SPERM. Anyone interested?

I don't think the gender quota thing is something I would be comfortable addressing from the standpoint of a mens rights group to be honest. I'm fully behind the other stuff however.

Protection of equality and rights for men? We (men) are privileged in our society. Reading this thread is as infuriating as reading about the "war on christians".

Feminism is all about equality - and in order to achieve this it seeks to dismantle things like stereotypical gender roles which, aside from making it difficult for women to do any number of things, also lead to the perception that men can't be victims of sexual violence and the mother is the most important parent who should have the most rights etc. If you honestly believe that women are at no disadvantage in society then you need to seriously re-examine your beliefs.

I could welcome a group for dialogue and support about problems men can face in relation to custody etc etc but I would actually be ashamed of any "men's rights" society. One step away from "white soc" and "straight club".

kisaragi wrote: »

I would actually be ashamed of any "men's rights" society.

Best of luck to you if you ever become divorced, homeless (74% male, stats from Peter McVerry Trust), get cancer (before Movember, male-specific cancers got the **** end of the funding drive), ever try to report domestic violence against yourself, find yourself in court, end up in prison (amazing how most rape stats don't include incidents occurring in prisons), apply for university as a mature student, or develop suicide ideation then yeah, "go male privilege!"

For christ's sake, it isn't men's right's vs women's rights - they're different problems. As we edge slowly towards proper gender equality, each side is beginning to become assertive about the ways they've been shafted in the past, and still are. But each side has different areas. Men have equality issues here, women there.

Setting up a mens' equality group is a fantastic idea, if for no other reason than it gets young men to really think about theirs and others' role in society, and consider pathways to true equality for both genders.

Also, maybe one day we can debate facts and statistics, and not try to win based on "who is the least happy."

Thanks Banquo for putting it more eloquently then I ever could.

banquo wrote: »

Best of luck to you if you ever become divorced, homeless (74% male, stats from Peter McVerry Trust), get cancer (before Movember, male-specific cancers got the **** end of the funding drive), ever try to report domestic violence against yourself, find yourself in court, end up in prison (amazing how most rape stats don't include incidents occurring in prisons), apply for university as a mature student, or develop suicide ideation then yeah, "go male privilege!"

For christ's sake, it isn't men's right's vs women's rights - they're different problems. As we edge slowly towards proper gender equality, each side is beginning to become assertive about the ways they've been shafted in the past, and still are. But each side has different areas. Men have equality issues here, women there.

Setting up a mens' equality group is a fantastic idea, if for no other reason than it gets young men to really think about theirs and others' role in society, and consider pathways to true equality for both genders.

Also, maybe one day we can debate facts and statistics, and not try to win based on "who is the least happy."

I'm not against rights for men, I'm against men's rights groups that exist as a counter-movement to feminism. Men and women might have different equality issues but they stem from the same place.

You seem to have read a lot into my post that I didn't actually say, but to reiterate - feminism is good for women and men, it's NOT about women vs men as a lot of people would like you to believe.

Feminism is not about equality. Equality, true equality, never enters the minds of the majority of women and the few that it does are shunned - Christina Hoff Summers for example.
I won't even say "equality where it's convenient", because more often than not it's more than equality they seek in these areas. Special scholarships for girls, quotas in politics, reduced entry requirements for women etc etc. That's not equality they're looking for, nevermind the glaring inequality in many other issues that they're quite happy to ignore.
We've a society that promotes violence towards men from women. Girl kicks guy in the balls on tv? Hilarious. Woman rapes man on TV (as per 40 days 40 nights)? Hilarious. You don't see many of these "women [who always] talk about equality" looking for equality there.
We've a society where we have a push to give seats in politics to lesser qualified people because they've a vagina instead of a penis, we've a schooling system dominated by women who've shown themselves to show preference to female students, we've colleges that extend additional scholarships and support to females despite them performing equally or even above their male counterparts at the end of Secondary School, we've a courts system that favours the female in a divorce settlement 80% of the time, the same courts hand out significantly more lenient sentences to women for the same crimes as their male counterparts and more.
We only have the option of drafting men into the military, if it were necessary. You put the drafting of women to vote and we'll see how "equality" minded they are.
There's no push for "equality" in society, there is, however, a massive push for female superiority on the grounds of being female and due to the perceived historical oppression.

I wish you the best of luck and hope that my above post goes a little way towards showing people why we need this. And why this idea cannot fall under the same banner as femsoc. In reality though there's probably going to be some bluster about "The patriarchy" and any progress on this front will be stopped or banned.

I take it that fatherless homes due to custody is what they're talking about but I'm also not blind to absentee fathers either. There's bad people on both sides of the divide.

Oh what I'm saying is that for the "fatherless homes" figure you can't just blame the woman for gaining custody as I'm aware that there's plenty of men who just disappear.

definitely set it up!