The Rights of Men

[Senethro]

Who was making statements about correct roles for genders???

IDK, none of that in this thread.

 

[Ryika]

But it does acknowledge it. Or some arms of it do.

The people who do should meet on neutral ground, not try to pull people into the blob of ideological ideas that is feminism as a prerequisite to tackle existing problems.

Its social politics. You can't not be ideological about it, because thats accepting the status quo as valid. When you are making statements about the correct roles for genders then that is a form of political speech.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. The only vaguely ideological position that one has to take is that "People should be allowed to do what they want." and "Problems that exist should be acknowledged and tackled." - that's it.

 

[Senethro]

The people who do should meet on neutral ground, not try to pull people into the blob of ideological ideas that is feminism as a prerequisite to tackle existing problems.

Feminisms got a good track record for actually getting stuff done in the 20th century. Not sure why Switzerland took until 1970 to give the vote to women though.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. The only vaguely ideological position that one has to take is that "People should be allowed to do what they want." and "Problems that exist should be acknowledged and tackled." - that's it.

Thats hella political. You write that on your blog in the wrong country and you get murdered.

 

[brennan]

IDK, none of that in this thread.

So why mention it? Running out of ideas for derails?

Edit: it seems so given that last retort. Being gay can get you killed in some countries, that wouldn't make being gay edgy and political here in this forum.

 

[Ryika]

Thats hella political. You write that on your blog in the wrong country and you get murdered.

Yes, it's political, but political is not ideological.

 

[Senethro]

So why mention it? Running out of ideas for derails?

Edit: it seems so given that last retort. Being gay can get you killed in some countries, that wouldn't make being gay edgy and political here in this forum.

I was being insincere. I could also have said "read the thread"

 

[Senethro]

Yes, it's political, but political is not ideological.

This probably deserves a Kyriakos thread for itself. I disagree though.

 

[Senethro]

Edit: it seems so given that last retort. Being gay can get you killed in some countries, that wouldn't make being gay edgy and political here in this forum.

Enter civfanatics gay marriage into google. You're wrong.

 

[Narz]

And there we go, the place we all knew this was going sooner or later, the old "individuals discriminating against individuals isn't really (racism/sexism/whateverism), <BLANK>ism means institutionalized <BLANK>ism" argument. Which is just a nicer way of phrasing the standard modern progressive belief that it's okay to discriminate against some groups of people because they have "privilege" so it's "punching up" rather than hate.

The very common sentiment that - "your problem, assault, brother's murder, whathaveyou isn't part of a systemic pattern therefore no big deal" is quite ironically minimizing those with minority problems.

In other words if your problem isn't a problem for most people its not a problem at all.

As if someone who got murdered as a hate crime or someone who just got murdered aren't suffering just the same (edit : their families suffering I meant, obviously if you're dead your suffering is over).

 

[Narz]

I was being insincere.

I'm hoping your whole persona is a caricature.

 

[brennan]

Would you like egg and chips with your spam Mr Senethro?

 

[Senethro]

Form a queue then. Its difficult to keep up.

 

[brennan]

That suggests that you find spouting largely content-free spam challenging. How sad.

 

[Senethro]

i am happy to find spam production more difficult than you do, dear brennan

Moderator Action: Repeated spam.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[jackelgull]

Come on guys knock it off. I made this thread RD for a reason.

 

[Samson]

So we have an elementary understanding that boys disagreements are more often directly physical while bullying is a co-gendered problem. We have one condemnation of drugging anywhere between 10-33% of American boys between ages 5-12 into compliance with slow-release meth. We have a suggestion that the War on Drugs is a problem, which is a delicious state of affairs given the previous. We have a suggestion that elementary school teachers should be paid more, though I'm pretty sure they being a white collar job are still paid better than more blue collar working class jobs than we probably think. We have a suggestion that helping more women be engineers will encourage men to spend more time with children. And we have at least some concern regarding spiking suicide rates among middle aged men. Also the suggestion that paying more attention to girls and women will fix these issues. Am I tracking so far? Missed anything before soliciting more conundrums?

There is my complaint about unequal parental leave, but it does not seem to elicit much discussion.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I have to ask because sometimes you don't volunteer!

Next question - If sexism never stopped, is that because it continues or because it never existed?

Well obviously I don't volunteer all opinions and thoughts I hold on every subject all the time because that would be a complete waste of time. I didn't volunteer my thoughts on this because it's not relevant to anything I was saying. I feel you're either trying to just derail things by asking a succession of irrelevant diversionary questions, or you're attempting to set up some insubstantial "trap" by asking me such basic questions that only really have one reasonable answer, so that when I give it you can say something along the lines of "Aha! So that means you MUST believe X then!". Whichever one it is I'm just not going to play along with it, sorry.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

You've said you are an anti-feminist. In this post you say you see no alternative but to fight against feminism.

Like, are we not supposed to believe the things you say?

This is why I ask the provoking questions.

If your implication is that anyone who believes sexism is a thing should be a feminist, then I would say that this is a very blinkered belief and not one I share. If you're not saying that, well then I don't know what your point is.

As I said, I don't believe the questions you asked were "provoking" at all, they were just completely irrelevant and derailing.

Edit: Actually, given how I responded, yes you could argue that they were "provoking" in one particular sense, but not in any sort of intellectual sense.

 

[Senethro]

Well obviously I don't volunteer all opinions and thoughts I hold on every subject all the time because that would be a complete waste of time. I didn't volunteer my thoughts on this because it's not relevant to anything I was saying. I feel you're either trying to just derail things by asking a succession of irrelevant diversionary questions, or you're attempting to set up some insubstantial "trap" by asking me such basic questions that only really have one reasonable answer, so that when I give it you can say something along the lines of "Aha! So that means you MUST believe X then!". Whichever one it is I'm just not going to play along with it, sorry.

I ask because its interesting. I find it difficult to imagine how you reconcile this absolute opposition to feminism when there is a need for it. This has resulted in me asking questions about whether the need for feminism ever existed (seeing if you acknowledge inequality/oppression across many times, places and societies), seeing if you can see that the need has not stopped, and I anticipated a future effort to show you that feminism has been effective.

The questions at time may seem diversionary because of the "Red is red" "No, blue is red" type issues going on. Sometimes these are not reconcilable, like asking a creationist if the world is more than 6000 years old. No point in continuing there.

If your implication is that anyone who believes sexism is a thing should be a feminist, then I would say that this is a very blinkered belief and not one I share.

Why is that? What is the anti-feminist solution to sexism?

 

[Farm Boy]

There is my complaint about unequal parental leave, but it does not seem to elicit much discussion.

I gave it a whirl. I'd say men should probably receive time for pre-birth leave too, if we want men to play a part then we need to give them the same time to play their part. The biological aspect is key, no duh, but we're not so dense as to think that's all that goes into developing a productive, safe, and loving household for childrearing the type of which we always seem to presume and want when we ask "where were the parents?" when something goes wrong, are we? If nothing else it equalizes out the market incentives kinda sorta. Actually, I think the one response we've gotten on that point was from Akka? I've been missing stuff though, so I may have missed it. For what it's worth I think so long as parental leaves are different between the genders in any meaningful way that is indicative of us just not actually giving a crap about equality where the rubber hits the road.