Electric Sheep wrote: » No, most people are aware that men's position in society has mostly to do with the Old Boys Network.
lawlolawl wrote: » So you don't need feminism or any adjustments to the current state of equality then. You are doing fine already.
tritium wrote: » BTW at the point where women first got the vote nearly half of the male population also wasn't eligible to vote, including many who had put their lives on the line in the war. Seriously, is anyone going to tell me that that men who came back from the first world war to low paid jobs and no vote were priveliged next to the middle class suffragettes? Is your average middle class college educated female graduate really oppressed next to the average working class inner city male, even before I factor in the biases in the educational system against male students?
The more I see if some if this stuff the more I have to conclude its completely detached itself from the real world most of us inhabit to trip out on a pity party of victimhood.
tritium wrote: » Wait, what's this men's position in society I keep hearing about? I don't have access to an old boys network, so how does it work for me? How does it work for the disporportionate numbers of male homeless and suicides? Old boy network too? Is it possible that the little success I've had in life might just be down to working my ass off, and that, much like thattequilagirl, no one actually *gave* me anything because I was a man or any other reason- you know, maybe when I, a man, beat out male and female candidates at interview it was actually on merit and not another patriarchal conspiracy Tbh lots of this male privelige stuff reads like the whining of a spoilt child. Some man has more than me and I want it waah! It doesn't matter that many men have, and always had less, that's conveniently ignored. BTW at the point where women first got the vote nearly half of the male population also wasn't eligible to vote, including many who had put their lives on the line in the war. Seriously, is anyone going to tell me that that men who came back from the first world war to low paid jobs and no vote were priveliged next to the middle class suffragettes? Is your average middle class college educated female graduate really oppressed next to the average working class inner city male, even before I factor in the biases in the educational system against male students? The more I see if some if this stuff the more I have to conclude its completely detached itself from the real world most of us inhabit to trip out on a pity party of victimhood. You know, the real world where we all get the bad end of the deal at times but rarely because 'the other' is either actively or passively oppressing us.
Jairo Fit Tenor wrote: » These things are nothing to do with rights or unequal opportunities its just the natural cycle of things when women become mothers.
thattequilagirl wrote: » And here's the kicker, for daring to say this, I'll be labeled a feminazi who just needs to get laid.
seamus wrote: » Potentially yes, but not really. Maternity leave is a legal construct. And in fact it's mandatory for a certain amount of time. If there was no maternity leave, this inequality would be less obvious because women who wanted children and a career would take very short leave before returning to work. That would be the "natural cycle" of things. But that too would be madness, because it would be detrimental to society in the long term. So you need maternity leave, but you'd need to level the playing field? In comes paternity leave. A notion that not only benefits men (new fathers want to be able to stay home as much as new mothers do), but also does as much as possible to "level" the playing field. Now the only people with the "advantage" are those who never take any parental leave - but this applies for both men & women, and not just men.
Jairo Fit Tenor wrote: » As at the end of the day the mother needs the time off to recover, breast feeding will be happening for the first one or two anyway etc.
thattequilagirl wrote: » No, on a personal level I don't need any support on account of being a woman. I'm still a feminist on account of the fact that many/most women aren't as fortunate. I'd like to see more balance in government, corporate life, and parenting. Just because things are going fine for me does not mean the movement no longer needs to exist.
Irishcrx wrote: » 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?
thattequilagirl wrote: » You're right in that there is no specific reason why women should have been GIVEN the vote, it should never have been men's to give us. But they took it, so we had no choice.
I've been GIVEN none of my success in life by men and I resent the implication. I competed against men in college and stood my ground, I beat men at interview for the job I have and for others.
And here's the kicker, for daring to say this, I'll be labeled a feminazi who just needs to get laid.
Ice Maiden wrote: » Female on male violence being laughed at and considered less serious than the reverse? Who is doing this laughing? Hint: not usually women.
Ice Maiden wrote: » Yes I know domestic abuse campaigns ignore violence against men, which is crap for sure. In my experience the vast majority of downplaying domestic abuse of men is by other men. The lack of awareness of it is not just due to feminism I'm afraid.
py2006 wrote: » Oh I agree, men for the most part just don't talk. But also they are not allowed. Men in an abusive relationship run the risk of loosing their kids, house etc if they run from abuse. Even if there was no kids or property involved where do they go? Hence they often don't. Plus men don't often realise they are being abused, certainly emotionally and pychologically.
Ice Maiden wrote: » Eh... why are you assuming I'm not familiar with that video? I am very aware of that vile harpy Sharon Osbourne's misandry, summed up by that disgusting video. It doesn't mean women are always laughing at female on male violence - it doesn't change the fact that female on male violence is often downplayed by men themselves. I can understand the anger at attitudes like hers not being met with deserved action though.
Ice Maiden wrote: » I was talking more about other men who refer to violence against men with "grow a pair", "man up" etc. Men "are not allowed talk"? Who is not allowing them?
py2006 wrote: » Oh right, well some women do too. As hard as it is for a woman to talk about abuse it is a 1000 times harder for men as a) there is virtually no support b) fear of ridicule c) fear of losing of kids d) elements of society and feminism suggest that only women can be victims of abuse. From my own experience of trying to raise the subject in conversation (in front of female colleagues. No not saying this is all womens attitude) the reaction ranged from laughter, being offended to the topic being dismissed as ludicrous as "99% of victims are women" etc.
Ice Maiden wrote: » In my experience nobody would dream of ridiculing a man who is being abused (except for my one experience of it happening to a poor man at work when it was laughed at by a bunch of men). If anything there would be extra sensitivity about it because of the realisation that it's hard for men to talk about. When men cry it is way more upsetting than when women cry, because it is so much more unusual and more difficult for a man to let go of his emotions.
silverharp wrote: » If you see any of those social experiments where a woman hits a man in a park, it seems to be the quickest way to put a smile on women passerby's face , and zero fks given by any men passing by
py2006 wrote: » There is a clip that I am trying to locate where a female student talks of her disgust at her largely female gender studies class laughed at the only male student in the class who spoke about his experience of domestic abuse. If I find it I will post it.
py2006 wrote: » This is the one I was thinking of. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgKsniZ4N9k
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6b1975299c8e5d4897a60061c4f145b7.svg)
