In what ways are men discriminated against?

Zulu

The Corinthian wrote: »

After all, with the proposed reforms on guardianship (which will effectively remove all guardianship powers from both married and unmarried fathers) and gender quotas in politics further discriminating against men, the situation is not going to get better, only worse.

It'll get a lot worse before people are motivated to make it better. Sadly society doesn't work together to iron out injustices, but rather elite groups selfishly looks after their own interests.

I don't agree that men need to get out there and fight for their cause. It really shouldn't be limited to "men" as a sex, but rather the treatment of people within our society. We shouldn't limit the cause of legitimate injustice to the victims. What is needed is a mature egalitarian approach, not a group of men protesting for men's rights... ...for, in the event of success, that will only leave us another elitist group depriving resources from more worthy causes.

eviltwin

Zulu wrote: »

How would you suggest men "fight for them"? Protest?

A lobby group? A lot of the big organisations that work on behalf of women started small, some were a few like minded people in a sitting room with a pen and paper but it was a start.

As for everyone fighting for men's rights...well I agree with that but good luck. For years women have fought against the inequality, still are, and very few men have backed us up. Its a bit much to expect women to help you along

But yeah you are right...if we start working towards the rights of everyone as a whole maybe we'll get somewhere...sadly its a fact of life certain things only seem to happen to certain people and as a result they are more likely to want to change it.

The Corinthian

Zulu wrote: »

How would you suggest men "fight for them"? Protest?

Recruit sympathetic journalists, lawyers, PR and other professionals. Raise finances to help fight test cases in employment and family law. Collect a list of all the laws that are still on the books that blatantly discriminate against men (such as those that specifically give harsher sentences) and start legal and awareness campaigns to overturn them. Name and shame companies and government bodies that practice discrimination. Set up a central body to promote men's rights and who actually knows how to write press releases and get stories published, rather than the collection of kitchen committees that presently represents the men's rights movement. Question every TD on their position on different Men's rights issues and then publish their responses (or lack thereof) with a copy of their voting history on related issues. Seek representation on equality bodies and in academia. Carry out and publish studies with regards to men's issues. Lobby TD's and senators to reform our archaic family law.

That's off the top of my head. Plenty can be done.

Zulu

eviltwin wrote: »

A lobby group?

Well, they're out there.

For years women have fought against the inequality, still are, and very few men have backed us up. Its a bit much to expect women to help you along

Injustices in our society should be overlooked on the grounds of gender. I don't expect women to help men, but I would have thought that mothers, sisters, & daughters would be concerned for how their sons, brothers, and fathers are treated.
My point is, I don't expect "women" to look out for "men", but I do want to live in a society that concerns itself with injustices visited upon its members.

But yeah you are right...if we start working towards the rights of everyone as a whole maybe we'll get somewhere....

Hopefully ...and if it means I've to work 5 years longer for you so that one day, our grandchildren will live equally promising lives, I ok with that.

Zulu

The Corinthian wrote: »

... rather than the collection of kitchen committees that presently represents the men's rights movement.

It has to start somewhere TC.

eviltwin

Zulu wrote: »

Well, they're out there.

Injustices in our society should be overlooked on the grounds of gender. I don't expect women to help men, but I would have thought that mothers, sisters, & daughters would be concerned for how their sons, brothers, and fathers are treated.
My point is, I don't expect "women" to look out for "men", but I do want to live in a society that concerns itself with injustices visited upon its members.

Hopefully ...and if it means I've to work 5 years longer for you so that one day, our grandchildren will live equally promising lives, I ok with that.

Tbh the only one I know is the Fathers Rights one and Amen but only cause I work in that area. They need a bigger profile.

I agree men's rights have a knock on effect on women but try its not as easy as that. I work for a women's charity and no man ever wants to talk to me! Its like because I represent women it doesn't have anything to do with him so thats the attitude you're up against. If anything I think women in particular would possibly see a men's right group as a threat. I know similar groups in the US are quite traditional in their values and its important not to get lumped in with that.

I think a lot of people would feel that men want more rights by denying women theirs.

The Corinthian

Zulu wrote: »

It has to start somewhere TC.

I don't have an issue with starting small, only with the incompetent, amateurish and personalized nature of many such kitchen committees. They have to grow up or become irrelevant.

eviltwin wrote: »

I think a lot of people would feel that men want more rights by denying women theirs.

Unfortunately that is inevitable. For example, women presently have close on a monopoly of rights over their children. To redress this would mean that women would lose some of these unfair rights, and even if unfair, there will be resistance to this from many quarters.

gizmo555

Zulu wrote: »

I'm surprised no one has mentioned pensions yet, so here's another one to the list:
Pensions.

Women are entitled to the state pension 5 years before men . . .

Probably no one mentioned it because it's not true.

Zulu

...oh I agree, it's part of the problem; it isn't helping the current men's groups. It compounds the problem of trying to achieve the likes of what TC posted.

Zulu

gizmo555 wrote: »

Probably no one mentioned it because it's not true.

You are correct.
Apologies, I should have stated in the UK, which is normalising the difference.

amacachi

If the same actuarial stuff was applied to pensions as insurance women would receive a far lower pension than men since they're likely to receive it for longer. Funny how things work out.

Zulu

amacachi wrote: »

Funny how things work out.

We were discussing state pension. ...but sure it's a moot point now.

amacachi

Zulu wrote: »

We were discussing state pension. ...but sure it's a moot point now.

Applies to both state and private pensions.

Zulu

amacachi wrote: »

Applies to both state and private pensions.

Sorry I just reread your post: "if women's pensions were actuarially adjusted".
My sincerest apologies Amacachi, I though you were suggesting that an actuarial adjustment of women pensions would be favourable & akin to favourable women's insurance. Sorry.

amacachi

Zulu wrote: »

Sorry I just reread your post: "if women's pensions were actuarially adjusted".
My sincerest apologies Amacachi, I though you were suggesting that an actuarial adjustment of women pensions would be favourable & akin to favourable women's insurance. Sorry.

No bother.

gordon_gekko

eviltwin wrote: »

I think men do have their own battles to fight re equality but they don't seem to have the same passion to fight them as women do. Most men I know would give a list of things they feel are unfair but won't fight them. Women weren't just given the rights we have, we had to fight long and hard for them. If men could get together and really push for their rights things would move quicker.

men are not only less likely to complain about thier plight on various issues , they are less likely to have thier complaints listened to than women theese days

gordon_gekko

The Corinthian wrote: »

I'd agree with this unfortunately. Outside of bellyaching on the Internet, like this, men really do not appear to be motivated at all. The few movements out there seem to be father's rights related and generally populated by only those who are affected directly, with only minor levels of support from without.

Of course, it does not help that equality bodies seem not to believe that there is even an issue with men's rights or that they are often dominated by feminist groups that are at best indifferent or even hostile to those issues, but even that does not excuse the complete lack of actual action by men.

I do think that 'bellyaching' does serve an important purpose in that it educates people to the fact that these issues exist; one of the big problems is that many still deny they do. However, there is a point (long past, IMO) when something more needs to be done.

After all, with the proposed reforms on guardianship (which will effectively remove all guardianship powers from both married and unmarried fathers) and gender quotas in politics further discriminating against men, the situation is not going to get better, only worse.

equality authority outfits are dominated by pc liberals of both the male and female variety , as most irish men are white and hetrosexual , they have little business aproaching that crowd

gordon_gekko

eviltwin wrote: »

Tbh the only one I know is the Fathers Rights one and Amen but only cause I work in that area. They need a bigger profile.

I agree men's rights have a knock on effect on women but try its not as easy as that. I work for a women's charity and no man ever wants to talk to me! Its like because I represent women it doesn't have anything to do with him so thats the attitude you're up against. If anything I think women in particular would possibly see a men's right group as a threat. I know similar groups in the US are quite traditional in their values and its important not to get lumped in with that.

I think a lot of people would feel that men want more rights by denying women theirs.

if your tone when approaching men is anything like the one in the above post , im not surprised they show little enthusiasm for what your flogging , your attitude towards male - female dynamics is quite antagonistic

eviltwin

gordon_gekko wrote: »

if your tone when approaching men is anything like the one in the above post , im not surprised they show little enthusiasm for what your flogging , your attitude towards male - female dynamics is quite antagonistic

Eh you might need to explain that Gordon....not sure what you mean!?

I can only speak from experience. Men generally don't express a desire to get behind what I do because - understandably - as its a womens organization they don't think it has relevance. Thats the mistake our founders made years back. Any similar group for men could learn from those mistakes. As someone said earlier it will work best if you can help women see the benefits to them too.

miec

I came across this article yesterday where both teenage girls and boys are protesting against the lad mag culture etc so things may be slowly changing.

@TC you're ideas for a lobby group that challenges discrimination against men are excellent and it is the only method that truly works imho (I currently see this method working in my job).

@Eviltwin Whilst I can see your point about men not helping out in the women's movement, I believe that discrimination against one gender affects the other. When one gender is subjugated for the other, it has a massive impact on society as a whole. We really need to lose this 'us vs them' thinking.

For instance there is growing concern that boys are falling behind academically and there are numerous studies showing that girls are outperforming boys. Now as a woman I could ignore this or not care but I am a mother of a boy and I want him to do well. In particular teenage boys have a much harder time staying in school or doing well so I want there to be level playing field for both sexes. I don't want my son growing up to feel like he should cut his balls off as equally if I had a daughter I don't want her growing up thinking her only value is her body / looks.

In addition as a mother of a teenage boy I worry more about him being attacked, beaten up, mugged etc, it is almost expected that every male will experience some form of violence, often by another man but there is a huge increase in female violence. I dread the day that he may come home with a bloody nose or worse.

I would hate to think that my son, if he becomes a father, will lose his right to his children because he is male or that he cannot babysit because people perceive him to be a potential pervert purely because he is male.

Also male only or female only clubs / schools etc encourage divisions between the genders and highlight the differences. They also oddly enough overly sexualise the other gender. You only have to see that behaviour displayed in single sex schools. It makes them Other (which gender theory is so often obsessed with).

Finally if there is a level / equal playing field for men and women it means we get on better as work colleagues, friends, lovers, as married partners and as parents and as such everyone benefits...well that is my Utopian view of life between the sexes.

Atomicjuicer

Has paternity leave been mentioned?

Men deserve some time with their own children.

Zulu

Super post miec!

The Corinthian

miec wrote: »

Whilst I can see your point about men not helping out in the women's movement, I believe that discrimination against one gender affects the other. When one gender is subjugated for the other, it has a massive impact on society as a whole. We really need to lose this 'us vs them' thinking.

The whole 'us vs them' thinking is a lot more complicated than that.

On one level I completely agree because ultimately women are still mothers, sisters and daughters to men.

At the same time we've seen feminism in the West move slowly away from a fight for rights to a fight for choice. Much of the reason for this is that women have, at least on paper, all the same rights as men. Indeed, women actually have more rights on paper than men. Increasingly examples from the past or from other countries have been used to justify many feminist positions here and now too. So what do you fight for when the fight is pretty much over?

An excellent example of this is where women are still disadvantaged, in such areas as salaries, employment and political representation. When we examine these areas, the same thing comes up again and again; women are typically the child carers in families and thus end up leaving work and losing years in their careers where they would otherwise be progressing - long term salaries inevitably suffer.

Likewise a woman of child baring age will be discriminated against when going for a job because it is presumed (correctly) that if she does have a child she will be the child carer. And likewise the role of mother has been citied as a reason why women do not enter politics.

All of this goes back to the role of women as child carers. So logically, one would think the solution is to break this stereotype so that men are equally viewed as such. Yet, there have been practically no move to do this outside of support for areas such as paternity leave where a man may assist a mother - he still only remains the assistant to the true child carer; the woman.

To actually equalize this area would mean sacrificing women's monopoly as child carers. It means women giving up rights. And unfortunately this sees little support in modern feminism. Instead, rather than lose these rights, the move is to gain additional rights to compensate for this stereotype, such as the proposed quotas for political candidates.

It's why you hear the phrase 'cake and eat it' in relation to feminism more and more. Increasingly it looks like women prefer to cherry pick which parts of traditional and modern gender roles they wish to have, while men are expected to facilitate this.

This kind of behaviour is normal for anyone; male or female. We all want to have our 'cake and eat it' and will even rationalize why we should if need be. However, it's unsustainable and eventually the pendulum will swing back. The problem is that when it does we'll be left with a patchwork of opposing rights that will probably cause as many problems as it solves, because it will be done employing 'us vs them' thinking rather than any collaborative compromise.

My feeling is that discrimination against men will likely continue to grow for a while before we finally organize and make a change. The smart thing for women would be to accept that this is going to happen and they're better off seeking that collaborative compromise than what will result from such a backlash - sacrificing some rights will be better than the longer term alternative. Regrettably, I suspect that by the time this happens it will be too late.

Blisterman

I think it's quite interesting that discrimination against men tends to be more official and obvious. ie Different insurance prices, Paternity leave etc.

Whereas discrimination against women tends to be more down to individuals and subtle. ie. the assumption that a man would be more rational or competent.

This is undoubtedly due to the feminist movement's achievements. But I agree with a previous poster. What we need now is more of an equality movement.

gordon_gekko

miec wrote: »

I came across this article yesterday where both teenage girls and boys are protesting against the lad mag culture etc so things may be slowly changing.

@TC you're ideas for a lobby group that challenges discrimination against men are excellent and it is the only method that truly works imho (I currently see this method working in my job).

@Eviltwin Whilst I can see your point about men not helping out in the women's movement, I believe that discrimination against one gender affects the other. When one gender is subjugated for the other, it has a massive impact on society as a whole. We really need to lose this 'us vs them' thinking.

For instance there is growing concern that boys are falling behind academically and there are numerous studies showing that girls are outperforming boys. Now as a woman I could ignore this or not care but I am a mother of a boy and I want him to do well. In particular teenage boys have a much harder time staying in school or doing well so I want there to be level playing field for both sexes. I don't want my son growing up to feel like he should cut his balls off as equally if I had a daughter I don't want her growing up thinking her only value is her body / looks.

In addition as a mother of a teenage boy I worry more about him being attacked, beaten up, mugged etc, it is almost expected that every male will experience some form of violence, often by another man but there is a huge increase in female violence. I dread the day that he may come home with a bloody nose or worse.

I would hate to think that my son, if he becomes a father, will lose his right to his children because he is male or that he cannot babysit because people perceive him to be a potential pervert purely because he is male.

Also male only or female only clubs / schools etc encourage divisions between the genders and highlight the differences. They also oddly enough overly sexualise the other gender. You only have to see that behaviour displayed in single sex schools. It makes them Other (which gender theory is so often obsessed with).

Finally if there is a level / equal playing field for men and women it means we get on better as work colleagues, friends, lovers, as married partners and as parents and as such everyone benefits...well that is my Utopian view of life between the sexes.

not everyone wishes to see a bluring of the lines between the two sexes , such a transformation would inevitabley require a further feminisation of the male sex and that pursuit has caused enough problems already

respect between all kinds of people is important but women and men are inherently different and i oppose attempts to engineer them as identical

mariebeth

Blisterman wrote: »

Whereas discrimination against women tends to be more down to individuals and subtle. ie. the assumption that a man would be more rational or competent.

Have to disagree on this, discrimination against men can be very subtle as well. As a woman, I have to admit that the most sexist people I generally come across are women, in the guise of subtle insults against men.

My dad's in his 70's, has always cooked, cleaned, taken an active role in childcare etc. He was a 'new man' before the term was even invented. Recently my mum had to get an injection in to her eye, and had her eye covered for 24 hours as a result, the [female] nurse said to my dad 'sher you'll be only having a boiled egg for your dinner today'.

I work in a deli, and we do up pizzas, literally putting the toppings on the pizza and putting it in an oven to cook for two minutes, and I've been told a few times by older women that I'll make a great wife someday :rolleyes: to be honest I pity my future husband/partner because I'm not one bit domestic!

Personally I think as long as discrimination occurs like this in every day life, nothing will change in policy or society as a whole for men or women.

gordon_gekko

women are often very quick to play the sexist card if they feel they are loosing a grip on situations involving men theese days , i once had a very negative experience while working for a female middle manager overseas , on my last day , had the " you have a problem with women telling you what to do " line thrown at me

fact of the matter was i didnt mind having a woman boss , what i did mind was having a sectarian bigot workplace bully assasinating my charechter everyday of the week

The Corinthian

gordon_gekko wrote: »

not everyone wishes to see a bluring of the lines between the two sexes , such a transformation would inevitabley require a further feminisation of the male sex and that pursuit has caused enough problems already

I don't mind blurring of the lines, with regards to roles, as long as it is based on choice and merit. Men taking up female roles will only result in feminisation if we choose to simply copy women, instead of making them our own.

mariebeth wrote: »

Have to disagree on this, discrimination against men can be very subtle as well. As a woman, I have to admit that the most sexist people I generally come across are women, in the guise of subtle insults against men.

This is another reason that the whole 'us vs them' thinking is a lot more complicated than we realize. I think both men and women are schizophrenic about gender roles. Women want to be women, but still often want the traditional marriage. Men want equality, but they'll still often expect a woman to do most of the housework. It's the 'cake and eat it' thing I mentioned earlier.

As such women are often the most chauvinist against other women that you find, because unlike chauvinist men, they don't need to hide it (it's like a black guy using the 'N' word).

panda100

Orion wrote: »

I call bull when I see bull. The fact is that a lot of women object to men only clubs but don't see the irony when defending women only clubs/hours/sections. When objecting to a statement it is customary to quote it for context - you don't need to take it so personally - it's certainly not meant personally.

I really can't see many women objecting to a male only gym. I would safely say that the majority of women would be fine with it. Personally, I wouldn't encourge clubs defined on the basis of sex, as we are all human and the same at the end of the day.

The Corinthian

panda100 wrote: »

I really can't see many women objecting to a male only gym. I would safely say that the majority of women would be fine with it. Personally, I wouldn't encourge clubs defined on the basis of sex, as we are all human and the same at the end of the day.

I think the hypocrisy of women-only associations is better exemplified by this little gem:

Senator Ivana Bacik: [..] I am happy to say that Baroness Corston will be visiting Leinster House on Thursday. Deputy Mary O’Rourke and I are hosting a meeting with her for all women Members of the Oireachtas. I am sorry that we cannot invite any male colleagues interested in this issue to the briefing with Baroness Corston.

Senator David Norris: Why not?

Senator Ivana Bacik: I would be happy to meet them to discuss the issues at another time.

Source. Related article.