Preparing for massive downvotes, but would like to share my opinion

sacredsanta · 2011-01-14T16:09:11+00:00

I wish that I, as a female, could be behind the feminist movement (any of them). The way you describe feminism is exactly what it should be; the desire that women and men are treated as equally as possible. That never seems to be the case though, and I've seen women my whole life take their gender to extremes in different situations. Blaming menstruation for acting rude comes to mind, as a small example. A larger one is applying for technical positions and knowing they will be hired even though they aren't qualified for the job.

It sucks, but to me, the feminist movement has destroyed itself, and many of the women in it are the reasons we do not have equality yet.

dalore · 2011-01-14T13:48:21+00:00

[permanently deleted]

aetheralloy · 2011-01-14T17:56:41+00:00

I wrote the "So you're a feminist in mensrights..." post.

The major problem with your post is that you think your personal definition of feminism is what men face in the world.

The problem isn't a bunch of women who are fighting for equality.

The problem is the bunch of women fighting just for women, in the name of equality.

bowling4meth · 2011-01-14T15:30:25+00:00

ITT: No-one says anything new. No-one changes anyone's opinion.

BPhair · 2011-01-14T16:05:40+00:00

No true Scotsman.

Faryshta · 2011-01-14T21:19:13+00:00

Falsely accusing men of rape is not feminism.

Ok, but feminist gave them all the weapons they need to act like that. There is a post in askreddit right now talking on the subject. If a girl accuse you of anything you are guilty until be found innocent.

cl3ft · 2011-01-14T13:10:53+00:00

From my own personal experience feminists are not about equality but advancing their own sex. So yes, ideally men's rights and feminists should be after the same goal, but most people who refer to themselves as feminists are not about equality, and thus the anti-feminism on mens rights

ignatiusloyola · 2011-01-14T15:47:54+00:00

The problem is that you are using the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. You can't just simply redefine "feminists", or rather "true feminists", to suit your purposes.

When people say "feminists" on this subreddit, they are referring to the activists of today, not the activists of days gone by. People who are actively campaigning for issues affecting women are feminists. And the unfortunately vast majority of these result in a detriment to men, as witnessed in so many cases of protecting false rape accusers, advocating for female-only-victim domestic violence programs, etc...

We are raging against feminists, not feminism necessarily. Please note the difference.

fishwish · 2011-01-14T13:15:20+00:00

This is the post she is referring to:

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ej780/so_youre_a_feminist_in_mensrights/

YHWH_The_Lord · 2011-01-14T16:47:57+00:00

As far as equal pay in the workplace goes, as someone who has worked in several different working environments i have this to say.

When i worked construction, generally the women got paid less, same thing when i worked on the docks at the local port, but the starting pay was the same for everyone. This made sense to me. The women were generally slower and less capable of performing the work. These women who were incapable of working at the same pace as the men, or incapable of performing the same tasks with the same efficiency, usually got fired within a few months.

The few women who actually kept pace with the men generally got the same amount of pay raises as the men, and for the same amount.

Now i work in an office of a large corporation. Most women who work here are secretaries. Secretaries get paid roughly 30% less than the person they are doing secretarial work for. Women who were not secretaries but "full employees" got the same base pay as men, and raises were based on performance. Most women ended up getting paid the same as men.

joannchilada · 2011-01-14T13:45:54+00:00

This is a matter of the image of the vocal, aggressive anti-male feminazis and the real, "We want to be normal humans" more passive and reasonable (by nature) feminists.

This is a natural evolution of any large and controversial movement. It always ends up being abused. It's best to adopt a new name. Humanism works, we're all equal under that.

strangersadvice · 2011-01-14T16:11:32+00:00

This seems like a good time to bring up reproductive rights.
-Can a man prevent the abortion of a child he wants? No.

-Can a man prevent the woman from giving away the child to adoption? In limited circumstances only, depending on the state.

-Can a man have an equal opportunity to be the primary caregiver to a child in a divorce/custody situation? No as the courts apply the laws today.

*These, for me, are the reasons for the men's rights movements...IT'S ABOUT THE CHILDREN. Women are taking them and our rights to them away from us.

beccaebdon · 2011-01-14T13:32:59+00:00

[permanently deleted]

fishwish · 2011-01-14T17:54:16+00:00

You know what? I'll take something back. You are not an 'Intro to Feminism' Feminist. You are a full blown hypocritical feminist. And as you call yourself... a true feminist.

Your intro is the same. "Feminism is about equality." But you don't really mean those words. When it comes to men's rights, you look for ways to belittle men's rights by calling it parallel to white rights. You go for the ad hominem attack to try and cut down our creditability. But when it comes to women's rights, it's different. You are not about equality. This is why feminism is not respected her. As you say, you are a true feminist. I'll call you a true bigot too.

on_a_moose · 2011-01-14T17:41:15+00:00

I believe men and women should be equal. That is feminism.

No. That is egalitarianism. There is nothing female-specific about all parties being equal, and treated equally. Both men and woman have aspects of their lives where they get the short end of the proverbial stick -- and they always have.

The term feminism itself is offensive because it is exclusionary, and polarizing. For a person, but especially for a male to identify as feminist he is perceived to be supporting rights/benefits of women. This has nothing to do with equality. Feminists don't do anything to protect or encourage the rights or benefits of anyone but women.

That feminists would like to hijack egalitarianism for their own agendas, and that you and so many others seem to have swallowed this line, is one of the big problems we're all facing here. Please identify properly. If you truly believe in equality for all people, identify as egalitarian. You can't make feminism into what you wish it to be just by calling it that.

2011-01-14T18:03:00+00:00

I'd like to post this TED talk.

http://www.ted.com/talks/hanna_rosin_new_data_on_the_rise_of_women.html

I'm not sure that I agree with every correlation she brings up, but she does bring up some interesting topics. Apparently there is a recent rise in which young women are doing financially better than young men. From what this one presentation says they are not behaving very well in their new role.

As a woman, I don't want that to happen. If my accomplishments are paying off, great. I want everyone who works hard and reaches a certain level of expertise to flourish. I do not, however want to treat men as women were treated before this. I hold no grudges b/c I haven't been affected and have no reason to. I also do not want to be seen as being given an opportunity b/c of my gender. It's demeaning. The best person for the job should get it. Flat out.

Don't get me wrong. I can tell the difference between when gender plays a role in how I am treated at a job, and I do my best to squash it. I work harder to prove that I am smarter, faster, and more capable than others. The only thing I do find is that, b/c of my appearance (small, big boobs, thin, pretty) that I have more work to do in that area. But wtf does that matter. We are all given cards and we choose how to play them. I don't see it as a reason to whine.

I got a little off track, but what I want to say is; sometimes it's hard to see when the fight may be over and the people reaping the benefits of the fight rarely know how to respect the outcome.

2011-01-14T21:30:06+00:00

So CALL OUT your friends who share your label before you come here and make up a strawman about how all your opponents are right-wingers (favoring things like "white rights" and "traditional marriage rights".) You're full of it. Guess what? Some of them are gay and some of them are liberal and all of them see your friends doing things like throwing parties for false-accusers: http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=11890 My liberal dollars go to that lobby.

People who care about Men's Rights (for lack of a better term) don't throw parties for rapists, because there's no such thing as "rape culture". There is an epidemic of abuses of justice coming from your friends that needs to be reversed. http://www.mediaradar.org/

You call yourself an "-ist" therefore you're part of an "-ism". Don't get weasely about who's a "true" feminist because it's not up to you. You've inherited a tradition coming from hate-filled ideologues like andrea dworkin. Go call your friends out and then your opinions might get respect.

thulminos · 2011-01-14T21:35:19+00:00

In any case joannchilada, thanks for starting the conversation, it triggered a lot of interesting debate that is not polluted by name-callings and the usual trolling.

GroundhogExpert · 2011-01-14T22:19:05+00:00

The word for equal treatment is egalitarian. What's wrong with just calling yourself an egalitarian? It's gender-neutral, and doesn't have a ton of baggage.

s1985 · 2011-01-14T16:54:19+00:00

Where are these true feminists you speak of?

I've never met any, just dozens upon dozens of....feminists

fishwish · 2011-01-14T13:34:20+00:00

and would just like to present some facts.

Oh, boy facts.

"Womens rights" evolved due to the oppression of women throughout history.

I agree.

All being a feminist really boils down to is believing that women and men should be respected and treated equally

Ah, the dictionary definition of feminism vs. how it gets implemented in the real word.

Claiming that "Mens rights" evolved out of the womens rights movement, and being proud of earning scorn, reminds me of people clambering for "white rights"

Oh, so you are one of the feminists who insists that since we stand up for ourselves we are like clansmen? Go fuck yourself hard. We get shit like that all the time. It's OK to stick up for women. But if men stick up for themselves they are evil. Seriously, go throw on a pink clansman hood and be the biggot that you are.

True feminists never wish to bring men down.

/fishwish Looks back up & see where you compared men's rights to white rights and doesn't believe you.

Women that want to squash men down are falsely using the feminist title for their own agenda,

If that's true, you are out numbered & out ranked by all the other feminists. Look. We aren't the ones who made feminism look bad. It started way before us.

I believe men and women should be equal. That is feminism.

And we pretty much only hear from feminist like you complaining here about us. Feminists who really do believe in equality are some of the most passive bunches. The feminists who are out there doing the work, skew heavily towards the kind we bash. They are the real world feminists. They are the active ones. You at best represent the "Intro to feminism" feminist. You got the sales pitch, sounded great & that is where it ended.

Raging against feminism only discredits your cause.

I don't believe so. The public seems to be very aware of what feminism today represents.

For all the legitimate experiences in this subreddit, blaming true feminism hurts.

"True feminists" only come here to complain. I rarely see them taking up the axe against the "fake feminists."

Edit: Sorry for being a little bit harsh, but seeing the ad hominem "white rights" slander yet again set me off & is representative of the typical feminism we see on a regular basis.

joannchilada · 2011-01-14T14:18:43+00:00

Raging against feminism only discredits your cause.

People are entitled to reject any belief or idea. Its your job to make a case for feminism, not ours to accept it.

bitter_cynical_angry · 2011-01-14T15:39:52+00:00

...any man that believes women and men should be treated equally is a feminist himself.

I believe men and women should be equal. That is feminism.

No, that is gender equality. I think both feminism and men's rights are unbalanced in exactly opposite ways. Your "true feminist" argument could apply just as well as a "true masculinist" (or whatever the word is). Regardless of the stated goals of feminism or men's rights, the name itself belies the inherent bias.

rantgrrl · 2011-01-14T22:12:08+00:00

Wow. If feminists actually put as much effort into ending injustices against men as they do into saying that they're not 'all like that'...

sacredsanta · 2011-01-14T16:11:30+00:00

This is a great discussion joannchilada, thank you.

joannchilada · 2011-01-14T15:01:39+00:00

Feminism is defined by what its practitioners actually do and say, not by what they pretend that their ideology is about.

joannchilada · 2011-01-14T19:03:18+00:00

It's all about equal rights until a pickle jar needs to be opened. Too soon?

joannchilada · 2011-01-14T14:03:21+00:00

Not trying to be mean but I saw no facts. Only unsubstantiated opinion.

Also, you need only to look at the history of feminism to see that it is not actually about equality.

fishwish · 2011-01-14T15:50:59+00:00

You say you are for equality.

You say that "men's rights" is like "white rights."

Do you also say that "women's rights" is like "white rights"?

Quazz · 2011-01-14T13:40:04+00:00

A real feminist wants to empower women, not dis-empower men

If you're for equality and only want to empower women, then yes, you are against men, because you don't seem to want to empower men and thus as you keep on empowering women, eventually (or it has already) women have more power than men thus creating inequality. Hence men's rights was born to even out the odds.

edit: not sure why i'm being downvoted for using pure logic based on what she said

shabutaru118 · 2011-01-14T16:24:39+00:00

if "feminists really think that, they should stop using the word "feminist". The word it self means empowering women, not making men and women equal.

joannchilada · 2011-01-14T16:39:06+00:00

[permanently deleted]

zombicidal · 2011-01-14T18:07:14+00:00

I believe in unity and love. So...

EddieFender · 2011-01-14T19:07:29+00:00

Egalitarianism != Feminism

subvertc · 2011-01-14T20:43:44+00:00

and any man that believes women and men should be treated equally is a humanist himself

FTFY

stuckinplace · 2011-01-14T21:30:36+00:00

(just as men don't want to be lumped into a category with rapists simply for being a man.)

MEN ARE NOT THE ONLY FUCKING PEOPLE THAT CAN RAPE THANK YOU.

So sick of hearing this stupid fucking point that makes no sense. Men can be raped by women. It works both ways. Stop spouting nonsense.

RobotBuddha · 2011-01-14T22:42:58+00:00

True feminists never wish to bring men down.

That's my main issue with feminists. To hear the vast majority of them talk, each and every one is the only one doing it right. It's a meaningless term. When someone says they're a feminist, it literally tells me nothing about them other than that they don't give much thought to language and like putting labels on themselves. And yes, that applies to a lot of words in the English language. The difference is that most of us aren't using them as descriptions of our core beliefs.

Lanza21 · 2011-01-14T23:04:05+00:00

Your view is kind of skewed. You are viewing feminism in a vacuum and as a movement for what it should be; equality. But let's be real, it's a political issue and it turns into a power tug of war. I don't follow the entire movements in the world of politics, so I can't argue specifics. But it's clearly not for complete equality like it's claimed.

And as far as reddit goes, the feminist subreddit is disgusting, anti male, pro female bullshit. Similarly, the mensrights subreddit is disgusting, anti female, pro male bullshit. My advice; politics on reddit is pointless.

Lovekraft · 2011-01-15T01:17:51+00:00

Equality is a socialist catchphrase that renders anyone questioning it "anti-equality".

Feminism is a term that renders anyone questioning is "anti-woman" or "misogynist"

Gay rights means that anyone questioning it is a homophobe.

Islamophobe, racist, bigot.

See how language has been co-opted by the evil to advance their agendas?

So many pseudo-intellectuals, living in western society and having the highest standard of living imaginable compared to the other 7/10 of the world, sipping their lattes, pondering how better life would be if we just published another article, another survey, another law.

Pitiful, dreary and female is this mindset.

We MRAs are the pioneers, the vanguards, the rebels who are chomping at the bit to shake up the whole system. An eternal cycle, but slavery isn't something we take lying down (no matter how dressed up and peaceful it appears).

The Spearhead.com is where these ideas are shaping into actual form. Also AVoiceforMen, mgtow-proboards. Here, we are clearing away the underbrush. Join us, and leave the navel-gazers and unproductive alone to fester in their shallow and harmful achievements.

truthiness79 · 2011-01-15T01:41:43+00:00

Claiming that "Mens rights" evolved out of the womens rights movement, and being proud of earning scorn, reminds me of people clambering for "white rights" evolving out of the civil rights movement

one of the best revisioning of history by feminists is that they have always been accepting of minority women, when in fact their entire movement was only concerned with white women. best example is with Sojourner Truth's speech at a women's convention. the truth was that she was booed and hissed, and the women present wanted her to stop speaking throughout the speech. yet there are people today who still believe the original story that it was openly welcomed by the white women.

melb22 · 2011-01-15T02:11:55+00:00

All being a feminist really boils down to is believing that women and men should be respected and treated equally.

No it doesn't. Feminism is one expression of a larger modern movement which treats individual autonomy as the defining human good. So feminism is the attempt to apply this concept, of maximising individual autonomy, to the lives of women.

That's problematic. If you want to self-define as an autonomous individual, then you cannot accept that something predefined like your sex has a significant role in life. So you have to assume that sex distinctions can be made not to matter: that they are false social constructs rather than something hardwired as part of human nature.

Furthermore, if you want to maximise female autonomy then you're likely to prefer that women focus on careers (which can be individually chosen) rather than the "biological destiny" of motherhood.

Which leads to a further problem. You then have to answer the question of why women preferred to focus on motherhood in the past. You can't answer that it has to do with natural sex differences, as this suggests that sex distinctions matter and that women might not be as naturally oriented to those activities deemed to maximise autonomy.

So the answer commonly given is that men as a class created an artificial gender system to deny a group othered as "women" equal autonomy in order to uphold their own unearned privilege and comfort.

From here it's a short step to the idea that the aim of politics is to bring down patriarchal privilege by instituting laws and education and employment policies designed to favour women.

It's also a short step to the idea that men as a class systematically use violence and rape against women as a class in order to uphold the gender system.

Little wonder that feminists who followed through with the logic of such a politics often arrived at a hostile attitude to men (if the theory were true then such hostility would be justified).

Is it theoretically possible to have a feminism which doesn't have these negative outcomes? Yes, but only if individual feminists are willing to think through the first principles the movement was founded on and replace them with something else.

2011-01-15T08:51:23+00:00

Anywhere injustice appears is where it should be fought. And one of the areas where there is injustice seems to be the laws that concern male-female interaction, which seem to be biased towards females.

I should also say that a lot of the posts on this subreddit are more "women do fucked shit to men!!" than any men's right issue which is regrettable. But just like some feminists equate the movement with hating men, likewise some men mix or mistake mensrights with woman hating.

evileddy · 2011-01-14T14:31:47+00:00

If feminism = equality.. why isn't it called "equalism"

Il128 · 2011-01-14T14:38:26+00:00

Feminism is funded via Domestic Violence and rape. Take away the BS and the Feminists lose a lot of funding.

DV is 50/50 and the vast majority of women are never raped.
Now look at the BS statistics Feminists want the Western world to believe about both those things.
DV is man on woman and it's a huge national problem. False. Less that 1% of everyone in the United States experiences Domestic Violence.

Rape is a huge problem, 1/4 women are rapped. False. Less that 5% of all women in the United States are raped. In fact, more men are raped every year in our nations prison systems than the total of all women raped over a ten year period.

IRageAlot · 2011-01-14T15:12:29+00:00

Falsely accusing men of rape is not feminism.

Nobody says it is. It is the act of a single person, but the laws that allow it to go unchecked, and even promote it to some degree were put in place by the femenist movement.

For example, if a black individual abused affirmative action to take a job from a more qualified white person it's not the fault of civil rights that that individual acted like a prick. It is because of that movement that those concepts were systemized.

Men's rights attacks that individual for being deplorable, and then they attack the movement for allowing those individuals to operate unchecked. You can bet your ass that if a man falsely accused a woman of rape that Men's rights would first attack the man for being a piece of shit, and then they would regroup and attack femenism movement again for, again, putting those laws in place.

If a movement, the femenist movement, works to "empowering women" as you put it, with no checks and balances on taking it too far then they are unfair. The mens rights movement is the checks and balances of the femenist movement.

How, in your mind you took the femenist, easily called the womens rights movement, looked at the mens rights movement, and determined that this was somehow an unfair setup I don't understand. If the femenist movement does something stupid, or a woman abuses a rule put in place by the femenist movement the Men's rights people will take note. If the mens rights movement does something stupid, or a man abuses a rule put in place by the movement you can bet your ass that the femenists will be right there with pad and paper.

emoprairiedog · 2011-01-14T17:23:30+00:00

A real feminist wants to empower women, not dis-empower men

Why I don't see feminists complaining about the total discrimination against men at DV ads and such then? Of course they won't, because no one would fight against an advantage from them. That's why MensRights exists.

2011-01-14T22:18:49+00:00

Sigh. Another useless troll and you all fall for it. Ignore and downvote this feminut.

Amazing_Steve · 2011-01-14T22:32:23+00:00

With women, I find it's always "we want equal rights," but then as soon as that becomes inconvenient, that the tune changes to, "but I'm a woman." Now they're not all like this, but it's been my experience that women tend to want to have their cake and eat it too when it comes to the subject.

2011-01-14T22:38:04+00:00

True feminists never wish to bring men down.

At this point, I'm tired of trying to figure out who's a true Scotsman and who isn't. Fuck 'em all and let the Devil sort 'em out.

2011-01-15T03:15:59+00:00

True feminists never wish to bring men down.

This is the old "no true Scotsman" argument. No one person has the authority to define feminism, so your definition of a true feminist is only as strong as your ability to convince people it's correct. As a movement, feminism will "be" whatever the collective ultimately decides it is, which may very well include anti-male sentiments if your definition doesn't gain traction.

AnnArchist · 2011-01-14T14:36:54+00:00

Men being falsely accused of rape is actually some what of a biproduct of organized feminism. . . sorry, it just seems to be that way.

joannchilada · 2011-01-14T14:38:08+00:00

"Womens rights" evolved due to the oppression of women throughout history.

Not true. This is part of the feminist myths taught in college, along with the "patriarchy" etc. Most of both men and women had shitty lives through history, women don't have a monopoly on experiencing suffering and oppression. Moreover, women's rights evolved due to the changing economic circumstances caused by capitalism and the industrial revolution.

All being a feminist really boils down to is believing that women and men should be respected and treated equally

Equally under law or equally in the results of society? Because you can't have both and the latter is the marxist version most feminists go with.

A real feminist wants to empower women, not dis-empower men

Problem with that is, the feminists that are actually affecting change, the politicians and lobby groups/activists etc, are creating laws which do dis-empower men. You can say that they are not real feminists, but at the end of the day they are the prominent people with power calling themselves feminists, and they rely on people like you calling yourself a feminist to lend them implicit support.

Raging against feminism only discredits your cause.

Your opinion. Feminism is an enemy to me, my society, and my species.

joannchilada · 2011-01-14T12:44:03+00:00

Ya know, from a purely lazy standpoint, doesn't it take more work, from a job perspective, to discriminate against a gender?

Wouldn't just be easier to say, "ok here is a job type, anyone who works this job type gets paid this much and does that kind of work," and that's it?

I just don't understand corporate sexism against either gender.

executex · 2011-01-14T16:02:37+00:00

Your argument is the same as 'No true scotsman' argument. While you may claim that no true feminist would violate a man's rights. The feminist movement has become large enough to inspire women to trample men's rights in FAVOR of women's rights, because of entitlement.

NiceGuysSTFU · 2011-01-14T15:06:34+00:00

I don't disagree with you, per se, but at the same time you're tilting at windmills here.

It is frustrating that I come here sometimes and see anti-women sentiment and anti-feminist raging, but I also come here and interact w/ people who have experienced harm solely b/c they are men (custody issues, abuse shame, etc.) and I relate to that and feel strongly that these voices need to be heard, that these interactions and support need to take place. I also feel that it is a small but growing movement that is of more interest to me than feminism as a whole.

If all you're basically saying no true scottsman applies to feminism, then you also have to concede that it also applies to MR, in which case, what is even the point of this post?

Astroichthyologist · 2011-01-14T15:10:58+00:00

[permanently deleted]

radamanthine · 2011-01-14T15:01:01+00:00

The feminists advancing the feminist agenda, proposing legislation and having the loudest voice are not like you claim to be. Though I surmise that you ikely still retain inherent bias toward women, which in the modern world makes you anti-male. Promote equality, if you're serious, not feminism. They're not equivalent.

2011-01-14T16:06:07+00:00

All being a feminist really boils down to is believing that women and men should be respected and treated equally

horseshit.

This is the definition of an egalitarian. You're brainwashed by your own horseshit lady. If thats what you think you should be called then stop calling yourself a feminist and start calling yourself an egalitarian, but you wont, b/c youre a feminist, someone who is for promoting more rights for women. For every feminist you find, you will find a new definition of feminism, this is the oldest trick in the book and we see this trick played out here every week. Youre not the first to try the tactic of redefining feminism. It doesnt work anymore, sorry.

I got a question that no feminist can honestly answer. If you are for "womens rights" then what rights are you fighting for as a woman living in western society in 2011? Dont worry, ill wait...

DoctorSolar · 2011-01-14T16:12:09+00:00

Right on! You are very eloquent! Sum up my feelings on the matter completely,

Foux · 2011-01-14T14:37:34+00:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E74-8A4f0k

vantharion · 2011-01-14T15:47:05+00:00

Feminism and Masculism I think are both largely hypocritical. I really like the points of each group.
I think a woman should have the right to control her own body- abortions aren't force upon them, they can choose if they want. I also think men are entitled to certain rights- 'I don't have to support this child because it wasn't my intention and I don't have the right to say you need to get an abortion' The problem is both groups have an extreme, a distasteful extreme. This is a counter motion to previous experiences they lived through. This is 'Men are the penis that is raping successful society', the 'Even consensual sex with a woman is inherently rape' and the 'Women should rule the nations, not men' type quotes.
There is also the 'Women are manipulative controlling rape claiming scum' type quotes.
Society just needs to be EQUAL, not an extreme.
I like the idea behind both masculism and feminism. They both just need to relax and stop being so extreme.

TripleCrown · 2011-01-14T18:13:49+00:00

Count me in

huls · 2011-01-14T18:25:22+00:00

You seem to have confused 'the original intention of feminism' with 'the way it actually is today'.

As for the 'true feminist' idea...it's a fallacy. The famous example is the 'true Scotsman': One guy says 'No Scotsman would drink Irish whiskey.' The second guy says 'What about Hamish McDonald? He's from Glasgow and he drinks Irish whiskey'. The first guy replied 'Yeah, but no true Scotsman would drink Irish whiskey'.

Simply ignoring the feminists who do things you don't like and saying they're not 'true' feminists doesn't stop them existing, and doesn't make anyone else ignore them. They still exist, and they still do things that you don't like, and everyone except you considers them feminists.

Berg426 · 2011-01-15T00:01:11+00:00

So why call yourselves feminists? Why not Egalitarians?

SNTNL · 2011-01-15T03:16:47+00:00

Why not just call yourself an egalitarian if all you seek is equality?

benreeper · 2011-01-15T13:09:10+00:00

Why is it still "save the women and children first?"

Lovekraft · 2011-01-15T17:08:09+00:00

MEN: this thread has turned into a giant feminized circle-jerk.

Get to the freakin' point!!! Feminism is a failed philosophy and shouldn't be given nearly the attention is has here! Let feminists come up with coherent policies that are verifiable and, until then, stop feeding the femtrolls.

2011-01-15T01:52:19+00:00

The thing that gets me is that, where men are lacking in rights compared to women - for example, where their children are concerned - it's generally because of efforts by women's rights groups. You can say that they're not real feminists, but that's the No True Scotsman fallacy. They are feminists.

Also:

any man that believes women and men should be treated equally is a feminist himself.

I really resent that, despite the fact that I'm not a man. I very much dislike being told that I'm really a feminist because I believe in equality (I've been on the receiving end of that remark too). Feminism does not own that opinion; believing that men and women are equal is simply something that decent human beings do. You don't get to tell others what they are or are not; if a person doesn't want to be part of that movement nobody can sit there and say "you're part of this movement even if you don't know it". I don't have to call myself a feminist because I believe in equality - nobody does. there's more to it than that.

The majority of feminists do not wish men harm, only the obnoxious loud ones that make me want to punch them.

And yet I see so much sexism from regular feminists, not just the loud obnoxious ones. And not much rebuke aimed their way.

kragshot · 2011-01-15T08:00:12+00:00

By the way....

Falsely accusing men of rape is not feminism.

No. Feminism states that "no woman lies about rape" which by its logical conclusion means the same thing. There are countless stories about women who have lied about rape, so therefore feminism has to defend those women who have been proven liars.

Case in point; the Hofstra Rape Case. Even after proof was given that the accuser had lied and had consented to the sex, "alleged feminists" were openly decrying the ruling and calling it "sexist." Furthermore, rather than decrying the accuser for degrading the torment that genuine rape victims have endured, the "alleged feminists" concentrated on trying to find a way to "punish the young men who had been found innocent of the crime," including by trying to dismiss the evidence which was used to exonerate as false or inconclusive.

You come in here waiving your banner and yet, your leaders are showing their true colors.

Jessica Valenti is calling for elimination of due process for men accused of rape and trying to vilify all men for the recent Arizona shooting.

NOW's president, Terry O'Neill is constantly lobbying against any legal discussion of shared parenting; calling it a smoke screen contrived by abusive fathers, seeking to further abuse their children.

Andrea Dworkin and Susan Brownmiller are historical archons of second wave feminism and they are the ones that started the entire dialog about "toxic masculinity;" which openly condemns and decries male sexuality as being harmful to women.

The blog owner at "Shakespeare's Sister" is calling for a return to segregation on public conveyances (like what is going on in India) that is a direct return to "Plessy v. Ferguson" which legalized the "back of the bus" laws against African Americans.

And yet you come in here defending feminism to us; claiming that these things are not feminism? In fact, I bet the next thing you will say is that "they don't speak for your movement."

We know more about your movement and its leaders than you do.

Check your privilege before coming in here to "correct and lecture us."

terrafelle · 2011-01-15T09:24:59+00:00

I've always found it particularly pernicious that certain urban women harp on and on about the "right to work" and the right to careers and so on. This certainly stems from a kind of envy of the male role, but it bears a little consideration. One finds that said role is not particularly enviable.

(As a small but important aside, it irritates me to hear women speak of "empowering" themselves via "careers", or from finding "fulfilling work". Work is not fulfilling; for the vast majority of people on the planet, work is dull, monotonous and something that has to be done to keep oneself from eating a Sherpa to stave off hunger. This is the apex fallacy at its worst; most men have never had "fulfilling" jobs and someone has to clean the sewers, rig the oil works, do security detail for haulage, etc. Funny how it never seems to be women.)

If women want to work because they'd sooner support themselves of their own volition than trade their (birth-given) sex for security as in the past, by all means. Their intentions, at least, have my respect. But the world is not so simple.

Firstly, there was no dearth of labor before female "emancipation", and certainly not in the fields that women choose to go into (paper-shuffling and soft sciences). This means that for every one man filling a role beforehand, there are now two people competing for that same role. For every five people, it's now ten; for every ten-thousand, it's twenty-thousand, etc. Fortunately most women work either part-time or drop out before they hit thirty, but massive bureaucracies (quangos in England are a perfect example) have had to erect themselves to fulfil the tremendous overabundance of labor, and this is having deleterious effects on both the health of the economy and more importantly the home. Women are no longer women but asexual rivals.

Second, women are born with natural strengths that overwhelm those of the male; indeed, the world has valued and protected women because genetically they are of much higher de facto value. Her rate of gamete production, as well as the difficulty and labors involved in bringing a child to term, mean that she endures under the auspices of sexual selection, passivity and mate screening. The vast majority of women who have ever lived have reproduced; the majority of men have not. In the sexual arena, women are incomparably stronger and they control the mating dance. Men present, women choose, etc.

But the usurpation of the male role by modern women has even further weakened his already essentially artificial hand; not only are more and more men locked out from the economic forum where they can jack up their attractiveness, more and more women will refuse to negotiate with men who aren't their superiors. Naturally these superiors become ever more scarce, and naturally the institution of monogamy begins to break down.

When men are outclassed by women in terms of sex (as they have been for all time) and outclassed by women in the workplace (which requires less numbers of women than one would think), the only recourse for men to establish social dominance is either via art or lawlessness. The female sex instinct is not rational and has not changed over the course of our last few thousand years of civilization, no matter what gender theorists may tell you. (Women still prefer tall men, for example, when such a criterion no longer makes any sense).

2011-01-14T19:23:03+00:00

I'm a woman. You lost me at "Womens rights evolved due to the oppression of women throughout history." That is a false statement. Women have been manipulating men and wielding the true power since she first ordered him to go out and hunt.

carterjs · 2011-01-15T03:30:34+00:00

Hell yes!! I have been waiting for this! "Men's Rights" is a joke. Thank you for your eloquent and intelligent post.

VoodooIdol · 2011-01-14T17:16:38+00:00

True feminists never wish to bring men down. A real feminist wants to empower women, not dis-empower men, and any man that believes women and men should be treated equally is a feminist himself. Women that want to squash men down are falsely using the feminist title for their own agenda, and it makes me sad to see men on reddit lumping all feminists into that category (just as men don't want to be lumped into a category with rapists simply for being a man.)

No True Scotsman logical fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

VisIxR · 2011-01-14T17:25:59+00:00

making a distinction between feminists and "true feminists" reminds me of when there's a music/fashion movement where one person thinks of themselves as a punk/goth/emo/hipster/mod/whatever, and sees other people trying to do the same thing as posers because they approach it less "authentically", or whatever.

From the outside looking in, all goths look like goths to us, whether they listen to the cure and cut themselves or just wear light make up and shop at hot topic. all feminists will be lumped together because you choose to use the same moniker, and behave in a manner that separates you from those who do not use this moniker.

if you don't like what other feminists do, use a different moniker.

Buckwyld · 2011-01-14T19:07:27+00:00

This is a problem the leaders of the womens rights movement need to address. However, I believe many of the so called "leaders" are seeking to surpass men in equality rather than become equals. There is plenty of proof of feminist leaders showcasing their thoughts on video around the internet regarding that position.

Even when lumped into a negative category, many women will brag about being feminists. Men on the other hand, cannot brag about being "rapists," because it is a negative category.

EDIT: Sounds funny how I wrote that, but the response is to the lumping of people into category in the original posters comment.

UncreativeMe · 2011-01-14T19:22:54+00:00

One this that I find interesting is the discussion of "true" feminism vs. "other" feminism. There is no "true" feminism. There are people who call themselves feminists who probably aren't, but not one feminism is the actual deal. There are many many different types of feminism, each one with their own major concerns are beliefs. So of which absolutely reject and dislike each other. There is currently no cohesive feminist movement, because there are too many dissenting opinions. It is therefore not really possible to say that all feminists believe any one thing, although throughout many types are are similar beliefs. Many-even most- types of feminisms believe in equality between the genders, not all do.

Undermind · 2011-01-14T19:30:14+00:00

The problem isn't with the term 'feminism', it is with the implementation people give it. I disagree with your assertion that most people who take up the label of feminism want equal rights for both sexes. If the person does, it is usually a casual identity that can be worn when it best suits her. There is a vast disconnect between how feminism is portrayed and is practiced. Much in the same way communism is: a noble idea but rarely implemented with noble methods or with a noble concept and with little actual connection to reality.

DigiSerf · 2011-01-14T20:15:39+00:00

Why should the modern man pay for the misgivings of the past? Its not acceptable.

side2 · 2011-01-14T22:59:51+00:00

Feminism - Communism for women. Both terms are great in concept but were warped into something completely different such as a great creature can be mutated into a nasty ugly creature.

Feminism as it is now is corrupt and has the connotation of such. Communism is a cool concept but was corrupted and has a connotation of such.

Point - Concept VS Reality. Mens rights hates the reality of something that should stand to be something awesome.

We all hate militant anything. However the militants of any such organization are what burns society the most as they are the most extreem and influential.

I applaud realists and not the militants. I appreciate this post however it doesn't properly address why we are truely pissed. That is why i have posted this. Mens rights stands up to the militant feminists. We are not upset with the concept based feminists.

joannchilada · 2011-01-14T23:01:51+00:00

I know there are a shitload of posts at this point, but I would sincerely like to hear back from you and get others opinions.

A real feminist wants to empower women, not dis-empower men, and any man that believes women and men should be treated equally is a feminist himself.

This is the part where I feel men's rights truly came from: not overt sexism, but passive.

I could be wrong in making this assumption, but found agreement with a "feminist" I would consider as true to egalitarian as anyone is, and they felt that terms like policemen, firemen, etc. are inherently sexist. Not overtly, it doesn't really directly hurt anyone, but it passively suggests that it is exclusive based on gender.

In much the same way feminism passively excludes men and thus masculism/Men's Rights. In essence it is more than a little pot-kettle-black from strictly this argument, but I think it makes the concept a bit more clear, we need and have every right to call it whatever we want, and this sort of post is oppressive, even if you don't mean it to be (and honestly I don't feel that you do!).

The majority of feminists do not wish men harm, only the obnoxious loud ones that make me want to punch them.

This makes the implicit suggestion that it isn't true in the opposing direction. True MRA's don't rage against true feminists, but rather the psychos that want to take [our] children away, but ultimately, when you say things like this, or

his wife was accusing him falsely...That is feminism.

you're being an egalitarian, and the fact that you call it feminism is a misnomer that is exclusive, but until we evolve beyond gender and imperfect dialects both "sides" need "teams".

rustynosebleed · 2011-01-15T01:17:32+00:00

Feminists and feminazis are not the same.

2011-01-15T02:15:35+00:00

using your reasoning, feminism is the female effort to gain equality for the sexes, masulism the male effort.

the 'earning scorn from feminists' comment simply says that females have broached the equality gaps from their side and feminism has turned into a vehicle for gaining female privilege, as is bound to happen as everyone in life seeks advantage.

male rights hasn't gotten so far yet due to the expectation we remain chivalrous, something, strangely (/s), which feminism has not campaigned against very much (although i do grant that some feminists have been against 'benevolent sexism' which is what chivalry often manifests as)

lurklikeaboss · 2011-01-14T16:39:41+00:00

I agree with everything you said. You have my upvote.

carlottavaldez · 2011-01-14T21:22:54+00:00

I am upvoting this. What I encounter in Mens Rights is often just thinly veiled misogyny and posts about horrific crimes perpetrated by women. Yes, women commit crimes too, horrible ones, but what good is a whole subreddit dedicated to threads about crimes? The whole attitude here is "women are bad and out to get men" and if you disagree, you"re told to get the fuck out. Literally. I've been told to get out of the subreddit for merely disagreeing.
This place has gone way off track, it's really just a joke now. The same few men raging about some perceived plot to destroy them.

rantgrrl · 2011-01-14T16:57:36+00:00

"Womens rights" evolved due to the oppression of women throughout history.

It's quite simple. I believe this is a false premise.

Throughout history men have been more free in their movements but far more expendable. Women have been less free in their movements but also far less expendable.

It's a trade off, not an oppression.

I think, as we begin to recognize the vulnerabilities of men and their equal right to safety and security as women, that society will see an equivalent 'oppression' of men throughout history.

I hope to live to see that day.

2011-01-15T02:16:36+00:00

Raging against feminism only discredits your cause.

further denying the reality that feminism has turned into a tool for securing female privilege further discredits you :-|

2011-01-15T02:12:29+00:00

"Womens rights" evolved due to the oppression of women throughout history.

:-|

and male rights is a response to the oppression of males throughout history, which continues today and is manifested in the death profession participation gap, longevity gap, prison gap, etc etc

thank you for playing

Kaetalya · 2011-01-15T02:53:25+00:00

Why would you be downvoted for this? Opinions are one thing, but I feel like you just stated actual facts, and I agree with you completely. I'm a feminist who loves men and is currently engaged. And we don't fall into traditional patterns at all. Instead, we both cook dinner, do dishes, equally give and a receive, etc. He has on occasion made comments that I was initially pissed off at, such as 'nobody watches women's basketball, other than old men,' but then I realized that it wasn't out of sexism or even directed towards me at all, since I'm not a basketball player. He was merely stating that he doesn't know many people who actually watch it, and then again, he's not much of a sports fan anyway. That comment actually annoys me still.. How would you handle something like that? I don't think he was trying to be sexist and rude towards women, but that's what I got out of it at first.

barbam · 2011-01-15T08:30:06+00:00

claiming that "Mens rights" evolved out of the womens rights movement, and being proud of earning scorn, reminds me of people clambering for "white rights"

I don't see why it is warranted to compare this reddit (as stupid as it is sometimes) to white supremacy groups. Really?

True feminists never wish to bring men down.

True Scotsmen, on the other hand...

Falsely accusing men of rape is not feminism.

Who defines what constitutes feminism and what does not, if not the people who subscribe to the word?

I believe men and women should be equal. That is feminism.

Why is it named feminism, and not egalitarianism or something similar which does not specifically reference advocacy for women?

Oh, right - because it's not egalitarianism. It is advocacy for women, on the theory that such advocacy will result in some overall balancing.

I don't accept this because one is often taking from Peter to punish Paul. Rather than across-the-board advocacy of a particular group, I believe one should specifically target extant problems for that group based on real hard data - not target other groups to be torn down, and not just advantage one group globally. For example, the wage gap is strong in some industries, but other industries or fields actually don't have a wage gap. In some of the latter, and in areas where women overwhelmingly dominate, women are still being privileged as if they were punished minorities in those fields. For another example, male children in the US are falling behind female children and in that context I feel that the pendulum should swing back until there is equality, not just gender-based advocacy.

Raging against feminism only discredits your cause.

I don't think it matters. It's a subreddit.

The majority of feminists do not wish men harm, only the obnoxious loud ones that make me want to punch them.

If feminism is defined by who you find obnoxious and want to attack, why isn't it defined by what other subscribers to feminism want to do?

smoothcam72 · 2011-01-14T16:58:45+00:00

i agree with you. i'm a man that believes in equality. i live it, ask my wife. (in theory, she's not a redditor) imo 2/3 of feminist haters are men trying to hold on to dominance. 1/3 of feminist haters have come across the "down with the patriarchy up with the matriarchy" set of "feminists" (translation me-ists) who are just as power hungry and corrupt as the men who wish to keep women at or below the 81 cents on the dollar that women make at work compared to men. i'm a humanist, so in that sense i'm a me-ist, i must admit. separatism is evil. us and them are the two words (discounting the article of course) that have caused every conflict in human history.

joannchilada · 2011-01-14T15:13:28+00:00

The feminist movement, much like the civil rights movement started out as a good thing. Where they both failed was letting the wrong people take over and speak for them. Also, the white male "oppressors" went too far in making things "equal". Now minorities (an outdated term) are often given more out of guilt that your ancestors treated theirs badly. Women especially. In the eyes of law enforcement and the courts are always the victims and even when found guilty of declaring multiple counts of false rape are let off with a warning because somewhere down the line they were oppressed. It's bullshit and anyone who calls them self "feminist" or a "civil rights activist" in this day and age is probably just someone trying to get rich off of other peoples guilt and naivety.

OiMouseboy · 2011-01-14T17:20:12+00:00

exactly. thats why when feminists i know say "men are scum"... I tell them they are feminazi's not feminists. feminists want equality. They want a egalitarian society.

truthiness79 · 2011-01-15T02:08:01+00:00

I believe men and women should be equal. That is feminism. Raging against feminism only discredits your cause. For all the legitimate experiences in this subreddit, blaming true feminism hurts. The majority of feminists do not wish men harm, only the obnoxious loud ones that make me want to punch them.

this is blatantly wrong. "raging" against feminism does not hurt MR at all. it doesnt make men misogynistic to bring awareness to inequalities. the fact is, the only reason MR has picked up steam is BECAUSE of women. women who have had their fathers, brothers, husbands, friends, etc. marginalized by feminists who claim to be acting on the behalf of "women everywhere." these women, who in spite of being labeled "traitors", "willing slaves to the patriarchy", and other nonsensical but still hurtful things by feminists, are why MR is able to push forward. so when feminists go out of their way to generalize that MR is just a bunch of misogynistic men, thats a complete lie, since its pretty simple to understand the mens rights movement would have very little credibility without women.

with all that said, is the only thing you agree with MR is that false rape is bad? what about paternity fraud? child support bankruptcy and imprisonment? false claims of domestic abuse in divorce cases? denying fathers their rights to visitation? no matter how i look at it, if feminists were honestly all about equality among both genders, how is any of this acceptable by them?

2011-01-15T11:21:18+00:00

Why not move a step up and call yourself an egalitarian? Why would an equal rights group be prefixed exclusively by only one of the parties involved? It assumes men have the ideal rights and are default or standard and that is not the case.

DigiTemuji · 2011-01-15T12:29:33+00:00

To be honest I had a very similar opinion as you do right now, as a man I was convinced early on, that my gender did only bad things for women and women needed to be saved and empowered. I agreed. (I still agree that women get an unfair deal on many things) Long before I came here and long before I found out about 'mens rights' I began to see the fallacy of a lot of what I was being told. The biggest problem I have is when people say " "Womens rights" evolved due to the oppression of women throughout history. All being a feminist really boils down to is believing that women and men should be respected and treated equally,"

This puts our modern social values up against the social values of the past and feminists are asking for retro active repayment for things that happened in the past based on how we see things now. I have contention with this because the priorities of the past, and what people knew in the past is not anywhere close to what we know and consider important today.

The tone of the quoted statement suggests that women had no rights or privileges in the past whatsoever. That men specifically sat down and engineered a social construct with the express intent of controlling women. However If that was truely the case, why did we then decide that women as well as men could be considered Monarchs? "Divinely chosen" to lead nations? If the entire female gender was truely, actively oppressed against for reasons of control and power, why would we even consider that females could also be our diety? How does the concept of chivalry, of worship and protection of women as beautiful and valuable beings equal oppression? How do we explain the existance of a wide variety of past societies which provided women with rights to property ownership, free enterprise and political power as far back as 2000bc? Wouldnt it make sense to squash all notions of female power entirely if we wanted complete control? Wouldnt we have barred women from being members of societies elite? They never were, in fact many rich women had male servants or slaves of their own. Wouldnt we have insisted that only women be our slaves? Wouldnt we also send women exclusively to fight our wars for us? Wouldnt we also require than women do all the dangerous and heavy labour?

Or was it perhaps that men AND women just simply didn't realize that women could help with the heavy lifting? Maybe men and women didn't realize that teaching women skills and trades would double our workforce and industrial capabilities? Perhaps women prefered (as most still do, unfortunatly) to stay at home and be with their kids? Or perhaps the roles that we see happening the past is what evolved to work the best in a time when survival and raising families where the biggest priorities to ensuring the success of the human race.

Feminism then perhaps first evolved from technological advancement providing women with greater freedom from the traditional child raising and home maintaining, it allowed women to realize that not only can they help with the heavy lifting, that they also want to. Feminism should never have been about shaming men for their hard work in the past but about moving forward into the future as fellow doctors lawyers and ceos, but they need to also move forward as fellow tradesmen, miners, loggers and firemen that builds and maintains our societies infrastructures.

TheBananaKing · 2011-01-15T12:47:27+00:00

I see the problem with feminism as being just like the problem with Zionism.

A group of people were, since time immemorial, marginalized second-class citizens, oppressed, mocked and horribly abused, to the point that this became their traditional role in the culture, institutionalised, taken for granted and almost invisible.

At some point in recent history, members of that group finally said 'enough', and set out to shake up the status quo, carving out a place for themselves in the public eye, raising awareness of the wrongs done them, and making explicit, unconditional advocacy of their interests the only acceptable position for anyone to hold, regardless of the context. Any dissenting view or counter-advocacy was to be met with scorn and shame, inextricably linked with hatred and abuse of all members of the group. By clinging to eternal-victim status, they are constantly awarded further advantage to offset their perceived disadvantage, no matter how egrgious the injustice thus caused.

It doesn't require conniving puppet masters to run it all, of course - for the most part, well-meaning PC types and the main bulk of society itself keep the system self-supporting, with only the occasional nudge from those cynical enough to use the system for personal gain in the short run.

Four legs not always good, people. Sometimes Snowball didn't do it. Give two legs a fucking chance, becuse we're actually just as decent as you. Underdog tribalism feels good, and may have had it's place at the outset - but it's utterly counterproductive and just as bad in the long run.

FreddyDeus · 2011-01-15T22:57:03+00:00

"Womens rights" evolved due to the oppression of women throughout history.

No it didn't. The Women's Rights movement was forged essentially by middle class women who lead very affluent lives because of the high paid jobs or the personal wealth of their husbands. The Women's Rights movement was also highly dependent on women having lots of free time to think, organise and campaign. This free time was initially available to affluent middle class women who had domestic servants to labour in the home. Later in the 20th Century, it was because a multitude of labour saving devices allowed less affluent lower middle and upper working class women far more free time.

A real feminist wants to empower women, not dis-empower men

This is a perfect example of the No True Scotsman logical fallacy and it doesn't mean or prove what you claim it does. There is a vast amount of evidence from the Feminist Movement that dis-empowering men is exactly what they want.

False rape accusations are horrific and inexcusable. Falsely accusing men of rape is not feminism.

Few if any posters on here have claimed that false rape accusations have anything to do with feminism. Feminism however, does deny that women make false rape allegations. Feminism contends that no woman would lie about rape. And when there is the occasional acknowledgment that women do lie about rape, they maintain the stance that the numbers of such false rape claims are so trivially small that they warrant no attention or action whatsoever.

These are just a few of the reasons why the Men's Rights Movement is absolutely necessary, and should be focused and unrelenting in its cause.

terrafelle · 2011-01-16T10:19:14+00:00

Something else that really casts suspicions on the whole "women's rights evolved due to oppression" line is that there are near to zero (if not precisely zero) cases of women trying to revolt against their "oppressors" prior to the late 19th Century, when coincidentally enough machines were threatening not just the male role (i.e. Luddism) but the female one (by the mid-50s, household chores could be completed in a few hours due to automation).

Not only is it thus insulting to draw comparisons between the civil rights movement and the "women's rights movement" but it would appear extremely disingenuous. Slaves tried to escape from the very first boats they were shipped over on; women have been quite contented with their responsibilities in life - which are comparatively few - for thousands of years.

RikF · 2011-01-14T14:32:05+00:00

[permanently deleted]

boyoboy · 2011-01-14T15:43:19+00:00

How many of these idiotic posts are we going to get? The "feminism really means" at the core.

FEMINISM MEANS DIFFERENT THINGS TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Stop. End of thought.

One chunk of them are using it to power-grab. This is a fact and not up for debate. Does this affect the other groups? Of course. If you serve up chicken parm and 2 groups of people use pork, then it'll affect if people really know what chicken parm is.

ExpendableOne · 2011-01-14T20:33:18+00:00

"Womens rights" evolved due to the oppression of women throughout history.

No, women's rights evolved due to the perceived oppression of women throughout history; a perception which was largely influenced by, or thrived because of, female privilege and feminist ideology. Looking back at throughout history, you will find that every single system of oppression that affected women, also affected men in numerous different ways(sometimes even significantly more so); with the main differences being that men were taught to endure instead of complain; provide instead of be provided for; have individual strength instead of collective dependency; to be expendable instead of prestigious.

The women's rights movements started out of women wanting more for women; not equality. No step towards "equality", or the feminist definition of equality, was every initiated or perpetuated with the fair treatment of men, or genuine equality, in mind. It was always about "what do women want?" or "what do men have that women don't have?"; never "what could women do to help men in the many area's where they are considered less than equals?".

The truth is that this perception, or misconception, of female oppression by men(i.e. patriarchy) would never have reach the level that it did had it not been for its lack of real opposition(i.e. "just give women whatever they want!"), for male expandability(i.e. male oppression = fact of life, unimportant, invisible, unchangeable; female oppression = human travesty beyond measure) or for this social/cultural misandry(i.e. men are ugly, bad, dirty, vile, malevolent, apathetic, etc; women are beautiful, fragile, pristine, clean, loving, caring, etc).

All being a feminist really boils down to is believing that women and men should be respected and treated equally, just like people of different races and cultural backgrounds should be treated equally.

This is a complete lie or misconception, not just because of this false premise that women were, or still are, in this position of unambivilant oppression(with men being their oppressors) but in feminism very own history(even the name depicts a very clear and undeniable bias). Their actions speak for themselves and they are a very contradiction of equality; not just in their exclusive focus on female priorities/perspective but in its advocation of anti-male biases, contempt and hatred, anti-male heterosexuality ideologies and laws/principles which undoubtedly do end up hurting men(damages which are just as often ignored, belittled or perpetuated by said feminists).

Claiming that "Mens rights" evolved out of the womens rights movement, and being proud of earning scorn, reminds me of people clambering for "white rights" evolving out of the civil rights movement and "traditional marriage rights" out of the gay marriage movement.

A poorly informed and inaccurate association to say the least; than again your statement also does seem to make the insinuation that discrimination or prejudice against white or heteresexual individuals doesn't, or cannot, happen(which is also absolutely wrong). In any case, you have to remember that there is a very clear distinction between "women's rights" and feminism(or feminism acting under the pretense of a women's rights movement); being anti-feminist does not mean the same thing as being against the equal rights of women, that is a completely dishonest misnomer which is not only wrong but actually quite insulting to both men and men's rights advocates. In fact, when MRA's say they are anti-feminists and do so with pride, it is specifically because they believe in equality(with feminism being a very real threat and clear obstacle to that equality, which it has proven itself to be time and time again; despite their claim to be an authority on the subject).

True feminists never wish to bring men down

That is your interpretation of what a true feminist is, not only is it wrong, for the most part, and naive but it does not even constitute a majority amongst feminists, much less for women in general. Those feminists could just as easily say the same about you and continue to rationalize their misandry or vindicate it through countless other forms of support(support which you also provide for them; both in your continued support of the word "feminism", a blind and misguided allegiance to say the least, and continued support of feminist movements).

A real feminist wants to empower women, not dis-empower men, and

Those two are often the very one and the same; especially in the context of feminism. The very premise that women need to be "empowered", despite the fact that they already benefit from countless other privileges that men do not, is in effect hurting men and undermind the issues that they face(not to mention often hurt men in the ways that "empowerment" is achieved). Belittling male issues(An attitude which is most MR advocates have grown accustomed to; even here in this threat, for example, you can easily find a surprising amount of "MRA's are just guys/losers who got burned by women!" misnomers posts and shaming attempts) is also very much about dis-empowering men in of itself.

This also directly contradicts your next statement about feminism being about equality. You cannot have a movement that is supposed to be about equality solely, or exclusively, focusing on "empowering" women; that is not equality. The fact remains however, that feminism, truly is not just about empowering women - in the majority of cases it is only empowering them in ways which would only be beneficial to women(i.e. equal privilege); never truly in ways which are beneficial to both genders or to men(i.e. equal responsibilities) - but often actually is about hurting or blaming men exclusively(very little of feminist activism is actually aimed or geared towards female contribution to feminist, or equal rights, issues; which are just as substantial even more so than men's).

any man that believes women and men should be treated equally is a feminist himself.

This is both an offensive and harmful notion; not just in the obvious fact that feminism does not actually about equality or advocate for the rights of men(both historically and in principle) while using that false mantle of "gender equality" to perpetuate their misandric ideologies; but in proclaiming that feminism holds a monopoly on the subject of equality in of itself(which not only creates this concept that any opposition to feminist ideology is wrong by extension in the first place but also that anyone who support the topic of equality should, in fact, support feminism). This type of tactic, or mentality, is absolutely dishonest, inaccurate and misguided.

(just as men don't want to be lumped into a category with rapists simply for being a man.)

Another grossly inappropriate and misinformed use of an association. Men certainly do not want to be unjustly labeled as rapists, creeps, etc(another form of male demonization that "feminists" often do little about or even encourage), much less actively support, encourage or vindicate their behavior(which is essentially what individuals who support feminism do, even more so amongst women).

Falsely accusing men of rape is not feminism

No, it generally isn't, but trivializing this issue, or the environment that supports it, is common practice amongst feminists as well.

I just assisted a close friend in his divorce hearings as his wife was accusing him falsely and trying to gain primary custody of their child. I believe men and women should be equal. That is feminism.

That isn't feminism, that is egalitarianism. Just because you wish to misguidedly credit feminism for this one example from one person, does not make it feminism. This blind adherence to feminism is not only not necessary but it is actually harmful to overall goal of equality and, if you truly were as pro-equality as you make yourself out to be, you would be able to see this as well.

This idea that feminism is a path, or even the only path, to equality is exactly what makes it so harmful and dangerous in the first place. If feminism actually stayed honest about its motivations, it wouldn't really be such a problem and it would be easy to ignore their lack of action/reaction to male issues(though, technically that would still be an issue for anyone who considers themselves pro-equality) but to pretend like supporting feminism is supporting equality certainly hurts us all, men especially(Which is not to say that there couldn't still be plenty of women's rights advocacy going on without it ever being considered feminism either).

Raging against feminism only discredits your cause

Wait.. shouldn't that be "our" cause? didn't you yourself claim to be pro-equality and pro-men's rights? Freudian slip perhaps... Either way, no, calling feminism out for what it is certainly doesn't discredit our cause. It might discredit us from individuals such as yourself, who are already devout followers of feminism and whom weren't really helping to begin with(nor whom would be able or willing to work on these issues in the first place, given your disposition, negative preconceptions or your gender-based sense of solidarity) but it wouldn't necessarily discredit from others who might be genuinely open to the idea or principles of actual equality. Not to mention that, just because you, or anyone else for that matter, might think being anti-feminists discredits someone(since, technically, someone who advocates for the right of men is just that; the opinions of one member in no way have to relate to the opinions of another. For you to discredit an entire movement for the opinions of individuals, especially when there are no labels or predefined ideologies to adhere to like there would be for feminism, seems rather hypocritical), doesn't necessarily mean that it's wrong or justified(which, again, is kind of a testament to harmful nature of feminism in the first place).

moduce · 2011-01-14T19:14:14+00:00

Oh yes, men need to "fight" for their special rights; give me a fucking break. "Oh look at us, running the world and subjugating women for all of human history. How fucking sad! Boo Hoo feel sorry for me" reminds me of white men that have no fucking clue about white priveledge and get all bent out of shape of quotas in school.

Here is my analogy: Look at life/work/civil rights like a 100 meter race. The "winner" is the first person to finish, right? Well, being a woman you don't start along the same line. You start further back. If you are a minority? You start further back and don't have shoes. So the gun goes off, and sure the white man crosses first most of the time (hence the white priveledge/men preference) but when a minority or woman say "hey, can have the same starting line please" white men are all like "OMFG I NEED RIGHTS TOO!"

TLDR: Shut the fuck up white men. You need rights, like china needs more people.

fishwish · 2011-01-14T16:09:13+00:00

Falsely accusing men of rape is not feminism.

It is modern feminism. Since equal rights has been achieved. The only thing left in the feminist movement is the bullshit where you punish men for being men.

Such as arresting a man if he hits a woman once even if she just unloaded on him for 10 minutes and he had to hit her to get her to stop.

Spotpuff · 2011-01-14T18:53:55+00:00

It seems like every response from men's rights advocates in this thread are suffering from extreme confirmation bias. EVERY interaction they've had with feminists is evil and awful and bashes men, without exception, therefore all feminists must be evil, men-hating people.

Liverotto · 2011-01-14T19:51:18+00:00

I believe men and women should be equal.

That is the root problem.

That is the cornerstone of your mental disease.

You want equality of what is not equal, men and women.

Great suffering will come of your stupidity modern western male.

MeloJelo · 2011-01-14T22:51:10+00:00

I support gender equality. But, overall, I have to say I agree with the OP's stance more than the opposing commentors'.

I often visits /r/mensrights, mostly because I empathize with a lot of the men who are put into horrible situtations or have to deal with false accusations or legal discrimination just because of their gender. Instances of fathers being denied custody or visitation or being disbelieved just because they are being accused by a woman is absolutely unjust, and our legal system and culture need to make changes to prevent such occurrences. To achieve this goal, the Men's Rights movement seems to often take an anti-"feminist" stance.

However, the meaning of feminism seems to be much debated here, so let us use a rather useful tool--the dictionary!

Definition of FEMINISM 1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes 2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

Both definitions that have been presented in this thread are present, and I'd say both are equally valid. But one thing some commentors are overlooking/ignoring is the reason for definition 2.

Of course feminism developed to promote women's rights--women WERE second-class citizens for most of human history and probably longer than that. To ever achieve equality, women more or less had to take a strictly pro-female stance 100, 75, 50, or even 25 years ago (granted that requirement lessened as time went on).

Feminism was a movement that aimed to swing the pendulum of power that had long rested on the side of patriarchy, and, over the last century, has succeeded in doing so over all. In a few ways it has swung all the way onto the side of matriarchy (e.g. child custody--a century or two ago, even if a woman was brave enough to try to divorce her husband, he was almost guaranteed custody of the children, regardless of either parents' fitness; on a side note--ironically, favoring mothers in custody battles reinforces gender role stereotypes), and in others, it still lags behind in patriarchy.

Many women throughout the world are STILL second class citizens, and even women in modern, democratic nations are still discriminated against in some respects. In these places and social aspects, I think feminism as a pro-women's rights movement still has an important part to play.

As for men's rights, this movement, too, obviously has a role to play in undoing the out-of-control effects of the feminist movement. However, I find that a lot of the men this sub-reddit tend to come off as anti-woman more than anti-feminist (this kind of feminist).

Obviously a lot of posters on here have had bad experiences with discrimination and often various forms of abuse by women in their lives, and it sometimes it comes out as bitterness towards women in general. This attitude (whether real or simply conveyed by mistake) I think is what hurts the cause of men's rights more than any general ranting against feminism.

Bakyra · 2011-01-14T15:12:06+00:00

You want to be equals? Next time you go on a date, pay for the whole thing. Invite someone out. Give the first step.

Woman enjoy the perks of being womans too much to really want equality.

turd_loaf · 2011-01-15T02:44:59+00:00

Why don't you call your movement something that sounds more honest, then?

I wouldn't be part of a movement for religious freedom that called itself "Neo-neo-nazism", and go around telling people, "Oh, you just don't understand, silly goose!"

chasingamy99 · 2011-01-15T06:58:58+00:00

That's not feminism, it's equalitairanism.

Il128 · 2011-01-14T17:03:26+00:00

Way to get trolled /r/mensrights.

SubtleKnife · 2011-01-15T02:10:10+00:00

Please define egalitarianism for me.

2011-01-15T02:17:18+00:00

Edit: Any downvotes you see are not from me. I'm not downvoting people in this thread, they deserve to be heard as much as me and therefore I respect any opinion.

thank you for considering me precious

Il128 · 2011-01-14T17:10:36+00:00

Total. Fucking. Karma. Whore.

She's not active in any political threads, except this one, right out of the fucking blue.

Title	Preparing for massive downvotes, but would like to share my opinion
Author	joannchilada
Upvotes	292
Comments	584
Date	January 14, 2011 12:40 PM UTC (15 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/f26rp/preparing_for_massive_downvotes_but_would_like_to/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/preparing-for-massive-downvotes-but-would-like-to.1044333 https://theredarchive.com/post/1044333

Comments