When did feminism go completely crazy?

[Borachio]

And don't we all just suffer dreadfully from both of those?

 

[cardgame]

You seem to have a perverse need to prompt people to accuse and re-accuse you of all sorts of things, perhaps in order to vindicate yourself and the little crusade you have going here. It seems like a symptom of a deep sense of insecurity and self-loathing.

I'm not insulting you, but the fact that you think I'm insulting you implies insulting things about you. But don't worry, I'm not insulting you.

 

[useless]

There's something deeply strange and ironic about a brony complaining about feminism.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Thing Is Valka you may communicate with words but we don't we communicate with numbers facts statistics, and when you make a claim and want US to be convinced you need to well ....convince.

I don't need to rattle off a bunch of numbers for you to read a damn article that explains a situation better than I can.

Congratulations, Triewd. You've accomplished something that few veteran posters have failed to do. I don't appreciate your attitude.

 

[Triewd]

I think that was uncalled for actually I don't much appreciate that post ether.

Please link that article cos I did not see it the first time......

EDIT: I am not trawling though this hell of a thread to find it.

Second EDIT: you asked for this video somewhere else in this thread so here it is again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJGZM2jtMpg

at 0:30

Thats right you liberal intellectual guy who has a healthy interest in science and skepticism but who finds feminism distasteful and would rather not hear about it You are worse than rape threats

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Many things that are common have their own Wiki pages and other sites. Chocolate cake, for instance. Millions, if not billions, of people on this planet either eat chocolate cake regularly, or at least on special occasions. By your logic, since it's a common occurrence, there should be no news features about chocolate cake, no Wiki pages to do with chocolate cake, no other websites to do with chocolate cake, and it shouldn't be mentioned on TV since it's just so common.

Yet it seems to be mentioned all over the place.

This is a bit like that "war equality" analogy. You're not comparing the same kinds of things. Obviously lots of common things have Wikipedia pages, even some absolute universal truths have wiki pages. There will obviously be pages about how judicial systems and courts work, probably with subpages for every country in the world. But that doesn't meant that each and every court case will have it's own dedicated page. Only a select few cases which are notable for some reason will have that honour. So yes, chocolate cake as a concept may well have it's own page, but there won't be pages dedicated to individual instances of chocolate cakes unless there was something quite notable about them.

 

[Traitorfish]

Then why do you (and others) continue to be hostile whenever we bring men's issues up?

When do you ever bring up men's issues? And I mean really attempt to discuss them, not quote a few statistics by way of rebuttal. And is there ever any attempt to bring up issues which concern gay men, or trans men, or disabled men, or mentally ill men, or or black and brown men, or poor men? If those issues are left aside, there is no discussion of "men's issues", just the grievances of particular, largely quite privileged men. (You yourself, in fairness, have occasionally touched on issues effecting non-white/ethnic minority men, but you're really the only one on this forum to do so.)

These are serious topics, which are becoming increasingly visible, yet the proponents of "men's issues" are nowhere to be seen in those discussions. The hostility to the proponents of "men's issues" isn't a hostility to the issues themselves, but to people who have failed to convincingly demonstrate any authentic concern for with men's issues, and not just for finding a socially-acceptable cudgel to beat feminists.

 

[Triewd]

The hostility to the proponents of "men's issues" isn't a hostility to the issues themselves, but to people who have failed to convincingly demonstrate any authentic concern for with men's issues, and not just for finding a socially-acceptable cudgel to beat feminists.

Thats a little unfair.

Maybe if we thought you would listen we would post.

but judging by your responses thus far you don't see to care......

 

[Hygro]

@Traitorfish (and cc: jackelgull), I guess what I mean is, this whole concept of "spaces" for "conversations" is a bit dubious, certainly not sufficiently literal in its general application. More important, to first use the "spaces" idiom and then to follow it with a suggestion that Group B must start their own space and pull from the general Open Places to form their discourse, not allowed by convention or some other social pressure to avoid sampling Group A's space's holdings, when Group B's discourse is greatly enhanced by piggybacking the ideas of Group A, creates an environment where intellectual ownership trumps good ideas, truth, and discursive progress.

 

[cardgame]

Traitorfish, broad issues of gender affect all men, be they privileged or unprivileged.

Back when I still visited /r/MensRights, you'd occasionally see a gay man for example walk in and ask, is this MRM inclusive of me? You're a man, right? So yes. Yes it is. Oh, will the MRM fight for gay marriage for you? That's what you're asking? This is MensRights, LGBT activism is best left to LGBT activists who have far more experience and knowledge about that. We're here for men. Which you are. So yes, we include you.

Somehow this qualifies the movement as unaccepting, when it's really just trying to stick to the issues it was founded on

There's something deeply strange and ironic about a brony complaining about feminism.

I should clarify here that I am not against feminism. In fact I've moved quite a bit towards feminism and far away from the MRM over the last two years or so, mostly within the last ~6 months. That said, I am still very much against idiocy.

 

[caketastydelish]

There's something deeply strange and ironic about a brony complaining about feminism.

He wasn't mocking feminism, he was mocking a hypocritical (and outright insulting) debating tactic.

When do you ever bring up men's issues? And I mean really attempt to discuss them, not quote a few statistics by way of rebuttal. And is there ever any attempt to bring up issues which concern gay men, or trans men, or disabled men, or mentally ill men, or or black and brown men, or poor men? If those issues are left aside, there is no discussion of "men's issues", just the grievances of particular, largely quite privileged men. (You yourself, in fairness, have occasionally touched on issues effecting non-white/ethnic minority men, but you're really the only one on this forum to do so.)

I've also touched on poor men, as well as men with mental illnesses. Anyway, the current "social norms" behind gender hurts men too, as in men across the board, not just minority and/or poor men. I've given specific examples of such before in this thread and elsewhere. You yourself admitted as much as "the patriarchy has failed men" so I don't see why you of all people would be hostile to this concept.

These are serious topics, which are becoming increasingly visible, yet the proponents of "men's issues" are nowhere to be seen in those discussions. The hostility to the proponents of "men's issues" isn't a hostility to the issues themselves, but to people who have failed to convincingly demonstrate any authentic concern for with men's issues, and not just for finding a socially-acceptable cudgel to beat feminists.

There's certainly some truth to this (as in people that behave the way you describe), but there are also people with legitimate concern for men's issues.

 

[caketastydelish]

Traitorfish, broad issues of gender affect all men, be they privileged or unprivileged.

Back when I still visited /r/MensRights, you'd occasionally see a gay man for example walk in and ask, is this MRM inclusive of me? You're a man, right? So yes. Yes it is. Oh, will the MRM fight for gay marriage for you? That's what you're asking? This is MensRights, LGBT activism is best left to LGBT activists who have far more experience and knowledge about that. We're here for men. Which you are. So yes, we include you.

I don't think anyone (reasonable) person would deny women have it worse overall. But social norms behind how men and women are "supposed" to act still hurt men too, *especially* if they're going by those social norms for no other reason than to be accepted by society, and they are penalized for not doing so.

And there's a lot more to "breaking social norms" than simply being gay, bi or trans. Even within straight men, there's a certain way straight men are "supposed" to behave, dominant and masculine etc, and if a straight man doesn't feel like being that way, he is penalized by society for it.

 

[Bootstoots]

Moderator Action: This thread is a disaster of flaming and trolling that, in retrospect, should have been euthanized long ago. Closed.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889