But what about the men?

nignag · 2012-02-19T01:28:19+00:00

If feminism would not corner the market on gender discussion, this kind of problem would not exist. When anyone brings up the topic of gender, society almost always thinks that Feminism is the only positive view to be had, and anyone other is misogynistic and bigoted.

When I can freely speak about men's issues without the stigma that comes with it today, I will not have to speak about it in feminist discussions. As it is now, they have monopolized gender issues to the point that you have to scream at them in order to get any recognition.

nignag · 2012-02-19T01:46:28+00:00

Men have historically enjoyed a biased privilege. This is just an historical fact.

Stopped reading around there, mostly because this is right after accusations of MRAs trying to "shut down discussion," and also because it is a vague and subjective statement. By what measure did men have privilege? How do you really quantify their privilege? How can you say that men as a group had privilege when many of them didn't? Why would anyone even say this if they weren't trying to shut up men?

CaptSnap · 2012-02-19T05:34:18+00:00

This is where he lost me right here:

Men have historically enjoyed a biased privilege. This is just an historical fact, not an attack against men.

This man suffers from a feminist interpretation of history. Let me give you an example.. Like most feminists, he would probably say it was awesome to be a man during the revolutionary war (this is just an example). He would look at General Washington on his white horse and say, "See! All the men everywhere are riding around like badasses completely forgetting about the barefoot and pregnant women at home."

He would completely overlook the uncountable and unmentioned hordes of men having their gangrenous limbs hacked off in the trenches because they succumbed to frostbite. How do I know he overlooks them? Because only an idiot would say what he just did after noticing the history of most of the men on this planet. For every General Washington there are thousands of mangled and broken bodies of men crushed and disposed in order to further civilization. Their only privilege being born to a disposable gender.

We don’t care that rape statistics show that women are much, much, more likely to be raped than straight cis men.

It depends which statistics and what definitions they are using. Since for most statistical purposes men can only be technically raped this YEAR I think its fair to call rape statistics into question. I mean its a little flippant to tell the gender who's rape is not even counted by definition to stfu in a discussion about how terrible rape is. It really makes one wonder how interested in the truth researchers are when they dont use data that even acknowledges men can be raped.

When you read a post where a woman describes her rape trauma, and someone comes in and says “Well, men get raped too, what about the men?”, they’re not saying “We’re all potential victims of sexual assault, look at how awful this is, let’s examine it as one entity called “human” that is opposed to this type of behavior in all of its forms.

The reason they arent countering with "this is a human problem" is because feminists discussions never take that form. They take the form "this is what is happening to women." And they dont care about whats happening to men to make it a "human" problem. There are no "human" problems in feminism, only female problems...even if men ALSO suffer. Thats the problem! Feminism is ideologically supposed to be about equality and removing labels and stigmas from the genders. But what happens is it only works for women and it tells men to shut up when everyone gets togethor to discuss problems. Then later when men still have their same problems, they are told the answer is feminism because its aims are equality. Its a catch-22 for men and the answer is not feminism because feminism is NOT egalitarianism its strictly and totally for women and quite frankly men are not welcome there.

There was an article posted the other day on reddit about women circumcising young girls in some backwater province in India. Somebody asked why was this front page material when men are circumcized all the fucking time in the United States. He was told to shut up because the article was about women and he should wait to talk about men until there was an article about men. So I pointed out that if it had been young boys that were being circumcized there would never be an article printed because nobody cares! Boys being circumcized is not news, its not a headline...big deal. So when feminists tell men to wait for an article is another cart before the horse. Its like saying, "Wait until your gender's problems are a big deal (like my gender's problems are) so that when an article is written about what a big problem it is then you can discuss it." But its not a big deal and thats why nobody writes articles about them.

See thats the whole problem. Men have been disposable for all of time so theres no discourse on how to make their lives better and stop treating them like resources. So to even get this kind of discourse started you have to go into the favoured gender's spaces and bring it up.

Thats the historical context. Women have always been protected and kept safe. So its EASY for them to talk about things that are threatening their safety. They want to overthrow their gender roles but they dont mind asking the state to insure their safety and well-being.....the very state that demands men die in order to create and protect itself.

Women dont need more spaces for this. They already have an entire movement, colleges have an entire department for the study of their historical woes and its impacts today, theres a white house council for them and them alone, they already have federally funded shelters, they already have a biased model for domestic violence propagated to law enforcement showing that men are the de facto aggressor, despite living longer they get to retire earlier and get the lionshare of health care money, they already control 80% of the consumer spending on the entire planet, and they already have a monopoly on the entire field of child care and especially education.

I find it rather insulting that with all of this they still play the "Im just a quiet little frail voice and need space away from men or else theres no way I could ever be heard." So let me ask you straight up...how far from half does college enrollment need to be before "female spaces" on academic campuses are seen for the absolute sexist shit that they are? 60/40 (we're there now)? 70/30? 90/10? What if there was just ONE man on the entire campus? Would you say the precious snowflakes would still need a space free from his male oppression in order to have their voices heard?

Well I am not apologetic that feminism (billed as equality) has to try and suppress dissent and is now trying to censor the gender conversations to be as absolutely one-sided as possible...even to the exclusion of half of the population of this planet. Thats on it, not me. Frankly Im not sure how anyone can support a movement so blatant in its propagation of hate and malice of an entire gender through such faulty statistics that they are little more than lies.

edited some cuss words out that werent necessary to my point..may have missed some, they're pretty fun to put in

luciansolaris · 2012-02-19T05:04:14+00:00

Women have had privilege throughout the years, and this is indisputable historical fact. They didn't have to labor as hard as men typically had to, they got to raise the children while husband was out working his ass off, and they didn't have to go off to war.

You tell me a more privileged class. I couldn't blame anyone that would kill to be a 18th or 19th century woman, man or woman!

MechaSixVII · 2012-02-19T01:09:50+00:00

link?

2012-02-19T01:16:09+00:00

Shit, sorry, I thought I had done it right :P

http://hila-lumiere.blogspot.com/2011/12/on-feminism-what-about-men.html

MartialWay · 2012-02-20T16:29:12+00:00

Men have historically enjoyed a biased privilege.

And so have women. Kyriarchy is a much more nuanced (and accurate) way to look at these things.

This is just an historical fact, not an attack against men.

When you ignore the very real privileges women enjoyed in the era ( not being sent to die in war in vast numbers, not a daily worry about being killed in a duel or savagely beaten over a casual insult, not slowly dying in the mines etc.), yeah, your focus does become impalanced and becomes a de facto attack on men.

We can't really talk about these topics in a mature manner if we blindly ignore history and engage with the history of male privilege in a disingenuous manner.

Correct, and when YOU blindly ignore history in favor of your own agenda, you're the one addressing it in a "disingenuous manner" and refusing to address it in a balanced, "mature" way.

The fact that we are now starting to redress this balance by talking about women does not signal that feminists are trying to exclude men, or "hate" men.

Many of them do indeed straight up hate men. To pretend they didn't is being disengenuous. Can you seriously read Andrea Dworkin and claim she didn't hate men? The Scum Manifesto (Society of Cutting Up Men)? You've got to own up to the hatemongers in your movement if you plan to be taken seriously as an honest commentator.

This is a rather childish and simplistic response to feminism, and also suggests a distinct lack of empathy or willingness to understand how other people experience the world and daily life.

?????????????????

Reasonable analysis of some of the members of your movement is not simplistic and childish....Ad Hominem attacks against people with opposing viewpoints are simplistic and childish. And I'm amazed that a plea for empathy gets labeled as a "distinct lack of empathy" simply because it comes form men. This attitude does NOT display a balanced viewpoint.

When I think of all the significant relationships and life-long friendships that I have with the men in my life who understand and support my perspective, it seems ridiculous to me to even have to justify my position.

And some of your best frineds are black, we get it.

Title	But what about the men?
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	0
Comments	105
Date	February 19, 2012 12:59 AM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/pvvtm/but_what_about_the_men/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/but-what-about-the-men.1027416 https://theredarchive.com/post/1027416

Comments