More Men's Rights Scariness

[clockworkgirl21]

I believe misandry is alive and well, and we need to address it, but damn it, these people need to stop making themselves look insane.

[Vene]

Really, the selective service? Really? There's not gonna be a damn draft, and even if there was I'm gonna bet it will quickly be changed to include both sexes.

As for the buying drinks thing, just don't buy women drinks if it pisses you off that much. And 10 years of clubbing, really?

[clockworkgirl21]

Even if there isn't going to be a draft, I still think the Selective Service is sexist not to include women. Sexism is sexism, and you can get away with it a lot easier if it's against men.

[Vene]

Sept 21, 2011 9:06:35 GMT -5 clockworkgirl21 said:

Even if there isn't going to be a draft, I still think the Selective Service is sexist not to include women. Sexism is sexism, and you can get away with it a lot easier if it's against men.

I'm pretty sure a lot of people are getting away with sexism against women at this moment by paying them less than men. There's also a lot more subtle sexism, of which this is an example. And we've also got a lovely birth control recall which is only needed because of sexism. I'll explain, there is the moronic idea that women are too weak and if they don't have their period regularly they lose their minds (go into hysterics) and so placebos are included in hormonal birth control. This is completely unfounded and due to assumptions by physicians when it was first developed.

I do not doubt there is sexism against men, in fact, I know there is (custody favoring women and people feeling uncomfortable leaving their child in the care of a man are two of the bigger ones), but it's really not comparable in magnitude.

[Dragon Zachski]

Actually, I would say that in many cases, misogyny can be more harmful to men than misandry.

Namely because misogyny, while defining women and womenly straits as
"feminine" and "lesser", also defines a set of traits as "masculine" and "superior".

So if you're a man who does anything even slightly considered feminine (such as doing chores around the house and making supper. I wish I was joking.) then you get mocked, ridiculed, shunned, and called a woman as an insult.

Let's not even talk about male knitters.

[Paimun]

Sept 21, 2011 17:15:36 GMT -5 Dragon Zachski said:

So if you're a man who does anything even slightly considered feminine (such as doing chores around the house and making supper. I wish I was joking.) then you get mocked, ridiculed, shunned, and called a woman as an insult.

Let's not even talk about male knitters.

Or trying to shave your legs.

[Admiral Lithp]

Because women bare the brunt of our neurosis. It is much easier for us to place our emotional burdens on the shoulders of our wives, our female friends, our girlfriends, our female employees, our female colleagues, than for us to impose them on the shoulders of men.

It’s a whole lot easier to emotionally manipulate someone who has been conditioned by our society to accept it. We continue to burden women because they don’t refuse our burdens as easily. It’s the ultimate cowardice.

I'm going to skip the wildly inappropriate ironic comment & just say that this is kind of a hypocritical comment to come out of an argument about sexism & emotional blackmail. In particular, the bolded would suggest that she's actually talking about men. Just as there's a widespread assumption that women are "more sensitive," guess who gets to be less sensitive?

I'd say that every sexist item creates a double-standard. As for who is affected worse, if I may be so bold, I don't really care. I'm more concerned with the questions of "Is it a double standard?" and "How do we fix that?" I don't see the point in quantifying who is more persecuted than whom.

I'll give credit where it's due, they have put a lot of time and energy into the work they do for divorced fathers, the problem is that they always go too far so that the message that they have gets lost amidst all the shite that follows it.

Who's "they"? Are you quite certain these are the same people? And what do we mean by "work"? Did they show up to a protest with cunt signs?

All are rhetorical questions. The point is that just because you contribute to a cause, it doesn't mean you actually help. It's like the radical feminists: All they do is fuck up, get parodied, & cause people to lose sense of what the word "feminist" actually means.

[Vene]

Sept 21, 2011 21:32:45 GMT -5 Admiral Lithp said:

Because women bare the brunt of our neurosis. It is much easier for us to place our emotional burdens on the shoulders of our wives, our female friends, our girlfriends, our female employees, our female colleagues, than for us to impose them on the shoulders of men.

It’s a whole lot easier to emotionally manipulate someone who has been conditioned by our society to accept it. We continue to burden women because they don’t refuse our burdens as easily. It’s the ultimate cowardice.

I'm going to skip the wildly inappropriate ironic comment & just say that this is kind of a hypocritical comment to come out of an argument about sexism & emotional blackmail. In particular, the bolded would suggest that she's actually talking about men. Just as there's a widespread assumption that women are "more sensitive," guess who gets to be less sensitive?

Author is male, he even says so in the title. You are absolutely terrible at this shit.

[Admiral Lithp]

Sept 21, 2011 21:39:57 GMT -5 Vene said:

Sept 21, 2011 21:32:45 GMT -5 Admiral Lithp said:

I'm going to skip the wildly inappropriate ironic comment & just say that this is kind of a hypocritical comment to come out of an argument about sexism & emotional blackmail. In particular, the bolded would suggest that she's actually talking about men. Just as there's a widespread assumption that women are "more sensitive," guess who gets to be less sensitive?

Author is male, he even says so in the title. You are absolutely terrible at this shit.

What shit? He seemed male to me. This caused me to think he was a woman:

"Since I have embarked on this feminist self-exploration"

In retrospect, that isn't really a sensible interpretation, but it happened. Also, I forgot the title.

[Smurfette Principle]

I agree that there is a lot of misandry, and we really need to address that, especially in the context of how sexism in general hurts both men and women. For example, if women are seen as too weak to work but perfect for childrearing, then it hurts women who want to work, but it also hurts men by making them the one who pays child support without being able to see their kids, regardless of who makes more money or who is a more fit parent.

It's just that we get so many of these misogynistic crazies that men's rights in general looks really, really bad.

[Dragon Zachski]

Actually, now that I think about it, misogyny and misandry are just two sides of the same coin.

If you have misogyny present, then also misandry, as imposing a set of standards for one gender implies a set of standards for the other gender.

This also goes both ways: The crazy misandrist feminazis cause harm to females as well as males.

Meanwhile, feminism plows forward for equality for both genders.

Oh, the day when a man can take knitting and a woman can take engineering and have neither of them be considered "gender atypical" for it.

[tolpuddlemartyr]

Sept 22, 2011 2:34:48 GMT -5 Dragon Zachski said:

Actually, now that I think about it, misogyny and misandry are just two sides of the same coin.

I present for the prosecution, Love.Shy and Aroo!

That is all.

[gyeonghwa]

Here is a misandry portrayal that feminists also dislike:

The bumbling idiot husband who doesn't know how to manage the domestic sphere and requires his witty wife to do it. It's a common trope now. You can see it in a lot of commercials.

It's a really sexists misandry portrayal which reinforces gender expectations.

I don't know why people think feminists have misandry. (Actually I do know why. It's a straw man made by MRAs).

But given our culture, misandry is less blatant and dangerous than misogyny.

[tolpuddlemartyr]

There is absolutely no reason why misandry and misogyny should be mutually exclusive, given that they both rely on stereotypes they are more likely to be mutually reinforcing.

It's kind of like when you take a look at white supremacists and black supremacists, take away skin color and you have intense young dudes who like strutting about in uniform clothing and army boots.





Who think it's all the jews fault, apparently.

EDIT: Reminds me actually, there's a Men's Rights group who like their natty uniforms too.



They've harassed divorcees and call themselves the Blackshirts with zero sense of irony.

[Amaranth]

Sept 21, 2011 1:34:21 GMT -5 Colosphe said:

The only thing that I think when I hear about this stuff: "Why must they always make a mess?" Not their plight or their views, just that they do it so sloppily.

Plus, the poor injured secretary.

... Also considering men's rights, I saw a comic that I kinda laughed at. Mostly because wikipedia is a source...

Yegads. Thanks for reminding me of an ICP bit.