In what ways are men discriminated against?

The Corinthian

Zulu wrote: »

Couldn't even the most valid complaints of discrimination be dismissed as "whining"?

For me whining is not that one makes a complaint, valid or otherwise, but that it is all they do.

...if this thread was held in the ladies lounge, a male input to a similar thread accusing women of "whining" wouldn't be tolerated, yet men aren't afforded the same privileges on Boards. It would appear that it's acceptable for some women to be wilting roses that need to have their opinions protected from the aggressive men, but men don't need the same protection. A prejudice towards both sexes!

You should direct such points to the moderators of tGC, as what you describe would ultimately be their responsibility - they shape and implement policy here, just as all moderators to on their fora.

Given this, the situation has improved; two years ago, this thread would have been locked by now for fomenting a war of the sexes. Perhaps the message is getting through, or perhaps it was the realization that such censorship would leave this forum with little more than metrosexual threads that has done this.

Zulu

The Corinthian wrote: »

For me whining is not that one makes a complaint, valid or otherwise, but that it is all they do.

And thats fair enough TC, however, as a point I raised earlier - it all has to start somewhere. For some this start could be complaining on the internet to find validation. However, if that's to be met with mockery, dismissal &/or belittlement it's hardly going to help progress the issue in a positive fashion! <again thats not aimed at you TC, I'm talking in general here>

You should direct such points to the moderators of tGC, ...

No! Again it wasn't my intention to replicate the LL for men, I'm just highlighting that society expects certain things from the sexes. It's "accepted" that women can be brow beat into submission and thus require a non aggressive arena to discuss "womens issues", but this isn't "accepted" for men, at least not "real" men.

Dudess

Balmed Out wrote: »

Dudess wrote: »

Not untrue but "I wouldn't give her a mickey if I'd a bag of them" etc is always being trotted out against female public figures who have the audacity to not be hot.

Youve never heard a woman make a similarly disparaging remark ???

oh come on, now really, just where... did I say or imply that? You are the one who said men don't do it. I simply said men do (try the troglodyte forum - aka after hours for starters). I never once said women don't.

The Corinthian I'm still bemused at your comparison of not wanting racial integration to not wanting to have sex with someone. Yes, because physical desire and all the changes that come with it are relevant to not wanting racial harmony...

Onanon

Suicide is a very gendered issue for men. I'm assuming the majority of posters here know someone, or have themselves been intimately affected by the suicide of a man.

The CSO figures 8/10 of the completed suicides here in Ireland are men, and men at all age brackets are at a four times higher risk of suicide. The highest risk group are men aged 18 -25. In Ireland, there were 500+ deaths identified as suicides. As with any suicide figures, they are unreported by up to 20%.

In the past 4 years there have been big changes implemented like the 'Please talk' higher education scheme, and the Samaritans SMS service. The LGBTQ mental health services in particular have come a huge amount. However, there hasn't been hasn't been one targeted specifically at men aged 18-25 who aren't GBTQ.

As a result, men, who could otherwise have been helped, are killing themselves because of government omission. I would look at the Scottish efforts in this demographic for a real success story, and would encourage the Irish government to imitate it.

The Corinthian

Zulu wrote: »

And thats fair enough TC, however, as a point I raised earlier - it all has to start somewhere.

No disagreement. All I said if it starts somewhere and then sits there indefinitely, then it becomes whining.

Dudess wrote: »

The Corinthian I'm still bemused at your comparison of not wanting racial integration to not wanting to have sex with someone. Yes, because physical desire and all the changes that come with it are relevant to not wanting racial harmony...

Both are things one 'feels' and may retrospectively 'justify' or 'explain', are they not?

Look, perhaps I'm being overly pedantic. If you don't understand, then no problem - it's hardly a pivotal argumentative point.

Balmed Out

Dudess we seem to have our wires crossed. When you made the point of what men say (with regard to the mickeys), I took it to mean you felt this was a gender specific thing.
What I said was that men dont comment on the style of women in the public sphere. Perhaps we do but women do so in a completely different league, look at all the womens mag's commenting on other womens appearance, weight, relationships etc, the vast, vast, vast majority of men dont care (and many women too). The problem of women who dare not to be hot is really due ot other women judging and them caring.

Dudess

Balmed Out wrote: »

Dudess we seem to have our wires crossed. When you made the point of what men say (with regard to the mickeys), I took it to mean you felt this was a gender specific thing.
What I said was that men dont comment on the style of women in the public sphere. Perhaps we do but women do so in a completely different league, look at all the womens mag's commenting on other womens appearance, weight, relationships etc, the vast, vast, vast majority of men dont care (and many women too). The problem of women who dare not to be hot is really due ot other women judging and them caring.

No it isn't just that in fairness - try saying that to fat women who get abuse shouted at them by men moreso than by women.

I agree it isn't a competition but I'm just saying it's unfair to put the blame at the feet of women only. There are dicks from either gender.

seamus

My wife has finally come around to my way of thinking that the P&G "Proud sponsor of Mums" ads are in fact deeply offensive and sexist against men, by implying that a mother is the key to raising a child.

While I completely accept that they're running with their key demographic, the inference is that only mums do all of the household work and child raising. The role of the father in raising the child is completely ignored, as if it didn't even exist. I'd probably feel doubly offended if I was a single father raising a child.

iptba

Regarding advertising: I remember a radio discussion (I think on a BBC Radio station) where they were looking at why men can belittled and made to appear stupid in ads. A female marketing executive said that for market X, this was acceptable as women were the main consumers/purchasers. That was seen as a valid reason and not challenged.

However, the next (obvious) step was not done: reverse the genders and see if everyone would be equally as happy with this sort of logic: would it be ok to belittle women and make them appear stupid, if the primary consumers/purchasers were men. This argument would be less acceptable to many/most people.

iptba

Dudess wrote: »

Apart from bitching about feminists for not taking on their causes?

I think it can be useful to bring up feminism now and again. Feminism has sold itself as an egalitarian movement so many people may justifiably think any gender disadvantages men have should be dealt with by feminists/feminism.

iptba

Balmed Out wrote: »

This has absolutely nothing to do with discrimination of women by men. This is wholly and completely women being judgemental of each other. Do you really think any man gives a rats arse about what Michelle Obama, Margaret Thatcher or Mary Robinson are wearing?
When it comes to discrimination of women too often its women not men that are the cause (the opposite holds true too but I dont believe to the same extent)
Anyone who has worked in a large company will have witnessed vindictive backstabbing of women by women.

Going slightly off-topic but thought this research was interesting (I first heard it mentioned on the Sean Moncrieff Show on Newstalk:

http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2011/11/22/women-behaving-badly/

A new study out of the University of Ottawa should come as some relief to working women who worry their inner-bitch may be a little too ready to show itself around the office, particularly when it comes to how we treat our sexy female colleagues.

[..]

In the first experiment, women were exposed to either an attractive female peer who was dressed in a sexy outfit or someone who was dressed conservatively.

[..]

Results showed that almost all women were aggressive toward the attractive peer. The women in this situation were more likely to roll their eyes at their peer, stare her up and down and show anger while she was in the room. When she left the room, many of them laughed at her, ridiculed her appearance, and/or suggested that she was sexually available.

By contrast, when the same peer was dressed conservatively, the group of women assigned to this second scenario barely noticed her, and none of them discussed her when she left the room.

The Corinthian

iptba wrote: »

I think it can be useful to bring up feminism now and again. Feminism has sold itself as an egalitarian movement so many people may justifiably think any gender disadvantages men have should be dealt with by feminists/feminism.

Personally I would not 'bitch' about feminism not taking on men's causes.

I will, however criticize feminism for claiming to represent gender equality and then only taking on women's causes, because that is not representing gender equality, only women.

So, either feminism should take on men's causes or stop claiming to be about gender equality. Then I think you'll find the 'bitching' will stop.

iptba

Zulu wrote: »

And thats fair enough TC, however, as a point I raised earlier - it all has to start somewhere. For some this start could be complaining on the internet to find validation. However, if that's to be met with mockery, dismissal &/or belittlement it's hardly going to help progress the issue in a positive fashion! <again thats not aimed at you TC, I'm talking in general here>

Yes. Consciousness raising is useful by itself. Many issues will need popular support. It's not like science where a single individual or team can go off and solve a problem themselves - these are issues where one needs a critical mass of people to also be onside.

Complaining on the internet also has a value in seeing which views are more or less acceptable at a particular point in time. Some ideas may be "too far out there".

Complaining on the internet can be useful to hone arguments on particular points. Also, I've had quite a few letters published in newspapers and have probably borrowed a few points other people made in my time when doing it. My letter writing was also influenced by previous discussions where I saw what was considered the stronger arguments.

Internet discussions have also helped me analyse shaming tactics that can be used to try to get people to stop raising issues.

grames_bond

I think this clears it up!




This is intended to be in good humour!

py2006

Dudess wrote: »

And what are guys gonna do about these grievances? Apart from bitching about feminists for not taking on their causes? For all their evil and the way they make this world so terrible for men with its male president of America at least feminists try to do something about what they consider discrimination.

Unfortunately, not all feminists fully realise what the movement is about. There is a branch of extremist among them that do the movement no favour and irritate the hell out of people with their double standards and deluded comments and behaviour.

Anyway, this thread is about discrimination against men, not about 'heads' coming in and telling us how we blame women.

vicwatson

Women can change their name when they get married and can legally be referred to as their maiden and marriage name if they want, if a man wanted to do it he'd have to do it by deedpoll.

yawha

Zulu wrote: »

The comments I hear with regard to ewan mcgregor, guy pearce, and daniel craig...

This is a thread asking about what ways men are discriminated against. Some posts are hitting the note, and some aren't. That said, belittling posters opinions is hardly a route to the truth. Accusing men of "whining" on this thread - a thread asking about male discrimination is poor form, and disingenuous. Couldn't even the most valid complaints of discrimination be dismissed as "whining"?

...and it raises the point...
[Please note: the following is NOT a pop at either this forum or the LL, but I feel it's valid. Frankly, I'm not complaining about either forum, nor am I suggesting any changes to the same, I just want to highlight a difference as to how the topic is handled as I think this mirror the "real world"]
...if this thread was held in the ladies lounge, a male input to a similar thread accusing women of "whining" wouldn't be tolerated, yet men aren't afforded the same privileges on Boards. It would appear that it's acceptable for some women to be wilting roses that need to have their opinions protected from the aggressive men, but men don't need the same protection. A prejudice towards both sexes!

Well, tbh, if in tLL it is indeed true that women can make ridiculous complaints and call them discrimination, and if other posters are not allowed to criticise them, then that's an issue with tLL, as opposed to there being an issue with tGC because we allow criticism of silly complaints which are called discrimination.

Tbh, personally, not just here but in many male forums, particularly by those calling themselves MRAs, I see so much clutching at straws, trying to make out how bad men have it, when in reality the issues don't affect them personally at all, are entirely trivial or aren't gender issues at all.

Thing is, I firmly believe that there are issues affecting men and that there exists discrimination against men. I oppose "whining" and dubious claims about male discrimination because I care about real issues affecting men, and don't want them to get lost in noise.

Like, male suicide, women being seen as the default caregiver to children, fathers' rights, societal expectation not to show emotion or weakness etc. are all valid issues.

Things like women getting laid more easily, claims that men's body image is a huge problem because women make such harsh comments to men, anecdotes about women being mean to men, feminist conspiracy theories, general claims that men are despised by society etc. I find difficult to take seriously and I think take away from actual serious issues which affect men.

The Corinthian

What feminist conspiracy theories?

iptba

There is too much censoring of men raising points about men's lives in the 3-D world. I'm sure plenty of the people, who directly or indirectly cause this censorship, claim they do it, or believe they do this, for the greater good.

panda100

vicwatson wrote: »

Women can change their name when they get married and can legally be referred to as their maiden and marriage name if they want, if a man wanted to do it he'd have to do it by deedpoll.

Really?? You honestly think that women changing their name to their husbands is discrimination against men? Do you think the title 'Mr' is discriminatory too, as it doesn't allow men to declare their marital status or sexual availability in their title?

PrincessLola

panda100 wrote: »

Really?? You honestly think that women changing their name to their husbands is discrimination against men? Do you think the title 'Mr' is discriminatory too, as it doesn't allow men to declare their marital status or sexual availability in their title?

Yeah, I feel like some of the things listed on here are just differences.

The name change thing is left over from a practise of making women take their husbands names when they got married.

The Corinthian

panda100 wrote: »

Really?? You honestly think that women changing their name to their husbands is discrimination against men?

It is if they want to change their name to the wife's one. Doesn't happen very often, but in fairness it does upon occasion. So while it's hardly a major topic of discrimination, that I personally would not lose too much sleep over, it still is a fair example of where the law discriminates solely on gender.

Do you think the title 'Mr' is discriminatory too, as it doesn't allow men to declare their marital status or sexual availability in their title?

TBH, Mrs and Miss are all but gone from the English language, at least in usage, having been replaced with the more generic Ms. In other languages, while Ms does not exist, the equivalent of Mrs is typically used regardless of marital status. So the analogy is a bit moot.

iptba

PrincessLola wrote: »

Yeah, I feel like some of the things listed on here are just differences.

Yes, it is probably true that some points may only be differences. But it can be useful to throw things out in a brain-storming session and see if people consider them discrimination or not.

iptba

The Corinthian wrote: »

TBH, Mrs and Miss are all but gone from the English language, at least in usage, having been replaced with the more generic Ms. In other languages, while Ms does not exist, the equivalent of Mrs is typically used regardless of marital status. So the analogy is a bit moot.

I see quite a lot of few women use Miss. From 30s up. For example, when giving their address when there is no need to have any prefix.

Some also use their Irish name ("ni/nic" form) - I can't be sure, but it seems possible in at least a few cases this is done to highlight their unmarried status given the use of "Miss" by others.

(And of course plenty use Mrs but those can be a bit older)

sharper

PrincessLola wrote: »

Yeah, I feel like some of the things listed on here are just differences.

Why should there be any differences? If a man wants to take his wife's name on marriage why not? Either it should be an option available to everyone or no-one.

sam34

ok folks, as per the charter, there is to be no further discussion of TLL, how it's moderated or what the ethos there is. that includes the "if this comment was made in tll..." rhetoric

no further warnings

The Corinthian

iptba wrote: »

I see quite a lot of women use Miss. From 30s up. For example, when giving their address when there is no need to have any prefix.

If you say so. I've not heard anyone use the term miss since school.

PrincessLola

sharper wrote: »

Why should there be any differences? If a man wants to take his wife's name on marriage why not? Either it should be an option available to everyone or no-one.

OK fair enough, I just didn't think men would want to voluntarilly give up their name, a social practise that was used to descriminate against women.

iptba

The Corinthian wrote: »

If you say so. I've not heard anyone use the term miss since school.

Actually, "quite a lot" may be an exaggeration now that I've checked a database*

Approx 900 female names and addresses.

Only 4 Miss.

However, only 21 "Mrs". This is in a context where people really don't need to specify either as it was just looking for name and address. I think a lot more would use Mrs (over Ms.) in situations where prefixes were sought (and hence more might use Miss).

*it was an honest mistake - it has just stood out to me at the time whenever I have seen it and has been slightly frustrating in some situations where I have sorted by first name and then one finds the Mrs/Miss/etc have to be sorted, or even, I've done something thinking everything was sorted and then discover this after

iptba

PrincessLola wrote: »

OK fair enough, I just didn't think men would want to voluntarilly give up their name, a social practise that was used to descriminate against women.

That's what we are conventionally told. However, women these days sometimes do choose to use "Mrs" themselves, even in situations when they don't need to give a prefix so, like with a lot of conventional wisdom, I question whether it is as simple as that.