TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Sexism and Men's Issues

Go To

MOD NOTE: Please note the following part of the forum rules:

If you don't like a thread, don't post in it. Posting in a thread simply to say you don't like it, or that it's stupid, or to point out that you 'knew who made it before you even clicked on it', or to predict that it will end badly will get you warned.

The initial OP posted below covers it well enough: the premise of this thread is that men's issues exist. Don't bother posting if you don't believe there is such a thing.


Here's hoping this isn't considered too redundant. I've noticed that our existing threads about sexism tend to get bogged down in Oppression Olympics or else wildly derailed, so I thought I'd make a thread specifically to talk about discrimination issues that disproportionately affect men.

No Oppression Olympics here, okay? No saying "But that's not important because women suffer X which is worse!" And no discussing these issues purely in terms of how much better women have it. Okay? If the discussion cannot meaningfully proceed without making a comparison to male and female treatment, that's fine, but on the whole I want this thread to be about how men are harmed by society and how we can fix it. Issues like:

  • The male-only draft (in countries that have one)
  • Circumcision
  • Cavalier attitudes toward men's pain and sickness, AKA "Walk it off!"
  • The Success Myth, which defines a man's desirability by his material success. Also The Myth of Men Not Being Hot, which denies that men can be sexually attractive as male beings.
  • Sexual abuse of men.
  • Family law.
  • General attitudes that men are dangerous or untrustworthy.

I could go on making the list, but I think you get the idea.

Despite what you might have heard about feminists not caring about men, it's not true. I care about men. Patriarchy sucks for them as much as it sucks for women, in a lot of ways. So I'm putting my keyboard where my mouth is and making a thread for us to all care about men.

Also? If you're male and think of something as a men's issue, by golly that makes it a men's issue fit for inclusion in this thread. I might disagree with you as to the solution, but as a woman I'm not going to tell you you have no right to be concerned about it. No "womansplaining" here.

Edited by nombretomado on Dec 15th 2019 at 5:19:34 AM

Kzickas Since: Apr, 2009
#3151: Jan 3rd 2013 at 5:16:32 PM

The SPLC isn't perfect, they could be wrong. Labeling A Vf M as a hate site wouldn't be wrong, but it would be using the term somewhat more widely than is usual. If that standard was applied across the board a lot of other sites would count too, and a lot of feminist sites. Naming and shaming is a tactic A Vf M learned from feminists. For exemple SRS is always threatening to out people from r/mensrights. Labeling r/mensrights a hate site however does not describe the discourse I have seen there at all.

edit: Daily Dot says the SPLC told them it doesn't consider r/mensrights a hate group, while containing some misogynists. A fair description in my opinion. I don't know enough about Daily Dot to say if they're reliable, but they look alright from a quick google.

http://www.dailydot.com/news/reddit-mens-rights-hate-group-splc/

edited 3rd Jan '13 5:21:36 PM by Kzickas

deathpigeon Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: One True Dodecahedron
#3152: Jan 3rd 2013 at 5:17:42 PM

[up][up] The Myth of Male Power sounds like, from a certain mindset, it's denying the patriarchy and denying sexism against women. In reality, it's talking about how the patriarchy affects both men and women and how sexism exists against men as well.

edited 3rd Jan '13 5:18:18 PM by deathpigeon

Kzickas Since: Apr, 2009
#3153: Jan 3rd 2013 at 5:20:56 PM

[up]Then it's not really a patriarcy anymore is it? At least not by the usual feminist meaning of the word. By the original meaning it obviously is.

edited 3rd Jan '13 5:21:46 PM by Kzickas

Besserwisser from Planet of Hats Since: Dec, 2009
#3154: Jan 3rd 2013 at 5:21:51 PM

Heh. It's quite nice when someone like fanty or Black Humor turns up. Reminds me why this thread exists.
They also made me appreciate other people here, who I might disagree with but who are also able to remain a somewhat reasonable discussion.

Talby Since: Jun, 2009
#3155: Jan 3rd 2013 at 5:24:06 PM

Disagreeing with patriarchy theory or feminism in general is not misogyny. Misogyny is the hatred of women. One of the things many people find problematic about some feminists is their tendency to label anyone who disagrees with them as bigots. "You're not a feminist? You must hate women!"

Here's the book titles from Wikipedia, by the way;

Why Men Are The Way They Are

The Myth of Male Power

Women Can’t Hear What Men Don’t Say

Father and Child Reunion

Why Men Earn More

Does Feminism Discriminate Against Men?

Not really seeing the misogyny here.

Anyway, I'm not about to ruin my evening by debating misogyny here, so you guys will have to continue without me I fear.

Sorry, but I couldn't let this slide. Has anyone here made any misogynistic remarks? Or is disagreeing with you enough to label someone as a bigot?

edited 3rd Jan '13 5:34:29 PM by Talby

Robotnik Since: Aug, 2011
#3156: Jan 3rd 2013 at 5:24:58 PM

[up] Hell, the third one sounds like it's criticizing men.

deathpigeon Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: One True Dodecahedron
#3157: Jan 3rd 2013 at 5:25:57 PM

@Kzickas: It's still a hierarchy, but, like every hierarchy, it constrains the options of those on top just as much as those on the bottom.

Talby Since: Jun, 2009
#3158: Jan 3rd 2013 at 6:00:14 PM

[up][up]And the last one is a debate book co-authored by a feminist.

Karalora Since: Jan, 2001
#3159: Jan 3rd 2013 at 7:20:26 PM

Oh, dear...oh, oh, dear...

Heh. It's quite nice when someone like fanty or Black Humor turns up. Reminds me why this thread exists.

Guest, kiddo, you might want to re-check the first page. This thread exists because I started it. As you may recall, I'm a pretty outspoken feminist. I use words like "patriarchy" and "male privilege" and everything.

edited 3rd Jan '13 7:24:37 PM by Karalora

DAStudent Since: Dec, 2012
#3160: Jan 3rd 2013 at 10:02:31 PM

Sexism against women is a men's issue. As long as misogyny is a common thing with any level of acceptance, men will always be subject to a curse. Because neither misogyny nor misandry is truly justifiable, at its core, but, of everything in the world, misogyny is the only thing that even comes close to justifying misandry, and misandry is the only thing that even comes close to justifying misogyny. There will be men's issues as long as there are women's issues, and there will be women's issues as long as there are men's issues - and believe me, we will be miserable as a culture as long as that is. When will we achieve true egalitarianism? I don't know. I hope to live to see that day, but I don't think it will come until everybody alive today is dead.

I'd say I'm being refined Into the web I descend Killing those I've left behind I have been Endarkened
Euodiachloris Since: Oct, 2010
#3161: Jan 3rd 2013 at 10:18:55 PM

[up]The world sometimes surprises you. I thought Apartheid wouldn't end in my lifetime when I was growing up in the middle of it. Oops. Got that wrong.

I was just as wrong with the USSR going on well into my adulthood. <shrugs> Sometimes, when change comes, it's a paradigm shift of epic swiftness.

Or, takes half an age of build up to a swift end in a kind of panic. tongue

0dd1 Just awesome like that from Nowhere Land Since: Sep, 2009
Just awesome like that
#3162: Jan 3rd 2013 at 10:34:47 PM

Going back a bit, but...

It's fine to say whites are privileged in such and such way on average if it's true, because whites exist as a whole and defined class on an abstract level. However, when you start telling white guy Mike to check his privilege, you're no longer seeing Mike as Mike. You're seeing him as White Guy. You've reduced him and his life experience to just two pieces of the whole.
That's all well and good to say that...HOWEVER, you must keep in mind that minorities, women, and the like don't get the privilege to just look at themselves as simply a person, as society constantly is reminding them of their gender, race, sexuality, etc. and forcing them to acknowledge it.

I'm reminded of a talk that was given at my college a while back by one Dr. Paula Rodriguez Rust in which she referred to this sort of issue. The following is just a paraphrasing of what she said (as I wrote it in a paper I turned in for one of my classes regarding it):

...[Straight while males] have the choice to remain unaware of the influence of their identity of their lives, and that they do not have to wonder if other see them or just their race, orientation, religion, or any other ways of classifying people. She gives the example of three friends talking to each other about what they see in themselves in the mirror. One friend says that what she sees in the mirror is “a black lesbian woman.” The next friend says that she just sees “a woman,” herself being a straight white woman. The third friend says that he just sees “a person,” himself being a straight white male.
And while making men acknowledge this to you may seem like a step back, it's an important step forward in helping them understand the plights of people who do not have the same social privileges as them.

edited 3rd Jan '13 10:35:48 PM by 0dd1

Insert witty and clever quip here. My page, as the database hates my handle.
Iaculus Pronounced YAK-you-luss from England Since: May, 2010
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
#3163: Jan 4th 2013 at 2:54:45 AM

In regards to Register-Her, the site's slogan is 'Fuck Their Shit Up'. Are you guys seriously saying it doesn't promote Internet vigilantism? Besides, let's just assume for a moment that they're totally right about every one of their false rape accusers being an evil, scheming harpy out to make a buck off honest men. They're still putting blog posts and joking Facebook comments (such as the girl who described her political affiliation as 'kill all men hail Satan') on the exact same level.

Paul Elam is a scary fucker, and I'm kind of disturbed that he's being so strongly defended in this thread.

What's precedent ever done for us?
Talby Since: Jun, 2009
#3164: Jan 4th 2013 at 3:26:28 AM

Paul Elam scares me in the same way that Joe Pesci in a Martin Scorsese film scares me.

That said, where do you draw the line between calling people out on their bigotry/crimes and internet vigilantism?

Iaculus Pronounced YAK-you-luss from England Since: May, 2010
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
#3165: Jan 4th 2013 at 3:34:13 AM

It's a blurry line, but I'm pretty sure it's a little way from 'offering cash rewards for the names and addresses of people who make blog posts you don't like'.

What's precedent ever done for us?
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#3166: Jan 4th 2013 at 4:50:00 AM

Disagreeing with patriarchy theory or feminism in general is not misogyny. Misogyny is the hatred of women. One of the things many people find problematic about some feminists is their tendency to label anyone who disagrees with them as bigots. "You're not a feminist? You must hate women!"

Misogyny has many definitions besides "hatred" of women. It's common hate group tactics to play semantics whenever someone mentions racism, classism, sexism, whatever. People will say things like "using the word 'nigger' or 'kike' isn't racist because racism means to think they're inferior, and I don't think niggers and kikes are inferior".

Patriarchy denial is considered sexist because it's defending androcentrism, which is what most people mean when they speak of "male privilege". The assumption that male concerns are the default is a major problem in many, many areas of life, which is the entire point of privelege and patriarchy theory.

And to indicate why some people might think of those books as sexist, let's alter them slightly:

Why Whites Are They Way They Are

The Myth of White Privilege

Blacks Can’t Hear What Whites Don’t Say

Why Whites Earn More

Does Civil Rights Discriminate Against Whites?

The one I left alone was "Father and Child Reunion" because that doesn't really have a good analogy in race. But everything else? What you see there is exactly the type of crap that went on prior to and during the Civil Rights Movement in order to create backlash against it. It preys upon mens' fears that feminists are really just evil nazis out to get them, rather than actually addressing the issues that are being brought up.

Like I said before, the problem with mens' rights is that it rarely ever comes up unless people want to use it as a means of stonewalling womens' rights.

Iaculus Pronounced YAK-you-luss from England Since: May, 2010
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
#3167: Jan 4th 2013 at 4:57:12 AM

Farrel has also said some rather strange stuff in the past about incest.

As for Paul Elam, the guy wrote this. Do I need to say any more here?

edited 4th Jan '13 5:06:01 AM by Iaculus

What's precedent ever done for us?
Talby Since: Jun, 2009
#3168: Jan 4th 2013 at 5:25:01 AM

[up][up]If women were disadvantaged in every respect compared to men, then your comparison would be apt, but they are not. Men still commit suicide at a significantly higher rate than women. Men are far more likely to be victims of violent crime. The vast majority of homeless people are men. Men and boys consistently under-perform in education compared to women and girls. Are these trivial issues that can be safely ignored?

The comparison to race and the civil rights movement just doesn't work.

[up]Just in case the Joe Pesci reference wasn't obvious, I was saying I find Paul Elam to be a dangerous and unstable person.

edited 4th Jan '13 5:30:24 AM by Talby

Kzickas Since: Apr, 2009
#3169: Jan 4th 2013 at 5:43:27 AM

@Death Pidgeon: I realized what you meant when I saw your post before the one I responded to, which i missed the first time around since I was typning my own post when you posted it.

Guest, kiddo, you might want to re-check the first page. This thread exists because I started it. As you may recall, I'm a pretty outspoken feminist. I use words like "patriarchy" and "male privilege" and everything.

Notice how your name wasn't one of the ones he mentioned? I doubt that was a coincidence. Using words like patriarchy or male privilege isn't the problem.

@King Zeal: If white people dropped out of school more often than black people, served longer sentances for the same crimes or were more likely victims of violence I'd ask what we could do to deal with the problems white people face. In reality of course it's the other way around, it's black people who experience those things. And men, which is why I dismiss any discussion about the suffering of white people but I don't dismiss the discussion about the suffering of men.

Besserwisser from Planet of Hats Since: Dec, 2009
#3170: Jan 4th 2013 at 5:48:24 AM

Guest, kiddo, you might want to re-check the first page. This thread exists because I started it. As you may recall, I'm a pretty outspoken feminist. I use words like "patriarchy" and "male privilege" and everything.
You aren't defending the protest against Warren Farrell, are you? Are you denying men's issues like others have done in this thread? Of course not, you made this thread. Guest made it very clear of whom he was talking about and he clearly wasn't talking about you. You have to stop taking everything as a personal attack against feminism, especially when someone takes the effort to adress specific people.
That's all well and good to say that...HOWEVER, you must keep in mind that minorities, women, and the like don't get the privilege to just look at themselves as simply a person, as society constantly is reminding them of their gender, race, sexuality, etc. and forcing them to acknowledge it.
You can say the same about men, though. It's just an unfair assumption to show women as a disprivileged group when we have those problems men have discussed in this thread.

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#3171: Jan 4th 2013 at 6:11:37 AM

If women were disadvantaged in every respect compared to men, then your comparison would be apt, but they are not. Men still commit suicide at a significantly higher rate than women. Men are far more likely to be victims of violent crime. The vast majority of homeless people are men. Men and boys consistently under-perform in education compared to women and girls. Are these trivial issues that can be safely ignored?

The comparison to race and the civil rights movement just doesn't work.

That isn't what anyone has said. However, the things you mention still have little to do with distancing from privilege. Blacks commit more hate crimes proportionately than white people, but that doesn't automatically eliminate the existence of white privilege. Of course men have issues, and I've mentioned several in this thread. The problem is that these issues are constantly brought up to circumvent discussions about feminism rather than being brought up on their own.

You can say the same about men, though. It's just an unfair assumption to show women as a disprivileged group when we have those problems men have discussed in this thread.

Men having problems doesn't disqualify them as a privileged group.

If white people dropped out of school more often than black people, served longer sentances for the same crimes or were more likely victims of violence I'd ask what we could do to deal with the problems white people face. In reality of course it's the other way around, it's black people who experience those things. And men, which is why I dismiss any discussion about the suffering of white people but I don't dismiss the discussion about the suffering of men.

See, the attitude that whites don't have it as bad as black people is a relatively new viewpoint (and one that is still contested to this day). White privilege is something that was laughable in the days before the Civil Rights era, because anyone who brought it up would have to explain why a white person who has a job to do, has property to maintain, and looks after the welfare of their family could possibly have it better than a lazy negro who doesn't have any of those things.

Similar, but not identical conditions now exist in the discussion of male privilege. Yes, men are subjected to more violence, are more often homeless, and are conscripted into military service, but this is a consequence of the assumption that men are tougher. If men are supposed to be tough, then by needing help, they are automatically disqualified from receiving it.

edited 4th Jan '13 6:51:32 AM by KingZeal

Besserwisser from Planet of Hats Since: Dec, 2009
#3172: Jan 4th 2013 at 6:16:49 AM

[up] They are brought up on their own. You probably see them more often because feminism has a much larger base than MR As and when feminists get called out after saying something unsupported it's far more notable than someone on the internet saying something unrelated to feminism about men's rights. It's an uphill battle for the MRM and that shouldn't be held against them.

Men having problems doesn't disqualify them as a privileged group.
You do, however, have to proof which one of the gender is privileged when you want to make the argument that one is privileged over the other. I rarely see that, just lots of claims that men are more privileged.

edited 4th Jan '13 6:18:50 AM by Besserwisser

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#3174: Jan 4th 2013 at 6:24:55 AM

They are brought up on their own. You probably see them more often because feminism has a much larger base than MR As and when feminists get called out after saying something unsupported it's far more notable than someone on the internet saying something unrelated to feminism about men's rights. It's an uphill battle for the MRM and that shouldn't be held against them.

Except most of the time it has nothing to do with feminism saying something unsupported. It has to do with MRA groups wanting to conflate the argument with a "me too" oppression olympics.

You do, however, have to proof which one of the gender is privileged when you want to make the argument that one is privileged over the other. I rarely see that, just lots of claims that men are more privileged.

No you don't. For example, the very fact that women have often had to use a Mustache Du Plume (even as lately as JK Rowling) in order to be taken seriously as anything other than romance and suspense authors is a problem. So is Hollywood's blatant discouragement of The Bechdel Test. As is comic books' assumption that female heroes don't sell unless they show T&A.

Those issues have nothing to do with which sex has it worse. Again, that's just oppression olympics.

Besserwisser from Planet of Hats Since: Dec, 2009
#3175: Jan 4th 2013 at 6:26:07 AM

[up][up] Old news, we already talked about it. Interestingly enough, from what I heard the SPLC later clarified their statements and said they weren't saying A Vf M and other MRM sites they mentioned were hate groups.

Except most of the time it has nothing to do with feminism saying something unsupported. It has to do with MRA groups wanting to conflate the argument with a "me too" oppression olympics.
You can say the same the other way around. Every time feminists mention the MRM they criticize them.

edited 4th Jan '13 6:29:48 AM by Besserwisser


Total posts: 22,924
Top