MRA and feminist issues.

[Rageaholic]

I'm carrying this over from the GG thread.

I'm going to go with the cliched view that both sides have their points and both sides have their nutjobs. To illustrate this, the whole idea that men can't get abused. I've heard BS from both sides. I've heard feminists try to defend the woman, operating under the assumption that all abusers are male. I've heard MRA jackasses call the abused man a 'mangina' because he wouldn't hit back. Even though, if he did, he would probably end up in a lot of legal trouble (even in self defense, such as the case with this guy).

I mean, I don't think men are horribly discriminated against or anything, nor do I think that all women's issues should be ignored. But at the same time, I don't think it's fair to automatically assume that any man's issue should be ignored just because of privilege.

[s_stabeler]

there...are indeed certain cases where MRAs might have a point- it has long been a bone of contention in the UK that in the majority of divorces, custody if children tends to be awarded to the mother- however, in quite a few cases, the arguments can turn somewhat spurious- either that, or feminists do have a point that the root issue is actually bias against women. ( take the mangina remark- at it's root, it is saying that a man is acting like a woman- presumably trying to call him feeble- and so if ti wasn't for the bias against women, the remark would lose much of it's power)

I do agree that male issues should not be ignored due to 'privilege', though- and particularly, you DO need to be careful not to go too far the other way.

[Gravekeeper]

I'm going to go with the cliched view that both sides have their points and both sides have their nutjobs.

Its not cliched, its flawed for reasons I believe were already covered in the GG thread.

I mean, I don't think men are horribly discriminated against or anything, nor do I think that all women's issues should be ignored. But at the same time, I don't think it's fair to automatically assume that any man's issue should be ignored just because of privilege.

Who is making this automatic assumption? You're just stringing together a bunch of anecdotes as if that makes the case for your argument. Which you're presenting as a counterpoint to another argument that you haven't even demonstrated exists.

There are legitimate issues facing men, yes ( typically in the sphere of domestic violence and family law for example ) but much like GG, the MRA movement is largely tainted by stupidity and misogyny. All of the legitimate issues have long since splintered off into their own focused movements to get away from the MRA label. And thats not me talking, that's decades of academia on the movement as its been around since 70s or so.

You should really look into some of the positions MRA's hold. Some of them are pretty insane. And its not just American MRA's with them. There are MRA positions in the UK and India for example that are even worse than some of the shit they hold up in the US. By and large a lot of it is tied up in this weird misogynistic view of women as deceivers and thieves that are out to trick or destroy men with their evil vaginas.

But again, the core problem here is not that there aren't some legitimate men's rights issues which do need to be addressed. But rather you just can't equate the problems facing the most historically powerful and privileged group on the planet against the problems facing the most historically oppressed and subjugated group on the planet. Then expect the argument to be taken seriously.

Women have been putting up with our shit since the dawn of the species. -.-

[Andara Bledin]

The vast majority of issues that men have in modern western culture are typically rooted in sexism against women.

Discrimination against men in family court is a symptom of raising kids being considered "women's work."

The same for alimony and child support issues.

The same for work-related discrimination against men becoming teaches or nurses or caterers.

Discrimination against men in abuse situations stems from the idea that women are weak and fragile and need to be protected.

The same goes for issues regarding rape, rape allegations, and the disproportionate enforcement and sentencing. Hell, it took a women's advocacy group to petition the FBI to expand the definition of rape to even include men as victims.

This isn't to detract from the fact that, for men, these are very real issues.

It's just that the solution for most of the issues that men face in modern western society can only be solved by aligning with the goals of feminism and raising women up to being full-class citizens along side their male counterparts. Trying to treat them as distinct issues is a mistake and doomed to failure.

Ultimately, all of this is what is being referred to when people use the term patriarchy. It's not a movement, but a mindset that has been reinforced through word and deed for countless generations and has caused society to make a lot of bad assumptions about the differences between boys and girls.

Yes, there are differences, but a lot of what we think about gender is actually nurture and not nature as is commonly assumed. We teach boys that they don't wear dresses. We teach boys that they don't wear makeup. We teach boys that they don't play with dolls. We teach boys that girls are weak and have to be protected. It's all bullshit.

Every time you hear someone talk about "boys being boys," that's a symptom of patriarchy. Every time you hear some guy being insulted for not being masculine enough, that's a symptom of patriarchy. Every time you hear about an incident between a man and a woman and it's assumed the man is at fault, that's a symptom of patriarchy. It's all interconnected and intertwined and most of us are complicit in it's continuation.

[Gravekeeper]

See? Since the dawn of our species. ><

[TheHuckster]

I agree that there are some bad gender stereotypes that lend themselves to support a gender-role system where men and women are pigeonholed into careers and lifestyles. It would be great to continue breaking down the walls and stop considering male flight attendants as "sissies" or female car mechanics as "butch" because they decided on a career that doesn't conform to the genders they've historically been populated with. A lot of that indeed starts with primary education and stopping the pattern of teachers and peers discouraging certain professions because of these stereotypes... and I'll also say that a lot has improved in the last 50-60 years, but a lot still needs to happen before we can consider things have gotten to a point where everyone has an equal footing.

That being said, I disagree with the notion that, in order to achieve equality, every gender has to do the same exact thing. Gender identity is a very strong attribute, and I think a lot of the "girls wear dresses and make up while boys don't" derives from a natural result from identifying one's gender for the opposite to find attractive. In other words, males finds females attractive because they do and wear things that males don't, and visa versa. This, of course, is not true for everybody but for a majority of the population who is straight and cis-gendered. To attempt to discourage people from adopting the little things that men and women tend to do could backfire, if those things are part of their identity and personality, whether those things were socially constructed or not. I mean, if someone told me that, in order to achieve total gender equality, I must have dresses in my wardrobe and wear make up, I'd upright refuse because that is counter to how I want to portray myself.

It is true that throughout human history, cultures have developed different standards. The "women wear dresses" standard is prominent in western culture. In other cultures both in the past and today, men have worn make up and dresses. Some have had more equality than women, and in some (rare) instances, there have been matriarchies where the women had more influence on society than men. But for the most part, at least since civilization really started to boom a few millennia ago, there was a very distinct idea of genders identifying themselves with their own fashion statements and standards.

If I understand the idea you're trying to convey correctly, Andara, it's that our goal in society should be to have males and females be interchangeable in appearance and fashion. That there should be just as many males wearing dresses as females, and people should be discouraged from conforming to anything based on gender because anything like that means there is no gender equality. That anyone who identifies with a specific gender dresses as such is a victim of patriarchy and sexism. I can't fully agree with that, and it would be detrimental to society if we tried to shame others for using their sexual identity to adopt a certain style or appearance. Keep in mind, I agree that we shouldn't do the opposite, where we shame others for not conforming and ridicule someone who dances to the beat of another drum, but that doesn't mean we should discourage people from being themselves, even if that means they like pink dresses and identify as female.

[Gravekeeper]

If I understand the idea you're trying to convey correctly, Andara, it's that our goal in society should be to have males and females be interchangeable in appearance and fashion.

Er? I don't think that was even remotely what she was saying.

[Andara Bledin]

If I understand the idea you're trying to convey correctly, Andara, it's that our goal in society should be to have males and females be interchangeable in appearance and fashion.

You're attempting to put the cart before the horse, here. Decrying the sexual discrimination in fashion is not the same as decrying people who, in their freedom, make choices that happen to align with previous stereotypes.

The fact that you assume that is what I'm trying to do absent any indication (and despite quite a bit of evidence to the contrary) is just another sign of how out of whack the typical perceptions of sex and society really are.

What I am trying to say is why can't a guy have the freedom to wear a skirt or heels without facing ridicule? Why can't a woman shave her head without having to listen to questions about her health or sexuality, or whether the man in her life is ok with her choice? Why can't a man wear makeup or nail polish without having his masculinity questioned? Why can't a woman wear a classic cut suit without being accused of penis envy?

This all goes hand in hand with the freedom for women to wear frilly dresses and lace and choose to be homemakers or teachers or caregivers and the freedom for men to wear suits and look like bachelors and choose to be jocks and nerds and mechanics and plumbers, etc, etc, etc. Freedom cuts both ways and is to the benefit of all. But to those who are entrenched in the bigotry of the status quo, true freedom is a threat to their ability to have handy signs so that they can label others without having to actually make the effort to think or get to know the people they attack.

What purpose does sex-based fashion actually serve other than to further separate us in yet another artificial manner?

[TheHuckster]

I understand what you're saying now, sorry if I was misunderstanding before. I just get a bit defensive about this stuff because in the past I have known people (personally, not on the Internet) who have attacked me for doing things in the status quo and finding some women attractive that the rest of society also finds attractive by calling me a "lemming" or a "sheeple" who was either "brainwashed" or "influenced" by society for what I wear and do, and it just irks me when they do that. Yes, I am a male who wears button-down shirts, loves beer, and has a career in engineering, and no, I'm not going to change my way of life just because in many ways I'm your "average joe" who doesn't challenge society's norms. I guess I'm just projecting that onto this discussion.

I agree that people should stop judging and labeling others, especially those they don't know, just for the clothes they wear, their mannerisms, or their lifestyles. I just think in many ways for a majority of people, they are going to conform to gender norms in fashion and other ways, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that, as long as they don't ridicule or judge/label people who choose not to.

[Hyena Dandy]

I will repeat what I had said before, which is that I feel uncomfortable with the use of the word patriarchy. This is in part from me, but also in part because I am repeating what I have been told by men who are victims of assault and abuse, that they feel that it's minimizing their struggles, and that and other things frequently used as part of how they were abused/controlled by their partners/caregivers, and they feel that if it were changed, it would be a lot harder to use like that.

I had a much longer post here, but I deleted it, because I was too nervous to post. It generally came down to the fact that I have often struggled with such issues, due to my difficulties with knowing what someone's beliefs are going to be based on what words they used. I know, for instance, a large number of self-identified feminists who have told me that as a man, I should not try to write science fiction, because science fiction has too many men. Or that I shouldn't write erotica. Or dress a certain way, or watch a television show I like. That's actually been part of why I have struggled to get back to my work in progress. Yet I know a (slightly smaller) number of self-identified feminists, who have told me that those people are idiots I should ignore. I've known feminists who say men can't be raped, because men have more power in society. I've also known feminists who say that the belief that men can't be raped is based in misogyny.

I've known, or at least known of, people who call themselves MRAs, who say that they think feminism is great, and just feel that there's parts of it that they object to, or that are being unintentionally harmful. I've seen people who call themselves MRAs who say that feminism is evil and women were just fine before all of it. Or were fine in the '60s. Or the '20s. I've also seen people, but been fortunate enough to not talk to, people who will say they aren't MRAs, and that MRAs are brainwashed feminist puppets, only to turn around and hear someone else call that person an MRA.

Then of course, some people will say "That type of person isn't a REAL feminist," or "That type of person isn't a REAL MRA," or "I wouldn't say that person is (X)," which is difficult. Because THEY say they are, and half the time, they'll turn around and say that the other person isn't. It makes me very reluctant to talk about these issues in anything but the most general terms. I'm afraid that I'll come across as something I'm not,or that people I like will decide they don't like me because they assume I believe something I don't believe.

[Andara Bledin]

If you're worried about how other people are going to interpret labels, then don't use them.

Just talk about the issues that you feel matter and what you think should be done to either identify the causes or correct them.

As for those who say that you can't do X because of Reason-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-X (such as not writing sci-fi because other men write sci-fi or talking about feminism when you're not a woman) - Ignore 'em. They're lousy human beings and should feel bad for discouraging any activity that doesn't harm anyone.

[Estil]

The vast majority of issues that men have in modern western culture are typically rooted in sexism against women.

Discrimination against men in family court is a symptom of raising kids being considered "women's work."

The same for alimony and child support issues.

The same for work-related discrimination against men becoming teaches or nurses or caterers.

Discrimination against men in abuse situations stems from the idea that women are weak and fragile and need to be protected.

The same goes for issues regarding rape, rape allegations, and the disproportionate enforcement and sentencing. Hell, it took a women's advocacy group to petition the FBI to expand the definition of rape to even include men as victims.

This isn't to detract from the fact that, for men, these are very real issues.

It's just that the solution for most of the issues that men face in modern western society can only be solved by aligning with the goals of feminism and raising women up to being full-class citizens along side their male counterparts. Trying to treat them as distinct issues is a mistake and doomed to failure.

Ultimately, all of this is what is being referred to when people use the term patriarchy. It's not a movement, but a mindset that has been reinforced through word and deed for countless generations and has caused society to make a lot of bad assumptions about the differences between boys and girls.

Yes, there are differences, but a lot of what we think about gender is actually nurture and not nature as is commonly assumed. We teach boys that they don't wear dresses. We teach boys that they don't wear makeup. We teach boys that they don't play with dolls. We teach boys that girls are weak and have to be protected. It's all bullshit.

Every time you hear someone talk about "boys being boys," that's a symptom of patriarchy. Every time you hear some guy being insulted for not being masculine enough, that's a symptom of patriarchy. Every time you hear about an incident between a man and a woman and it's assumed the man is at fault, that's a symptom of patriarchy. It's all interconnected and intertwined and most of us are complicit in it's continuation.

You may be shocked to hear this but you've pretty much hit all the nails on the head. I know we may not agree on a lot of other stuff but as a male abuse victim myself (mostly at the hands of my own "family" as well as those who don't believe me or think I'm "overly sensitive") you certainly get a "Amen!" to pretty much all that.

On a semi-related note, I would love to see some female players make it to the NBA and especially MLB. We've had girls in Little League for over 40 years now so you'd think we'd have some MLB (or at least pro caliber) female players by now but the problem is in HS girls can only play softball. Nothing wrong with softball mind you but it is NOT the same sport as baseball. So how is a Little League girl who loves and is real good at baseball supposed to have any shot at the pros if nearly all HS's I know of expect girls to only play softball when as I explained before it's not the same sport. On the other side of the coin, an increasing number of schools are offering volleyball...but usually only have a girl's team...ooooookay since when did volleyball of all things become a "girl's sport"? :P

Peggy Hill said it best, "there [should be] no "boy's sports" or "girl's sports" they're just sports.

[Andara Bledin]

In the sport world, there's typically a significant difference between the men's and women's division, though it's very much not constant across the men/women divide, but varies considerably between both.

Caster Semenya is a shining example of how that can cause issues. The world running organization actually took action that makes sense by putting in a testosterone limit on competing in the women's division. It's very similar to having weight limits in boxing. It would be nice if they went the rest of the way and put a floor on the men's division so men with atypically low testosterone could compete against people of similar development as well.

I'd like to see gender separation done away with entirely in favor of hormonal separation that allows for people of actual similar range to compete against one another with some degree of overlap in the middle where a person can choose to stay in the lower or move permanently up to the higher (no flip-flopping, in other words). That would make an awful lot of sports a lot more exciting.

[BlaqueKatt]

to expand on andara's post, here's a list of men's rights issues feminism is already working on

It's an excerpt from this very long article (read more than just the headline*)


*The MRAs didn't and ironically pointed out exactly what she was saying, also they regularly write screeds on the author because she went from(in their opinion) "attractive and fuckable to troll like", and some actually believe that feminism does that, not an individual's choice.

[Nekojin]

*The MRAs didn't and ironically pointed out exactly what she was saying, also they regularly write screeds on the author because she went from(in their opinion) "attractive and fuckable to troll like", and some actually believe that feminism does that, not an individual's choice.

Anyone who identifies other people as "fuckable" in anything other than a dating scene is too immature to even be invited to the round table for this sort of discussion.