Men's Right's Movement

[MotherWolff]

Men's Rights do not exist to protect man's rights. I mean, come on, do men REALLY need rights that they simply already have because they are men? <.<

Men's Rights exist to fight against Feminism.

Feminism belittles men.

 

[S_Spartan]

I am a member of this class called "men", what are you saying that I should be doing?

I don't get your meaning.

Men need to realize that there is more to life than sex/(societally approved)success/being a provider.
Feminism changed A LOT of societal expectations toward women but the expectations of men are still basically the same. Or, if you believe in hypergamy, the old expectations are even greater now on men.
Time to move past that.
We may end up with an androgenus society but, oh well. I guess that is the price to pay for everyone to be free of their gender roles.

 

[Odo]

We may end up with an androgenus society but, oh well. I guess that is the price to pay for everyone to be free of their gender roles.

I would argue that androgynous society is what you get when people are free to be who they are, not who they are expected to be, ie: fewer closeted homosexuals, fewer transgendered people going through life afraid to tell anyone, fewer homosexuals who would rather not prosecute the gang that beat them up because they were lynched outside of a gay bar, etc.

 

[S_Spartan]

I would argue that androgynous society is what you get when people are free to be who they are, not who they are expected to be, ie: fewer closeted homosexuals, fewer transgendered people going through life afraid to tell anyone, fewer homosexuals who would rather not prosecute the gang that beat them up because they were lynched outside of a gay bar, etc.

I'm talking about androgynous heterosexual people here.
And I agree that more homosexuals and transgendered people will be more open about their desires and we are seeing that now, however, for straight males the bias that dictates what makes a man a "real man"(and therefore worthy of female respect) is still firmly in place.

 

[Odo]

I'm talking about androgynous heterosexual people here.
And I agree that more homosexuals and transgendered people will be more open about their desires and we are seeing that now, however, for straight males the bias that dictates what makes a man a "real man"(and therefore worthy of female respect) is still firmly in place.

Sure it is, but that's more because of the lingering traditions rooted in patriarchy, and has nothing to do with feminism or the 'new' society.

Most of the complaints I've heard about feminism are more complaints about women who don't realize the 'advantages' of women under patriarchy (ie: man always pays, man must make more than the woman) need to go just as much as the disadvantages (women can't work, vote, have abortions if they want to).

But these women aren't feminists, they're just women who want to benefit from feminism without letting go of the patriarchy and 'classical' femininity, so their expectations of men are also rooted in patriarchy.

 

[S_Spartan]

Sure it is, but that's more because of the lingering traditions rooted in patriarchy, and has nothing to do with feminism or the 'new' society.

Most of the complaints I've heard about feminism are more complaints about women who don't realize the 'advantages' of women under patriarchy (ie: man always pays, man must make more than the woman) need to go just as much as the disadvantages (women can't work, vote, have abortions if they want to).

But these women aren't feminists, they're just women who want to benefit from feminism without letting go of the patriarchy and 'classical' femininity, so their expectations of men are also rooted in patriarchy.

I think I see what you are saying here and I would agree.

I would also add that what feminism has striven to do(and succeeded for the most part) is to make femininity a subjective idea while promoting masculinity as being objective. In other words, we have been encouraged to expand our expectations of what is and what is not feminine behavior. A woman can partake in historically masculine events and aesthetics and few will call into question her wholeness as a woman but the same cannot be said for men.
Of course there are limits to this but it's undeniable that feminism has given women much more freedom to "be" and has turned femininity into a big, gray, poorly defined, area.
Masculinity is still objectively defined, thus the "real man" concept. The idea that an agreed upon set of hardened qualities, all added up, are what make a man, a man.
And THIS is the concept that I would hope the MRM will address. The fact that the concept of masculinity must become more free and subjective.

 

[Odo]

I think I see what you are saying here and I would agree.

I would also add that what feminism has striven to do(and succeeded for the most part) is to make femininity a subjective idea while promoting masculinity as being objective. In other words, we have been encouraged to expand our expectations of what is and what is not feminine behavior. A woman can partake in historically masculine events and aesthetics and few will call into question her wholeness as a woman but the same cannot be said for men.
Of course there are limits to this but it's undeniable that feminism has given women much more freedom to "be" and has turned femininity into a big, gray, poorly defined, area.
Masculinity is still objectively defined, thus the "real man" concept. The idea that an agreed upon set of hardened qualities, all added up, are what make a man, a man.
And THIS is the concept that I would hope the MRM will address. The fact that the concept of masculinity must become more free and subjective.

Feminism can project a kind of exclusivity in that it primarily concerns women's issues, but I also think that by virtue of it challenging the patriarchy it also challenges traditional masculinity. There is some disagreement as to whether including men's issues in the movement detracts from its focus on women's issues, however... but that isn't to say that all feminists think men's issues are irrelevant.

Most people's negative impressions of feminism come from radicals or from things like MRM that want people to hate feminists. It's often easier to convince people that they hate something than to get them to understand it.

 

[Kiwong]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aHNKziN-fE

 

[MollyBeGood]

It is the whole idea that a woman has a certain kind of work she is suited to, ex housework and made to feel inferior for and a man has a kind of work he is more suited to ex. physical and because it is more physical it is superior.

Now there is no need for one gender to be one way, there are no lions to protect the cave women from so the cave women can come out and be like the cave men. The cave men don't want to go into the cave and cook though-that would be regression.

 

[MollyBeGood]

LOL Kiwong nice AD!! Is that a popular beverage in AU? -have You "Cracked a Solo before?"

I remember learning when they really targeted women for smoking, saying it was the sign of a true independent modern woman, in the US and had a group of well-dressed women marching in the Easter Parade-(wow that was 1929 looking at the wiki)... That sky-rocketed cigg sales after that to females wanting to make a statement. Genius of the sick the Edward Bernay's.

Torches of Freedom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh yeah Virginia Slims, too in the 1960's-so crazy to think that tobacco is a sign of freedom.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSo6yxgiWKA

http://www.jimsburntofferings.com/adsvirginiaslims_ads.html

This brings up some more great points about who is really behind these popular "Movements" for freedom and rights, it's never who you think and what you think.

I found this also interesting-

“IT’S UP TO THE WOMEN”Edward Bernays, Eleanor Roosevelt, and feminist resistance to shopping for patriotism
Jane Marcellus
In 1932,
Ladies’ Home Journal (LHJ)
ran an extensive campaign, orchestrated by public relations pioneer Edward Bernays, to persuade American women to end the Great Depression through consumer purchases. Although the campaign failed, it is historically significant, illustrating how PR and magazines worked together to prescribe women’s roles—a point little explored by feminist historians. While some women read the campaign hegemonically, others resisted its message, even adapting campaign language to suggest alternative plans. Foremost among these, I argue, was Eleanor Roosevelt (ER), whose 1933 book title,
It’s Up to the Women
, is identical to the campaign’s slogan. Attributed to ER alone, the slogan has been reprised in twenty-first-century Democratic presidential campaigns and used elsewhere. Patriotic shopping has also reemerged in recent crises. Although less important to feminists, FDR’s (Franklin D. Roosevelt) famous “fear” line from his First Inaugural address resembles language in
LHJ campaign. Thus, the campaign can be seen not only as a site where the contested nature of women’s roles was played out but one that illustrates how media language can be repurposed to shape changing cultural and political messages.

 

[MollyBeGood]

I think if men should be up in arms about something it should be whether or not they want their penis' mutilated at birth.

That seems like something they need to address.

I know I wouldn't be really happy as a gender if they were cutting off pieces of my privates at birth to fit some kind of cultural "Beauty" standard.

Talk about abuse.

Why does this still happen to men?

 

[BlackPuma]

^ I'd wager that because it happens so early in these people's lives it's not too often looked upon as an inherently bad thing. By the time they're old enough to articulate objection, they've lived with it for their entire lives up until that point. Many will have learned to live with it by then unless the procedure was messed up and caused mutilation.

But you bring up a good point. It's odd that such an invasive and irreversible change is forced upon babies of all people. Sure, it's more painful later in life, as you'll remember it more vividly were one to choose to do it, but it should be people's own choice.

 

[Bronson99]

Men need to realize that there is more to life than sex/(societally approved)success/being a provider.
Feminism changed A LOT of societal expectations toward women but the expectations of men are still basically the same. Or, if you believe in hypergamy, the old expectations are even greater now on men.
Time to move past that.
We may end up with an androgenus society but, oh well. I guess that is the price to pay for everyone to be free of their gender roles.

This. And I don't think there's anything wrong with desiring some of these ideals, even if it doesn't come to pass soon, or ever.

Not enough men can fulfill the mainstream expectations these days, and they lack a voice.

It's about time they start getting their reparations! (ideally)

 

[Kiwong]

Women being encouraged to smoke as a means of empowerment is tragic. The lengths big business will go to exploit, and how easily people can be manipulated is frightening.

I have cracked a solo or two in my time, but I am scared of heights. I'm too much of a sook to be a real solo man.

 

[MollyBeGood]

Absolutely tragic, and yes indeed frightening how easily humans are manipulated. I read a statistic that 85% of the population is subjectable to such things-that's too many!

I also think that people here are the ones that are not.

I was also thinking maybe the reason we are taught to put so much importance on being social is because it's proven so much easier to manipulate crowds, and the individual, the free-thinker is the one who resists and has their intelligence in-tack due to the fact they are not falling for social pressure and propaganda.

Go loners!:bigsmile:

 

[MollyBeGood]

^ I'd wager that because it happens so early in these people's lives it's not too often looked upon as an inherently bad thing. By the time they're old enough to articulate objection, they've lived with it for their entire lives up until that point. Many will have learned to live with it by then unless the procedure was messed up and caused mutilation.

But you bring up a good point. It's odd that such an invasive and irreversible change is forced upon babies of all people. Sure, it's more painful later in life, as you'll remember it more vividly were one to choose to do it, but it should be people's own choice.

I agree it should be a choice what happens to anyone's body. Women and Men alike. Still not sure why they continue to do this in this modern world. Why do we allow it to happen and not even make it an issue? Abortion is an issue and women have a right to their bodies. I guess men's bodies and men's issues are not that important in the scheme of things-who cares about a foreskin. Regardless, it's still genital mutilation of a baby.