The Men's Rights Movement

[Rinaldo]

I honestly don't even understand why violence against women campaigns even exist.

[Purusha]

"The Simpsons" on modern feminism (click to enlarge):

Gamer gate in a nutshell, wow.

[Ken B]

Should violence against men capmaigns exist? Should anti-violence campaigns ful stop exist?

I ask because, considering the context, Greg's observations on the number of male victims, and the italics, I take that to be the import of Greg's remarks: Why single out only some violence for disapproval and campaigns? A stunned look is not an answer to that question. All it is is an attempt to call him stupid while ignoring his point.

[Fagotterdämmerung]

  I hesitate to drift into this thread, but as the reference might not be an obvious one, I suspect Rinaldo was referencing this song/video:

  https://www.youtube.com/v/tWdHOm256N4

  As something of an anti-war song, I suppose it makes sense in the context of this thread.

[ibanezmonster]

I watched the video and am not really sure of the point Rinaldo was trying to make.

[The Six]

Why single out only some violence for disapproval and campaigns?

Because not everything can be all-inclusive. Sometimes it's more effective to single something out.

I'm not sure there's actually problem here, though. Most anti-domestic violence groups do a good job of acknowledging that violence can occur against men as well as women. The thought that women are being given some kind of unfair advantage here is an imaginary one.

[lisa needs braces]

Here's some light reading for you: http://www.sarpn.org/documents/d0001563/Women_work_UNIFEM.pdf

That report is nothing but a long-winded complaint that in large parts of the world, people still engage in gender roles. Of course if you neglect the support that partnered women engaging in nurturing/care/housekeeping receive from their husbands and kin you can arrive at the conclusion that it is the women who are poor, rather than afamily itself.

Where does your claim that the majority of the poor and underprivileged are male come from?

From the clear fact that most homelessness in the U.S, most jailing, and most suicides are suffered overwhelmingly by males as compared to females. Never mind the fact that poor women have the option to just plop out a couple of kids and have the government step in for them to provide housing assistance, food stamps, free medical care for them and their spawn, etc -- whereas poor men are left to their own devices for the most part.

Another absurd thing feminists do: Complain ad nauseum that the West/U.S are sexist but, when challenged on these points, start babbling about how women can't drive in Saudi Arabia.

[Ken B]

Because not everything can be all-inclusive. Sometimes it's more effective to single something out.

I'm not sure there's actually problem here, though. Most anti-domestic violence groups do a good job of acknowledging that violence can occur against men as well as women. The thought that women are being given some kind of unfair advantage here is an imaginary one.

Sure sometimes you can focus on an issue. That's pretty general. Any reason to think that's the case with domestic violence just against women? Why not an anti domestic violence campaign? That seems a coherent topic, a single something to focus on. A lot of the same issues such as anger management or the stress of sharing a home or finances are common there. More to the point, is it gobsmackingly stupid to ask? I think not. The fact that many organizations are in fact doing just that proves it's not stupid to ask, don't you think?

[lisa needs braces]

Imagine being a Spartan male... 

Women and feminists are perfectly okay with the way society uses males.

One notorious feminist crime against males is the "white feather" campaign of World War 1 in which early feminists in the UK were substantially complicit. Young men were pressured to volunteer to go die in the trenches by using women to shame them into volunteering and it was the early feminists who were most enthusiastic about doing this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_feather#World_War_I

Of course, another way that society uses males is for dangerous, unpleasant, unfulfilling jobs that must be done to maintain civilization's structures.

How to motivate men to take these sort of jobs?

Answer: You attach a wage premium to those sort of jobs, otherwise men would be stupid to undertake them. And realize that in the fast majority of cases the reason a man would work at such a job for decades on end is to provide for his family, otherwise why not simply take an easier job?

But what do feminists do? Complain about a gender "wage gap" and go around saying stuff like "a woman earns 78 cents for every dollar earned by a man." The thing is that even if a figure like that is true (and its truth is questionable as women tend to work fewer lifetime hours than men) so what? Men do the nasty and dangerous jobs that maintain civilization. They DESERVE a wage premium for doing so!

[Ken B]

Women and feminists are perfectly okay with the way society uses males.

One notorious feminist crime against males is the "white feather" campaign of World War 1 in which early feminists in the UK were substantially complicit. Young men were pressured to volunteer to go die in the trenches by using women to shame them into volunteering and it was the early feminists who were most enthusiastic about doing this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_feather#World_War_I

Of course, another way that society uses males is for dangerous, unpleasant, unfulfilling jobs that must be done to maintain civilization's structures.

How to motivate men to take these sort of jobs?

Answer: You attach a wage premium to those sort of jobs, otherwise men would be stupid to undertake them. And realize that it the fast majority of cases the reason a man would work at such a job for decades on end is to provide for his family, otherwise why not simply take an easier job?

But what do feminists do? Complain about a gender "wage gap" and go around saying stuff like "a woman earns 78 cents for every dollar earned by a man." The thing is that even if a figure like that is true (and its truth is questionable as women tend to work fewer lifetime hours than men) so what? Men do the nasty and dangerous jobs that maintain civilization. They DESERVE a wage premium for doing so!

This is an interesting post. But I think at the end you make the same error many do. The men actually doing those jobs deserve their wage premium. That doesn't mean men as a class deserve one. It might be that those men undercut the 78 cents thing, which I agree is a fallacious argument,  but it does nothing more than that.

[The Six]

Sure sometimes you can focus on an issue. That's pretty general. Any reason to think that's the case with domestic violence just against women? Why not an anti domestic violence campaign? That seems a coherent topic, a single something to focus on. A lot of the same issues such as anger management or the stress of sharing a home or finances are common there. More to the point, is it gobsmackingly stupid to ask? I think not. The fact that many organizations are in fact doing just that proves it's not stupid to ask, don't you think?

You lost me. What are you even arguing against?

[lisa needs braces]

This is an interesting post. But I think at the end you make the same error many do. The men actually doing those jobs deserve their wage premium. That doesn't mean men as a class deserve one. It might be that those men undercut the 78 cents thing, which I agree is a fallacious argument,  but it does nothing more than that.

What I was saying was the fact that it's mostly men who do those type of labor intensive/dangerous jobs will be reflected in the average earnings of men vs women (which aren't even really that far apart.) So I'm justifying the disparity in averages and not saying that all men are entitled to earn more than women.

[ibanezmonster]

You lost me. What are you even arguing against?

Dude, what if there were plenty of anti-violence campaigns that targeted men instead of women, and none existed for women (and in this scenario, women suffered more from violence overall)? Wouldn't that seem a little weird?

Not that it actually bothers me by itself, but when I read feminists complaining that women are so neglected and are the victims of violence, even though they suffer from less from violence and have all of these anti-violence campaigns while men have none, I feel like doing an infinity facepalm.

[The Six]

Dude, what if there were plenty of anti-violence campaigns that targeted men instead of women, and none existed for women (and in this scenario, women suffered more from violence overall)? Wouldn't that seem a little weird?

Not that it actually bothers me by itself, but when I read feminists complaining that women are so neglected and are the victims of violence, even though they suffer from less from violence and have all of these anti-violence campaigns while men have none, I feel like doing an infinity facepalm.

What are some of these campaigns that ignore men?

[ibanezmonster]

What are some of these campaigns that ignore men?

Google "violence against women campaign," then google "violence against men campaign."

The first 2 pages of "violence against women campaign:"
The insultingly named "man up" campaign: http://manupcampaign.org/
http://endviolence.un.org/
http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/women-s-rights/violence-against-women
http://www.whiteribbon.org.au/
http://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/campaigns
http://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/ending-violence-against-women/take-action
http://www.coe.int/t/dg2/equality/DOMESTICVIOLENCECAMPAIGN/
http://www.zonta.org/ViewArticle/tabid/490/ArticleId/384/Zonta-Says-NO-to-Violence-Against-Women-campaign-and-16-Days-of-Activism.aspx
(and a fb page which I excluded)

The first two pages of "violence against men campaign:" http://www.oneinthree.com.au/malevictims

[ibanezmonster]

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.

[jochanaan]

Society had different uses for the genders. To some extent, it is true that society oppressed women, but guess what, it also oppressed men -- the men it asks to engage in back breaking labor and to fight its wars. Also that female "oppression" was a double sided coin -- women were taken care off and provided for by society in a way that men weren't.

That is not "society oppressing men;" it is merely kings, nobles, corporate executives, "the 1%" or whatever oppressing those who aren't.  Male-on-male oppression, in other words.

[Rinaldo]

I watched the video and am not really sure of the point Rinaldo was trying to make.

I was just.. lost for words.

[lisa needs braces]

That is not "society oppressing men;" it is merely kings, nobles, corporate executives, "the 1%" or whatever oppressing those who aren't.  Male-on-male oppression, in other words.

And all those powerful men are themselves merely instruments of society (perhaps "culture" is a better word?). Our way of living requires that men and women be used differently, because the genders appear to relate to each other differently (women are good at face to face relationships and men happen to be good at forming shallow and hierarchical relationships). Men (and women) regard males to be disposable in a way that women are not and I believe this to be an aspect of our psychology that both feminists and traditional conservatives exploit to push policies that seem to oddly converge in how they treat males as utilities to serve women.

[The new erato]

start babbling about how women can't drive in Saudi Arabia.

I'll babble happily about how women can't reverse in the West.