ronaldo's latest underwear photo shoot. Men are not immune to feeling threatened about their appearance.

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

There are many small subtle ways for a woman to experience discrimination in the work place.

There is -but I often found myself in that position early in my career in the UK being Irish and my g/f often gets that even as a senior manager. Listen ,grasshopper as you may get more of an insight to the business you are in than those who dont.

Having said all that, I don't think discrimination against women in the workforce is the major discrimination issue of our day - class is a much bigger factor in earning power.

I don't know really -but on education maybe but then access to things like public authority housing and public healthcare is class based and in some ways gender based in the opposite direction.

CDfm, you are very much mistaken. I'm a feminist but that doesn't mean I don't care about men's issues.

I think the acid test is whether someone will promote equality at the expense of their gender and I would like to think I would.

What nonsense. Should we also be campaigning for men to be equally persecuted for their appearance? Should we be campaigning for men to have more eating disorders?

I wouldn't be me if I didnt post a little rant now would I

There are many small subtle ways for a woman to experience discrimination

I wish Id added that to the rant:D

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

I have done several times and two men I know personally got treatment there and it made a huge difference to them in dealing with what happened to them so that they could get on with their lives.

Its an honest comment, maybe there are certain individuals if you know them you could refer them on to but I would have huge reservations based on what I have seen on TV etc.

Macha

CDfm wrote: »

I think the acid test is whether someone will promote equality at the expense of their gender and I would like to think I would.

I personally try not to see these things as a zero-sum game but yes of course if it means reducing women's maternity leave then that's what should happen.

Personally, I think the state should just say to a couple: right, here's 9 months (or whatever), you're both grown adults - figure it out between the two of you.

CDfm wrote: »

I wouldn't be me if I didnt post a little rant now would I

Hah, of course not, CDfm!

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

Hah, of course not, CDfm!

Challenge you to a toilet seat up or down thread:D

Nevyn

CDfm wrote: »

Its an honest comment, maybe there are certain individuals if you know them you could refer them on to but I would have huge reservations based on what I have seen on TV etc.

Cos the media never presents a skewed take on anything, and society doesn't already have a skewed notion on rape. I know the work they do, I've held a rape victims hand for most of the 24 hours after a rape while she was processed by the garda and attended the crises clinic and I have refereed friends and family and strangers there over the years to support groups and services when they were coming to terms with something which had happened
and they have always found the help they have needed.

So frankly your talking out of your hat with your assumptions based on what you have seen briefly on the T.V.

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

So frankly your talking out of your hat with your assumptions based on what you have seen briefly on the T.V.

From what I have seen on TV or read in the Media attributed to the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre I would not think they would be sympathetic to a man. I am talking about male victims.

It is their problem how they choose to portray themselves in the media and not mine.

Its a pity thats the way it is but its the reality.

Agree to disagree but not everyone is as fair minded as you.

WindSock

CDfm wrote: »

I saw a report that men die 5 years younger than women -but you never hear campaigns for lowering the retirement ages for men.

As far as I know there are talks to increase the retirement age for women, perhaps in the UK, not sure about here. However no one is stopping you from campaigning for retirement age equality here.

A point that is often missed is experience and that if a woman takes time off bringing up children she needs to re-skill and and get up to date to reach the poiint she was at when she left.

Some women I know wont hire women managers simply because of the disruption caused by maternity leave etc.

A problem with the system, imo.

For women to compete with men they have to put the same hours and effort in. You cant be a part time entrepeneur or crisis manager or take time off cos your child is sick.

Are you suggesting that we don't? :eek:
It is most often the woman who takes the time off to look after the sick child. What do you suggest happens instead?

Equality means equality of effort and taking a huge disruption to your personal life.

Again....that to me looks like you are suggesting we only want to share the burden of responsability when it suits us...?

The Corinthian wrote: »

Nonetheless, you really cannot deny that many feminists are openly hostile to father's rights - I supplied a few links above and a quick Google will return dozens more.

Whenever the topic of rights for a particular gender pop up, you can be assured there are voices of dissent from groups of the opposite gender. Do you not think women have had to face it when they fought for rights over the last century?
Just because there is opposition doesn't mean you should 'stop'.

"Getting on with it" is going to mean changing victim culture of feminism, as well as the male culture that we cannot be victims. And ultimately, if it is equality that we are looking for, then some of those sexist privileges that women retain will have to be sacrificed.

What other sexist privilages do women retain, bar child rearing?

WindSock

CDfm wrote: »

From what I have seen on TV or read in the Media attributed to the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre I would not think they would be sympathetic to a man. I am talking about male victims.

It is their problem how they choose to portray themselves in the media and not mine.

What about Amen.ie? Every bus in Dublin had an ad for it.
As for portraying sexual abuse in the media, I barely heard a breath of a mention of female victims when the Ryan & Murphy reports were published.

Boston

The Dublin Rape Crisis Centre has an idealogy now? I don't think thats accurate.

The Corinthian

taconnol wrote: »

Can you show widespread evidence of this?

I've already done so and you have simply attempted to dismiss it as a vocal minority. How about you show me widespread evidence to the contrary?

Really? Proof?

I responded to this in my last post.

WindSock wrote: »

A problem with the system, imo.

I agree, but suspect our reasons would differ.

Just because there is opposition doesn't mean you should 'stop'.

I don't think men have ever started is the problem. I think we are only beginning to see men realize that something is wrong.

What other sexist privilages do women retain, bar child rearing?

Off the top of my head, and based on women in the West, unless otherwise stated:

• Where conscription exists women are exempt (except for Israel).
• Emergency housing in Ireland is only supplied for women. Men are directed to hostels/shelters.
• Family law in cases of divorce or separation greatly favours women.
• Women have post-conceptual reproductive choice. Men do not.
• Women are either immune or subject to more lenient treatment in law for a range of sexual offences or crimes such as paternity fraud.
• Women pay less for car insurance and a range of other services.
• Society takes far more seriously women's health and violence issues against them women, while often ignoring or trivializing this issue for men.
• Violent behaviour is condoned in Women - a woman slapping a man is even humorous, while a man slapping another man (let alone a woman) is treated as assault.
• Women may become home-makers, men may not and are effectively considered parasitic losers by society if they do.

There are plenty of other specific cultural and legal examples to various countries, but the above is a start.

Macha

The Corinthian wrote: »

I've already done so and you have simply attempted to dismiss it as a vocal minority. How about you show me widespread evidence to the contrary?

No, it's your job to provide evidence of your own claims. And you haven't provided evidence of your claim that "when things such as the right to automatic guardianship for fathers or equal rights to custody are added to the mix support quickly vanishes."

The Corinthian wrote: »

I responded to this in my last post.

Er, no you didn't, you just stated that they are not the cause of the pay gap. You haven't demonstrated that they aren't a contributor to the gender pay gap at all.

I mean look, I'm guilty of assuming the woman is the PA myself and I'm a feminist! I don't think it's part of some big conspiracy and I do agree that it's basic practical stuff like taking time out to look after kids and parental leave that contributes to the majority of the pay gap.

WindSock

The Corinthian wrote: »

I agree, but suspect our reasons would differ.

What are your supposed differing reasons?

Off the top of my head, and based on women in the West, unless otherwise stated:

• Where conscription exists women are exempt (except for Israel).
• Emergency housing in Ireland is only supplied for women. Men are directed to hostels/shelters.

There is no conscription here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_service

There is emergency housing for men:

http://www.respond.ie/Projects.aspx?categoryid=134465

Family law in cases of divorce or separation greatly favours women.

Family law is skewed in the favour of the primary care giver. Irish society and previous laws and the constitution have re-inforced that it is the woman's job.

CDfm

WindSock wrote: »

As far as I know there are talks to increase the retirement age for women, perhaps in the UK, not sure about here. However no one is stopping you from campaigning for retirement age equality here.

You just need fairness really.

Are you suggesting that we don't? :eek:
It is most often the woman who takes the time off to look after the sick child. What do you suggest happens instead?


Again....that to me looks like you are suggesting we only want to share the burden of responsability when it suits us...?

One thing that always amazes me is that these initiatives have economic costs that Ireland as a country cant nescessarily afford it. So as a country it adds to our labour costs and is especially true when other countries do not operate as we do. It also adds to the costs of providing services such as health etc like taking qualified doctors etc out of the labour force who are trained at our expense.

During the boom years we had imported foreign labour.This meant a huge outflow of money from our economy.There is lots of money spent on the welfare on women -what other countries do is handle this by way of subsidised childcare rather than by the welfare system.

So the economic/benefits model used is a bit of a mess.

Whenever the topic of rights for a particular gender pop up, you can be assured there are voices of dissent from groups of the opposite gender. Do you not think women have had to face it when they fought for rights over the last century?
Just because there is opposition doesn't mean you should 'stop'.


What other sexist privilages do women retain, bar child rearing?

There are quite a lot of privelages guaranteed by law and you can see just some of them here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055694680

WindSock wrote: »

What about Amen.ie? Every bus in Dublin had an ad for it.
As for portraying sexual abuse in the media, I barely heard a breath of a mention of female victims when the Ryan & Murphy reports were published.

I totally agree - I disagree with the gender based model but its what is there now. The reason its like this is that until recently 100% of the domestic violence budget has been spent totally on female victims of male partner abuse.As it is they get 99% of the budget.

So you also have elder abuse, child abuse etc same sex abuse all excluded from this on the basis that the group with the funding is a womens advocacy group.So the model has male -female heterosexual partner abuse where the male is the perpetrator and woman the victim. No other model.

Amen as a group say society should not discriminate along gender lines.

Stheno

The Corinthian wrote: »

I
[*]Family law in cases of divorce or separation greatly favours women.

From an Irish Family law point of view, the differentiation is more so where the woman is a mother, and there is constitutional protection of that role.

Where a marriage results in divorce/seperation and there are no children, there is no differentiation between men and women in terms of their rights arising out of the dissolution of the marriage.

Outside of the West, there are several countries in Asia/Africa and Southern America who have conscription for women as well as men.

Edited to add: Missed Windsock's post, her point in relation to family law is essentially what I am saying

CDfm

Boston wrote: »

The Dublin Rape Crisis Centre has an idealogy now? I don't think thats accurate.

In context what I am saying is that senior figures at the Center have been involved in high profile media campaigns and I think the term is "gender feminism" or are what John Waters calls extremists

translation feminazis

.

So as a group it has a culture.

Life for the nun who raped a child, Irish Independent, 24 July 1999 (Extract)

Welcoming the imposition of a maximum sentence, Dublin Rape Crisis Centre director Olive Braiden said it would ensure Nora Wall would be monitored for the rest of her life to prevent any recurrence.

Richard Greene, 20 January 2000

On Friday's "Today at 5" on RTE, Ms. Olive Braiden of the Rape Crisis Centre was given the opportunity of welcoming a landmark case in the North of a man convicted of raping his wife. There was little discussion on alternatives to this approach to the problem, or on the implications of the case.

It is interesting that Ms. Braiden should be returning to the spotlight after such a long absence. During that time we have had one of the most serious miscarriages of justice in the history of the State ie the Nora Wall/Paul McCabe case. It was a case based on a false accusation of rape.

Ms. Braiden, following the Cyprus case **, told RTE's Gerry Ryan that she had not had experience of false claims of rape, and that no one would make a false accusation of rape to her, because there would be nothing in it for them.

Miss Wall and Mr McCabe were freed on appeal on the grounds of false allegations by a person with a mental illness and a history of making false allegations.

Stheno

CDfm wrote: »

In context what I am saying is that senior figures at the Center have been involved in high profile media campaigns and I think the term is "gender feminism" or are what John Waters calls extremists

translation feminazis

.

So as a group it has a culture.
.

The home page of the DRCC makes it cler that they are there for both male and female victims of rape.

http://www.drcc.ie/

If you have been raped, sexually assaulted, sexually harassed or sexually abused you are not on your own. Many women and men of all ages have had similar experiences.

Taking individual examples of people's experiences as opposed to the objective of an organisation is not a balanced view.

Boston

How come everytime this topic comes up I end up angry and confused? What on earth is your point CDfm? Is it honestly that because some "senior" person involved with the dublin rape crisis center had/has blinkered support for rape victium, she (and by assoication all of the DRCC) have a feminist hatred of male rape victiums. This somehow explains what?

CDfm

I was at a conference years ago where I heard a senior official of DRCC say "women dont lie" as an organisation where the personal beliefs of its leaders hold enormous influence then they must be taken into account.

Its the culture innit.

In no way would I support an organisation orv support group for men that would not acknowledge female victims. Thats my point.

I dont think you can change the culture.

Boston

Hold on, are you saying the DRCC refused to support male victiums because they felt male victiums lie?

It's not the job or a rape support group to oust people who lie. It's a better policy to just accept everyone at face value given the number of people who will dismiss the victium.

Giselle

Nougatti's post also makes it clear that the DRCC acknowledges both male and female victims.

CDfm, your posts seem as blinkered and one sided as you accuse that organisation of being.

Cicero

I've only flicked through the thread but looks like we are a little away from the original topic ...or maybe not...I don't know...I'll leave it to yourselves to decide....

OP-
-we are only 36 years down the road from when women were expected to give up work, after getting married...

- up to the late 1980s, Ireland was still classed as significantly community/rural based with the family playing the central role in how it's society was formed and governed....farming and agriculture still constituted a significant % in employment which was based on the very defined sociological roles of family and community carrying out their defined tasks to keep it alive (although this statistic was starting to very much decline by then)....

I'm not entirely sure that from a societal perspective, has a lot changed since...the family is still predominantly the accepted way to organise- where there is one parent working, and one staying at home with the family, it tends to be the female- you can debate the reasons why on another thread but considering the cost of childcare, a lot of parental couples elect to forego one wage, and predominently, that person is still the mother...

in answer to your question- am I tired of seeing these articles- YES- absolutely...comparing salaries of males/females totally undermines the realities that exist in terms of how we still organise ourselves from a societal perspectiveand in addition, totally undermines and obsecures the societal values and roles of the male and female in modern society, and brings the level down to money, which is to a large part, totally irrelevant & quite de-humanising...

I think we are still hugely in a transitional state in Ireland as to (a) how we would like to be precieved Vs (b) how we to the large part, want to live our lives, and we have yet to define how we stand apart from how we have previously organised ourselves to the extent that it can be measured in a meaningful way from a 'statistical' perspective...If female wages are to match similar levels to that of men, I think we would see a seismic shift in the way Irish culture currently organises itself. .
...there is no right/wrong here-

...statistics like these taken out of context of wider sociological settings are actually very misleading and the newspaper equivalent of a discussion forum troll....

metrovelvet

Dont forget the farmer's wives who worked the land their whole lives, who raised their sons to work and inherit the land and who are entitled to a non contributory pension.

As for family law, it could be argued that it favors the married woman with kids, but that leaves a whole lot of women it does not favor.
Wasnt there a case recently of a father who got a year sentence for raping his four daughters? Yeah, really, the women are favored.

Procasinator

metrovelvet wrote: »

Wasnt there a case recently of a father who got a year sentence for raping his four daughters? Yeah, really, the women are favored.

What is your point here?
If he had raped four sons instead, do you think the sentence would have been harsher?
Or if it had been the mother who had sexually harassed the girls her sentence would be higher?

I would say if it was the first, we'd probably sadly never hear about it as these abuses are far less likely to be reported. Yeah, really, the men are favored.

CDfm

Giselle wrote: »

Nougatti's post also makes it clear that the DRCC acknowledges both male and female victims.

CDfm, your posts seem as blinkered and one sided as you accuse that organisation of being.

What I am saying is you can take the man out of the bog but not the bog out off the man.

So while the DRCC may advertise support services for men and children and victims of female abuse IMHO its inappropriate given the provenence of the organistion that it all of a sudden has become all lovey dovey and cuddly. It would be like asking Sinn Fein being Marshalls for an Orangemans parade.

Im not buying it.

There also is the issue of the fastest growth area in sexual assault complaints to Childline UK being from boys where the abuser is female. This isnt a recent phenomena but has been written about since the early 70s.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

As for family law, it could be argued that it favors the married woman with kids, but that leaves a whole lot of women it does not favor.
Wasnt there a case recently of a father who got a year sentence for raping his four daughters? Yeah, really, the women are favored.

It is a truly shocking case -awful and depraved.

• • This is The West Country »
    

  Shocking sex abuse ChildLine statistics in South West
  1:00am Monday 9th November 2009
  
  By Steve Sowden »
  

  THE NSPCC is releasing new figures today that show last year volunteer counsellors at ChildLine’s South West base counselled a total of 212 children across the UK about sexual abuse as their main concern.
  The figures show that 21 had been sexually abused by a female.
  In total, ChildLine counselled 12,268 children nationwide for sexual abuse.
  Although figures show that the majority of calls were in relation to abuse by a male, the findings show that more children are reporting assaults from a woman, usually their mother.
  A total of 2,142 young people across the UK told ChildLine they had been sexually abused by a female. Of those callers counselled, 1,311 told ChildLine they had been abused by their mother.
  
  
  

But these are awful cases too and the real sad part of it is that the victims do not come forward and the abusers are not prosecuted.

I dont see how you can carve up the rights and wrongs along gender lines as both are equally shocking.

Jesus Wept

CDfm wrote: »

I saw a report that men die 5 years younger than women -but you never hear campaigns for lowering the retirement ages for men.

WindSock wrote: »

As far as I know there are talks to increase the retirement age for women, perhaps in the UK, not sure about here. However no one is stopping you from campaigning for retirement age equality here.

The retirment age is lower in the UK for women than men but is being increased (in years to come) to fall into line.
Pretty messed up.

metrovelvet

cdfm- I came across a statistic that claimed the most common form of bullying is sons to their mothers.

I can believe that most childline complaints are about mothers as its mothers who are caring for the kids. If the dads were the carers the stats would be different.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

cdfm- I came across a statistic that claimed the most common form of bullying is sons to their mothers.

I can believe that most childline complaints are about mothers as its mothers who are caring for the kids. If the dads were the carers the stats would be different.

I have had my little rant and gone a bit off topic as it does not relate to the CSO report.

I dont believe that women are any better or any worse than men in this context just that the system is screwed up with its male perpetrator/female victim model. Its my speciality battle but I just would like to see people be a bit more open minded.

IRL lots of my friends are women and one is a short haired lesbian whose sense of humour is similar to mine and a nice girlfriend too. All in all not a bad life.

Sorry if I have offended anyone with my views on DRCC I didnt mean to take away from the excellent work lots of its volunteers do as individuals.