Equal right - Losing it's balance in favour of women?

Letree wrote: »

Try setting up a mens society in a university and see the reaction of feminists. Feminists don't support the formation of mens societies in fact they actively oppose them. Even though it should be none of their business.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11670138/Why-are-our-universities-blocking-mens-societies.html

http://www.avoiceformen.com/allnews/university-of-syndey-mens-society-first-group-to-be-blocked-in-over-ten-years/

From your first link:

“Fem Soc have been great, and have offered to work with me, but I don’t think that’s satisfactory, as they don’t have men’s issues as a pressing goal,” he says. “That’s fair enough – so why can’t I set up a men’s group?

“To be clear, I’m not interested in waging ideological war against feminism and want to distance myself from those MRAs and misogynists who seem to spend a disproportionate amount of time bashing feminism. I want to help men. Instead of just bitching about stuff on the internet I want to get into activism.

That's a terrible example you chose.

osarusan wrote: »

From your first link:

That's a terrible example you chose.

Also from the same article, you must have missed this bit.

But, to my mind, Durham’s refusal to allow Adam to start a men’s group follows a similarly depressing call made by Staffordshire University in February, when the Men’s Rights Society was blocked by the university's Woman’s Network, who called it “dangerous”.
Similarly, men’s groups from as far afield as Australia, USA and Canada have been faced with similar Left-leaning, feminist-driven flak, making it feel like modern universities support diversity in all forms – so long as it isn’t male.

Letree wrote: »

Also from the same article, you must have missed this bit.

You gave an example of Adam Frost and his attempt to start a society and used it as an example of feminisim 'actively opposing' such things - they didn't actively oppose it - they offered to help.

Despite the strong reaction by many, the Fem Soc has got behind Adam because of their “shared values”.
Fem Soc president Catherine Crook told us: “We’ve already begun to liaise with Adam, potentially starting some sort of Fem Soc supported men’s discussion group about the issues he was right to raise.
“Our aims are fundamentally similar and hopefully together we can make progress towards raising awareness of these issues.”
‘People aren’t aware that men make up roughly a third of domestic violence cases’

http://thetab.com/uk/durham/2015/06/09/meet-the-founder-of-the-new-male-human-rights-society-19409


Like I said, bad example.

Quotas are stupid honestly

What is with all the women hating lately??

I've never come across a feminist outside the usual hippy college sort (and I'm a woman) I don't know where all this Feminism controlling men ****e is coming from. I don't know any women that think like the way they are portrayed here!

Is it like the guys here think we all have some kind of secret meet up every evening and just plan all the ways we can **** up men? Let me tell you, it doesn't happen. Women don't want special treatment, they just want to get on with their lives and do the best they can - same like men.

In daily life, I just try to get on with it and so does my husband - we're not sitting in a room across from each other hating each other and only being there to create children - which I won't try to take from him at any point. Why would I hurt my children by taking them away from their father, that's just crazy. The only time I would do that would be if my husband was violent or abusive! Then it would make absolute sense to me.

I'm sorry some guys here are going through that though and it's very unfortunate that you chose that person to have a child with but it's not a man vs women issue, it's a petty person issue, pure bad judgement and a lot of hurt feelings on both sides that need to be addressed first.

I also agree that the court system is very female biased when it comes to family situations (it was only two generations ago that the opposite was true and it was the man that had all the rights regarding the children, so it obviously can change to be more equal) Hopefully it'll be addressed sooner rather than later.

I assume I have the same chance at any job as a man, I've never tried to use my boobs and vagina to gain the upper hand, my CV did the job and same with my female friends. I work in a very male orientated environment and I wasn't head hunted or handed my job - I actually had to convince my employer that I was worth taking a chance with and I still have to prove it with each project - just like my male colleagues.

It's actually very belittling for people to come on here and insinuate that the only reason that women get the job is because they are female and it doesn't matter what is on their CV. It's a load of nonsense really. Noone is taking on females for the sake of it - that's not cost effective and I assume employers want to make money and have productive staff. I would be disgusted to find the only reason I got a job was because I had ovaries instead of testes. I take great pride in my work and I achieve everything my employer asks of me.

I think this whole us vs them and Ooooh women this and men that is just absolutely childish. Women get a **** deal sometimes and men get a **** deal other times.

Life is not black and white and its impossible to please all of the people all of the time.

Just be excellent to each other.

Also, having periods sucks balls, giving birth is that times a million and the biggest shock I had in my life was being pregnant and realising that if I ran into trouble and it came down to a choice between me and my unborn child - a doctor was going to choose the child, even if it had zero chance of survival because the law tells him/her that as long as the baby has a heart beat, I'm just an incubator.

It's ****ing scary being in a situation where you're not sure if your doctor is telling you all the truth in case you hop on the boat across to the uk and you're there every day hoping against hope that all is fine. It'd be like going in with a broken leg and not being sure the doctor was going to put it in a cast or amputate it or just leave you to bleed to death - all depending on his/her attitude and beliefs.

Sure it was scary for my husband to be watching it all but no matter what happened, he was coming out of it all alive and pain free - my chances weren't so good at the time.

It was the one and only time I ever felt second class and not at all equal - it was my one moment when I wished I wasn't female. Luckily though all came out okay and I wasn't too badly messed up physically and then when we got over all that we went back to being equal partners and arguing about whos turn it was to change the toxic nappy.

So, obviously that too needs to be addressed - hopefully at the same time as the family law situation but that again isn't an us vs them situation - it's a pushing politicians to see the need for change situation. A whole other thing altogether!

Women don't hate men, we're not all hiding away terrified of encountering a man in case he rapes us - I have many male friends, I dont feel the need to get sexy with them or suppress them and visa versa - we just talk to each other, like human beings. That's reality.

I've found most right thinking people oppose the man hating, social justice warrior, militant type of feminism.

The regular "lets just not treat women like objects and get on with doing important stuff" people are far more numerous but you'll hear less from them on the internet because there busy getting on with doing important stuff.

Stay away from Tumblr

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

But this is the same kind of thing which drives the attempts to prevent the setting up mens' groups - the very prominent ideology among today's mainstream feminism that men have no right to air their own grievances with society; that women have a monopoly on doing something about discrimination.

Literally the only point I made was that the poster chose a poor example to support their point. That is literally the only thing I said.

You seem to agree with that. So I don't know what you are doing even posting this in reply to me. It has nothing to do with what I said.

somefeen wrote: »

I've found most right thinking people oppose the man hating, social justice warrior, militant type of feminism.

The regular "lets just not treat women like objects and get on with doing important stuff" people are far more numerous but you'll hear less from them on the internet because there busy getting on with doing important stuff.

Stay away from Tumblr

"Stay away from Tumblr" used to be the answer, but now that sh!te is bleeding into mainstream culture and actively hurting men. It's not too surprising that a lot of us are getting fed up of it.

For the record, I never really cared about the mens' rights issue until I found myself in an emotionally abusive relationship which happened to coincide with a UK government ad campaign about teen relationship abuse - every single ad in which focused on a guy being an asshole and a woman being treated like crap. And then I'd turn off the TV and have another MSN message telling me that this girl would kill herself and spread lies about me if I didn't go on another date with her.

Guys my age have spent their entire lives having anti-male propaganda rammed down their throats by the media. Not all guys notice it, some can handle it, some shrug it off, but for those of us who have been directly hurt in some way by these double standards, it's something we're very, very resentful of. And I for one don't find that in any way unreasonable. It's no more unreasonable than a woman with a high sex drive being resentful of the demonisation she would have experienced growing up in the 90s and 00s as a result of the slut/stud double standard.

The issue is when feminists try to pretend that there's no such thing as sexism against men because "privilege" or some such bullsh!t - that's when tempers flare.

A huge leap forward for women's rights in the stone age kingdom of Saudi Arabia.....

A Saudi panel of “scientists” concluded that women aren’t just household items as it was previously thought in the Kingdom, but are mammals and therefore should have same rights as camels and goats, the Islaminsesi news portal said.

What a “historic” social discovery on the behalf of Saudi “scientists” — women are indeed a little better than a sofa or kitchen utensils and should be granted the same rights as other mammal species, except humans of course.

According to Jane Austin, a spokesperson for the Women’s Liberation Action Network, as weird as it might seem the verdict of the Saudi panel of “scientists” is “a great leap forward for women’s rights in Saudi Arabia.”

I don't think it's losing balance in favour of women by any stretch just yet.

What feminism has achieved so far is a relatively balanced treatment of both genders before the law. Having the law on your side and receiving fair treatment, however, are not necessarily the same thing. I believe that socially, there's still a good bit of catching up to do.

I do feel, though, that so far feminism was too much focused on women getting the same rights that men always had. And this is not an approach that will create balance, as it really amounts to women trying to be more like men in order to obtain the same levels of respect and the same favourable treatment. And we've neglected men in all this. While women were striving to expand their social and economic roles and broken into ever more previously men-only fields and thereby gaining respect and influence. Men were left with the same social and economic roles they had before. No expansion for them into the fields that are traditionally regarded as "female".
On the contrary, many men would still expose themselves to ridicule if they tried to change their traditional male role for one traditionally thought of as female.

I think the heart of this phenomenon is that it's almost exclusively in the male roles that both men and women find they're being respected and valued, the female roles are still being treated with at best a condescending smile by both genders.
And that, I feel, is what we'll need to work on.
It needs to be ok for a man to decide he wants to be a stay-at-home dad, just as it is for a woman to decide that she wants to go back to work after having had a child.
It needs to be ok for a boy to play with dolls if he wants to, same as it is for a girl to play with a toy truck.
And it needs to be ok for a man to want to work as a child minder, a librarian, a PA. There won't be any equality worth speaking off otherwise.

Candie wrote: »

A Voice For Men, run by Paul Elam, that rape apologist? Great source.

From the tellingly titled "I'll Decide If You Were Raped, Not You", a small extract from a vile misogynistic rant about rape victims:

The face of the MRA movement.

Wow. That far out-weighs whatever tripe Una Mullaly and like-minded columnists spew out.

fatknacker wrote: »

That Roosh guy was just looking for more attention by negging the whole world.
Sadly, it worked

Yep, the Roosh Douche is a prime example of a circumstance where "no-platforming" is OK, to deny him the oxygen of publicity.