Sexism and Men's Issues:

Total posts: [20,030]
1 ... 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 ... 802
This could potentially be problematic if the absence of the father at birth would be used by lawyers to justify keeping the father away further. I'm not sure how the laws are in the US but prior to a reform biological fathers with no former contact with their children had basically no rights to ever seeing them. In cases such as the ones in the article, every instance where the father is denied access to his child makes it harder for him to ever see his offspring.
9177 Mandemo17th Mar 2014 03:09:14 AM from Cookie Jar , Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
Hmm, two minds on it.

It is a stressful situation, so the woman should have right to decide whenever or not the father/to-be-father-figure is present.

On the other hand, so should the father equally have the right to be part of his child's birth.

I think I am leaning more on mothers side here, though. Could be just a cultural difference, but around here, as far as I know, most fathers wait outside the room unless called in.

Anyway, I think the right is good to be there, as long as it's "on mothers demand" rather than becoming a norm to exclude the father from the birth. If the mother has no issues, the father can stay but if his presence is making the mother nervous/stressed/whatever, she should have the right to ask him to be removed (though I think most decent would leave by themselves if asked)
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
[up]Yeah, it's the mother squeezing a great big lump of baby out of her nether regions, so I feel she should have a bit more control of the situation.
What's precedent ever done for us?
Yeah, if you're having a serious medical procedure like giving birth, it should be a given that nobody can insist on being present if you don't want them there, even if they are the father.

Ideally you want everyone's rights to be equal as possible, including access to children, etc. but we ultimately can't get around the fact that it is the woman who gets pregnant and carries the child to term, so her rights must be respected as well.

edited 17th Mar '14 5:51:08 AM by Talby

Nameless Hero
Just thought I'd chime in. I'm not a "pretty-boy", but I do maintain my hair and try (but mostly fail) to keep my weight down. So the ideas that men are slobs, lazy (looking after your hair and the rest of your body is time consuming) or objectively unattractive get on my tit. But what really upsets me is the idea that men have to get on with it when they have issues. I have suffered from mental health issues, which have stemmed from being told or having it implied to me that men are naturally tough. When I wasn't tough, I felt less of a man. The idea of men always consenting has also caused me pain thru my life, so that needs to go. It also annoys me that a thread devoted to women's issues will virtually never have someone say "it's also offensive to men, cos..." and yet a thread on men's issues will almost always have someone say "it also hurts women, cos..." and often be hijacked and made into a discussion of women's issues. And what about the burden of proof being placed on the man accused of rape, DV, child abuse, etc, when it should be placed on the individuals making the accusations? That needs to be fixed.

What I think needs to be done is to create fiction highlighting men's issues. A lot of tropers are aspiring writers of some kind, so why don't the writers on this thread create works highlighting men's issues, whether or not you're an MRA or Feminist? My current work features a girl stalker, with the male victim's suffering played straight. If enough fiction shows male victims of various crimes committed by women as sympathetic and the female criminals as inexcusably bad then we'll get closer to true equality.
The name's Axel. Wanna check out Aim 4 The Head, my Zombie Apocalypse spoof comic?:
9181 Gabrael1st Apr 2014 06:50:47 AM from My musings , Relationship Status: Is that a kind of food?
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
9182 Mandemo1st Apr 2014 11:14:00 PM from Cookie Jar , Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
Something that popped into my eyes while checking stuff for Women's Issues. A link to the relevant file.

In fact, NCFM Vice- President Marc Angelucci represented the plaintiffs in the landmark equal rights case of Woods v. Horton (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 658, which held that it was unconstitutional to exclude male victims of domestic violence from victims’ services receiving state funding based on the victims’ sex.

Can anyone confirm how spread this? Male victims being denied state funded services? Cause that sounds really bad if people are being denied aid they need...

edited 1st Apr '14 11:22:07 PM by Mandemo

[up] I'm not sure where services for male domestic violence victims do get state funded. Earl Silverman tried to get tax money in Canada in the only domestic violence shelter for men in all of Canada and he failed. At least some states in the US have laws specifically against funding help for men, others simply don't pay. We have two shelters for men in Germany, both trying to get government funding but as far as I know they're still failing.

Edit: Having read the source more thoroughly, I guess in California victim services have to help men as well. Still, this seems more the exception rather then the rule.

edited 2nd Apr '14 5:01:04 AM by Mastah

9184 Euodiachloris2nd Apr 2014 05:28:55 AM , Relationship Status: Is that a kind of food?
[up][up]See? This is the kind of thing that needs addressing. Which is a battle with government assumptions and laws. Not a general attack on all things female (and a few things besides: I don't get why "gay" or "trans" suddenly means you're not a man worth defending). <_< <glares at most MRAs>

Guys are hurting and what the sodding hell are they actually trying to do about it?

edited 2nd Apr '14 5:36:30 AM by Euodiachloris

[up] That's a strawman if I ever saw one. This Earl Silverman I mentioned earlier? A lot of the support he got was from MR As. Erin Pizzey dedicated her life to help domestic violence victims of any kind. She is also part of the staff of AVFM. NCFM is also highly endorsed by the MRM, if not a part of it.

There is no "attack on all things female", there is an opposition to feminists who in turn oppose equal treatment. Earl Silverman stated feminist lobbying as his major obstacle and Erin Pizzey got death threats to herself and her family, culminating in the death of her dog.

I would have to look it up but there already were several initiatives to change laws like these, many at least support by the MRM. Which at on occasion was used as an example of them opposing help for female victims because the policy which prevented state funding for men was also guaranteeing that funding to female victims.

Seriously, this is one of the major talking points of the MRM, pretending they aren't working on it is just ignorance, willful or otherwise.

Edit: What the hell is this about the MRM suddenly being trans- and homophobic? They don't actively involve themselves in the LGBT community as a movement (which incidentally would be more likely to help the MRM than the other way around) but they do support them individually and when they are affected by being male they consider it their responsibility again.

edited 2nd Apr '14 5:46:36 AM by Mastah

Pronounced YAK-you-luss
Though the men's rights movement didn't exactly cover itself in glory over the Earl Silverman Centre - A Voice For Men lost ownership of it when the woman they'd put in charge left the site due to a falling-out over libertarianism (AVFM liked it, she didn't) and the site's attempts to court the ultra-misogynist Men Going Their Own Way (think lesbian separatists but slightly more half-assed and rapier). Apparently, it's still a work in progress with some fairly major funding issues, and AVFM has officially withdrawn its support.

edited 2nd Apr '14 5:51:10 AM by Iaculus

What's precedent ever done for us?
9187 Euodiachloris2nd Apr 2014 05:51:43 AM , Relationship Status: Is that a kind of food?
[up][up]Not a strawman when that's practically the mission statement of many MRA sites, mate. -_- And, I sincerely wish it wasn't the case: men need advocacy and a voice when facing government stonewalls, too.

Scapegoats don't solve real problems.

edited 2nd Apr '14 5:52:43 AM by Euodiachloris

[up][up] I can see your point that they messed up but making mistakes is different from not even trying, which is the point which Euo tried to make. And you just slander the MGTOW, which should be really something feminists should be supportive of if their issue is men involving themselves in the lifes of women in a way they shouldn't.
No, MGTOW is far too bitter and spiteful.
[up] I'm assuming that comes the territory with men who are unwilling to engage with women in many ways. But you basically just criticize them for their attitude which they might have but I fail to see how that's harming anyone.
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
[up][up][up]Men Going Their Own Way would be a rather nicer bunch if they didn't make themselves women's problem. However, they swear off relationships, not sex (the two sites the culture is centred around are quite clear on this), which makes for a seriously poisonous cocktail when mixed with their utter disdain for women. They're the sort who rough up prostitutes and get into the really scary side of pick-up artist culture.

Even outside that, though, it's hard to see them getting along with feminist groups given that the MGTOW forums blasted A Voice For Men for being 'pussy-whipped' and filled with 'manginas' for daring to include female columnists.

edited 2nd Apr '14 6:12:30 AM by Iaculus

What's precedent ever done for us?
[up] So, blaming people for seeking sex instead of relationships isn't slut-shaming, how? They want to avoid being harmed by women while still enjoying sex. I can see how certain individuals can be problematic but I don't see that as a reason to slander the entire group.

What I have seen about discussions about women in the MRM mostly revolved more around them receiving more attention and respect for being women because they are female, not the fact that women are there. Which strangely enough I see with feminists and their male members in similar ways. But I guess there's something to be concerned about if you spoke about different occurences.
9193 Achaemenid2nd Apr 2014 06:39:32 AM from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 , Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name

Iaculus did not say that MGTOW are bad because they choose sex over relationships; he said that this outlook, combined with their sexism leads to a seriously problematic movement that tends towards mistreating women. There's nothing with consensual casual sex; what there is a problem with is poisonous attitudes towards that increase the likelihood that "casual sex" will involve sexual violence or abuse. Forgive me, but that's a fairly obtuse reading of Iaculus's post above.

Schild und Schwert der Partei
Wanting sex is fine. But the MGTOW movement has a history of being bitter.

Iaculus posted this a looooong while back: [1]
It's still very much a stretch. Basically, you're assuming because a person has some negative emotions, they cannot interact with others without harming them. Mind you, one of the reasons MGTO Ws avoid women is the fear of false accusations of rape. Going out of your way to get a real accusation seems rather counterproductive here. MGTO Ws see themselves as a sort of silent protesters, who want to affect change through non-action. Assumptions of how they could be violent is really nothing more than slander.
9196 Mandemo2nd Apr 2014 07:00:25 AM from Cookie Jar , Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
Great.... discussion seemed to pick up and immediately there is a rush to silence the matter by declaring MRM as misogynist and claiming they hate <insert group of your choice>

In case you people missed, even feminist movement is extremely hostile to transpeople, even worse. To point where they are called "infiltrators". Then again, I expect to hear NAFTA argument to come in soon...

Why is it, that it's okay to constantly attack and derail any converstation of men's issues and men's rights advocates, but you criticize the feminism...

edited 2nd Apr '14 7:02:13 AM by Mandemo

Treatment of transpeople probably got admittedly got better in the feminist movement. There are still those where it basically didn't change from the time when feminism was a major treat to transsexuals but they aren't as numerous in relation to the movement anymore. I mean, they couldn't have gotten worse.
9198 Silasw2nd Apr 2014 07:07:57 AM from a handcart heading to Hell , Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
I wouldn't call saying that the combination of [hates X group] and [wants y from x kind of people] a very bad idea much of a stretch, the logical result of combining those two things is that they will hurt x group to get y and not care.

Edit: [up][up], My understanding of MGTOW is that they swear of relationships with women because they think all women are out to get them, that sure sounds like hatred to me... Correct me if I'm wrong though.

edited 2nd Apr '14 7:09:52 AM by Silasw

"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael

"If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
What the hell is this about the MRM suddenly being trans- and homophobic?

I had the impression that a good part of them considers gay men class traitors. Wait ....

Ah yes. Paul Ehlam explains his position here.

Euo isn't completely off the mark there.
All I know is, my gut says maybe.
When every tentative to raise the point that men have their issues is met with derailment or outright hostility, thinking people are out to get you is not much of a stretch, either.

Total posts: 20,030
1 ... 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 ... 802