Male attitude to feminists/feminism

donfers

My girlfriend made dinner last night and didn't complain/moan or whinge about doing so as I just sat idly on the coach playing a videogame. After a while I was taken aback that she had not commented to me on my laziness/chauvinistic behaviour.disrespectful attitude to women etc so I put the video game controller down, walked over to her and said. "I've been playing the game for the past hour and you've been slaving away there cooking a meal and you haven't said a word to me, don't you believe in women's rights?". I was kind of half winding her up at this point.

Anyway her answer was simple, concise and made me very proud.

"I believe in human rights" she said.

I think most reasonable people here in TGC believe in human rights and thus it can be said we are all feminists.

I remember doing an Arts degree a long time ago and one of the compulsory modules was feminist literature. The first thing the lecturer said was that a feminist is anyone who believes a woman is fully human. Fair enough, I thought to myself, I'm a feminist then. The lecturer for the next two months of the course proceeded to bash men in general as a gender which for me is where the problem starts. If you target specific men for specific reasons then fine, go ahead and do that but to just lazily bash a whole gender and blame it entire for the perceived injustices your own gender has suffered is not only wrong, it's counter-productive to your own cause yet again and again and again that mistake is repeated by this movement and thus it alienates many who would otherwise seek to help them further their goals.

The fact is a superclass of CEO's, business and industry leaders, lobby groups and politicians make the key decisions that affect us all. It's estimated this group or superclass contains about 5,000 people and they are calling the shots. Their decisions are invariably about making money. It's as simple as that. They must be amused watching genders, religions, nationalities and special interest groups play off each other as we blame each other for stuff way above all our heads.

I have two main difficulties with the feminism that I have encountered here

1) Middle-class educated well-off white women constantly banging on about what a raw deal they get grates after a while. Their complaints that they haven't got promoted in 18 months or that a guy made a blonde joke pale in comparison with genuine cases where intervention is needed like in the Middle East where women can't even meet together in public or are executed for having an affair. I would suggest that they choose their causes wisely. We can all bleat and whine about every petty slight that comes our way but truly they should be fighting for the sisterhood in places where they actually do have it bad

2) Feminism by its very nature is a movement that ostracises both children and men. It is a movement about women for women. A woman is a feminist because she believes feminism can benefit her gender. If I by accident or by biological incident or by grace of god happen to be born a woman does it then mean that I automatically should be a feminist? Surely the thought-processes behind supporting a movement (if it is to have any credibility at all) should relate to its merits rather than the pavlovian "I am a woman therefore I should be a feminist". My problem is that I think its goals can be fulfilled and achieved better under the humanist or civil rights label. this way it can't be accused of putting the self-interest of a group merely based on the arbitrary notion of gender above the discrimination, suffering and pain suffered by us all regardless of gender, colour, age, religion or sexuality.

"The more we seek to seperate and prioritise our own pain the more we refuse to acknowledge the pain of others, the more pain we cause in the end for all of us" Simone De Beauvoir

Anyway guys please tell me your attitudes to feminists and feminism? empathy? alienation? misunderstanding? what?

DazMarz

I have no problem with any down-trodden sector of a society standing up and demanding equal rights. I believe that this is an extremely necessary part of societal evolution.

However... A good friend of mine always gets very pissy and angry when I crack the odd sexist joke and she is always banging on about how she studied feminism and is a feminist and so on.

So finally I exploded one day and shouted: "Right, you're such a feminist: who was Emeline Pankhurst???"

And she didn't know...

Great, one of the single greatest people in the history of women's rights, and you (someone who claims to be a feminist) doesn't know who she is???

I don't mind feminists, but the ones who claim to be one and know little of the past or theory of it, and those who are just man-bashing freaks are the ones that boil my blood.

Iwasfrozen

DazMarz wrote: »

I have no problem with any down-trodden sector of a society standing up and demanding equal rights. I believe that this is an extremely necessary part of societal evolution.

However... A good friend of mine always gets very pissy and angry when I crack the odd sexist joke and she is always banging on about how she studied feminism and is a feminist and so on.

So finally I exploded one day and shouted: "Right, you're such a feminist: who was Emeline Pankhurst???"

And she didn't know...

Great, one of the single greatest people in the history of women's rights, and you (someone who claims to be a feminist) doesn't know who she is???

I don't mind feminists, but the ones who claim to be one and know little of the past or theory of it, and those who are just man-bashing freaks are the ones that boil my blood.

Did you mean Emmeline Pankhurst ?

DazMarz

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Did you mean Emmeline Pankhurst ?

One small typo? Really? Pedantic in extreme there...

hobochris

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Did you mean Emmeline Pankhurst ?

Oh Noes.. the typo police are here...

@donfers: good post, provides food for thought.

deadhead13

I'm all for equality. but an attitude of all sexes are equal but one sex is more equal than the other seemed to prevail with the self proclaimed feminists I have known. A bit of a sweeping statement I know, but there you go.

Nevyn

Emmeline Pankhurst wasn't a feminist, the term didn't exist back in her day she was a suffragette.

DazMarz

Thaedydal wrote: »

Emmeline Pankhurst wasn't a feminist, the term didn't exist back in her day she was a suffragette.

I know she wasn't a feminist, but she was an incredibly important person in the history of women's rights, and I would think that feminists should hold her in very high regard.

To me, and maybe I'm being unfair here, but someone who would claim to be a feminist and not know who she was is nothing short of a hypocrite of the highest order.

Nevyn

DazMarz wrote: »

I know she wasn't a feminist, but she was an incredibly important person in the history of women's rights, and I would think that feminists should hold her in very high regard.

To me, and maybe I'm being unfair here, but someone who would claim to be a feminist and not know who she was is nothing short of a hypocrite of the highest order.

I disagree, it's like saying that someone can't be a Liverpool fan cos they don't know the club was found by splitters from Everton F.C. if a person has studied feminism as a movement and a philosophy it won't start with Emmeline Pankhurst.

Herbal Deity

Thaedydal wrote: »

Emmeline Pankhurst wasn't a feminist, the term didn't exist back in her day she was a suffragette.

Can the term not apply retroactively?

Nevyn

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Can the term not apply retroactively?

Given that self determination is part of the feminist philosophy I don't think it's far to do that.

CDfm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Did you mean Emmeline Pankhurst ?

Surely you mean Emily Davison.

I don't believe women in Irish Society get a bad deal overall.They live longer, are less likely to become homeless, less likely to be in prison, have lower incidence of suicide,less then 40% of mothers work. have priority on housing and they are preferentialy treated at family law. So overall the quality of life the majority of women enjoy is greater than that of men.

Maybe at the very top its not so but that only affects the top 2% of the population. The other 98% well....

I don't think as a movement that Irish feminism based on it is on 60s & 70's socialism does Irish women any favours.

The main groups are viewed as ballbreakers because that is what they are. OP says it is so in college studying feminist literature.

Critics of feminist theory say there is a huge conflict between the theory of feminism and the statistical evidence in domestic violence and child cruelty and abuse.

That said - some male dominated workplaces aren't great for women. By the same token some female dominated workplaces are not great for men. There are issues there and there is no doubt about that. You should get equal pay and opportunity irrespective of gender.

There is concern that the feminisation of the teaching profession and education has resulted in an anti boy system.

I recently saw that one of the teachers unions had a very anti man Domestic Violence policy. I find that hard to reconcile that with equality. You have women only gyms like Curves, and associations like the Irish Countrywomans Association yet you have a silly court case about 1 golf club in the country not allowing women members.

Will

Short response from me is;
Feminism is great in the main, sometimes I resent it and feel men are left behind.

Fleshed out version;
If you as a woman or man feel that women as a group are marginalised or not equal to men, fine, do your best as a person to better your cause in a manner that is safe and legal.

The more extreme forms of feminism (radical) I associate with misandry. The idea that there is patriarchal system in place and that this has caused oppression and inequality may have been true 60 or more years ago but personally I feel we are long passed that horrible era and have moved on as a people.

Feminism has achieved great things for women. I do feel that men are looked over on now though, and that it is frowned upon to promote men's rights. The focus in my experience is on the women and the blame/suspicion is all too readily put on men. An example of this would be where I work; Female dominated sector, women are allowed change both males and females. However male staff are only allowed change the male service users. This has always irked me, as I do just as good a job as my female co-workers and am as competent and responsible as them also. Even though I work there and have been entrusted to care for the service users I am not allowed change females.

Really I feel that there should be equal rights for both men and women, however lately in my opinion the balance is firmly tipped in favour of women. In saying that I think the world would have been a horrible place if it wasn't for feminism.

donfers

CDfm wrote: »

Surely you mean Emily Davison.

I don't believe women in Irish Society get a bad deal overall.They live longer, are less likely to become homeless, less likely to be in prison, have lower incidence of suicide,less then 40% of mothers work. have priority on housing and they are preferentialy treated at family law. So overall the quality of life the majority of women enjoy is greater than that of men.

You have chosen metrics there that they conveniently choose to overlook.

They find their own metrics to suggest they are discriminated against in other areas.

The key is that no one gender should have a monopoly on victimhood and no movement should suggest that somehow their mistreatment is

a) entirely because of their gender (**** happens....and it's not always just because you are a woman and there is a dark insidious misogynist conspiracy that stops you from becoming zillionaire president of the world who nobody can ever make a joke about and who is viewed always with goddesslike respect)

b) somehow more important or more worthy than the suffering of others just because of the arbitrary gender you belong to.

A person who wishes to erase suffering and injustice (if they truly believe in justice) should look beyond mere gender boundaries when seeking to erase it, otherwise it is borne out of self-interest and not very just at all, just small-minded, hypocritical and counter-productive

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

Given that self determination is part of the feminist philosophy I don't think it's far to do that.

If its a philosophy that implies there are some unified beliefs so what are they?

Nevyn

CDfm wrote: »

If its a philosophy that implies there are some unified beliefs so what are they?

I'm not going to get into a feminism 101 debate/discussion here,
this thread is about what men's attitudes to wards what they percieve as feminism and feminist and I don't want to drag it off topic.

The Corinthian

Feminism is a trade union for women. That is, it is a movement for the representation and defense of rights for only one of the two genders of our species.

Feminism is only about equality in so far that promoting the interests and rights on women, who were historically greatly disadvantaged, brings them up to an equal status to men. Where women have an advantage in rights, compared to men, then feminism will not seek to redress that inequality and will even act against equality, to protect the gender it is representing.

Feminism still is important in many parts of the World, but has become a liability in the West. Where once one could look at inequalities and clearly see that they were imposed against women, increasingly we find that those inequalities are self imposed in the West.

For example, socially (and in some cases legally) child care or home-making is not an option open to men, or at the very least a much more difficult one to follow. Women guard this effective monopoly on child care, to the point that some feminist groups actively campaign against father's rights groups. Ironically, this assumption of the woman as home-maker and child carer ultimately backfires and forces many to sacrifice their careers (leading to women having poorer salaries and promotion prospects).

Feminism is causing more harm than good in the West. Equality is not perfect, but most of what is holding back the remaining inequalities have more to do with both male and female attitudes than any patriarchal conspiracy and has left Feminism to devolve to post-feminist, sex and the city, cake and eat it crap.

Macha

The vast majority of generalisations of feminism are inaccurate. If someone is going is say "Feminism is X or Y" they're probably going to be talking about a small number of people.

I'd have more respect for people's opinions of feminism if they were able to recognise that not ALL feminists think A or B, in the same way that most people can understand that not ALL men think A or B.

Historically men have dominated in the public sphere and forced women to dominate in the private sphere. In Ireland, men generally stil dominate the public sphere and women dominate the private sphere. When either attempts to step into the other sphere, barriers are encountered in the form of attitudes, institutional barriers or even legal barriers.

Re: the argument that people are worse off elsewhere. If we were to apply that all the time, we would never discuss any issues in Ireland because there's always somewhere far worse off. I'm as happy to discuss the adultery laws in Saudi Arabia as I am the difficulties Irish women have in juggling childcare and a career (or men's fight for paternity leave) - it doesn't mean I'm under any allusion that the two are on a par with each other.

Herbal Deity

taconnol wrote: »

The vast majority of generalisations of feminism are inaccurate. If someone is going is say "Feminism is X or Y" they're probably going to be talking about a small number of people.

I'd imagine the amount one can say about feminism without it being generalising is very small.

"Feminism" means so many different things to so many different people that it is, in essence, an empty term with little substance.

metrovelvet

I would have thought the guys would love feminism because it would make sex without a wedding ring possible as well as not putting your hands in your pockets to pick up the tab.

Monkeybonkers

donfers wrote: »

I think most reasonable people here in TGC believe in human rights and thus it can be said we are all feminists.

I'm a feminist :eek:. I wasn't aware of this.
Anything specific I need to know?
Don't want to let the side down :pac:

donfers

metrovelvet wrote: »

I would have thought the guys would love feminism because it would make sex without a wedding ring possible as well as not putting your hands in your pockets to pick up the tab.

You see, if you insinuate men are sex-mad, commitment phobes who count the pennies that's grand and a laugh, if I made a similar comment about women on another forum I'd be infracted before I could stick a smilie in there

getting to the point, as the corinthian alluded too earlier, a lot of reasonable folk, men and women have a problem with the double standard within feminism i.e. equality where it suits.

If the titanic is going down or a burglar enters the house or there is heavy stuff to carry or the bill comes in the restaurant at the end of the meal it's amazing how many staunch feminists suddenly yield to more old-fashioned traditional viewpoints and notions of equality go out the window

Macha

donfers wrote: »

If the titanic is going down or a burglar enters the house or there is heavy stuff to carry or the bill comes in the restaurant at the end of the meal it's amazing how many staunch feminists suddenly yield to more old-fashioned traditional viewpoints and notions of equality go out the window

How many?

Herbal Deity

I think it's a flawed and lazy assumption that women who are pro-equal rights automatically revert to old-fashioned ideas when it comes to paying their way etc.

It's as lazy and stupid as the "no atheists in foxholes" argument.

CDfm

It doesn't seem to me that feminism has anything to do with equality.Its more like synonomous preferential treatment for women.

Herbal Deity

CDfm wrote: »

It doesn't seem to me that feminism has anything to do with equality.Its more like synonomous preferential treatment for women.

Is it really?

What makes you arrive at this conclusion?

CDfm

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Is it really?

What makes you arrive at this conclusion?

Its just from my perspective and the things I percieve as important as I posted earlier.

I don't believe women in Irish Society get a bad deal overall.They live longer, are less likely to become homeless, less likely to be in prison, have lower incidence of suicide,less then 40% of mothers work. have priority on housing and they are preferentialy treated at family law. So overall the quality of life the majority of women enjoy is greater than that of men.

Now if the feminist movement was egalitarian I would think differently but it does not seem to be to me they would also want these issues dealt with.

I often think that men are another race or another species when I read feminist literature. So the feminist movement is adversorial in all areas and often in areas where there should be no disagreement. DV for instance.

So much of it is based on extreme situations - like studies done in Womens Refuges in Ireland where 50% of the occupancy are Travellers will reflect the traveller community rather than society or if an argument is made based on the treatment of women in Iran. It undermines the credibility of what are worthwhile aims by spinning them, just like Tony Blairs WMD Iraq Dossier.

Some aspects of Irish feminism (social policy) are rooted in socialist political and economic theory and expect the state to actively subsidise and intervene for women.

I have a good friend who set up a business a few years back who overheard her friend who she had hired tell her temp how once her year was up she was planning to be pregnant. My friend said this would have killed her business and wiped her out financially so she moved to a serviced office. She could not tell her (former) friend or she would have been wiped out. When she eventually hired a reolacement she hired a man. So much for sisterhood butbalso the cost of employing a woman.

Other policies are costed as a cost to the exchequer or to the economy I just wonder why these are not. Other countries get around the issue by transfering welfare budgets into subsidised childcare which is a much fairer way of helping women , benefiting society and benefitting the economy. So women should be seen as an economic asset.Thats a fundamerntal flaw IMHO.

K-9

Feminism has reached its end. It has achieved general wide ranging reforms for women. There are big differences in what women of today want and it doesn't look like feminism can, or wants to, recognise that.

vicecreamsundae

donfers wrote: »

You see, if you insinuate men are sex-mad, commitment phobes who count the pennies that's grand and a laugh, if I made a similar comment about women on another forum I'd be infracted before I could stick a smilie in there


If the titanic is going down or a burglar enters the house or there is heavy stuff to carry or the bill comes in the restaurant at the end of the meal it's amazing how many staunch feminists suddenly yield to more old-fashioned traditional viewpoints and notions of equality go out the window

i don't think that comment insinuates that men are sex mad commitmentphobes.
i'm a woman, and of course a feminist, and i thank the women's movement for changing things so that it is acceptable for me to have sexual relationships without getting married, and for fighting for my rights to education, employment and my own bank account to support myself financially.

also your second point there is just wrong. firstly, as for the whole women-and-children-first thing, that was generally a male decision -women didn't ORDER to be first. and secondly, feminists don't expect men to pay the bill at a restaurant...that's sexist. i think you are a little confused.

CDfm

vicecreamsundae wrote: »

also your second point there is just wrong. firstly, as for the whole women-and-children-first thing, that was generally a male decision -women didn't ORDER to be first. and secondly, feminists don't expect men to pay the bill at a restaurant...that's sexist. i think you are a little confused.

Ok vicecreamsundae. look at a real biggie.

women and children first -thats certainly the case at family law.
men are routinely put out of their homes and end up paying for houses they cant use.

If feminism was about equality you would not have that situation. Everyones accomadation needs and custody issues would be dealt with equaly.

i

Herbal Deity

I'm sorry, but how does family law being unjust mean that feminism is about nothing but preferential treatment for women?

CDfm

Herbal Deity wrote: »

I'm sorry, but how does family law being unjust mean that feminism is about nothing but preferential treatment for women?

HD conveniently skirts around mucho big issue by the feminist movement.

Prefers to talk about paying for her own lunch and nightclub tickets :rolleyes:

If egalitarianism was a central tenet of feminism then a lot of this gender stuff would be redundant. I am into equality and naturally believe in equality. Feminism has me as the enemy.

Feminism fosters genderism and feminist theory is often unsupported by facts and when they are not there -they simply get made up. Fine philosophy that is.

Will

CDfm - if you are gonna make the type of claims you have in your above post please post some proof and follow your own advice

Feminism fosters genderism and feminist theory is often unsupported by facts and when they are not there -they simply get made up. Fine philosophy that is.

just a general comment - It's been a good discussion so far, apart from one or two silly posts so let's try keep the same quality and get a good discussion going so we can all learn something

Macha

CDfm wrote: »

If egalitarianism was a central tenet of feminism then a lot of this gender stuff would be redundant. I am into equality and naturally believe in equality. Feminism has me as the enemy.

In that case, you oppose any specific group's organised quest for equality, including homosexuals, those fighting against racism etc because everyone should just be using the singular banner of 'anti-discrimination' or 'equality'. Therefore I assume you are against the UK group 'Fathers 4 Justice' because they should not be identifying themselves in such a genderist way.

CDfm wrote: »

Feminism fosters genderism and feminist theory is often unsupported by facts and when they are not there -they simply get made up. Fine philosophy that is.

Examples please. And if you resort to the lunatic fringe, I will be disappointed CDfm!

PeakOutput

good to see i agree with most of the posters on a thread for once

i think feminism is an outdated idea and in my experience anyone who has explained to me that they are feminist has had some pretty hypocritical views on equal rights. i have no problem with womens centers excluding men as there are practical reasons for this related to the execution of their service but i have a serious problem when their policies are exclusionary and they refuse to acknowledge or criticise the same injustices happening against men

the general civil rights movement is were its at right now imo everyone equal no matter what gender race religon or sexuality.

PeakOutput

taconnol wrote: »

Therefore I assume you are against the UK group 'Fathers 4 Justice' because they should not be identifying themselves in such a genderist way.

i wonder how long you would have to wait for a condemnation of a husband who beats his wife from someone in this group? then compare it with how long it would take a feminist group to condemn a woman for beating her husband

wasnt the rape crisis center shown recently to not treat male rape victims equally? i cant remember the exact story maybe someone else does but i remember thinking how disgracefull and typical of the feminist movement that was(i am aware that the rape crisis center would not describe itself as part of the feminist movement)

at heart ithink 99% of feminists mean well jsut like 99% of people in other groups but many times their views cause just as much discrimination as they object to and i just think their existence in a developed country is no longer necessary and everyones cause should be united as one for equal rights for all

CDfm

Will wrote: »

CDfm - if you are gonna make the type of claims you have in your above post please post some proof and follow your own advice

Here are studies I cited elsewhere on another thread and the facts speak for themselves.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=65520242&postcount=14



SUMMARY: This bibliography examines 271 scholarly investigations: 211 empirical studies and 60 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 365,000. http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Here is a further study by the University of British Columbia

http://www.amen.ie/reports/28004.pdf

What it does is polarise positions in an Animal Farm way " Four Legs Good -Two Legs Bad" and is every bit as bad as the system they sought to change.

Feminism now is the unfair and misleading establishment as opposed to being on the side of equality,fairness and justice.

I dont want to get hung up on that part of it but just to say that Domestic Violence in Ireland is Irish Feminisms Shop Window.

So if the OP is asking about male attitudes to feminism I can only answer on the bits I see.

Macha

PeakOutput wrote: »

i wonder how long you would have to wait for a condemnation of a husband who beats his wife from someone in this group? then compare it with how long it would take a feminist group to condemn a woman for beating her husband

How long?

PeakOutput wrote: »

wasnt the rape crisis center shown recently to not treat male rape victims equally? i cant remember the exact story maybe someone else does but i remember thinking how disgracefull and typical of the feminist movement that was(i am aware that the rape crisis center would not describe itself as part of the feminist movement)

If that is the case, then it is a disgrace and an example of sexism. But it doesn't prove that sexism against women doesn't exist or shouldn't be addressed.

I don't get this argument that just because men are discriminated against as well, suddenly feminism is pointless.

trout

Equality ... by which I mean treating all people the same regardless of race, gender, belief, sexuality etc, I think that's well accepted by most, not all, but most people.

Where it gets tricky for me, is when people have more extremist views, opinions, or experiences ... which makes it harder for me to appreciate or relate to. That applies to any extremist view, gender, race, religious belief ... but the point is made more blunt by the acceptance of gender equality at a macro level in this country. I can't say there is equality throughout this country ... only in the spheres I move in, but that's only my own, limited experience.

What I find harder to handle is the micro angle. I can appreciate that there is a gender pay-gap (for example) but I don't see feel myself as responsible for it ... where I work, there are payscales, and the differentiations are made by experience, academic/professional qualifications, and performance based on objectives ... gender doesn't come into it; so when I hear individuals talk about this, or see the media campaigns ... I wonder what I'm expected to do, as an individual? Do I just feel guilty? Say nothing? Empathise?

So, my approach is simple but effective (like meself) ... I can't claim to be a feminist, as I can't claim to understand feminism ... and I don't try to ... I just treat try to treat people as I want them to treat me.

I will engage with anyone who is reasonable and fair-minded ... I find it much harder to warm to people with extremist views, or blind devotions to a one-sided agena ... what does that make me?

Herbal Deity

CDfm wrote: »

If egalitarianism was a central tenet of feminism then a lot of this gender stuff would be redundant.

Since when are we ruled by feminists?

Your idea that since feminism hasn't solved any gender discrimination affecting men, therefore it must be anti-men is ridiculous.

Why should feminism have to be about equality or else be discriminatory? I don't see what's wrong about looking at areas where men are treated preferentially to women and seeking to change laws or attitudes, why should they be obliged to also campaign for male issues? Is a homosexual rights movement discriminatory if they don't seek to improve rights for or address attitudes towards black people?

Now, once again, it is an empty term because what laws and attitudes "feminists" seek to address and what their ideals are vary dramatically.

But it's too easy and lazy IMO to dismiss all those calling themselves feminists as bitches with bees in their bonnets.

Men need a masculist movement, moaning about feminism not considering male issues achieves nothing and is completely illogical.

Charlie.

CDfm wrote: »

I don't believe women in Irish Society get a bad..........less then 40% of mothers work........So overall the quality of life the majority of women enjoy is greater than that of men.

I can't understand this point. So you're saying woman have a better quality of life because many (according to your stats) do not work when they become a parent. Do you think many woman have a free choice to work or not when they become a parent? If not working provides a better quality of life, why do most men continue to work when they become a parent?

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

In that case, you oppose any specific group's organised quest for equality, including homosexuals, those fighting against racism etc because everyone should just be using the singular banner of 'anti-discrimination' or 'equality'. Therefore I assume you are against the UK group 'Fathers 4 Justice' because they should not be identifying themselves in such a genderist way.


Examples please. And if you resort to the lunatic fringe, I will be disappointed CDfm!

I have cited some studies above and in my first post I just concentrated on what I see as important -the quality of life stuff. I am not opposed to equality and support egalitarian issues.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=65550594&postcount=12

On fathers4justice I really dont follow it a lot. Bob Geldof is a supporter I believe. I the UK you did have scope until recently for that type of high profile protest which in Ireland you dont have. John Waters won his case in the UK and would have been unlikely to have done so in Ireland.

I would tend to back away from supporting groups who want to go toe to toe "in the struggle" with feminists as too extreme -they would be as extreme as Womens Aid are and WA are a mainstream organisation.

It appears that any reform of family law or the abuse industry to tackle women who abuse or are violent is considered misogynist.

Child abuse by women is the fastest growing reported area of abuse according to Esther Rantzen and Childline. I have brought up on other threads stats about lesbian dv, elder abuse etc and it kind of kills threads off.

How to **** did this happen.

CDfm

Charlie. wrote: »

I can't understand this point. So you're saying woman have a better quality of life because many (according to your stats) do not work when they become a parent. Do you think many woman have a free choice to work or not when they become a parent? If not working provides a better quality of life, why do most men continue to work when they become a parent?

I am saying that if the woman has the better earning power than its logical for pop to stay at home.

In family law, the mother is considered the carer and the guy is meant to go out to work so its very difficult for aguy to get custody etc in the case of a family break-up.

But the option to stay at home is a major perk of motherhood.

If a man stays at home,it is unusual or he is unemployed whereas a woman is a super duper homemaker.

We had a great thread on Marriage and the law in Ireland -sticky material I would have thought but take a peak on the differences between mens rights and womens rights legally and say what you think then

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

Charlie.

CDfm wrote: »

I am saying that if the woman has the better earning power than its logical for pop to stay at home.

That didn't come across in your post

CDfm wrote: »

In family law, the mother is considered the carer and the guy is meant to go out to work so its very difficult for aguy to get custody etc in the case of a family break-up.

Yes I agree and that is really unfair, men are totally discriminated against in the area of family law. Is this the fault of feminists though?

CDfm wrote: »

But the option to stay at home is a major perk of motherhood.

I would say the "option" to stay at home is a perk for parenthood. Ideally whether this is the mother or father should be as a result of a mutual decision.

CDfm wrote: »

If a man stays at home,it is unusual or he is unemployed whereas a woman is a super duper homemaker.

Ok so you are agreeing that mothers usually stay at home as a result of social and cultural norms rather than actually having the choice?

It is unusual for a man to stay at home. Is this the fault of feminists? The opposite I believe. Oh and as for comment "a woman is a super duper homemaker"....not rising to the bait;) but it does say a lot on why you have an issue with feminism.

CDfm

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Since when are we ruled by feminists?

Your idea that since feminism hasn't solved any gender discrimination affecting men, therefore it must be anti-men is ridiculous.

I suppose you have sort of nailed it there - I see the brand of feminism mainstream in Ireland as promoting gender discrimination against me.

Men need a masculist movement, moaning about feminism not considering male issues achieves nothing and is completely illogical.

Or you need the feminist movement to embrace egalitarian principles.

Do you have brothers, uncles, boyfriend ,father,husband or son. They will be affected by the health and other issues. Are they a different race or species to you? As a citizen do you belive in fairness ? Subsitute skin colour or religion into your argument and try to sell it.

What the world needs is another movement. Ya right :rolleyes:

CDfm

Charlie. wrote: »

It is unusual for a man to stay at home. Is this the fault of feminists? The opposite I believe. Oh and as for comment "a woman is a super duper homemaker"....not rising to the bait;) but it does say a lot on why you have an issue with feminism.

So you dont like my racy prose

But you havent read the thread on the law and marriage -most of it was written by a woman teacher.

no bait here.

Does a woman have more rights than a man to custody of the children and the family home.

Thats a statement of fact irrespective of their arrangements in the marriage on who works.

Herbal Deity

CDfm wrote: »

Or you need the feminist movement to embrace egalitarian principles.

Do you have brothers, uncles, boyfriend ,father,husband or son. They will be affected by the health and other issues. Are they a different race or species to you? As a citizen do you belive in fairness ? Subsitute skin colour or religion into your argument and try to sell it.

What the world needs is another movement. Ya right :rolleyes:

You can't lump every issue in the world into one movement. There are too many issues and one large movement addressing them all would be inefficient. Nothing would ever get done.

Divide and conquer.

CDfm

Herbal Deity wrote: »

You can't lump every issue in the world into one movement. There are too many issues and one large movement addressing them all would be inefficient. Nothing would ever get done.

Divide and conquer.

`

But if you look at the thread here we have general agreement on egalitarianism (love that word and I heard it from a woman) but I think that people like me believed that feminism was about civil rights for all.
A two way street and not a one way street.

What we are getting is a version of unioinism and republicanism played out along gender lines. The system has been created to cause inequality through a conflict based mindset.

So you are saying feminism should not have civil rights for all as a central tenet -sociologists call the system "structural inequality" so you want to bring down a bad structure and build an equally bad one. Lovely.

Charlie.

CDfm wrote: »

But you havent read the thread on the law and marriage -most of it was written by a woman teacher.

You added that in after/while I was replying I think so no, not yet.

CDfm wrote: »

Does a woman have more rights than a man to custody of the children and the family home.

Thats a statement of fact irrespective of their arrangements in the marriage on who works.

One which I have already agreed with you on. Men are totally discriminated against in this regard but as I asked before is this the fault of feminists?

The way I see it, social and cultural norms exist. I don't blame them on men, I don't blame them on woman. I do however respect those that try to change them.

Feminists (both men and woman) fought for equality for woman in areas where they were discriminated against. Are they to blame because a similar movement for men's/human rights haven't achieved equality in family law ect?

Wibbs

trout wrote: »

I will engage with anyone who is reasonable and fair-minded ... I find it much harder to warm to people with extremist views, or blind devotions to a one-sided agena ... what does that make me?

Sensible.

CDfm

Charlie. wrote: »

You added that in after/while I was replying I think so no, not yet.

its probably the most concise piece of writting on marriage you will find on boards thanks to lazygal.

She is a legend and it deserves sticky status for the quality and clarity.

One which I have already agreed with you on. Men are totally discriminated against in this regard but as I asked before is this the fault of feminists

Yes I do.

The way I see it, social and cultural norms exist. I don't blame them on men, I don't blame them on woman. I do however respect those that try to change them.

But if you try to change discrimination with other discrimination well...

Feminists (both men and woman) fought for equality for woman in areas where they were discriminated against. Are they to blame because a similar movement for men's/human rights haven't achieved equality in family law ect?

Feminism would seem not to be about civil rights.Certainly not in Ireland.