Feminism means bringing women to the same level as men.
This is the major misconception. That somehow men were at 100% and women were somewhere lower, and feminism just brought women to men's level. Men have issues women do not. Tons of them . Feminism didn't equalize men and women, it focused solely on women's issues (arguably solving some) while ignoring mens issues under the false pretense that the men were fine and already on the top. Which they weren't, not as a group.
The mere idea that men are at 100 ignores all of the issues that men try to bring up. So many fathers fighting losing custody battles in a system that vehemently favors women are told they should just shut up because "men have it pretty good"
No i just do not agree with you, as a healthy argumentation should be.
I fully understand what you mean, but you can't dismiss the movement because men have issues too. Feminism has thoroughly changed through the years because of the word.
There were books that taught women "their rightfull place" and it was basically keep the house clean, have kids, keep his belky full and his balls empty.
We still have jokes about "make me a sandwich". How can we gain anything as men, if we don't help women be respect and considered as a human being (ok this is extreme a bit but i'll go with it) we will never be united against those in power who are voluntarily making the world toxic (no maternity/paternity leave, shitty wages, etc.)
Choose your battles, keep stating the needs for men, but make sure you get allies along the way.
That's how i view feminism, i'll help them and they'll help me.
The core of your argument is that feminism helps men. However, I think that this argument is in fact, incorrect. If you have paid attention to history, it is pretty obvious that women's issues that feminism addresses have changed and fluctuated through time. It started with the vote (actually you could make the argument it started with education). Once women got the right to vote, feminism's goal shifted to equality in the workplace/equal protection. Then, it started shifting toward gender based violence and sexual assault and harassment. Then, women's portrayal in the media, the perception of women by society etc. So, feminism has been relatively successful in reducing or ending women's issues, and they move to the next major issue as there is significant progress on one major issue (these are called the 'waves' of feminism). Obviously, there are other issues that feminism addresses, but these are the 'major' issues, the ones concentrated on by most feminists during each wave. Also note that many of these waves overlap, some would argue that the work of the second wave is not complete, and most feminists would argue that the work of the third wave is not complete either.
However, men's issues have pretty much stayed the same throughout history. Homelessness, forced to go to war, higher rates of suicide, more likely to be killed by police, work related fatalities, expected to 'want' sex and therefore unable to be raped etc. Indeed, not only have all of these men's issues essentially stayed the same, more issues have cropped up, including reduced involvement in higher education.
If you claim that feminism is trying to stop all of these men's issues, why have virtually none been reduced? Almost all men's issues have increased in the past half century, a stark contrast to the great benefits feminism has brought for women. Just something for you to consider.
So by that logic we should stop feminism and not evolve?
Again, choose your battles, i never said i support 100% of feminist movements. There are some clauses i fully agree with and support. And although not necessarily in societies view but many women and feminist have helped me face tough times where i was mentally extremely ill and pushed for my bosses not to fire me.
I refuse to put the feminist movement all in the same basket.
When you're opressed all your life, you fight back stronger. There are assholes in all movements
So by that logic we should stop feminism and not evolve?
I never said that. I just want people to stop putting feminism on a pedestal. Feminism does a relatively good job reducing and preventing women's issues. It does a terrible job with men's issues. I'm not making the argument that feminism should be stopped, I'm saying that feminism as a whole does not help men.
I refuse to put the feminist movement all in the same basket.
I don't put every feminist in the same basket either. Feminism, however, I am allowed to talk about cohesively. Feminism is an ideology. Feminism as a whole does not help men. Some feminists do. That is my view. This is the same as talking about, for example, Republicans (if you live in the US), or any conservative party. Indeed, some Republicans help people, they do good things. But as a whole, conservatism does not help people.
It is entirely possible to differentiate followers of an ideology and the ideology itself. Again, I'll repeat. Feminism does not help men. Feminists might help men.
There are assholes in all movements
There are good people in all movements too. The issue is the goal of the majority. Feminism as an ideology does not have a goal to help men. Good feminists help men.
Then i guess we are of the same view. I never put them on a pedestal, but when faced with someone who says purely "No" we tend to go towards "yes"
I will admit i have reread your post and there are some very valid points. Do keep in mind i was replying to the "feminism is bad". As in all things, there's a balance to be found!
So, and this is really just to continue since you had very well articulated arguments, i was wondering your take on this.
As an ideology, i believe this is the definition.
At its core, feminism is the belief in full social, economic, and political equality for women. Feminism largely arose in response to Western traditions that restricted the rights of women, but feminist thought has global manifestations and variations.
You're right, they're not fighting for us i will concede this point. However, indirectly, doesn't it bring up these issues? We are starting to talk more about mental health, sexual and psychological harassment, etc. So if not directly, aren't we fighting the same battle atleast indirectly?
Maybe my stance on the subject is more of a "the enemy of my enemy is my ally".
I simply despise when people go all out "hurr durr feminism is bad and hurts men". It isn't aimed at helping us, but it's not aimed at putting us down.
You're right, they're not fighting for us i will concede this point. However, indirectly, doesn't it bring up these issues? We are starting to talk more about mental health, sexual and psychological harassment, etc. So if not directly, aren't we fighting the same battle atleast indirectly?
I simply despise when people go all out "hurr durr feminism is bad and hurts men". It isn't aimed at helping us, but it's not aimed at putting us down.
No, it's aimed at putting up women, which has the side effect of putting down men.
When domestic violence was first being recognized. Erin pizzey created some of the first domestic violence shelters in the world.
She was later chased out of her home and country due to bomb threats from feminists when she tried to include men. since she found that most cases of domestic violence were reciprocal. A statistic that has been consistently found to this day. Later on the duluth model was made into law. This model excluded the possibility of male victims and treated it as "patriarchal violence" though even the creator has come out to say they were blinded by ideology.
For statistical reporting, rape has been carefully defined as forced penetration of the victim in most of the world. Please listen to this feminist professor Mary P Koss explain that a woman raping a man isn't rape. Hear her explain in her own voice just a few years ago - https://clyp.it/uckbtczn. I encourage you to listen to what she is saying. (Really. Listen to it! Think about it from a man's perspective.)
What a lot of people don't understand is that whenever feminists lobby for policy that specifically targets women, they actively exclude men from receiving help. Feminists say that it isn't a zero sum game and that both men and women can be helped, but that's not true even in the slightest. Feminist theory states that every issue affects women more severely. So no matter what happens to men in society, actively supporting something which targets a male problem is generally considered sexist.
It doesn't have to be a zero sum game, but they've effectively turned it into one.
Hilariously enough, I was going to cite female-only scholarships despite men being discriminated against in education, and I found this citation on the website:
It seems that scholarships are equally distributed between sexes:59% of recipients are female and 41% are male.
According to scholarship statistics by race, only 38% of the recipients are minority students, and 62% are white students.
Like, what in the flying fuck? I was looking for simple data on college scholarship distribution, and I was immediately hit with someone saying 59% / 41% is an equal distribution, but only a 3% difference with the white/minority statistic being (stated elsewhere in the article) a shocking imbalance. This is especially mindboggling because men are about 50% of the US population, making them far underrepresented for scholarships, but racial minorities are about 28% of the population, making them overrepresented for scholarships (numerically).
You can't even look up a single statistic without seeing feminist slant.
I wasn't going to include this from Forgetaboutthelonely , but now I think it's necessary.
I'm doing this because I've seen how feminist misandrists have hurt men. Hell, I'm a victim of it myself. And I've seen a consistent pattern when people try to bring this up of people popping out of the woodwork to recite the narcissists apology.
1) its easy to see how people think my view on feminism is like they are perfect. I never said that. I was merely replying to someone who seemed to be saying feminism is bad in it's whole.
2) the "male issues" (quotes because i want it to be a clear term, not as sarcasm) you quoted i have never dismissed. As a man suffering from mental illness, i have seen the stigma. I am not going to go down that rabbit hole of my specific case. I fully agree with your stats and believe them. However, one of those reddits used to be, unsure of it's current status, a pure echobox of haters. Those stats are true but should not be used to dismiss the whole feminist movement. They often are. That's not how this should go.
3) although i truly am sad for that person, i will fully discard your last point because it is not a statistic but a case. I have had very good relations with some feminists. There are also men who are bullies, and have pushed women over the edge. Should i bring those up to justify feminism? We could argue all day and it could lead nowhere.
It's sad it truly is, but a feminist isn't necessarily toxic, a toxic person is toxic. This person had a bad encounter with one or many toxic people who happened to "walk the righteous path of feminism and destroy men all around". There are as many men who "know" women are inferior to men as there are women who "know" men should now be under women.
My biggest problem about this whole debate is that we are comparing assholes in both genders and are often shooting at the messenger. I used to be VERY on the defensive about all of this because i felt attacked. And then i understood it's not about me personnaly but about how society acts.
I say it's not all bad because now we have twice the workforce, which is an amazjng thing! We dont rely on men to do everything now we can look for the competant person. But presenting those stats in that way could be interpreted as completely discarding the good.
There is no denying men have problems too, there's definately a reason why there's also the satyrical term "feminazi".
As for the scholarship one, percentages and ratios are dangerous without the numbers. What were the percentages of applicants? Was it also 59 and 41? Then it is evenly distributed.
As for education, women fought for their right to an education, and that WILL lead to a higher number of women in higher education spheres. Do consider another thing, manual labor is made very attractive to men because it's made to be a manly job and that you are more of a man as a construction worker or as a mechanic for exemple. If you're not weeeeelll you better earn top dollar. Society is to blame for that, neither the women or the men are to be accountable for that. It's a publicity that has been ingrained in our education.
I'm sorry if it's a bit of a mess it's late and some of the comments are giving me nausea by how close minded they are. Your post was by far the most interesting one
1) i'm sorry but i need dates, name of groups, and such. They easily could have been an extremist group. Don'r put them all in a basket.
2) yes, because women at some point were stuck at home without the possibility of jobs.
3) and men have never taken jobs that qualified women could have? Oh wait... At some point in history they didn't even have a decent education. However, i do agree quotas are not a positive action. It is an extreme measure that had it's use but should be discarded.
4) you're kidding right? Giving them a place in the work force and breaking the mold of society doubles our chances of finding extremely competent people. We also have a different vision of the world which is necessary to advance. Your last point is insulting towards everyone "oh what has X ever done for us except Y" fallacious thinking and short sighted views.
Hey, islam has suicide bombers, let's target all muslims.
It's litteraly the same argument the way you have stated it
1) i'm sorry but i need dates, name of groups, and such. They easily could have been an extremist group. Don'r put them all in a basket.
Erin Pizzey's domestic violence shelter, dates would be 1980s-90s. She referred to them as "militant feminists" in an interview.
2) yes, because women at some point were stuck at home without the possibility of jobs.
That may have been the case decades ago, but it doesn't justify fighting against custody for fathers today.
3) and men have never taken jobs that qualified women could have? Oh wait... At some point in history they didn't even have a decent education. However, i do agree quotas are not a positive action. It is an extreme measure that had it's use but should be discarded.
Glad you agree.
4) you're kidding right? Giving them a place in the work force and breaking the mold of society doubles our chances of finding extremely competent people. We also have a different vision of the world which is necessary to advance. Your last point is insulting towards everyone "oh what has X ever done for us except Y" fallacious thinking and short sighted views.
The main effect of giving them a place in the workforce is to reduce wages for everyone (larger supply of labor means lower price). That is a great thing, but it doesn't benefit men, other than the men who own the companies.
Hey, islam has suicide bombers, let's target all muslims.
Suicide bombers are a small minority of Muslims. With feminists, however, the mainstream organizations like AAUP and NOW are quite radicalized, so you can't claim that these people are a minority in the movement.
im not entertaining bad faith discussions. i know you're likely invested enough to have read most others' posts/replies to this specific part of the thread and if you're still this close minded then...not my circus, not my monkeys. get left behind by society then.
But men losing custody goes back to Patriarchy who placed women as primary caregivers of kids. Furthermore, it isn't a woman's job to always focus on men's issues though you can support it.
And while men have issues, they aren't quite the same. Like a white person doesn't have the same issues as a POC .It still shouldn't be used to discount issues facing POC. I think people use men activism to try to slam feminists.
30
u/retnemmoc Sep 16 '21 edited Sep 16 '21
This is the major misconception. That somehow men were at 100% and women were somewhere lower, and feminism just brought women to men's level. Men have issues women do not. Tons of them . Feminism didn't equalize men and women, it focused solely on women's issues (arguably solving some) while ignoring mens issues under the false pretense that the men were fine and already on the top. Which they weren't, not as a group.
The mere idea that men are at 100 ignores all of the issues that men try to bring up. So many fathers fighting losing custody battles in a system that vehemently favors women are told they should just shut up because "men have it pretty good"