A different form of sexism

clairefontaine

The Corinthian wrote: »

I've never said destiny, only that it is inevitable given there appear to be no likely alternatives and present trends continue. And I do agree there is that danger of an endless negative circle, which is why I keep on asking you if you think a likely alternative exists.

I'm not sure emigration makes a difference, as these issues will still be here and there will still be people in Ireland.

Unless of course all the men emigrate because of this, and I'll have to admit that gender politics in Ireland is one of the reasons I left, and since the cohabitation bill, I've heard it cited by more recent emmigrees.

I've offerred alternatives, but you don't like them or don't think they will work.

You know how you can be a member of a community, online or real life and you can point out flaws or ways to make things better or things you don't like and the attitude is "if you don't like it you can leave." Well, that's what people do with that attitude in place, they suck it up or they leave. You can't anywhere with that axiom in operation.

Emigration does make a difference. The country is hemoraging people, mostly young people. Ireland is a very conservative country [think the whole country -not just Dublin] and the older populations will remain and so will the status quo and most injustices. It's the young who have the time and energy to do things. Emmigrants don't even have the right to vote once they leave, never mind conduct social reform from abroad. And that is why nothing will change, and not just gender politics.

Believe me I hate this narrative, I hate reinforcing the idea of obstacles and that you can't make changes because it only ads to the power behind the exclusion, but in this case, in these circumstance, I'm afraid in the limited time one has to live their lives, it's wiser to choose your battles.

The Corinthian

clairefontaine wrote: »

I've offerred alternatives, but you don't like them or don't think they will work.

The only alternative that I can make out you've proffered is very unlikely to get anywhere; I gave my reasoning why it won't go anywhere and you've not yet rebutted that.

Emigration does make a difference. The country is hemoraging people, mostly young people. Ireland is a very conservative country [think the whole country -not just Dublin] and the older populations will remain and so will the status quo and most injustices. It's the young who have the time and energy to do things. Emmigrants don't even have the right to vote once they leave, never mind conduct social reform from abroad. And that is why nothing will change, and not just gender politics.

I agree, at least in the short to medium term, that nothing is likely to change - indeed, for men, it's more than likely to get worse, with more laws effectively discriminating against us on the basis of protecting women's or everyone else's rights.

But emigration stabilizes in time, recessions end and new generations grow up, and so with no change in this trend it probably is only a matter of time.

clairefontaine

The Corinthian wrote: »

The only alternative that I can make out you've proffered is very unlikely to get anywhere; I gave my reasoning why it won't go anywhere and you've not yet rebutted that.

I agree, at least in the short to medium term, that nothing is likely to change - indeed, for men, it's more than likely to get worse, with more laws effectively discriminating against us on the basis of protecting women's or everyone else's rights.

But emigration stabilizes in time, recessions end and new generations grow up, and so with no change in this trend it probably is only a matter of time.

A question. Overall,not just men's rights, how do you perceive Ireland's relationship with the notion of "rights"?

Do you think rule of law is enforced and practised?

Do you think civil rights are a genuine concern in the national conciousness?

Because what I see is the same old same old nation of gombeens ruining the people into the ground.

So before you can address anyone's rights, you have to establish a meaningful relationship with rights in the first place.

Emmigration now is different from previous years in that the people left behind are not having 10 kids at a time to replace the hemoragging population, and my guess is the kids today will grow up and leave too, unless they are part of the protectionist rackets running things or grow up to be farmers. And you also have the women emmigrating with the children for those who are seperated or single because they have to work too. It's a different picture altogether.

Ireland has been a poor country since its inception, with a brief interlude in the late 1990s. There has been no such thing as relief from recession with the exception of that particular boom, and I can't see it improving for generations to come. It may just stay poor like it always was.

The IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT YOU CAN LEAVE axiom will remain.

The Corinthian

clairefontaine wrote: »

A question. Overall,not just men's rights, how do you perceive Ireland's relationship with the notion of "rights"?

Much like most Western nations; when people think of rights, they tend to see them as entitlements - the consequences of rights are seldom considered and when they are people tend to want more 'rights' so that they can avoid those consequences.

Do you think rule of law is enforced and practised?

A joke.

Do you think civil rights are a genuine concern in the national conciousness?

Only when it affects the citizen directly or they can be swayed by media campaigns to act.

So before you can address anyone's rights, you have to establish a meaningful relationship with rights in the first place.

I'm sorry, but all this philosophizing isn't really going anywhere. Unless, you want to suggest that the women's rights movement also suspend activities until we all "establish a meaningful relationship with rights" or is it only men's rights movement that should do this? I would certainly oppose the latter and doubt the chances of the former.

Emmigration now is different from previous years in that the people left behind are not having 10 kids at a time to replace the hemoragging population, and my guess is the kids today will grow up and leave too, unless they are part of the protectionist rackets running things or grow up to be farmers. And you also have the women emmigrating with the children for those who are seperated or single because they have to work too. It's a different picture altogether.

Already addressed this earlier, indeed I've addressed most if not all of this already, so we're at a point that you're just asking the same questions or making the same points, without addressing the fact that many have already been addressed or rebutted.

The IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT YOU CAN LEAVE axiom will remain.

And as I pointed two pages ago this is already the case.

Personally, I don't believe that the 'opt-out' strategy is a viable long-term one in a country even like Ireland. If the level of inequality continues to increase (and all signs point to this), then eventually such a strategy will be insufficient to act as a 'safety valve' for the resentment that men feel at being increasingly treated as second class citizens.

But I've already written this here, along with rebuttals to all your points, so unless we actually progress in this discussion, is there any point continuing it?

clairefontaine

So have you written to your legislators? What did they say to you about it?

The Corinthian

clairefontaine wrote: »

So have you written to your legislators? What did they say to you about it?

Are you just going to ask me questions and ignore my previous rebuttals?

clairefontaine

The Corinthian wrote: »

Are you just going to ask me questions and ignore my previous rebuttals?

I accept your points, am just asking a question.

The Corinthian

clairefontaine wrote: »

I accept your points, am just asking a question.

Very well. To respond to your question about letter writing, I've made my opinion on this very clear on a number of occasions.

clairefontaine

Ah yeah. Well I'd ask you if you set up some kind of organisation.

But if you feel rule of law is a joke here, which I agree with you there, then what is the point of fighting for anyone's rights? You can't have rights without a rule of law. You still have in Ireland this post colonial quaint attitude with the law. Emigrants don't even have the right to vote. So I'd encourage you to do something with your beliefs, even if I don't agree with half of them, but another part of me would say you are pissing in the wind, and I'd say that about women's rights too. The childrens' rights referendum, for example, what a joke. It's all state's rights couched in the language think of the children. And not like they will mean anything anyway in reality, except if someone in power takes a serious personal disliking to someone else. I'd be wary that anytime you start begging this government for rights, you are handing them more and more control. Do I have a solution? Not one other than emigrate, and you have already done that.

The Corinthian

clairefontaine wrote: »

But if you feel rule of law is a joke here, which I agree with you there, then what is the point of fighting for anyone's rights? You can't have rights without a rule of law. You still have in Ireland this post colonial quaint attitude with the law.

With regards to men's rights, it'll probably have to get a lot worse before there is any actual action taken; both by men and women who recognise that it's gone too far.

I can see that happening. We already have noises being made on things like the abolition of custodial sentences and the effective abolition of guardian rights - instead placing all rights in the hands of the custodial parent - and I suspect that there are plenty of other initiatives in the pipeline that will further marginalize and discriminate against men.

Eventually this will go too far and force the apathetic majority to actually do something, but as I already mooted, it's not going to happen for a while.

Emigrants don't even have the right to vote.

I'm sure they'll introduce that for the purposes of introducing double taxation before long.

Do I have a solution? Not one other than emigrate, and you have already done that.

Atlas Shrugged, Irish style.

clairefontaine

The Corinthian wrote: »

With regards to men's rights, it'll probably have to get a lot worse before there is any actual action taken; both by men and women who recognise that it's gone too far.

I can see that happening. We already have noises being made on things like the abolition of custodial sentences and the effective abolition of guardian rights - instead placing all rights in the hands of the custodial parent - and I suspect that there are plenty of other initiatives in the pipeline that will further marginalize and discriminate against men.

Eventually this will go too far and force the apathetic majority to actually do something, but as I already mooted, it's not going to happen for a while.

I'm sure they'll introduce that for the purposes of introducing double taxation before long.

Atlas Shrugged, Irish style.

What do you mean, abolition of custodial sentences? I cant see that happening in reality.

Abolition of guardian rights, I see that is making it akin to how it works in most of the rest of the western world where rights are tied into custody, that does not mean full custody necessarily but shared or partial. In other words, for the custodial parent to be able to make unilateral decisions, s/he has to present a full custody order- which basically means the child has no contact with the other parent at all - usually done only in very extreme circumstances or by abandonment. Even your child goes to the other parent for even one weekend a month, that makes you a shared custodian.

Its just far more practical all around for everyone. Guardianship seems to be more stuff from the land of the twilight zone, product of the "it is and it isnt" mentality.

Ireland had social reforms probably because of the EU and not because of domestic action- I could be wrong there, but that is my impression.

The Corinthian

clairefontaine wrote: »

What do you mean, abolition of custodial sentences? I cant see that happening in reality.

Why not? Dafter things have.

I wouldn't have thought ten years ago that simply living with someone for five years would automatically make you de facto married to them, as such a concept would run completely against the principle of personal freedom - yet, that now the case.

Abolition of guardian rights, I see that is making it akin to how it works in most of the rest of the western world where rights are tied into custody, that does not mean full custody necessarily but shared or partial.

Under the last government a committee was set up to explore and put forward possible reforms in the area of guardianship. What they eventually published effectively abolished guardianship, instead replacing it with a new concept know as 'parental responsibility'.

Some of this was progressive, in that it became 'automatic' (upon application) for all, including unmarried fathers. However, as part of this 'reform', all those guardian's rights associated with religious, educational and other aspects of their child's upbringing were abolished also, placing them solely in the hands of the primary custodial parent.

In practice, this would mean that for unmarried fathers, they would still need to apply for this new form of guardianship, but at least could not be opposed (outside of a challenge to the paternity), however for married fathers (and those unmarried fathers who already won guardianship) they would lose any say in key aspects of their child's upbringing.

Even your child goes to the other parent for even one weekend a month, that makes you a shared custodian.

Not sure about that. Under Irish law, I believe it's still only treated as access, but with over-nights. Of course, the above reform is moot anyway, because in practice such guardian rights are effectively ignored by the courts.

Its just far more practical all around for everyone. Guardianship seems to be more stuff from the land of the twilight zone, product of the "it is and it isnt" mentality.

Then the most practical solution is not to have any rights for the non custodial parent, by that logic.

Ireland had social reforms probably because of the EU and not because of domestic action- I could be wrong there, but that is my impression.

This was once the case, but not any more. Neither smoking ban nor the cohabitation act were a result of pressure from the EU. Ireland is way 'ahead' of the EU parliament where it comes to gender quotas or the criminalization of clients of prostitution too.

Most of these social policies are nowadays the result of domestic lobby groups that have entrenched themselves in the organs of government. Check the CV's of many of those involved in gender related initiatives and you'll typically find women's studies along the way.

clairefontaine

Geesh, they sure know how to complicate things. What the hell? I can't keep up with all that reform. FFs, how is anyone supposed to know what is going on. I seriously don't know how those families where they never fully filed for divorce and then start new families under cohabitation deal with all this.

Or how do get anything done here you need to use the circuit court in which you need a barrister and a solicitor costing people even more money.

My bet is that this is all started by lawyers so they can keep themselves in business and fancifully lubricated by money ripped from despairing and confused people in the midst of a family break up.

There needs to be a lobby group to democratise the courts and not use family law as a scam to make money for legal professionals, - that is ultimately what I am reading between the lines there.

The Corinthian

clairefontaine wrote: »

Geesh, they sure know how to complicate things. What the hell? I can't keep up with all that reform. FFs, how is anyone supposed to know what is going on. I seriously don't know how those families where they never fully filed for divorce and then start new families under cohabitation deal with all this.

Interesting legal question. I'd imagine both the spouse and new partner would have a claim on maintenance, assets and inheritance.

My bet is that this is all started by lawyers so they can keep themselves in business and fancifully lubricated by money ripped from despairing and confused people in the midst of a family break up.

While the nature of the Irish legal system, not to mention the Gardai, leaves a lot to be desired, it's ultimately the law itself that is the larger problem. You can reform the courts all you want, but if that law is prejudiced, those reformed courts will still be obliged to hand out prejudiced judgements and sentences.

clairefontaine

The Corinthian wrote: »

Atlas Shrugged, Irish style.

Freedom to travel. I'm sure the irony of this on a post about mens' rights does not pass you by.