The misandry problem - real or imagined?

Too many of the posts in this thread do meet the standards of posts in an RD thread, as the OP specifically requested not be the case.

I was thinking that myself. Maybe this is the way to start a proper thread on here, get all the silliness out of the way first.


As an aside... what does "check your privilege" actually mean? Is "check" used in the sense of "please reign in your privileged attitude", or is it more like "oooOOOOOhhhh check out YOUR privilege Mr Dudebro"?
 
That sounds nice and all, but doesn't say much about why a lot of discussion gets derailed. True, there are zealots who don't help, but oftentimes things go south because of the manner in which men's problems are brought up in discussions touching on feminism. "But what about men's problems, huh? Why are we not talking about them?" - this in discussions about women's problems, which tends to be followed by insults and derogatory remarks directed against feminists.

To try and give a serious answer (despite the pleas of the OP), in my experience on this board at any rate, this "de-railment" usually comes after a topic of policy has been brought up that, while technically about women and not addressing men directly, has some obvious and unfair repercussion for men (in some people's eyes at least), and therefore it's entirely reasonable to bring things up.

For example, let's go with something that always gets brought up in these debates, the fact that 90% of the homeless (or something of that order) are male. Now imagine the government announces a special initiative/programme to help get the female homeless off the streets and into some accommodation, at some cost to the tax payer. Now obviously, on the face of it, this is a good thing - the problem is real and no-one should be on the streets, and good will be done by the programme. But if a man pops up and says "er.... hang on a minute, that seems a bit unfair...", is it really right to shout him down and to tell him to stop making this about men? Is this a women's issue that he's hijacking, or is he actually making an entirely relevant point about fairness?

Or a more ludicrous example, what if the government announced they were giving out free cars to all women over 18 because women are just so great and deserve them? Would "OMG stop making this about YOU all the time!! This is clearly a policy about women, for women. It's not about you, stop trying to make it about you!!!!" be a reasonable response?

I can't, off the top of my head, remember any examples of these arguments on CFC that have started with some entirely fair and reasonable discussion about a genuine female issue or problem, that's being dealt with in a reasonable way, being suddenly hijacked by an MRA demanding we talk about men instead. It's usually in response to something stupid like subway signs telling all men to never talk to women and stop openly masturbating all the time.
 
As an aside... what does "check your privilege" actually mean? Is "check" used in the sense of "please reign in your privileged attitude", or is it more like "oooOOOOOhhhh check out YOUR privilege Mr Dudebro"?

I think its a hockey reference.
 
Oh... well I'm not going to start watching hockey just to understand that.
 
That proves my point: When there was a fight here about changing the constitution to allow women in combat, it wasn't about making the paragraph in question gender neutral (it still isn't). It was just about removing all restrictions on women.

but your piont is political, so women saying they too should be in the army as soliders and pilots is wrong because they want to have restrictions removed... they only want the same restrictions men have, they are actually asking for something gender neutral, and have then been told but the army is different, (it's a mans job) and now you actually critise them for asking for gender neutrallity while saying they actually didn't
 
It's usually in response to something stupid like subway signs telling all men to never talk to women and stop openly masturbating all the time.

Funny, because what I remember is male posters calling into question if harassment happens because they've never harassed anyone. They felt insulted and made it all about them.

Its doubt at every step. Doubt about if harassment occurs online or offline, police doubt of rape/sexual assault victims on a massive scale just recently in Rotherham, whats it going to take for a little belief?
 

Link to video.

Not sure if posted in any of the other threads, but this seems to be the appropriate thread..
 
but your piont is political, so women saying they too should be in the army as soliders and pilots is wrong because they want to have restrictions removed... they only want the same restrictions men have, they are actually asking for something gender neutral, and have then been told but the army is different, (it's a mans job) and now you actually critise them for asking for gender neutrallity while saying they actually didn't

Uh....no?

Now it's not a man's job anymore, but only men can be forced to do it. That is not equality in my book.
 
Uh....no?

Now it's not a man's job anymore, but only men can be forced to do it. That is not equality in my book.
not sure where you live?
but do away with conscription like the US, UK, Canada, Australia,

surely you don't expect anyone to actually try to bring in something they don't agree with, as a male I protested hard not to be sent to Vietnam, as did a lot of others I just do not see how women not wanting to send their sons to some hell whole at 19, is any different to them or me not wanting to go to some hell hole at 19

your saying that women are sexist for not trying to bring about something most would see as wrong yet they reconised the fact that some women wish to serve their country and have fought to have restrictions removed for women to actually join men on the front lines

what do you expect feminism to actually do, hold mens hands and get rid of their problems instead of criticisng that women don't get conscripted, get out and get 500.000 people marching on the government, and get change so that men can not be conscripted... it works
 
Oooh look, a strawman of me. You even got the hat right :)
 
screw em, bunch of whineing incessant plebs constanrtly complaining about nothing let God sort em out
 
your saying that women are sexist for not trying to bring about something most would see as wrong yet they reconised the fact that some women wish to serve their country and have fought to have restrictions removed for women to actually join men on the front lines

I am not accusing women of being sexist. It is perfectly fine that they are fighting for their rights. However that is something distinct from fighting for equality.
 
God sorting out things never works. I mean, guy's a damned psycho, ready to salt any city as we go..
 
Back
Top Bottom