nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Irishcrx

Just a conversation that popped up recently when out with friends and I guess something that has been on my mind for a while now as I watch differant friends, situations etc.

Has radical feminism and a push for equal rights gained so much momentum , pressure in the press , the workplace , social media that it has actually now swung the other way and it is men that are looking at oppression?

A couple of scenario's swing to mind , the company I work for have had several pushes to be seen to be an equal opportunity employer , which they are , however this also included women in positions of ppwer (IE Unit leaders and Directors) they have often appointed women to these positions to make up their numbers balance while more qualified men were turned down for the job in favour of the news letter saying we have met the European quota - This isn't right.

Single father rights - Or lack there of, absolute joke of a system - Several friends of mine are single fathers and being dragged through hell to see their children even though they are great fathers. All the power with the ex girlfriend and the bitterness , the law says it protects the children but it really is protecting the mother and many abuse this position to exact revenge on an ex - Good father need rights equal to mothers regardless of marriage - Bad ones don't.

Add to this the rise of feminism , the extreme feminism , the talk of all men being scumbags , the belief of some that's it's ok to say horrible thing's to men , female on male domestic violence being laughed at and generally looked upon as not being as serious as male on female, a man smacks a girls ass in a club it's sexual assault , a woman does it and it's funny, from looking at these boards alone from day to day you can tell most men have become almost afraid to approach a girl or say boo to them even when they are very in the wrong.

So has it never been a worst time to be a man? Are men becoming less of men because of this? And has that balance changed to a position where it's now men in need of equal rights?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Ice Maiden

Things are not harder for women in the West - these assertions also add to the "us v them" stuff. I've no problem with men speaking out constructively about issues that affect men only, once they do so without hostility towards women.

py2006

The one thing I have noticed on the net AND out in the real world is that once a man tries to speak of abuse/discrimination etc etc it gets shouted down in kinda of 'how dare you, only women can be victims' mentality. Not always but it happens.

At the lunch table in an old job where at the time I was the only male, the subject of children and the courts after separation/divorce came up. Generally I sit there quietly and listen but I just happened to say "men seem to be unfairly treated when it comes to divorce and kids etc" to which I was shouted down and "HOW DARE YOU" and the next 5 mins was spewing out how bad women have it and men are this and that... The following week I was minding my own business and as I walked by the same group I heard one say, "sure he hates women". I kid you not.

Due to media, campaigns etc we all know only too well how some women have suffered abuse, discrimination and rape etc and as a result all avenues are made available to them and in some cases government funding.

Yet when it comes to men, there is nothing and we get laughed at or even shouted at for talking about it. Take for example domestic violence, ALL campaigns suggest that only women are victims. I truely believe that in reality that figure is A LOT closer as I have witnessed it, experienced it and spoke about it with male friends. Yet it is largely dismissed. Thankfully, with the internet more people are starting to mention it online more.

py2006

Ice Maiden wrote: »

I've no problem with men speaking out constructively about issues that affect men only, once they do so without hostility towards women.

Not sure about hostility towards women. Some people mistake criticism of feminism and feminists as an attack on women. Not saying you believe that but just something I have noticed online.

Debtocracy

These are some of the major issues I feel are facing men today. Overall, I don’t think feminism is a major problem for men, albeit a bit annoying at times.

Educational system: Boys have higher levels of hyperactivity and poorer levels of sustained attention. In an educational system that requires sitting in your seat and paying attention for excessive periods of time, boys will underperform relative to girls all other things being equal.

Porn: While I’ve no moral qualms about porn, it does mess with the brain’s reward circuitry leaving addicts (vast majority male) less motivated in general and less aroused by girls in their everyday life. It also creates unrealistic standards for sex, which is especially unhelpful if the guy is experiencing porn-induced erectile dysfunction.

Video games: As with porn, addiction here messes up the reward circuitry and reduces boy’s ability to sustain attention in educational contexts.

Female-biased divorce settlements: In too many situations the husband is left impoverished and banished from his family. The absence of paternal input is a further blow for men as it substantially increases the chances that any male child will engage in antisocial behaviour.

Unrealistic female standards: The average guy is increasingly not meeting the standards for the average gal and I see three reasons for this:
1) Women constantly exposed to rich, attractive men in the media, giving the illusion that there are lots of them about the place.
2) Women are becoming more educated and successful (which is great in itself) but almost always expecting a partner of at least equivalent success or higher.
3) Online dating which gives the illusion that there are multiple men for every woman so women gain an expectancy that the perfect boyfriend is out there.
Because the average guy is finding it increasingly difficult to meets these standards, it is more likely he will regress and seek easier gratification through porn, video-games, drugs/alcohol etc.

Feminists over-criminalising sexual behaviour: Some of the feminist discussion of sexual assault is very beneficial, such as recognising when a girl is too intoxicated to provide legitimate consent. However, more often than not, it presents men and their culture in general as the problem, rather than a selective group of predators and douchebags. These ‘Yes means Yes’ campaigns and surveys about how 80% of women have been assaulted (regretted sex, who hasn’t) are ridiculous, associate sex with criminality and something that a man inflicts upon a woman. Again, the virtual world of porn looks a lot more safer and gratifying than sex in the real world.

py2006

Misogyny is probably the most misused word online today in my opinion. It has slipped into the media and has virtually replaced the word sexism in the eyes of the people who use it. I think Madonna used it last week in response to people who were critical of her concert performance.

Rape Culture is another word that seems to have slipped in too. It is commonly used in relation to colleges in the US and is creeping over here too. I think there was an attempt to justify it recently in UCD with suggestion about 200 male students.

Ice Maiden

Debtocracy wrote: »

These are some of the major issues I feel are facing men today. Overall, I don’t think feminism is a major problem for men, albeit a bit annoying at times.

Educational system: Boys have higher levels of hyperactivity and poorer levels of sustained attention. In an educational system that requires sitting in your seat and paying attention for excessive periods of time, boys will underperform relative to girls all other things being equal.

Porn: While I’ve no moral qualms about porn, it does mess with the brain’s reward circuitry leaving addicts (vast majority male) less motivated in general and less aroused by girls in their everyday life. It also creates unrealistic standards for sex, which is especially unhelpful if the guy is experiencing porn-induced erectile dysfunction.

Video games: As with porn, addiction here messes up the reward circuitry and reduces boy’s ability to sustain attention in educational contexts.

Female-biased divorce settlements: In too many situations the husband is left impoverished and banished from his family. The absence of paternal input is a further blow for men as it substantially increases the chances that any male child will engage in antisocial behaviour.

Unrealistic female standards: The average guy is increasingly not meeting the standards for the average gal and I see three reasons for this:
1) Women constantly exposed to rich, attractive men in the media, giving the illusion that there are lots of them about the place.
2) Women are becoming more educated and successful (which is great in itself) but almost always expecting a partner of at least equivalent success or higher.
3) Online dating which gives the illusion that there are multiple men for every woman so women gain an expectancy that the perfect boyfriend is out there.
Because the average guy is finding it increasingly difficult to meets these standards, it is more likely he will regress and seek easier gratification through porn, video-games, drugs/alcohol etc.

Feminists over-criminalising sexual behaviour: Some of the feminist discussion of sexual assault is very beneficial, such as recognising when a girl is too intoxicated to provide legitimate consent. However, more often than not, it presents men and their culture in general as the problem, rather than a selective group of predators and douchebags. These ‘Yes means Yes’ campaigns and surveys about how 80% of women have been assaulted (regretted sex, who hasn’t) are ridiculous, associate sex with criminality and something that a man inflicts upon a woman. Again, the virtual world of porn looks a lot more safer and gratifying than sex in the real world.

Good points there - the hypergamy thing does not chime with my own observations however.

The word "misogyny" is sometimes misused Py, but that doesn't mean there aren't real examples of it. The Return of Kings and Roosh stuff - put yourself in the shoes of a woman reading that. Although I do avoid it but it disturbs me that others are being taken in by it.

As shown here too, an undercurrent of resentment exists too - on the relationships and online dating threads as I said.

steddyeddy

AtomicHorror wrote: »

You think Thatcher is evidence that women will succeed on their merit? Thatcher succeeded because she demonstrated traditionally male characteristics. That's what you get when you don't try to level the playing field, an environment that filters out women who display anything less than classical male traits.

And how many pages would we fill with the men? You can name as many women in power as you like, but the numbers are indisputable. Men dominate, and that means our political institutions are not representative of our people.

You're misunderstanding what oppression means. Even if a group is under-represent in an area like politics or STEM fields you cannot take that as proof of discrimination.

Foxtrol

Thoie wrote: »

I'm sure there's some out there, but I've never heard any women laughing at domestic violence, no matter who's beating who. Who do you hear laughing at it?

There are a number of well publicised, mainstream Hollywood ‘comedies’ that portray women going out to physically and emotionally attack men who they believe were unfaithful to them.

Imagine the outcry if a movie portrayed a group of men forming plots to spike a woman’s drink with testosterone or contained a comedy set piece moment which ends with the woman smashing through a window and the men stand around her laughing.

Emotional and physical domestic violence against men is still seen as something that’s acceptable and even comical because as ‘ah sure he deserved it’.

In contrast, there was an outcry (including on boards) about how a dinosaur in Jurassic World attacked a woman in a ‘sexist’ manner. I repeat, a dinosaur attack was apparently sexist...

orubiru

PopePalpatine wrote: »

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

Totally agree about denying him publicity but I wouldn't suggest "no-platforming", I'd just suggest either ignoring the guy or refuting his points in a calm and controlled fashion. Give him enough rope, and all that.

The main tactic that guys like Roosh and other PUA types employ is targeting men who feel alienated or depressed or maybe just confused. They are essentially offering the illusion of acceptance, understanding and camaraderie.

Any guy who is interested in following Roosh V or is thinking about "taking the Red Pill" is gonna see these crazy maniacs chasing him around Canada or trying to get him banned from the UK and they are gonna think "f*ck yeah! He's taking on the world, count me in!"

Aggressively, loudly, and publicly no-platforming him just gives him more supporters to be honest.

He's like a creepy, rapey, misogynist Jesus Christ and the mob seems to think that crucifying him is the right thing to do. The mob screams that he wants to legalize rape and runs him out of town with pitchforks. Any fool with Google can verify that he didn't ACTUALLY say that and now he's got another sympathy vote. They don't seem to realize that they are making him even more popular.

I'm feeling like we are seeing the same thing happening with Trump but on a much larger scale.

We are constantly telling large segments of society that they, and their opinions, are not welcome because of "male privilege" or whatever. Then these guys come in and take them under their wing. If this happens often enough, and for long enough, then everybody ends up losing.

Actually, you could argue that it's kind of what has happened to the OP here. He makes a post discussing his worries about being a man in society, talks about concerns he has for his male friends. Then he basically gets told "f*ck off, women arent even treated like humans and the deck is stacked in favour men, look at all these examples of misogynist pigs".

So now who does he turn to?

hatrickpatrick

py2006 wrote: »

Not sure about hostility towards women. Some people mistake criticism of feminism and feminists as an attack on women.

It's not a mistake, it's a very deliberate and disingenuous attempt to invalidate an argument without addressing its substance. It's no different to "oh, you support Palestinian statehood? YOU ARE LITERALLY A NAZI SYMPATHISER!"

hatrickpatrick

Foxtrol wrote: »

In contrast, there was an outcry (including on boards) about how a dinosaur in Jurassic World attacked a woman in a ‘sexist’ manner. I repeat, a dinosaur attack was apparently sexist...

It was worse than that. The outcry over that scene essentially boiled down to "what was funny when it happened to guys in movies 1 and 2 is just downright nasty when it happens to a woman". :mad:

darkpagandeath

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's not a mistake, it's a very deliberate and disingenuous attempt to invalidate an argument without addressing its substance. It's no different to "oh, you support Palestinian statehood? YOU ARE LITERALLY A NAZI SYMPATHISER!"

Most people say Radical Feminism or 3rd wave nonsense. They don't just say women. I love those ads on the TV with a bloke like me surrounded by cleaning products going “What sorcery is this.”

The_Conductor

Shenshen wrote: »

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

Plenty of organisations have 'equality' units- which focus on measures to bring up participation in the organisational structure at various levels. To this end- they hold recruitment drives aimed at women- and minority groups (such as the disabled)- and hold the likes of interview preparation courses- specifically for women- in a stated attempt to get a more representative ratio of women in all ranks.

Where one gender- or section- of the population is specifically excluded- as *is* the case in the likes of internal promotion competitions in the civil service for example- it simply is discriminatory- even if the stated purpose of the discrimination is positive action (its anything but- if you're part of the discriminated against group).

hatrickpatrick

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Most people say Radical Feminism or 3rd wave nonsense. They don't just say women. I love those ads on the TV with a bloke like me surrounded by cleaning products going “What sorcery is this.”

Now this is a good example of where feminism pisses me off. Feminists will frequently respond to that by saying "Oh yeah, that's appalling sexism - implying that a man shouldn't know about that stuff because a woman's place is in the kitchen" or some variation thereof.

In other words, taking something which is very clearly and directly an example of men being mocked and ridiculed by the media, and instead of addressing the psychological harm this does to young men and the double standard with regard to how much mockery is acceptable when someone is a guy, they flip it so as it becomes another example of how women are being targeted.

Same with fathers' rights. "Oh yeah, remember that guy who killed himself after being denied access to his children for five years? What an incredible example of sexism against women! How dare the courts insinuate that it's a woman's job to mind the kids" etc.

That, above pretty much anything else, is the "privilege" argument which turned a guy who identified with feminism in his early teens into a guy who actively identifies as anti feminist in his twenties. It's utterly toxic.

Maximus Alexander

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Most people say Radical Feminism or 3rd wave nonsense. They don't just say women. I love those ads on the TV with a bloke like me surrounded by cleaning products going “What sorcery is this.”

Those kinds of ads are offensive to both genders though. It invariably ends up with a woman doing all the cleaning like it's 1955 or something. Men are clueless, dirty idiots and women are all good little housewives. God I have such disdain for that sh*te.

[Deleted User]

No more than certain minority groups calls for equality really meaning a call for special treatment for them, feminist groups fall under the same category. They don't want equality they want special treatment or in other words be able to discriminate against men.

Gender quotas are a perfect example, they are total discrimination against men and should never have been introduced. The job should go to the person who deserves it be it a man or a woman. If that means all women or no women then so be it. What's all this crap with women only insurance and women only gyms too, if someone opened a men only gym there would be a volcanic eruption of outrage.

PopePalpatine

orubiru wrote: »

Totally agree about denying him publicity but I wouldn't suggest "no-platforming", I'd just suggest either ignoring the guy or refuting his points in a calm and controlled fashion. Give him enough rope, and all that.

The main tactic that guys like Roosh and other PUA types employ is targeting men who feel alienated or depressed or maybe just confused. They are essentially offering the illusion of acceptance, understanding and camaraderie.

Any guy who is interested in following Roosh V or is thinking about "taking the Red Pill" is gonna see these crazy maniacs chasing him around Canada or trying to get him banned from the UK and they are gonna think "f*ck yeah! He's taking on the world, count me in!"

Aggressively, loudly, and publicly no-platforming him just gives him more supporters to be honest.

He's like a creepy, rapey, misogynist Jesus Christ and the mob seems to think that crucifying him is the right thing to do. The mob screams that he wants to legalize rape and runs him out of town with pitchforks. Any fool with Google can verify that he didn't ACTUALLY say that and now he's got another sympathy vote. They don't seem to realize that they are making him even more popular.

I'm feeling like we are seeing the same thing happening with Trump but on a much larger scale.

We are constantly telling large segments of society that they, and their opinions, are not welcome because of "male privilege" or whatever. Then these guys come in and take them under their wing. If this happens often enough, and for long enough, then everybody ends up losing.

Actually, you could argue that it's kind of what has happened to the OP here. He makes a post discussing his worries about being a man in society, talks about concerns he has for his male friends. Then he basically gets told "f*ck off, women arent even treated like humans and the deck is stacked in favour men, look at all these examples of misogynist pigs".

So now who does he turn to?

First off, I shouldn't have conflated ignoring with "no-platforming".

TBH, I see little difference between the recruiting methods of Daesh and ROK/"neo-reactionaries" - the only difference seems to be that the latter group's violent tendencies manifest themselves in rape, sexual assault, domestic abuse and setting up sock-puppet Twitter accounts to tweet rape & death threats at any woman they deem a feminist.

ThinkProgress

Equal rights is an illusion.

Women are born with many innate disadvantages when compared with men.... The only true way to create the illusion of an equal playing field, is to weaken men and strengthen women.

Because if you pitted all the men in the world against all the women - the men would almost exclusively win in practically every area. (on average)

Men didn't create or design women to have those disadvantages. That's just how the cards were dealt. But we sure as sh*t have to carry the burden of responsibility for them!

Without the voluntary concession of men, the illusion of equality is impossible. But that's the great irony of the whole thing... because if women were actually born with equal capabilities, they would not require the concession of men!

If you want something in life, you have to take it yourself... unless you're not capable of taking it... Then you are forced to ask for it and hope it's given to you!

maudgonner

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Equal rights is an illusion.

Women are born with many innate disadvantages when compared with men.... The only true way to create the illusion of an equal playing field, is to weaken men and strengthen women.

Because if you pitted all the men in the world against all the women - the men would almost exclusively win in practically every area. (on average)

Men didn't create or design women to have those disadvantages. That's just how the cards were dealt. But we sure as sh*t have to carry the burden of responsibility for them!

Without the voluntary concession of men, the illusion of equality is impossible. But that's the great irony of the whole thing... because if women were actually born with equal capabilities, they would not require the concession of men!

If you want something in life, you have to take it yourself... unless you're not capable of taking it... Then you are forced to ask for it and hope it's given to you!

OohhhhKaaayyyy......

FortySeven

maudgonner wrote: »

OohhhhKaaayyyy......

I take it you disagree? I'd be interested to hear you elaborate.

maudgonner

FortySeven wrote: »

I take it you disagree? I'd be interested to hear you elaborate.

I'll just select one point then:

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Women are born with many innate disadvantages when compared with men....

Many innate disadvantages. Born with many innate disadvantages.

Aside from the obvious physical advantages men have over women (which is a given), I'm interested to hear of the many ways in which my gender is inherently inferior to his/yours. What inbred intellectual superiority do you have? (From birth - not due to education mind) What emotional superiority?

Because that post does not sound like it's talking about societal disadvantages - it's inherent inferiority that's being referred to. That women are a like a lesser species and should be grateful what we are allowed to have.

[Deleted User]

Jairo Fit Tenor wrote: »

No more than certain minority groups calls for equality really meaning a call for special treatment for them, feminist groups fall under the same category. They don't want equality they want special treatment or in other words be able to discriminate against men.

Gender quotas are a perfect example, they are total discrimination against men and should never have been introduced. The job should go to the person who deserves it be it a man or a woman. If that means all women or no women then so be it. What's all this crap with women only insurance and women only gyms too, if someone opened a men only gym there would be a volcanic eruption of outrage.

There've been men only clubs for yonks and I'd say you'd find them now and nobody would give a sh!te. Cuts Fitness for men was around for a while.
If you want one that badly go set it up.

py2006 wrote: »

The one thing I have noticed on the net AND out in the real world is that once a man tries to speak of abuse/discrimination etc etc it gets shouted down in kinda of 'how dare you, only women can be victims' mentality. Not always but it happens.

At the lunch table in an old job where at the time I was the only male, the subject of children and the courts after separation/divorce came up. Generally I sit there quietly and listen but I just happened to say "men seem to be unfairly treated when it comes to divorce and kids etc" to which I was shouted down and "HOW DARE YOU" and the next 5 mins was spewing out how bad women have it and men are this and that... The following week I was minding my own business and as I walked by the same group I heard one say, "sure he hates women". I kid you not.
.

This one time I met a rude man. Men are all so rude.

FortySeven

maudgonner wrote: »

I'll just select one point then:

Many innate disadvantages. Born with many innate disadvantages.

Aside from the obvious physical advantages men have over women (which is a given), I'm interested to hear of the many ways in which my gender is inherently inferior to his/yours. What inbred intellectual superiority do you have? (From birth - not due to education mind) What emotional superiority?

Because that post does not sound like it's talking about societal disadvantages - it's inherent inferiority that's being referred to. That women are a like a lesser species and should be grateful what we are allowed to have.

Spatial perception for one. Makes us better drivers.

py2006

bluewolf wrote: »

There've been men only clubs for yonks and I'd say you'd find them now and nobody would give a sh!te. Cuts Fitness for men was around for a while.
If you want one that badly go set it up.

This one time I met a rude man. Men are all so rude.

I think men only clubs are long gone? Wasn't there a golf club that was men only for years but they had to change it?

[Deleted User]

I wouldn't know

I really doubt anyone would care. I'd say you've more of a marketing issue than anything else. Loads of weights areas are mostly men anyway

py2006

bluewolf wrote: »

This one time I met a rude man. Men are all so rude.

I was giving an example of the type of response that is met when the discussion of discrimination or abuse of men is brought up. It was not a suggestion of all women but I think you knew that.

[Deleted User]

py2006 wrote: »

I was giving an example of the type of response that is met when the discussion of discrimination or abuse of men is brought up. It was not a suggestion of all women but I think you knew that.

Fair enough

Generally when anything facing women is brought up, my experience is that men are straight in with "but what about men". Or "not all men" when it was never implied. Not even as a genuine attempt to resolve issues, just to shout down.
International women's day? Half the response must have been "but what about MENS DAY HUH????" highest google results.

It would be less exhausting if we could all just work together to face the issues for everyone, like how to advance on this year's fatherhood guardianship legislation changes, etc.

gctest50

FortySeven wrote: »

Spatial perception for one. Makes us better drivers.

Insurance companies used to offer cheaper rates to women drivers

& insurance companies are rarely known for doing that for a bit of fun

FortySeven

gctest50 wrote: »

Insurance companies used to offer cheaper rates to women drivers

& insurance companies are rarely known for doing that for a bit of fun

I didn't say safer. I said better. Parking and racing show this to be true. Women are safer because they have to be careful. We crash because we are careless.

py2006

bluewolf wrote: »

Fair enough

Generally when anything facing women is brought up, my experience is that men are straight in with "but what about men". Or "not all men" when it was never implied. Not even as a genuine attempt to resolve issues, just to shout down.
International women's day? Half the response must have been "but what about MENS DAY HUH????" highest google results.

It would be less exhausting if we could all just work together to face the issues for everyone, like how to advance on this year's fatherhood guardianship legislation changes, etc.

I hear ya, but I think sometimes 'whataboutery' (a word I learned on here) is warranted by men as they are largely ignored when issues which should be discussed as social issues are discussed as gender issues i.e only affecting women. Domestic abuse in all its forms being the obvious one.