Mens Rights: Do we need a movement

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

Had a poll... poll itself didn't post, tying to find out if men even want reproductive rights. The answer seems to be largely no.

But we started speaking about more general men's rights, domestic violence stats and more. Example to which I'll respond.

evilthecat:

In a minority of cases, women (and some men, because it's not a gender specific defence) have been able to legally defend themselves against charges of criminal violence, including homicide, by citing the effects of battery and demonstrating that they were subject to a pattern of coercive control which impaired their normal judgement.

And I've noted examples of women avoiding responsibility in such cases apparently without such support. The ability to get out of jail free by claiming they'd been battered is power. I think people need to be aware that this happens.

The prevalence of DV in same sex couples in no way impacts on what we know about the effects of battery, because we know that those effects can apply to people of all genders. It has nothing to do with the genders of those involved, and everything to do with the pattern of coercive control.

I would think just the opposite. Because we see similar rates of DV in same sex couples as straight, gender appears to have nothing to do with who can be violent and controlling.

It just so happens that, in heterosexual relationships, men are vastly, vastly more likely to engage in coercive control against women than the reverse. This is not to say that the reverse does not happen, and because both the law and policy research are gender neutral it is perfectly capable of responding to those situations, but they are comparatively rare. Now, the fact that it's comparatively rare doesn't mean noone cares about it. Ask anyone who works in domestic violence prevention and they will probably tell you that there is no such thing as a typical case of abuse, and that it's important to be open minded and vigilant and not to rely on stereotypes. But you need to face the basic statistical inequality, and if you can't do that then you aren't capable of the level of good faith needed for a productive discussion.

"A woman's tongue is the only weapon that gets sharper with use" According to FBI and CDC stats, women engage in this kind of coercive control as often and at every level as men.

So, why don't women earn the same amount of money as men?

Please see the videos of Jordan Peterson. Huge topic in and of itself. Example:

I'm not so sure that men need a movement per se, but an organized group invested in the interests of men in need of aid (I'm thinking in relation to being destitute, and all that can accompany that degree of poverty, like disorders, substance abuse, being victims of violence, etc), that sort of thing makes sense to me.

As long as their are issues that affect large amounts of men, there should be Men's Rights movements. While I certainly have my own issues with how many MRA's seem to define themselves more as fighting against Womens Rights Activists (I couldn't help but notice some of your examples fit this mold) it doesn't change the fact that society still has some issues when it comes to talking about male victims of abuse, homelessness and mental health.

TrulyBritish:
As long as their are issues that affect large amounts of men, there should be Men's Rights movements. While I certainly have my own issues with how many MRA's seem to define themselves more as fighting against Womens Rights Activists (I couldn't help but notice some of your examples fit this mold) it doesn't change the fact that society still has some issues when it comes to talking about male victims of abuse, homelessness and mental health.

It did devolve into that and that is unfortunate. Men are increasingly not going on to secondary education, dropping out of school, dropping out of society, and even killing themselves in record numbers. We cannot get male circumcision outlawed. There is discrimination in family and criminal law against them.

But a lot of these problems are framed in terms of comparisons to women. There is also the likelihood of opposition coming from women's groups when fighting to change the problem.

The strongest single example of which I can think is the fight to get acknowledgement that domestic violence is not a gendered issue. Women initiate violence at every level as men do (estimated 1/4 men start it, 1/4 women, 1/2 no identifiable instigator, just a conflagration). Women are fighting tooth and nail to keep this recognition from happening because pretending it doesn't means the power of victim hood for them.

Um, sure. If you find there are issue in which men need support - and I suspect there are many - then yeah, get a group going. Sounds like good works.

TrulyBritish:
As long as their are issues that affect large amounts of men, there should be Men's Rights movements. While I certainly have my own issues with how many MRA's seem to define themselves more as fighting against Womens Rights Activists (I couldn't help but notice some of your examples fit this mold) it doesn't change the fact that society still has some issues when it comes to talking about male victims of abuse, homelessness and mental health.

Feminists have actually had to fight against the MRA's to be able to make it okay for men to talk about their emotions, seek help for abuse, and for men to be able to redefine what it means to be male due to many MRA's seeing that as an attack on Men when it is an attack on Toxic Masculinity. Many MRA's seem to find the very idea of Toxic Masculinity as a being an attack on Men when it is the primary obstacle men have to overcome in society in order to change the view of " men being weak for being like women"

Feminists have done quite a bit for Men's rights:
https://mic.com/articles/88277/23-ways-feminism-has-made-the-world-a-better-place-for-men#.99nuRli04

Gorfias:

TrulyBritish:
As long as their are issues that affect large amounts of men, there should be Men's Rights movements. While I certainly have my own issues with how many MRA's seem to define themselves more as fighting against Womens Rights Activists (I couldn't help but notice some of your examples fit this mold) it doesn't change the fact that society still has some issues when it comes to talking about male victims of abuse, homelessness and mental health.

It did devolve into that and that is unfortunate. Men are increasingly not going on to secondary education, dropping out of school, dropping out of society, and even killing themselves in record numbers. We cannot get male circumcision outlawed. There is discrimination in family and criminal law against them.

But a lot of these problems are framed in terms of comparisons to women. There is also the likelihood of opposition coming from women's groups when fighting to change the problem.

The strongest single example of which I can think is the fight to get acknowledgement that domestic violence is not a gendered issue. Women initiate violence at every level as men do (estimated 1/4 men start it, 1/4 women, 1/2 no identifiable instigator, just a conflagration). Women are fighting tooth and nail to keep this recognition from happening because pretending it doesn't means the power of victim hood for them.

The biggest obstacle to getting male circumcision outlawed is male dominated institutions preventing them from having the power to do so. The problem is it should not be framed in terms of comparisons to women but instead look at how and why these things are to be able to address those preventing them from changing. You have to go after those in power that are forcing those roles upon men to be able to address the issue. It is not Women that are preventing these things from changing, it is overwhelmingly men.

Women's groups have done quite a bit to HELP men's rights in these areas, it is other men that are the biggest obstacle here, not women. You are terribly misunderstanding if you think that women are not acknowledging that men can be victims of abuse. They very much are:

https://everydayfeminism.com/2015/12/facts-male-rape-survivors/

https://everydayfeminism.com/2015/09/stop-joking-about-men-raped-by-women/?utm_source=Everyday+Feminism+Subscription&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=af4f2a274b-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_term=0_d19c2176ed-af4f2a274b-90994361

https://everydayfeminism.com/2014/08/male-rape-no-laughing-matter/?utm_content=buffer3b71d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

However, the issue here is that the overwhelming majority of domestic violence incidents that result in hospitalization or death are from men abusing someone either male or female. Men are killing both men and women for the most part and on an extreme level that must be decreased. Once they start to address and reduce that drastically, they can then focus on the other issues. Right now, they are putting what little resources they have towards trying to save lives. If you take resources from that to direct elsewhere, more people will die. That is not something they are capable of doing at this time. If you want them to be able to get to it sooner, get them more resources and help reduce the number of males and females being killed by men first. They are targeting the most serious issue first, sort of like we do in the ER, we take the most life threatening cases first, everyone else has to wait longer. If you want to reduce the wait, give them more resources to work faster.

The nonsense about "victim hood" is just that, it is make believe. Women just want the abuse to stop. No one wants to be a victim. To even suggest such is promoting ignorance of the situation. Due to the extreme lack of resources at the shelter I volunteer at, they only admit women with children who's lives are in terrible danger. Women who have already been harmed and released from the Hospital. They do not want to send these women home to their deaths, which mind you has happened repeatedly when the shelter was full, so they send them to a "compound" with electric fence, barbed wire and armed guards protecting them. Before they added the guard, the man she was hiding there from broke in past the electric fence and barbed wire and was still able to attack her. That is why the guard is now necessary. None of those women who are in that shelter wanted "victim hood" and it is asinine to suggest such they are there to try to stay alive and keep their children alive. Taking any resources from them means someone will die. Greatly reduce those numbers and then we can talk about being able to address anything else. Currently there is not even enough funding to address the life and death situations and far too many people are still dying.

Men are overwhelmingly killing both men and women and due to the sheer numbers, this has to take priority and be addressed before they can even begin to crack into the outliers. We have to deal with the rule before we can get to the exception.

Yes. Though, most of the things causing problems for men are being fought by feminism already.

But there are serious problems being faced by men, that are going ignored by the MRM except when they can attack feminism with them.

Yes, except whenever I try to speak about serious issues men are facing right now like a mental health crisis I just get called a "cuck" by the people who think fighting for men's rights just boils down to calling feminists ugly dykes because they hate women more than they care about men.

CheetoDust:
Yes, except whenever I try to speak about serious issues men are facing right now like a mental health crisis I just get called a "cuck" by the people who think fighting for men's rights just boils down to calling feminists ugly dykes because they hate women more than they care about men.

The worst part of the current mental health crisis is we have to change the mindset that "mental health" means to lock those who do not conform in padded cells while they continue to go on and turn the pressure up on Men for not being "Men". Much of the Mental Health push by male dominated institutions is the opposite of help, instead it is to tag, target and dispose of those who they see as a "Threat" instead of trying to genuinely help people work through issues and reduce their stress and help them cope and succeed.

We have to focus on the causes within society itself that is increasing their stress and provide the people with better tools to be able to not only survive but to thrive. This also means to address institutionalized toxic masculinity and actually provide resources to help the people rather than just utilize resources to increase their stress by targeting them further.

People should be aware that there are serious issues involved here in regards to these institutions as they are privatized and often they do not keep people for that person's health, but instead to milk their funding. People need to understand the very real danger involved here.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/rosalindadams/intake?utm_term=.iigE2VXx6#.wvXlNJdra

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/legislators-warned-of-patient-abuse-potential-fraud-in-50-billion-for-profit-psychiatric-behavioral-market-300575229.html

Yes, that is correct, locking up people who should not even be there just to fill beds and bill their insurer. This is a very serious issue in the US and far more common than people realize.

I am very concerned that the recent push for "better mental health" by those who ALSO push "For profit mental health hospitals" only means to lock up people and ruin their lives to line their pocketbooks. People need to understand that " better mental health" should not be focused on mental health facilities in the US, due to at this time, sadly, they are not likely there for the patients well being. Actual " better Mental Health" should be combination of resources to reduce stress inducers within society and access to support structures, medical treatment and medication needed.

As everyone else has said, yes. But it needs to be a parallel movement to the feminist movement, not in opposition. From what I remember there's 1 Male Domestic Abuse center in the nation, compared to the hundreds for women. We need every single one of those hundreds of women sites. Don't close a one. But open as many male sites.

The help-men movement should be a different side of the same coin to the help-women movement. The two should exist not just in harmony, but in open support.

Lil devils x:

The biggest obstacle to getting male circumcision outlawed is male dominated institutions preventing them from having the power to do so.

No argument here.

However, the issue here is that the overwhelming majority of domestic violence incidents that result in hospitalization or death are from men abusing someone either male or female.

Is this true? I don't think 1/3 male victims of DV in hospitals or dead = over whelming though I do think men better at violence.

many MRA's seeing that as an attack on Men when it is an attack on Toxic Masculinity.

I've written before that the term itself is an attack on men. In a world where we are supposed to "ban bossy" as a term that undermines girls desires to fight for top employment positions, you'd think people would know not to use that term around 5 year old boys. And stop telling straight men that their sexually adoring the very sight of marriageable women is "objectification" that must be stamped out. What we can do is start using less hostile and shaming terms to advance a war on men. For instance, I think aggression tends to be a good, constructive thing. Mis-placed aggression that leads to criminal violence is the bad thing. Focus on that rather than labeling men bad.

Silentpony:
As everyone else has said, yes. But it needs to be a parallel movement to the feminist movement, not in opposition. From what I remember there's 1 Male Domestic Abuse center in the nation, compared to the hundreds for women. We need every single one of those hundreds of women sites. Don't close a one. But open as many male sites.

The help-men movement should be a different side of the same coin to the help-women movement. The two should exist not just in harmony, but in open support.

They actually do not need as many male domestic abuse shelters as they do female due to not as many men actually needing them. What they have been doing however, is putting men up in Hotel rooms since it is actually more cost efficient to do that for the few men seeking help so in reality the Men have better accommodations than the women. In the women's facilities, they are often so full, not only are they packed into bunk beds sleeping in the same beds with their children, but at our shelter here they have 8 families ( yes families not people as the women sleep in a single sized bunk with their children and another family above them) in one room, and then we still have women sleeping on makeshift beds made of trash bags full of clothing in the hallways to try and fit as many as possible in and still have to turn people away.

One of the primary reasons that there are not as many males looking to stay in domestic abuse shelters is men usually have a place to stay or financial means to stay somewhere of their choosing. Women are frequently held captive by men in their homes and prevented access to any financial resources to allow them to flee. The men's and the women's situations are usually very different, so do not require the same resources to address. Due to actual demand there would never be need for as many male domestic abuse shelters as there are need for women's. It would instead create a situation where men's shelters would be empty and they would still be leaving many women to be killed in the process who were turned away due to lack of space.

The other issue is that the condition the women arrive at the shelter is usually far worse than men. The women are released from the hospital with terrible injuries from their spouse trying to literally kill them. They have burns, broken bones, terrible bruises and other injuries that must be cared for. We are not seeing anywhere near that level when it comes to the men. That is far more rare.

Gorfias:

Lil devils x:

The biggest obstacle to getting male circumcision outlawed is male dominated institutions preventing them from having the power to do so.

No argument here.

However, the issue here is that the overwhelming majority of domestic violence incidents that result in hospitalization or death are from men abusing someone either male or female.

Is this true? I don't think 1/3 male victims of DV in hospitals or dead = over whelming though I do think men better at violence.

many MRA's seeing that as an attack on Men when it is an attack on Toxic Masculinity.

I've written before that the term itself is an attack on men. In a world where we are supposed to "ban bossy" as a term that undermines girls desires to fight for top employment positions, you'd think people would know not to use that term around 5 year old boys. And stop telling straight men that their sexually adoring the very sight of marriageable women is "objectification" that must be stamped out. What we can do is start using less hostile and shaming terms to advance a war on men. For instance, I think aggression tends to be a good, constructive thing. Mis-placed aggression that leads to criminal violence is the bad thing. Focus on that rather than labeling men bad.

That is a false equivalency. Bossy =\= toxic masculinity. Both men and women can be bossy, just usually women are criticized for doing so and men are rewarded. Toxic masculinity on the other hand is not a "war on men" at all, and if you think that it is critical of straight men, you lack an understanding of the word or the reason why it should be used. Men have to address men for them to progress men's rights and it starts with addressing the harmful behaviors imposed on men by men, which IS Toxic masculinity.

That is not an attack on straight men. Instead it is saying that straight men can be emotional, can be however they choose to be and not have to live up to " what it means to be a Man" nonsense. ALSO not every straight man is a sleeze. Yes, it is okay to admire a woman's body, as well as her mind, personality and accomplishments. Where Toxic masculinity comes into it is when a man admires a woman's achievements, other men ridicule them for it instead.

ag?gres?sion
əˈɡreSHən/Submit
noun
hostile or violent behavior or attitudes toward another; readiness to attack or confront.

You see this as a good thing? Do not confuse aggression with assertiveness. I am sitting here with a few males right now that do not see " toxic Masculinity" as an attack on men, but they actually understand that it is the " toxic masculinity" that is the attack on men, not calling it what it is.

Definately, but they need to be more serious than the current MRA's most of which seem to mainly revolve around arguing with women's rights activists rather than fighting for their own cause or spreading awareness. Currently even societies where women's rights and LGBT rights have gotten far share a common problem when it comes to men's rights. I think men have made a lot of progress, particularly since 1968 by combatting 50s patriarchal culture. Men today can be involved in raising their children without being stigmatized. The traditional ideal of masculinity idealizes an unhealthy form of stoicism which results in many men not being open about their feelings. Because men are told by society to be 'tough' they end up not telling people about their problems, hence the higher suicide rate.

Lil devils x:

That is a false equivalency. Bossy =\= toxic masculinity.

Rather than false, I think it spot on. I repeat: telling a five year old boy that the most basic aspects of his personality are evil is going to have negative consequences.

Yes, it is okay to admire a woman's body, as well as her mind, personality and accomplishments.

I agree with this statement but know that there are whole schools of Feminist thought that disagrees with us. There is a real initiative out there to change men's sexuality into, I do not know what.

Aggression:
hostile or violent behavior or attitudes toward another; readiness to attack or confront.

You see this as a good thing? Do not confuse aggression with assertiveness. I am sitting here with a few males right now that do not see " toxic Masculinity" as an attack on men, but they actually understand that it is the " toxic masculinity" that is the attack on men, not calling it what it is.

Also "a forceful action or procedure (such as an unprovoked attack) especially when intended to dominate or master " The "unprovoked" part was added. Without it, you have a statement about a quality than can be helpful in war, sports, scholastic endeavors and business.

CyanCat47:
Definately, but they need to be more serious than the current MRA's most of which seem to mainly revolve around arguing with women's rights activists rather than fighting for their own cause or spreading awareness. Currently even societies where women's rights and LGBT rights have gotten far share a common problem when it comes to men's rights. I think men have made a lot of progress, particularly since 1968 by combatting 50s patriarchal culture. Men today can be involved in raising their children without being stigmatized. The traditional ideal of masculinity idealizes an unhealthy form of stoicism which results in many men not being open about their feelings. Because men are told by society to be 'tough' they end up not telling people about their problems, hence the higher suicide rate.

I hope to end joint income tax filing and have laws regarding direct deposit. Right now, my pay goes into a joint account. I'd require deposits go to an individual accounts in an effort to steer men who are in marital relationships into greater financial autonomy.

I would fight to have the first Amendment over-ride affirmative action, allowing men and women, girls and boys, to have their own spaces IF they so choose.

I think boys and girls learn differently. I would allow for them to have separate public schools. At this time, I think there is a war on boys in our public schools. I want them free to be the best possible versions of themselves.

There's a ton of work to do out there.

Gorfias:

Lil devils x:

That is a false equivalency. Bossy =\= toxic masculinity.

Rather than false, I think it spot on. I repeat: telling a five year old boy that the most basic aspects of his personality are evil is going to have negative consequences.

Yes, it is okay to admire a woman's body, as well as her mind, personality and accomplishments.

I agree with this statement but know that there are whole schools of Feminist thought that disagrees with us. There is a real initiative out there to change men's sexuality into, I do not know what.

Aggression:
hostile or violent behavior or attitudes toward another; readiness to attack or confront.

You see this as a good thing? Do not confuse aggression with assertiveness. I am sitting here with a few males right now that do not see " toxic Masculinity" as an attack on men, but they actually understand that it is the " toxic masculinity" that is the attack on men, not calling it what it is.

Also "a forceful action or procedure (such as an unprovoked attack) especially when intended to dominate or master " The "unprovoked" part was added. Without it, you have a statement about a quality than can be helpful in war, sports, scholastic endeavors and business.

First of all, I work with Children daily. That is my choice field of study. A five year old boys basic aspects of his personality are not Toxic Masculinity, and it is a misrepresentation to suggest it is. A five year old boy is emotional, open about their feelings and has not necessarily had Toxic Masculinity imposed upon them. Yes, they could have had it imposed upon them if they live in a household where they try to force those things on their children, however, in homes that do not their children have no issue with being open with their emotions or playing dress up or with dolls or trucks. That is just it, they can do what they want rather than have someone telling " no that is bad for boys that is for girls" Toxic masculinity is imposed upon them and taught, not inherent.

Gorfias:
At this time, I think there is a war on boys in our public schools.

Okay I'll bite.

Why do you think that?

undeadsuitor:

Gorfias:
At this time, I think there is a war on boys in our public schools.

Okay I'll bite.

Why do you think that?

Thank you for biting. It's an important topic.

For starters: https://www.amazon.com/War-Against-Boys-Misguided-Policies/dp/1501125427/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1527524398&sr=8-1&keywords=the+war+on+boys

Things you've likely heard:

Record amounts of drugging boys in grade school;
A move away from grades based upon test results that boys do well in, to homework, the they do less well;
Less recess at which they can expend energy;
poorer and poorer academic achievements, lower and lower college participation, suicide rates up and more.

A lot of anecdotes too. One where a woman teacher snatches a little boy up while he was playing with Legos hissing, "boys already have too many advantages".

EDIT: Please note that MRAS like Paul Elam do say Sommers real position is less about helping boys than making them better utilities for women. Dunno how correct he is or not.

Lil devils x:

First of all, I work with Children daily. That is my choice field of study. A five year old boys basic aspects of his personality are not Toxic Masculinity, and it is a misrepresentation to suggest it is. A five year old boy is emotional, open about their feelings and has not necessarily had Toxic Masculinity imposed upon them. Yes, they could have had it imposed upon them if they live in a household where they try to force those things on their children, however, in homes that do not their children have no issue with being open with their emotions or playing dress up or with dolls or trucks. That is just it, they can do what they want rather than have someone telling " no that is bad for boys that is for girls" Toxic masculinity is imposed upon them and taught, not inherent.

I think overt efforts to subvert the natural tenancies of boys will harm them and I keep seeing evidence that this is happening.

Lil devils x:

CheetoDust:
Yes, except whenever I try to speak about serious issues men are facing right now like a mental health crisis I just get called a "cuck" by the people who think fighting for men's rights just boils down to calling feminists ugly dykes because they hate women more than they care about men.

The worst part of the current mental health crisis is we have to change the mindset that "mental health" means to lock those who do not conform in padded cells while they continue to go on and turn the pressure up on Men for not being "Men". Much of the Mental Health push by male dominated institutions is the opposite of help, instead it is to tag, target and dispose of those who they see as a "Threat" instead of trying to genuinely help people work through issues and reduce their stress and help them cope and succeed.

I think you will find that "tag, target and dispose" is still very much a mainstay of modern medicine - certainly in the mental health area. Of course, you need to be a patient and usually a long-term one to recognise this. Doctors and health professionals will not acknowledge it (any why would they when they are the main beneficiaries?).

Lil devils x:

Gorfias:

Lil devils x:

That is a false equivalency. Bossy =\= toxic masculinity.

Rather than false, I think it spot on. I repeat: telling a five year old boy that the most basic aspects of his personality are evil is going to have negative consequences.

Yes, it is okay to admire a woman's body, as well as her mind, personality and accomplishments.

I agree with this statement but know that there are whole schools of Feminist thought that disagrees with us. There is a real initiative out there to change men's sexuality into, I do not know what.

You see this as a good thing? Do not confuse aggression with assertiveness. I am sitting here with a few males right now that do not see " toxic Masculinity" as an attack on men, but they actually understand that it is the " toxic masculinity" that is the attack on men, not calling it what it is.

Also "a forceful action or procedure (such as an unprovoked attack) especially when intended to dominate or master " The "unprovoked" part was added. Without it, you have a statement about a quality than can be helpful in war, sports, scholastic endeavors and business.

First of all, I work with Children daily. That is my choice field of study. A five year old boys basic aspects of his personality are not Toxic Masculinity, and it is a misrepresentation to suggest it is. A five year old boy is emotional, open about their feelings and has not necessarily had Toxic Masculinity imposed upon them. Yes, they could have had it imposed upon them if they live in a household where they try to force those things on their children, however, in homes that do not their children have no issue with being open with their emotions or playing dress up or with dolls or trucks. That is just it, they can do what they want rather than have someone telling " no that is bad for boys that is for girls" Toxic masculinity is imposed upon them and taught, not inherent.

This is ridiculous. If you work with children you must know that natural, biological tendencies kick in at different times. A 5 year old child isn't interested in sex but that doesn't mean he won't be at age 15. That will usually happen whether or not an interest in sex is imposed on him.

It seems to me that "toxic masculinity" is sometimes used as code for "masculinity that some women dislike".

I think a movement to focus on men's issues and actually fund think tanks and facilities to aid them would be a great idea.

Shame all we have right now is trad-con cheerleading and organized female bashing.

CheetoDust:
Yes, except whenever I try to speak about serious issues men are facing right now like a mental health crisis I just get called a "cuck" by the people who think fighting for men's rights just boils down to calling feminists ugly dykes because they hate women more than they care about men.

I see I'm not alone in that experience.

Gorfias:

Record amounts of drugging boys in grade school;

The overuse of medicine to treat kids for assumed ADHD is appalling, but I can't seem to find anything to say that's something that only happens to boys.

A move away from grades based upon test results that boys do well in, to homework, the they do less well;

The reliance on homework to shove studies into students to prepare them for an assault of standardized testing is appalling, but that's not something that only affects boys.

Not to mention, this is just flat out wrong as the amount of standardized testing thrown at kids is only increasing, meaning that if boys excelled in testing they wouldn't be doing worse.

Less recess at which they can expend energy;

The removal of recess is appalling, and more than likely has something to do with the aforementioned increase in assumed ADHD cases which is also appalling, is all appalling but is something that isn't limited to boys. Unless you want to claim that little girls don't enjoy recess.

poorer and poorer academic achievements, lower and lower college participation, suicide rates up and more.

Toxic masculinity prohibits men from asking for help in these areas.

If you want to help men and boys, you first need to create a culture where they can ask for help without being seen as less manly for asking.

But you seem to want to eat your cake and have it too so idk

Of course.
If you don't have at least a semi organized movement fighting for your rights at all time, no matter who you are, you'll get those rights abused and even taken away.
For example, there aren't many people fighting for equal treatment in family courts and as a result, many men have had their lives ruined during divorces. Men constantly get raped in prison but it's a topic of jokes to the rest of society (compare that to how the rape of a woman gets treated).
For every rich and powerful man, I can show you 50 homeless ones.
Saying that men's rights doesn't need a movement is honestly very sexist.

undeadsuitor:

Gorfias:

Record amounts of drugging boys in grade school;

The overuse of medicine to treat kids for assumed ADHD is appalling, but I can't seem to find anything to say that's something that only happens to boys.

A move away from grades based upon test results that boys do well in, to homework, the they do less well;

The reliance on homework to shove studies into students to prepare them for an assault of standardized testing is appalling, but that's not something that only affects boys.

Not to mention, this is just flat out wrong as the amount of standardized testing thrown at kids is only increasing, meaning that if boys excelled in testing they wouldn't be doing worse.

Less recess at which they can expend energy;

The removal of recess is appalling, and more than likely has something to do with the aforementioned increase in assumed ADHD cases which is also appalling, is all appalling but is something that isn't limited to boys. Unless you want to claim that little girls don't enjoy recess.

poorer and poorer academic achievements, lower and lower college participation, suicide rates up and more.

Toxic masculinity prohibits men from asking for help in these areas.

If you want to help men and boys, you first need to create a culture where they can ask for help without being seen as less manly for asking.

But you seem to want to eat your cake and have it too so idk

Boys about 3 times to be medicated: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adhd/data.html
It has been pointed out, if there is 20% of a thing (20% of boys diagnosed with this "disorder") then it isn't a disorder. They need to stop this.

And we have to stop using the term, "Toxic Masculinity". It is meant to be offensive. And it is.

The achievement gap is worsening and people are noticing.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/09/why-girls-get-better-grades-than-boys-do/380318/

I am concerned that trying to fix it will be seen as an attack on girls so I suggest a right to have separate gender schools but I've heard that considered an attack as well. Feminists claim if we do that, the boys will get funded and girls neglected. I doubt that would happen.

No.

Men who want equality need to fight for equality for blacks and gays and women etc and they will get their own equality out of it too. That is why it is called 'equality'. It means equal.

And Jordan Peterson is a sexist. Do not use him as a defense cause it only hurts your side.

Yes, and we do have several.
The problem is that advancing Men?s Rights wont work while Toxic Femininity rules this Third Wave Feminism.
Right now, they have the power and hold sway over educational institutions and mainstream media (amongst other things).
They are also helped by the fact that women?s innate go to aggression and conflict resolution skills lies in word and emotion manipulation.
Some old remnants from the 50-100 year old patriarchal traditions are also resistant to change and isn't helped by being seen as the only opposition to the malign Toxic Femininity.

Toxic Femininity?s rise to power have also brought with it a rise in further and deeper divides wherein everything becomes polarized.
So reconciliation becomes harder and harder.

Gorfias:

I hope to end joint income tax filing and have laws regarding direct deposit. Right now, my pay goes into a joint account. I'd require deposits go to an individual accounts in an effort to steer men who are in marital relationships into greater financial autonomy.

Hang on, it's the law that your money has to go into a joint account? That's a bit weird.

Saelune:
No.

Men who want equality need to fight for equality for blacks and gays and women etc and they will get their own equality out of it too. That is why it is called 'equality'. It means equal.

And Jordan Peterson is a sexist. Do not use him as a defense cause it only hurts your side.

I'm a sexist too. I think most people, including women, are sexist. There are many things women would not want to be equal with men in, such as longevity and death rates in jobs and military casualties.

Rather than label people and call them intellectual untouchables, I would encourage you engage their arguments instead.

Baffle2:

Hang on, it's the law that your money has to go into a joint account? That's a bit weird.

Does it need to be? I know if my own life, enforcement of such a deposit scheme (enforce an independent deposit scheme) would have helped me maintain my financial autonomy. As it is, attempts at doing so would be seen as hostile to my wife. So, at times, I've had to go to her and ask for coffee money like I'm 5. I've handed her big bucks or find myself divorce raped. 85% of purchasing decisions are made by women. How do we fix that as, currently, this is tyranny and exploitation. Your advice?

Vendor-Lazarus:

Toxic Femininity?s rise to power have also brought with it a rise in further and deeper divides wherein everything becomes polarized.
So reconciliation becomes harder and harder.

I think social media, which increasingly confirms our biases, is also causing polarization.

For now, we have to keep being vocal to what the issues even are if there is to be any hope of fixing such injustices.

Saelune:
No.

Men who want equality need to fight for equality for blacks and gays and women etc and they will get their own equality out of it too. That is why it is called 'equality'. It means equal.

And Jordan Peterson is a sexist. Do not use him as a defense cause it only hurts your side.

I especially love how he chalks women up as avatars of Chaos, like we live in fucking Warhammer or something...

Gorfias:

Does it need to be? I know if my own life, enforcement of such a deposit scheme (enforce an independent deposit scheme) would have helped me maintain my financial autonomy. As it is, attempts at doing so would be seen as hostile to my wife. So, at times, I've had to go to her and ask for coffee money like I'm 5. I've handed her big bucks or find myself divorce raped. 85% of purchasing decisions are made by women. How do we fix that as, currently, this is tyranny and exploitation. Your advice?

Tell her to get a job? Not being funny either. Me and my wife both work, and I wouldn't accept her not working unless she was able to pay her half of the bills some other way (and I'd expect her to feel the same way if I chose not to work). I mean, I wouldn't divorce her if she lost her job, but I'd start to think about it if she just couldn't be arsed to get another one, because I believe that would be taking the piss.

I don't see how it would have helped you maintain autonomy - your wife is clearly controlling you in some capacity. Your money making a stopover in your own account on its way to the joint account wouldn't make any difference that I can see.

Not sure where your 85% figure comes from, certainly isn't true in my own experience. Maybe you could volunteer to do the shopping? I hate shopping and would love someone to do 85% of it for me.

Gorfias:

And we have to stop using the term, "Toxic Masculinity". It is meant to be offensive. And it is.

Look, if there are parts of masculinity that are directly harmful to men, those parts are toxic end of discussion.

Is it really that hard to acknowledge that encouraging men to bottle up their emotions is bad for them? Maybe so many boys wouldn't shoot up their schools if they had a positive outlet.

Blood Brain Barrier:

Lil devils x:

CheetoDust:
Yes, except whenever I try to speak about serious issues men are facing right now like a mental health crisis I just get called a "cuck" by the people who think fighting for men's rights just boils down to calling feminists ugly dykes because they hate women more than they care about men.

The worst part of the current mental health crisis is we have to change the mindset that "mental health" means to lock those who do not conform in padded cells while they continue to go on and turn the pressure up on Men for not being "Men". Much of the Mental Health push by male dominated institutions is the opposite of help, instead it is to tag, target and dispose of those who they see as a "Threat" instead of trying to genuinely help people work through issues and reduce their stress and help them cope and succeed.

I think you will find that "tag, target and dispose" is still very much a mainstay of modern medicine - certainly in the mental health area. Of course, you need to be a patient and usually a long-term one to recognise this. Doctors and health professionals will not acknowledge it (any why would they when they are the main beneficiaries?).

Lil devils x:

Gorfias:

Rather than false, I think it spot on. I repeat: telling a five year old boy that the most basic aspects of his personality are evil is going to have negative consequences.

I agree with this statement but know that there are whole schools of Feminist thought that disagrees with us. There is a real initiative out there to change men's sexuality into, I do not know what.

Also "a forceful action or procedure (such as an unprovoked attack) especially when intended to dominate or master " The "unprovoked" part was added. Without it, you have a statement about a quality than can be helpful in war, sports, scholastic endeavors and business.

First of all, I work with Children daily. That is my choice field of study. A five year old boys basic aspects of his personality are not Toxic Masculinity, and it is a misrepresentation to suggest it is. A five year old boy is emotional, open about their feelings and has not necessarily had Toxic Masculinity imposed upon them. Yes, they could have had it imposed upon them if they live in a household where they try to force those things on their children, however, in homes that do not their children have no issue with being open with their emotions or playing dress up or with dolls or trucks. That is just it, they can do what they want rather than have someone telling " no that is bad for boys that is for girls" Toxic masculinity is imposed upon them and taught, not inherent.

This is ridiculous. If you work with children you must know that natural, biological tendencies kick in at different times. A 5 year old child isn't interested in sex but that doesn't mean he won't be at age 15. That will usually happen whether or not an interest in sex is imposed on him.

It seems to me that "toxic masculinity" is sometimes used as code for "masculinity that some women dislike".

Doctors and health officials have acknowledged it that was what was in the articles linked above, and considering my degrees are in Pediatric Medicine and Immunology, I have not only been acknowledging this but actively warning people about the issue and trying to get support to have this changed.

I am fully aware of the developmental stages of children to adulthood. I was addressing this quote above in regards to a five year old:

I repeat: telling a five year old boy that the most basic aspects of his personality are evil is going to have negative consequences.

I think you misunderstand what Toxic Masculinity is. "Toxic Masculinity" is not about women, it is about men. Yes, women are impacted by these things as well, but it is most harmful to men. Men are the one's having this imposed upon them against their will by other men. It is harmful to men and it is Men who do not like this being done to them, thus why Men have to address Toxic Masculinity for them to be able to move forward. It is Toxic Masculinity that pressures men to not express emotion, to behave aggressively and violently towards other men, to not participate in child rearing activities, to not participate in what other men see as " women's work" whether it be a stay at home father or a Nurse. Toxic Masculinity is responsible for that thus why it is the primary obstacle that men have to overcome to be able to address the issues impacting men the most.

Yes, there should be Men's rights movement as there are lots of issues in that area.
And yes, it would be nice if it wasn't mired in anti-feminism... just like it would be nice if feminism wouldn't be likewise mired in anti-male attitudes. So long as one exists, the other will continue to exist as well, and this isn't going to change anytime soon as both movements have little motivation to change.

Baffle2:

Tell her to get a job? Not being funny either. Me and my wife both work, and I wouldn't accept her not working unless she was able to pay her half of the bills some other way (and I'd expect her to feel the same way if I chose not to work). I mean, I wouldn't divorce her if she lost her job, but I'd start to think about it if she just couldn't be arsed to get another one, because I believe that would be taking the piss.

I don't see how it would have helped you maintain autonomy - your wife is clearly controlling you in some capacity. Your money making a stopover in your own account on its way to the joint account wouldn't make any difference that I can see.

Not sure where your 85% figure comes from, certainly isn't true in my own experience. Maybe you could volunteer to do the shopping? I hate shopping and would love someone to do 85% of it for me.

This is all over the place:
http://www.luceperformancegroup.com/Women-Consumers-Control-85-percent-Of-Spending-Power___635774267810750931_blog.htm

Quote that for me, is illustrative re: the Nixons:

Pat: I let him recognize China or not. I choose our home, where our kids go to school and where we take vacations.

And believe it: women would resent men trying to change any of this.

undeadsuitor:

Look, if there are parts of masculinity that are directly harmful to men, those parts are toxic end of discussion.

Is it really that hard to acknowledge that encouraging men to bottle up their emotions is bad for them? Maybe so many boys wouldn't shoot up their schools if they had a positive outlet.

Words and intent matter. There are ways to address problems with social expectations of men without insulting them. I think this was meant to insult. Misdirected aggression, which can be gender neutral? Terrific. Toxic Masculinity? It is like it is meant to cause withdrawal by men, which is not good. Men DO have problems. Insulting them does not seem like a cure to me.

Lil devils x:

There is nothing wrong with the term Toxic masculinity.

Then, why use this term if I, and many others, find it offensive and meant to offend? Why not use terms that are less offensive?
I would argue, because the intention is not to fix problems, but to offend. Mission accomplished. I am hurt.

Gorfias:

undeadsuitor:

Gorfias:

Record amounts of drugging boys in grade school;

The overuse of medicine to treat kids for assumed ADHD is appalling, but I can't seem to find anything to say that's something that only happens to boys.

A move away from grades based upon test results that boys do well in, to homework, the they do less well;

The reliance on homework to shove studies into students to prepare them for an assault of standardized testing is appalling, but that's not something that only affects boys.

Not to mention, this is just flat out wrong as the amount of standardized testing thrown at kids is only increasing, meaning that if boys excelled in testing they wouldn't be doing worse.

Less recess at which they can expend energy;

The removal of recess is appalling, and more than likely has something to do with the aforementioned increase in assumed ADHD cases which is also appalling, is all appalling but is something that isn't limited to boys. Unless you want to claim that little girls don't enjoy recess.

poorer and poorer academic achievements, lower and lower college participation, suicide rates up and more.

Toxic masculinity prohibits men from asking for help in these areas.

If you want to help men and boys, you first need to create a culture where they can ask for help without being seen as less manly for asking.

But you seem to want to eat your cake and have it too so idk

Boys about 3 times to be medicated: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adhd/data.html
It has been pointed out, if there is 20% of a thing (20% of boys diagnosed with this "disorder") then it isn't a disorder. They need to stop this.

And we have to stop using the term, "Toxic Masculinity". It is meant to be offensive. And it is.

The achievement gap is worsening and people are noticing.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/09/why-girls-get-better-grades-than-boys-do/380318/

I am concerned that trying to fix it will be seen as an attack on girls so I suggest a right to have separate gender schools but I've heard that considered an attack as well. Feminists claim if we do that, the boys will get funded and girls neglected. I doubt that would happen.

There is nothing wrong with the term Toxic masculinity. The more men discuss how to address it openly the more they progress.

https://www.askmen.com/news/sports/the-rock-talks-mental-health-and-toxic-masculinity.html

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Toxic%20Masculinity

The reality is Toxic Masculinity is toxic TO men, that is why it is addressed as such.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked