The Men's Rights Movement

[The Six]

Though there's nothing stopping anyone from making violence against men campaigns. There's just less interest in that. Probably even the average guy would be more supportive for a female-oriented campaign rather than a male-oriented one.

And that's the point. You realized it on your own. These organizations are doing nothing wrong; they just aim to help a certain group of people. The question you should be asking isn't why there are groups that benefit women, but why, if you think there's a lack, there aren't more groups for men.

[ibanezmonster]

I was just.. lost for words.

Do you have a point you'd like to discuss or are you going to just sit there and look like a dear in the headlights? 

And that's the point. You realized it on your own. These organizations are doing nothing wrong; they just aim to help a certain group of people. The question you should be asking isn't why there are groups that benefit women, but why, if you think there's a lack, there aren't more groups for men.

The point I made is the same point I made about "not enough" women being in certain fields (such as IT, politics, whatever it may be). Maybe they just aren't as interested, on average. And maybe people of both genders just aren't interested, on average, of making a campaign against violence against women than against men.

The explanation for the indifference toward men is just a general way society feels (like in this video I've posted previously):
https://www.youtube.com/v/u3PgH86OyEM

My point is that it's silly for feminists to think that women are generally disregarded in every way when you already have many more people ready to stick up for a woman in distress rather than a man. Remember, it's women and children first- just let the men drown. But feminists just want to play the victim card so they get more advantages in society.


As for "just aiming to help a certain group of people," I also wonder how people would feel if there were a campaign against violence against white people? I know that would raise my eyebrow in confusion.

[lisa needs braces]

The explanation for the indifference toward men is just a general way society feels (like in this video I've posted previously):
https://www.youtube.com/v/u3PgH86OyEM

Don't forget the "Women are wonderful" effect, a bias shared by BOTH genders.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E2%80%9CWomen_are_wonderful%E2%80%9D_effect

[lisa needs braces]

From that wiki:

It revealed that the more sexual encounters a man had, the greater the likelihood of him sharing the positively-biased perception of women.

[Florestan]

That is not "society oppressing men;" it is merely kings, nobles, corporate executives, "the 1%" or whatever oppressing those who aren't. 

The list is severely incomplete. It should also include Presidents, Prime-Ministers & their governments and Communist Party Secretary Generals.

[The Six]

Do you have a point you'd like to discuss or are you going to just sit there and look like a dear in the headlights? 

The point I made is the same point I made about "not enough" women being in certain fields (such as IT, politics, whatever it may be). Maybe they just aren't as interested, on average.

So if we wanted to figure that out, we could trust your conjecture that they "just aren't interested," or we could trust the decades of hard evidence that women have been discouraged or outright prevented from pursuing jobs in these fields. I think I'll take the evidence.

My point is that it's silly for feminists to think that women are generally disregarded in every way when you already have many more people ready to stick up for a woman in distress rather than a man. Remember, it's women and children first- just let the men drown. But feminists just want to play the victim card so they get more advantages in society.

Well I haven't seen any feminists here say anything like that. If there were any here who said that I guess they would want to refute what you said.

As for "just aiming to help a certain group of people," I also wonder how people would feel if there were a campaign against violence against white people? I know that would raise my eyebrow in confusion.

Certainly, because white people are not victims of hate crimes.

[Purusha]

Actually, they are often victim of hate crimes, but since i consider the concept of a hate crime to be fundamentally flawed, i don't see how it is something that needs to be campaigned against, one way or another.

[Ken B]

Certainly, because white people are not victims of hate crimes.

What an absurd claim.

FBI stats
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2012/topic-pages/victims/victims_final

It's a hard area to get solid numbers so other methods of counting give varying numbers. From Department of Justice:

There were no significant differences
in rates of hate crime vulnerability for
racial or ethnic groups. Whites were
victimized at a rate of 0.9 per 1,000,
blacks at 0.7 per 1,000, members of
other races at 1.4 per 1,000, Hispanics
at 0.9 per 1,000, and non-Hispanics at
0.9 per 1,000

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf


A particular example
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/19/race-based-hate-crimes-spike-in-dc/?page=all

I won't give numbers on the white Jewish victims of Hamas. I'll just let your dismissive claim hang in the air.

[The Six]

Actually, they are often victim of hate crimes, but since i consider the concept of a hate crime to be fundamentally flawed, i don't see how it is something that needs to be campaigned against, one way or another.

It's a relatively new category that has a purpose, though I can see how it can be flawed. I should have said they aren't victims at rates comparable to other groups in the US. I didn't mean there are zero hate crimes against whites.

[The new erato]

Do you have a point you'd like to discuss or are you going to just sit there and look like a dear in the headlights? 

Oh deer.

[ibanezmonster]

So if we wanted to figure that out, we could trust your conjecture that they "just aren't interested," or we could trust the decades of hard evidence that women have been discouraged or outright prevented from pursuing jobs in these fields. I think I'll take the evidence.

Well, of course if you go back enough decades you'll see more stuff like that. But things are a lot different now. People can more than ever even be openly gay (though maybe not in every sort of environment). The difference between now and then is that now what is viewed as "discouraging women from entering science-related jobs" is a guy with a shirt of sci-fi cartoon women in bikinis. Surely back in the 50's they had more to complain about.

Well I haven't seen any feminists here say anything like that. If there were any here who said that I guess they would want to refute what you said.

Maybe not here specifically, but elsewhere, I have seen that pattern of thought.

[Rinaldo]

Maybe they just aren't as interested, on average.

Maybe you should be asking why they're not interested. Maybe you should listen to women who talk about their experiences when trying to enter a field that is dominated by men simply because women were forbidden access for centuries (e.g. technical fields). Maaaayyybeee.

[Ken B]

It's a relatively new category that has a purpose, though I can see how it can be flawed. I should have said they aren't victims at rates comparable to other groups in the US. I didn't mean there are zero hate crimes against whites.

That's wrong too, according to the data in my links.

[ibanezmonster]

Maybe you should be asking why they're not interested. Maybe you should listen to women who talk about their experiences when trying to enter a field that is dominated by men simply because women were forbidden access for centuries (e.g. technical fields). Maaaayyybeee.

Oh, technical fields like IT? I know that back in the 1700's they were completely banned from using computers, but since they haven't been banned from IT work the last few decades, I wonder why they are still acting like they aren't allowed to use computers?

As for male nurses and cosmetologists, a good percentage of (straight) men love doing makeup and taking care of people, but since those fields have been dominated by women for a while, the men tend to be afraid that they won't fit in and don't pursue that career path. What man hasn't dreamed of doing someone's nails for a living?

[Henk]

Oh, technical fields like IT? I know that back in the 1700's they were completely banned from using computers, but since they haven't been banned from IT work the last few decades, I wonder why they are still acting like they aren't allowed to use computers?

As for male nurses and cosmetologists, a good percentage of (straight) men love doing makeup and taking care of people, but since those fields have been dominated by women for a while, the men tend to be afraid that they won't fit in and don't pursue that career path. What man hasn't dreamed of doing someone's nails for a living?

You mean that with the men's right movement? For a living? Or for fun?

There is no men's right movement. If there is, they are not men.

[Henk]

Harry Mulisch said he was for equal rights. He said that there are however some practical issues. Because of this he wanted to, like a woman has men, have 10 women walking behind them doing him obscene proposals. "I have the right to it."

[snyprrr]

What an absurd claim.

FBI stats
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2012/topic-pages/victims/victims_final

It's a hard area to get solid numbers so other methods of counting give varying numbers. From Department of Justice: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hcrvp.pdf


"white jewish" lolz

this needs its own thread!!


(also, hamas created by yissyrel to oppose arafat)

A particular example
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/19/race-based-hate-crimes-spike-in-dc/?page=all

I won't give numbers on the white Jewish victims of Hamas. I'll just let your dismissive claim hang in the air.

[Rinaldo]

Oh, technical fields like IT? I know that back in the 1700's they were completely banned from using computers, but since they haven't been banned from IT work the last few decades, I wonder why they are still acting like they aren't allowed to use computers?

You wonder, good. Read on, ye wondering guy, and the truth shall set you free. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/23/us/gender-gaps-stanford-94.html

As for male nurses and cosmetologists, a good percentage of (straight) men love doing makeup and taking care of people, but since those fields have been dominated by women for a while, the men tend to be afraid that they won't fit in and don't pursue that career path. What man hasn't dreamed of doing someone's nails for a living?

Yeah, 'cos working a computer is such a manly endeavour, why would women even think about getting near such a masculine device.

[Ten thumbs]

I have noticed the bias that relates to 'women are wonderful' in the case of celebrities making guest appearances on television. Ladies are generally described as 'the wonderful', whereas men have to put up with 'the great'. It is interesting that, even in this day and age, it is very rare for any woman to be allowed the appellation 'great'.

[The Six]

So women who try to become civil servants or police in Indonesia have been subjected to "virginity tests" in which recruits are violated. The government seems to be passing it off as a legitimate physical exam, which either insults everybody's intelligence, or reveals their own lack of such.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/19/world/asia/indonesia-police-recruits-virginity-test/

Yeah, it's so easy for women these days, right? So much has changed. Silly feminists complaining about nothing.

Oh, technical fields like IT? I know that back in the 1700's they were completely banned from using computers, but since they haven't been banned from IT work the last few decades, I wonder why they are still acting like they aren't allowed to use computers?

Ever read accounts from women who try to get in to the video game field? Some of it ain't pretty.