Why Can't There Just be Equal Rights?

ellecon · 2012-12-28T04:30:40+00:00

Why do rights have to be categorized by gender? We have a rule of law that is supposed to apply to all equally. There shouldn't be women's rights and...

[–]Eulabeia 21 points22 points23 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 13 years ago (64 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D82 -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (55 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

all of the self-identified feminists I know are also for equal rights for males, at least

And I honestly don't deny that at all.

Now not to sound asshole-ish... but how much do these people actually do? Are they gender studies professors? Are they leaders of lobbies/big feminist organizations? Are they multi-million book sellers?

Do you see why I have a problem defining feminism by people like you and your friends, and instead choose to define it by what it's doing?

What do you mean by well-funded feminism taught in schools?

The well-funded part I'm referring to organizations such as NOW who just this week (it was posted today on this sub) said :

" We must find a way to disentangle ourselves from the lethal gender narratives that lead men to violence, that lead men to kill women they seek to control, that lead them to kill large numbers of people to exact revenge on a class of people or a world they believe has done them wrong."

I'm curious what you think of that statement.

Now as for the "taught in schools" part... I'm talking about patriarchy, and these gender studies courses teaching things like "all men are oppressive to all women to gain power" or "universal male privilege". If you start with the assumption that ALL men are privileged... how can equality possibly be a result? Do you and your friends believe this? Because it's this type of thinking that leads stuff like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0

Just try and understand that wanting equal rights for women does not make you a feminist. I want equal rights for women, and as I'm sure you can tell, I am pretty anti-feminist. So all I ask, is be careful about choosing to use that label. If you disagree with what feminist organizations are saying, then giving them social support by identifying as a feminist is probably not what you want to be doing... and it's also not beneficial to men, because it's groups like them that push for superiority. So as equality minded as you and your goals may be (and you'll have 100% of my agreement in these goals)... your choice to call yourself a feminist isn't really helping the push for equality (again, if you actually do disagree with what the main feminist groups/courses/authors/professors are actually saying/doing).

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

I disagree with your position on NOW and agree with what you said about Warren Farrell (sorry for the late reply, I was looking him up on Wikipedia and such - I like to check information that comes from any biased source [I would do the same for a name thrown out in 2XC or any other subreddit with a clear agenda/political purpose]). I think that NOW was saying that gender narratives - the stereotypes and scripts - we as a male-and-female society project on men can aid already-disturbed men to commit violence the same way that violence in videogames, while not by any means causing or even promoting everyday violence, allows those who are already sociopathic to experience and refine new violent ideas (source: Stanton E. Samenow, professor of criminal psychology). Women are actually encouraged to be victims by a flip of the same coin, and those who break from the gender norm - males who experience female partner violence, for example, are shamed for (in a classic and disgusting blame-the-victim example) somehow breaking gender narratives and being 'weak', 'unmanly', 'unwomanly', etc. In addition, because gender laws are seen as sacred, less help is available to those who fall outside the norms. But I'm digressing now, sorry. I agree with a lot of what Warren Farrell says - though the date rape is not exciting poster did disturb me, did he say anything to suggest that, that you recall? I didn't see anything on the sites I visited - and that's why I go here and think that more feminists should. /r/Mensrights is a great way of demonstrating how there are legitimate complaints of bias on both sides. I'm going to keep identifying myself as a feminist because of what I said earlier - because I think that the people you're listening to, the ones who are coming to your attention, are the wingnuts. Christians don't give social support to FOF by identifying themselves as Christians. Republicans don't necessarily all endorse Newt Gingrich because he's one of them. I'm a feminist and I disagree with some of the movement. I'm going to keep identifying as a feminist in part to not let the nutties of my movement take over. Me and my friends might not be much right now, but we're going to be one day.

[–]DerpaNerb 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Hrmm... I didn't really get that interpretation from the NOW quote.

The line that really gets me is " that lead men to kill women they seek to control". The phrasing of that just seems way too "broad" and seems to suggest (along with the line before it), that all men are prone to violence, and seek to control women... and apparently kill them.

Ignoring DV... I think violent perpetrators are more often men (though some show 50/50, or at least much closer... and then we get into sentencing disparities and shit like that so i just won't touch that and assume that the mainstream opinion is fact for ease of discussion). Anyway, violent perpetrators are more often men... this does not mean that most men are violent and/or have actually committed violence.

Say we have group A and group B. There are 50 in each group. Of the 100 total people, 10 people just fucking love apples. 9 of these people happen to be from group A. You can say that most people who love apples are from group A and therefore someone who loves apples is more likely to be from group A... but you cannot say that most people from group A just love apples.

though the date rape is not exciting poster did disturb me, did he say anything to suggest that

From what I recall... he said that what used to be called "exciting" was now called "date rape". As in... meeting someone at the bar and having consensual drunk sex used to be something exciting to people (in his experience)... but now many feminists call that rape. It was either that, or something about spontaneity.

Republicans don't necessarily all endorse Newt Gingrich because he's one of them.

The only difference though... is that Republicans have an official voting process in place to choose who speaks for them.

I'm going to keep identifying as a feminist in part to not let the nutties of my movement take over.

I would argue that they already have. I mean, as I said... look what's already being done in the name of feminism. I don't mean to be disheartening, but it's true.

I would say it'd be easier to just dissociate yourself, and then try and accomplish the exact same thing , but call yourself a "WRA" or egalitarian instead.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"If a man ignoring a woman's verbal 'no' is committing date rape, then a woman who says `no' with her verbal language but 'yes' with her body language is committing date fraud. And a woman who continues to be sexual even after she says 'no' is committing date lying...

"We have forgotten that before we began calling this date rape and date fraud, we called it exciting." -- Warren Farrell, in Myth of Male Power

...from what I can see, I can see where he's getting at, but I think there's an enormous, dangerous amount of entitlement in this quote. Like he's entitled to someone because 'their body seems to be responding' or something - that's dangerous. That's very much 'you wanted it' territory right there, and I can understand how women would be upset. Remember the NOW quote that I understood but that you interpreted as biased against you? I think we're having the same situation here flipped the other way.

[–]DerpaNerb1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't think he's talking about a woman who simply "gets wet".

He's talking about women who are actively participating (major implied consent in my opinion), yet say "no" in a playful manner.

Still... say a man is laying there literally doing nothing but says "yes". A girl jumps on top and does her thing... but say's "no".

Is it rape? I mean... the guy is completely motionless.

I think this just highlights the problems with trying to be so black and white with rape... and also (for some people at least) trying to say that there is no such thing as implied consent, or at the least, that it's impossible for implied consent to take precedent over explicit consent.

I mean, if the girl is initiating even though she didn't verbally consent... well, I don't see how someone would take that as an overall "no".

[–][deleted]1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]0 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I believe that we live in a rape culture. Not just female rape...in my anecdotal experience (which is, I admit, worthless in a logical debate with statistics involved) I've found that female rape/sexual assault/harassment tends to conform to the accepted 1 in 4 statistic. And men suffer about half as much - which is still a fucking terrifying amount. Now, here's a confession: I'm 16. I shouldn't have a calculation for it. But it's happened to so many of my friends that I do.

Also, the same problem exists in this subreddit; there's a lot of people on here that get all their information on feminism from 'radical feminists'/'feminazis'/people who hate feminism, and I can see it influencing their ideas on MRA. Not people who think rape is awesome, people who believe rape can be 'justified', or that a girl can 'ask for it'. But I think you'd say that the vast majority of those on your - I hesitate to break it down like this - side are still reasonable, well-informed people. I would say the same.

[–][deleted]1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

while claiming 'some girls rape so easy'

Doing some research into this quote, I find that it is taken horribly out of context. Emphasis mine.

[He (his father) also told me one thing, ‘If you do (have premarital sex), just remember, consensual sex can turn into rape in an awful hurry.’ Because all of a sudden a young lady gets pregnant and the parents are madder than a wet hen and she’s not going to say, ‘Oh, yeah, I was part of the program.’ All that she has to say or the parents have to say is it was rape because she’s underage. And he just said, ‘Remember, Roger, if you go down that road, some girls,’ he said, ‘they rape so easy.’

What the whole genesis of it was, it was advice to me, telling me, ‘If you’re going to go down that road, you may have consensual sex that night and then the next morning it may be rape.’ So the way he said it was, ‘Just remember, Roger, some girls, they rape so easy. It may be rape the next morning.’](http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/11/ryan-endorsed-wisconsin-republican-some-girls-rape-so-easy/)

This guy does not support rape. This is the same thing people have done to demonize Warren Farrell. A person may disagree strongly with his politics, but that doesn't mean it's right to take quotes out of context to demonize him.

there's very little victim support

This is not evidence of rape culture. Providing support for people is expensive, if the funding isn't there, it just can't happen. And RAINN would also disagree with you.

'I raped that' is a common triumphant phrase

Again, not evidence of rape culture. There are more common triumphant phrases that are also vulgar. 'I fucked you up' or 'I murdered you' are more common and are not evidence of 'sex culture' or 'murder culture.' There is always going to be cuss words, being politically correct won't magically change things.

lawmakers prohibit saying 'vagina' on the House floor

This has nothing to do with rape. This is what happens when people take being 'politically correct' too far.

it's considered an acceptable defense to make it the victim's fault

There is a small minority of people saying this. But most people accused of 'victim blaming' are not saying this. Saying that there are things a person can do to protect themselves is not blaming them for something that happened. I lock my car and house up, but it doesn't mean we live in a theft culture.

The biggest problem I have with feminism is they spread fear. The vast majority of people in the world are good. The 1 in 4 statistic is bullshit, most people have not been raped, and will never be. The world is not a scary place, it is awesome. The world has enough groups spreading fear, it needs some more groups that are focused on spread love, and doing good.

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]kintu -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D82 -3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D82 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D82 -2 points-1 points0 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D82 -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D82 -2 points-1 points0 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D82 -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D821 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]-1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D820 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]OuiCrudites 26 points27 points28 points 13 years ago (61 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 7 points8 points9 points 13 years ago (60 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOne 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Feminism was never about equal rights between men and women. The fact that you could even qualify it as "feminism is equal rights FOR WOMEN" implies that there is an inherent bias for women and a complete dismissal of reality and male suffering/inequality. There would never have been a need for a "men's rights movement" if feminism have been about equality, nor would feminism have ever been called, or kept calling itself, FEMinism if it had been about equality. You cannot call yourself a gender egalitarian while also calling yourself a feminist; that would be like calling yourself both a rational thinker and a creationist. Feminism is a set of doctrines which are irrational, nonfactual and inherently anti-male. If anything feminism actually exploited, from its very beginning, very sexist predispositions, or cultural attitudes, of male-expendability, male sacrifice for women and female pandering. Never once, in the history of feminism, has it ever fought for men's best interest or even in the intent of helping men. Instead it has spend countless time and resources vilifying, attacking, belittling, blaming and hating white and heterosexual men.

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]CosmicKeys 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]rottingchrist 5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnonTheAnonymous 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I can't speak of the transformation of the MRA since I'm to new to the movement to have anything to add to that, but there is a point where I do disagree with you about a part of feminism.

But I think that because feminism has existed longer than MRA...it's worked out...the misandrists in its ranks.

While it may have worked out some of the super extremely hateful people, there is still alot of hate. I hesitate to use the word misandry (is this word? my computer is telling me I did not spell this correctly), because it may be too extreme, or perhaps to simple of a concept to accurately portray what is occurring.

In fact that hate (which leans towards misandry) is built into the core assumption of feminists, in the form the patriarchy. This is a conspiracy theory that says men control everything, men oppress women, men also oppress other men (this is how they can claim that feminism helps men), men are inherently bad, and things would be better if females had more power. This is a scare tactic that the organization uses to control people into following it. Politicians use this all the time in their slogans (both sides do it, the politician's campaign slogan will be something like, "My opponent will be such a disaster for the economy that you'll lose your job!" when in reality each side just has different opinions on what's best for the economy).

Fear drives people, it is very powerful. It's a very negative emotion, and I personally dislike it (so brave, I know. But it is a powerful tool for propaganda. One thing the MRA has blown out of proportion to spread fear is sperm-jacking. Thankfully it doesn't get too much attention here, but it still pops up). By using fear to spread you message you, in my eyes, compromise your intellectual integrity. Fear is a easy thing to rely on, but science tends to show fear as being full of shit. (For example: yes, terrorists are scary, but you should not fear being killed by them. There has been so few terrorist related deaths on American soil that the odds of you being killed by one are basically zero. You should fear the flu waaaay more. But nobody is afraid of the flu, it's just a worse cold, right? Rhetorical question, no it's not).

So, back to hate and fear. I was arguing something over at /r/feminism and I realized we wouldn't agree on that, so I wanted to end on a positive note (and a more important one, this premise means a lot to me personally). If I could spread only one message in my life, it is this message: The world is not a scary place and humans are good. That's it. The odds of you getting killed or mugged in daily life are miniscule. That's it. I don't think it's a controversial subject, but apparently when dealing with feminists I am wrong. Feminism has done such a good job at telling women that they are oppressed and that the world is a scary place, these people actively believe it. They believe people are more evil than good. That the world is a scary place, where people only want to hurt others. That danger lurks around every corner. And I feel sad for these people. To focus so much on the negativity... it has damaged their psyche. It's almost like all the love and positivity have been replaced with spite and malice. And they've devoted so much time and energy into this hate and anger that they have internalized it, and to question their emotions is to question who they are. And me, a scary mean outsider, well, I have no right to question who they are or the emotions that they feel (that last part is their view at least. I think a person should always be questioning their own hypotheses. Socrates once said that the unexamined life is not worth living, and damnit, I respect that guy).

TL;DR: Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.

[–]Crimson_D82 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]loose-dendrite 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CosmicKeys 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]CosmicKeys 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]CosmicKeys 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

That's still not misogyny. It's sexist sure, but not misogyny.

Also... where do you think 90+% (IIRC) of goes? To women. If it's a big enough problem that the bar felt the need to put up a sign... then it's a pretty safe to assume that the majority of people it's targeted at are in fact women.

Yes you are right that it's not okay to suggest that all women are like this... but it's perfectly valid to suggest that the majority of people looking to spend their child support at the bar, are in fact women.

Also, I'd just like to point out that at least from what I read just now... I haven't really seen to many comments that have been upvoted that express that sentiment. I'd also like to point out that r/mr doesn't really censor or downvote for disagreement. Sure you may see a bad post that hasn't been downvoted into oblivion...but you will see a bunch of replies afterwards explaining why it's wrong.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]CosmicKeys2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You're a subreddit dedicated to getting yourself equal right. I hate to say it, but if you ever want to make a real difference, you have to learn how to play well with others. Don't say "This gets offensive, you stupid b----, stop trying to shut me up I'm advocating for my rights". Say "Some people word it roughly, but you might want to check their actual points before you downvote."
Yes, you can continue acting as you've acted previously. You can tell me to shut up and you can get butthurt if you want to. When your issues make it to Washington, women will be 50% of those voting for or against it. Yeah, there will be some who will just vote with you because you're correct - because you have legitimate issues and a good stand. But if you start off by calling women inherently stupid, lesser, feminazis - which I've seen and continue to see and downvote - then there's a large portion of people who are simply not going to listen.

[–]ellecon1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Hypersapien 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hypersapien 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Hypersapien 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]punkline1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]OuiCrudites -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Feminism is supposed to be about equal rights for women, not superior rights. If a person thinks that women should have more rights than men, they are not Feminists, they are advocates of female superiority

Sorry, but bullshit.

I don't really care to define feminism by what a bunch of ignorant, voiceless, powerless and unfunded armchair feminists THINK feminism is about.

I'm going to define it by how it's being taught, by the dogma it pushes, by what it's leaders are saying (who have voices, and power, and massive funding), and most importantly... by what it's actually DONE.

Show me ONE thing that feminism has accomplished in the last decade (maybe two) that is equality, and maybe i'll change my opinion. All I see is VAWA, ACA, title IX, dear colleague, shit family courts, false statistics, the duluth model, hiring quotas, admissions quotas, gender specific "incentives" (scholarships and the like).... shall I keep going?

Cut it with the No True Scotsman shit, and "man up" (hardy har har) to what your ideology is responsible for. You are either ignorant to what they are doing, or just don't give a shit, (or maybe you actually agree with it)... but whether you like it or not, you are giving the people who do have power your support when you choose to share the same label with them, and as such, are at least partially responsible for their actions.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/to-the-nice-feminists/

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'll disagree with you and say that women can be just as interested in sports as men,

I actually wasn't trying to say otherwise.

I was simply suggesting that the possibility is there. Just like there is also a possibility that men may not be as interested. This also changes depending on the sport.

Like if the school has one football team... and it's unisex... I think the pretty obvious outcome is that the majority of players will be boys. Is that discriminatory? IS this say... 95/5 male/female split actually a source of discrimination? Is the school can't generate funding for a bunch of sports that just happen to be dominated in numbers by females (to even it up)... should the football team be cut? I have a feeling you wouldn't think so.

But also as you said... I think the "potentially available" funding needs to be equal, or at least close. So that IF the want is there for girls to play sports, then they can... but if they simply don't want to, well then, theres no need to start cutting teams. I guess this goes back to "equal opportunity" vs "equal outcome".

I actually did just think of another question though... what about situations where the sports are in fact unisex... but because of the fact that they are physical or something... that men happen to be more represented (even assuming equal amounts of males/females attempt to join). Should a separate women's team be created? This is actually something I'm kind of mixed about (i'll wait to hear what you have to say and then explain my side).

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

You're using the No True Scotsman fallacy wrong. In fact, this is what anti-feminists do when they assert that being a feminist means you are a misandrist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

"but whether you like it or not, you are giving the people who do have power your support when you choose to share the same label with them, and as such, are at least partially responsible for their actions."

Firstly, I have not identified as associating with any ideology (and if it were to be anything it would be Eliminative Materialism). You jumped to this conclusion because I correctly defined an ideology. You seem really emotional about all this, which is fine, but all this emotion makes me uncomfortable...like wading in treacle. I was only trying to make the point that MRA and Feminism are meant to advocate equal rights according to the definitions of the ideologies.

I don't believe in gender at all really.

[–]DerpaNerb 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pharmakoza 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CosmicKeys 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is a huge over simplification of gender issues.

Feminists, MRAs etc - every body agrees that the final place we want to be is a reasonably egalitarian utopian society, one where the only gender specific laws are based around biological differences (i.e., women can compete against just women in sports).

What is disagreed upon is how we get there. For example, many believe affirmative action is required to change society. Do you see the complication? Affirmative action is inequality to acheive equality. Not everyone believes this, but people on both sides do.

Secondly, men and women are biologically different in many different way. Each biological difference is different enough from the others that it requires individual consideration, and in some cases "equality" is not possible. These mostly surround either the uterus or strength. You've chosen easy or vague examples that are largely unneffected by biology.

[–]NCender27 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]DerpaNerb 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]danredux 13 years ago* [recovered] (9 children) | Copy Link

We all agree with that here. Gender-specific laws are also unsuitable with the new acceptance of the non-polar genders, eg, third gendereds.

Problem is, true equality doesn't allow a specific group to dominate, so no one feels superior. Hence why we are so against the feminists. We only complain about things that are inequalities, feminists will even claim they need extra care and attention that men do not, and that men should be treated differently.

[–]ellecon 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[+]danredux 13 years ago* [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

It's my opinion that the extreme feminist we have all come to hate is the single biggest problem to the female population. When these extreme feminists demand special treatment for women above men, they are insinuating that the woman NEEDS extra help because she is weaker than the man.

When they demand gender equality quotas in upper management or political areas, they are insinuating women can not get promoted in the first place. This is one of many "women need extra help" gigs that they run and it sickens us all as egalitarians.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]danredux 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RJNDesigner 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]danredux 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Can you do gender neutral Olympics ?" If it was classed by weight like boxing, yes.

Even then women would be at a huge advantage. Tetesterone is a pretty awesome hormone. It's so powerful that most sports organizations have banned tetesterone doping. It's why supplement companies make a shit ton of money selling testosterone boosters (which don't do anything). Testosterone is why during puberty men gain muscle and lose fat, while the opposite happens in women (who gain fat, typically around the thighs and bosom). Since we're talking Olympics we can assume elite competitors on either side, so the testosterone levels (among other things) of the men would just make it unfair.

A recent example that I can think of is Annika Sorenstam. She's basically one of the greatest female golfers of all time, but when she played with men on the PGA she got 96th out of 111.

Men just have a biological advantage that no amount of training or perseverance can overcome, so I would be against a gender neutral Olympics.

[–]CosmicKeys 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Except the father doesn't equally have to take the health risks of pregnancy, or carry the baby. You could argue that they've both made the choice already, but then theirs complications about rape victims, people lying about contraception etc.

This argument starts with the assumption that the complications you mentioned didn't happen in this scenario. People lying about contraception, and people becoming pregnant from getting raped occurs so rarely that most people won't have to deal with those issues. And if they do come up, since they are so different than "the norm" they will require a completely separate set of rules to deal with.

So, all you have said is true, but shouldn't the father have some say in what happens to his child? I mean, compare 9 months of pregnancy to 18 years (216 months) of raising and paying for that child. It takes a village to raise a child, and forcing that big of a responsibility on somebody who doesn't want it will rarely yield good results. So while I believe women are the majority stakeholder when it comes to pregnancy, men are still have some shares. The most best solution I have heard of is called something like "financial abortion." It's a 'meh' solution, but it's still the best one I've come across where both parties get a say in the matter without forcing the other person to simply submit to the other.

[–]CosmicKeys 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I honestly don't know, I'm not hugely opinionated on the subject. As I mentioned, you could say the man has already consented to giving her the choice by risking pregnancy to have sex. Then again, you could say the "my body my choice" logic extends to sperm.

It's sort of a false dichotomy where the only options on hand seem to be pay for the entirety of the childs unbringing or none. The real issue is there is huge social stigma about having an abortion, if a father wants a financial abortion the mother might then decide not to raise the child, but an abortion is no click of the fingers. If it was, then this would be a much simpler case where both adults have a choice. Next of course is the fact that society doesn't want single mothers so forcing financial investment increases likelyhood of involvement from the father.

All in all, lots of interesting concepts. The current laws don't bother me egregiously, fathers not getting access to children after they're born is the more serious issue.

[–]DerpaNerb 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]danredux 13 years ago* [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

Gender neutral Olympics- Any person participating in the Olympics is given equal opportunity to compete and potentially become the victor, excepting peoples with physical disabilities who may instead participate in the Special Olympics.

I don't consider being female to be a disability so I see no reason why they should have their own Olympic competitions.

[–]td9red 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]danredux 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can I just quote myself? Is that ghetto?

Even then women would be at a huge advantage. Tetesterone is a pretty awesome hormone. It's so powerful that most sports organizations have banned tetesterone doping. It's why supplement companies make a shit ton of money selling testosterone boosters (which don't do anything). Testosterone is why during puberty men gain muscle and lose fat, while the opposite happens in women (who gain fat, typically around the thighs and bosom). Since we're talking Olympics we can assume elite competitors on either side, so the testosterone levels (among other things) of the men would just make it unfair.

A recent example that I can think of is Annika Sorenstam. She's basically one of the greatest female golfers of all time, but when she played with men on the PGA she got 96th out of 111.

Men just have a biological advantage that no amount of training or perseverance can overcome, so I would be against a gender neutral Olympics.

[–]mordicaii 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Second and Third Wave Feminism pushing (and receiving) superiority.

Notice that I left out First Wave Feminism. They actually fought for something, specifically, the right for women to vote. Many Suffragettes, upon completing their goal (in 1920), were content, the genders were now (more or less, I can't speak for the 1920's) equal, just look up "Flappers", they were the product of First Wave Feminism, they were the embodiment of what many modern Feminists believe they are fighting for, sexual autonomy. They had equal rights, prior to women's suffrage, women were not exactly equals to men, I don't think anyone here (in the MRM) will deny that. In come Second and Third Wavers in the 50's and 70's who are pushing for more, by riding on the coattails of their predecessors. Second Wavers in the 50's may have actually had a point, fighting for equal employment opportunities. However, they did about it in the wrong fashion. Instead of fighting for equality like their mothers and grandmothers did (First Wavers), they fought for superiority, they wanted preferential treatment, employment quotas, specifically. They wanted to "wrong those that wronged them" (which was exactly what First Wavers were fighting against, just in reverse). Third Wavers are what we have now, I don't think they need an introduction.

TL;DR: Many modern Feminists are fighting for superiority, not equality. We are trying to undo the damage they have done, and level the playing field once and for all.

[–]DavidByron 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]rottingchrist 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D82 -2 points-1 points0 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kintu -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]kintu -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]kintu -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rightsbot 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ma99ie 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lickHerIce 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Betrivent 13 years ago* [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link

Because were biologically different. End of story.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Betrivent 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Betrivent 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CaptainDancyPants 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Benthazaal1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]comanon -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Pecanpig -13 points-12 points-11 points 13 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig -5 points-4 points-3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bulbort 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bulbort 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig -2 points-1 points0 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ellecon 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Why Can't There Just be Equal Rights?
Author	ellecon
Upvotes	46
Comments	212
Date	December 28, 2012 4:30 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/15k24v/why_cant_there_just_be_equal_rights/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/why-cant-there-just-be-equal-rights.1005614 https://theredarchive.com/post/1005614

Comments