This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
Manspreading!?!
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Antifazian
Men often don't move their legs to let someone else sit comfortably though - that's the point. It is more comfortable for everyone to sit with their legs at least slightly open rather than forced together, not just men. It is very common, though, to see a woman sat with her legs together hardly taking up any room, whilst a man has his legs splayed out.
How many men do you know can even do this?
Crossed once at the knee, another crossed over in back of the calf ... just so natural. Won't work for women with bigger thighs like the average man.
Original post by Antifazian
It's supposed to reflect the fact that men are usually far more comfortable than women are, for various reasons, with taking up space in general. We teach women to shrink themselves, they should sit with their legs together, cover up, be quiet, follow others, be deferential, nurturing, never show anger etc. whereas we encourage or accept the opposite traits in men.
Nothing to do with anatomical biology or even that the testes are outside the body so it can be at a lower temp?
Who teaches these women? Who has told you? E.g.s of this happening?
Original post by Antifazian
Plus, there's the fact of sexual violence, cat calling and so on that make it even less comfortable for women being in public space, because for many, these are daily occurrences to different levels of severity.
So the campaign is designed to get you to think about these sorts of things - the different ways that men and women experience public space, and how this can literally reflect in the different ways we therefore tend to take up space, or move around it.
So the campaign is designed to get you to think about these sorts of things - the different ways that men and women experience public space, and how this can literally reflect in the different ways we therefore tend to take up space, or move around it.
I think FGM and other women's issues around the world such as women's rights in countries like Saudi Arabia is much more important than this.
Also, I can't sit legs closed as it is very uncomfortable for my balls (they're a sensitive part of the body), saying that my legs are never that wide lol.
Also, I can't sit legs closed as it is very uncomfortable for my balls (they're a sensitive part of the body), saying that my legs are never that wide lol.
Original post by Dandaman1
It's not because of, I don't know, testicles. Ya'know, those things hanging between our legs that itch and chafe like hell if they're squashed together. Has it not crossed these morons' minds that we sit this way because it happens to be comfortable?
However, before I happily oblige, how about you move your bulky purses and bags onto your laps where they belong, Eh? Where are the awareness campaigns about that, huh?
However, before I happily oblige, how about you move your bulky purses and bags onto your laps where they belong, Eh? Where are the awareness campaigns about that, huh?
Quite. Especially on the last part, I hate that so much.
Original post by Antifazian
Haha, ok. What's your basis for saying it doesn't exist?
Because I could real off endless stats about sexual violence, rape, abuse against women, the glass ceiling, pay gaps, street harassment, the division of household labour and childcare, female genital mutilation, sex trafficking, abortion laws, slut shaming, sexual objectification and over-sexualisation of particularly young girls, and so on - all of these things overwhelmingly disadvantage women. Those are facts. Even where they negatively impact men, as some of these issues do, the figures are tiny when compared to those for women.
So tell me again how there is no patriarchy..?
Because I could real off endless stats about sexual violence, rape, abuse against women, the glass ceiling, pay gaps, street harassment, the division of household labour and childcare, female genital mutilation, sex trafficking, abortion laws, slut shaming, sexual objectification and over-sexualisation of particularly young girls, and so on - all of these things overwhelmingly disadvantage women. Those are facts. Even where they negatively impact men, as some of these issues do, the figures are tiny when compared to those for women.
So tell me again how there is no patriarchy..?
My basis? Well if we want to get purely technical all political power in this country is held by one woman. So we are in that sense a matriarchy. I'll grant that in parliament there are many more male MPs than female ones, but I'm not sure what that really implies in a democracy where everybody has the right to run as an MP, and universal suffrage exists.
I'm not going to address all your points because I simply don't have the time (granted this sounds like a cop out but I really don't care enough to argue this point too much to somebody who isn't going to be persuaded differently to the idea that women are simply downtrodden victims in this society.
I will point out a few things, FGM is illegal male infant circumcision is not, and abortion is completely legal. So I've no idea what your point with these was.
Original post by cake_lover
I think FGM and other women's issues around the world such as women's rights in countries like Saudi Arabia is much more important than this.
Also, I can't sit legs closed as it is very uncomfortable for my balls (they're a sensitive part of the body), saying that my legs are never that wide lol.
Also, I can't sit legs closed as it is very uncomfortable for my balls (they're a sensitive part of the body), saying that my legs are never that wide lol.
Fully agreed.
I clicked the thread with visions of some new horror movie involving a knife and toast... slight disappointment.
... but yeah, I'm a lady and even I know guys spread to make their nuts comfortable. I'd rather them "manspread" than have to keep adjusting their underwear/sweaty nutsacks.
... but yeah, I'm a lady and even I know guys spread to make their nuts comfortable. I'd rather them "manspread" than have to keep adjusting their underwear/sweaty nutsacks.
Original post by Antifazian
How on earth can 'sexism' against men exist in a patriarchy, get real. 
Haven't you grown up yet? Get a friend to help you answer.
1. If patriarchy exists + has existed for years before the present day, then why do women have MORE rights, benefits, privileges?
Patriarchy is responsible for instituting this which women enjoy & profit from.
2. Why did patriarchy give women the vote & not get the police to crush them?
3. If this oppressive patriarchy exists, why have women been allowed to infiltrate it? Living longer, affirmitive action in Politics until 2025 (H. Harman), paying only 28% of taxes, yet using the majority of Govt. benefits.
Where in history have the dominant Masters been in a worse situation than their Slaves?
"In fact, if the patriarchy does indeed exist, it seems that it is more concerned with women and their rights, well-being, and demands than they are with their own gender."
In society there is good & bad people.
- When women are the perps there is a call for mental problems, whilst men get jailed more & an imbalance in the number of women reaching Court compared with men, as more women than are issued with pre-court sanctions.
- When women suffer there is plenty of help (social & financial), when men suffer there is v little help available. That Kills & Damages men which affect women & children, when it can be fixed.
In areas of life expectancy, education, employment, social divide, work life choices, violence, avoidable death, drink and drugs, mental & sexual health.
Who are these people trying to control men?
Edit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sSdojKQKng&t=9m0s (hopefully starts at 9 minutes) Feminists push the idea of a social construct, so women can't be blamed for their nature & since we live in a supposedly patriachy men are ultimately responsible for the worst female behaviour in society. As Bax wrote in 1913 about Feminism Always the "Injured Innocent"!
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Antifazian
You're totally wrong, look through here and there are loads of stories about women being sexually assaulted on trains/metros/the underground, as well as on the street in broad daylight - http://everydaysexism.com/
Most of these submissions are from women in Europe or America.
Men wanking on them, feeling them up etc. You have absolutely no idea what women go through on a daily basis, these are not unusual occurrences. The women are there telling you exactly what they have experienced, and you just go 'grow up, that doesn't happen'. Only an idiot ignores the evidence just because it contradicts their narrow view of the world. You are male, you have no idea what happens to women so stop acting as if you have a clue. If you think all these problems only exist in Saudi Arabia you need to pull your head out of the sand and start listening to the people who actually experience it.
You have pulled the link to extroversion out of nowhere, there is nothing to say that extroversion/introversion is a factor. We are talking about gender, so stay on topic.
Most of these submissions are from women in Europe or America.
Men wanking on them, feeling them up etc. You have absolutely no idea what women go through on a daily basis, these are not unusual occurrences. The women are there telling you exactly what they have experienced, and you just go 'grow up, that doesn't happen'. Only an idiot ignores the evidence just because it contradicts their narrow view of the world. You are male, you have no idea what happens to women so stop acting as if you have a clue. If you think all these problems only exist in Saudi Arabia you need to pull your head out of the sand and start listening to the people who actually experience it.
You have pulled the link to extroversion out of nowhere, there is nothing to say that extroversion/introversion is a factor. We are talking about gender, so stay on topic.
Well in that case I suggest you focus your minds on the sort of sexual offenders who apparently do this stuff, rather than innocent men sitting on the train to work in the natural male sitting position. Feminists continue to create ridiculous campaigns that lump normal men going about their daily business in with serious sex offenders.
Sitting position, I will reiterate, is a sex difference due to the difference in alignment of our hips and is thus a very poor metric for measuring who is confident enough to occupy space and who is not. Women are also at a physical disadvantage when people are packed in close because they are smaller and weaker, but men will usually ensure they can at least make their way off the train.
This is all due to our physical differences and has not the slightest thing to do with women apparently being brought up to be meek and demure. My point in talking about introversion was to highlight that some men and some women are brought up in each different way. I would have thought number of siblings would be the main environmental factor in whether people could make their voices heard or not.
Original post by Antifazian
How on earth can 'sexism' against men exist in a patriarchy, get real.
This attitude is revolting. Any kind of discrimination can exist against any group of people in any environment, and you claiming that it's ok in a 'patriarchy' is a selfish and arrogant excuse for your own hypocrisy and sexism.
Original post by Auschwitz FC
I don't think the video is implying that it's sexual domination. It's implying that it's not a good use of crowded cramped spaces.
Original post by SHallowvale
At what point did the video say either of those things?
It's not put that way specifically in this video, but it's a running theme elsewhere in the campaign and among its supporters. The video posted here isn't the whole thing (sorry).
Original post by Dandaman1
However, before I happily oblige, how about you move your bulky purses and bags onto your laps where they belong, Eh? Where are the awareness campaigns about that, huh?
Please, you're talking as though the majority of women's clothing has any decently sized pockets. As though when men have backpacks they don't leave their bulky luggage on seats. Hey, how about we swap jackets? Then I'll be the one happily obliging.
Original post by gohohome
Please, you're talking as though the majority of women's clothing has any decently sized pockets. As though when men have backpacks they don't leave their bulky luggage on seats. Hey, how about we swap jackets? Then I'll be the one happily obliging.
This final comment was made somewhat in jest, and yes, it can apply to men too. Nevertheless, I find women to be guilty of this more often than men are. I'm not saying don't have purses/bags; just try not to spread them out all over the seats around you.
We have 3 legs, need the extra room.
Original post by rad_student
How many men do you know can even do this?
Crossed once at the knee, another crossed over in back of the calf ... just so natural. Won't work for women with bigger thighs like the average man.
Nothing to do with anatomical biology or even that the testes are outside the body so it can be at a lower temp?
Who teaches these women? Who has told you? E.g.s of this happening?
Will women ladyspreading reduce sexual violence, cat calling? If so then we should have ads telling women to splay, not men to close?
Crossed once at the knee, another crossed over in back of the calf ... just so natural. Won't work for women with bigger thighs like the average man.
Nothing to do with anatomical biology or even that the testes are outside the body so it can be at a lower temp?
Who teaches these women? Who has told you? E.g.s of this happening?
Will women ladyspreading reduce sexual violence, cat calling? If so then we should have ads telling women to splay, not men to close?
No one teaches, as a woman you cannot ignore this stuff because you deal with it everyday.
I never implied that 'ladyspreading' would solve sexual violence, I said that 'manspreading' was a reflection of the different ways in which men and women experience public space.
Original post by limetang
My basis? Well if we want to get purely technical all political power in this country is held by one woman. So we are in that sense a matriarchy. I'll grant that in parliament there are many more male MPs than female ones, but I'm not sure what that really implies in a democracy where everybody has the right to run as an MP, and universal suffrage exists.
I'm not going to address all your points because I simply don't have the time (granted this sounds like a cop out but I really don't care enough to argue this point too much to somebody who isn't going to be persuaded differently to the idea that women are simply downtrodden victims in this society.
I will point out a few things, FGM is illegal male infant circumcision is not, and abortion is completely legal. So I've no idea what your point with these was.
I'm not going to address all your points because I simply don't have the time (granted this sounds like a cop out but I really don't care enough to argue this point too much to somebody who isn't going to be persuaded differently to the idea that women are simply downtrodden victims in this society.
I will point out a few things, FGM is illegal male infant circumcision is not, and abortion is completely legal. So I've no idea what your point with these was.
I presume you are referring to the Queen, in which case you are completely wrong, she is more of a figure head and has very little 'political power' at all.
Women are not downtrodden victims, that's not my point, but there are huge disadvantages in society, such as having to deal with those issues I listed. Try to think for a moment about how having to constantly calculate how likely you are to have to deal with sexual violence, cat calling, potential rape, etc. on a daily basis feels like.
FGM is not illegal, nor abortion legal, in all countries. Even in America and parts of Ireland abortion is a contested issue.
Original post by scrotgrot
Well in that case I suggest you focus your minds on the sort of sexual offenders who apparently do this stuff, rather than innocent men sitting on the train to work in the natural male sitting position.
Probably because a lot of these same men are going to be the ones committing sexual violence against women - 'normal', outwardly innocent appearing men are the exact people who are doing this. Rapists, gropers etc. do not hide in alleys and all wear club badges, they are 'normal' men. Our society socialises normal men into violence against women, by seeing them as inferior, sub-human and merely extras in a male life story.
"
Most rapists are "ordinary" men from all classes, professions, ages, nationalities and backgrounds. They are not necessarily psychopaths or mentally ill. Rapists are usually "normal" men who are expressing a commonly accepted male behaviour which reflects a very low regard for women.
A rapist is usually somebody's son, brother, father, husband, trusted friend or best mate - "normal" to those who know him.
Rapists are friends, relatives, neighbours or total strangers. There is no such thing as a particular "type of man" who rapes.
A rapist is usually somebody's son, brother, father, husband, trusted friend or best mate - "normal" to those who know him.
Rapists are friends, relatives, neighbours or total strangers. There is no such thing as a particular "type of man" who rapes.
http://www.brissc.org.au/resources/for/for_3.html
[that violent men are socialised by the ingrained sexism and entrenched masculinity that permeates everything, from our daily interactions all the way up to our highest institutions
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/18/my-wife-was-murdered-by-a-monster-but-most-perpetrators-of-violence-are-normal-guys
Can you tell the difference between a rapist and a men's magazine? Apparently most people couldn't. Does that not seem wrong to you.
http://jezebel.com/5866602/can-you-tell-the-difference-between-a-mens-magazine-and-a-rapist
The reason feminists need to focus on this other stuff is that this stuff, sexism on a mundane level, escalates into the bigger stuff.
Do you know how many women are killed each year by their partners or former partners? These 'normal', apparently innocent men just catching the tube to work each day...
However, in Women’s Aid’s view, domestic violence has to be seen within a context of power and control, which is usually (though not always) gender-based:
http://www.womensaid.org.uk/default.asp
'Counting Dead Women' - http://kareningalasmith.com/counting-dead-women/
My point is not to attack individual men, but to demonstrate that we live in a society that socialises men as a gender group into behaviours that are seriously damaging, even killing, women. This is a fact, this is what is actually happening every day. It is infuriating to see men trying to deny that this even happens, when the evidence is so abundant - if it isn't happening, why are men killing women far, far more than the reverse? Why is sexual violence against, and rape of, women so common? Why is it far less common for men? None of these things are coincidences, this is what patriarchy is.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Friar Chris
This attitude is revolting. Any kind of discrimination can exist against any group of people in any environment, and you claiming that it's ok in a 'patriarchy' is a selfish and arrogant excuse for your own hypocrisy and sexism.
I didn't say that it was ok, I said it didn't exist - let's not start making things up.
There is a huge difference between an act of apparent sexism against a man, in a partiarchal system in which men hold, arguably, all/almost all bastions of power, and an act of sexism against a woman who is statistically highly likely to be raped, sexually assaulted, even killed, by men. I say that sexism against men doesn't exist, because it is not even on a comparable level to that of sexism against women.
Example; if a woman gropes a man in a club, he is highly likely to feel particularly intimidated by this. He is likely physically stronger than her, etc. If a man gropes a woman in a club, she is acutely aware of the fact that he is likely to be strong enough to overpower her if he wishes to. Plus, she will be aware of the fact that violence, especially sexual violence, against women is endemic. The same cannot be said for the man, he is unlikely to face any likely threat from the woman groping him. How can the man's experience be called sexism when it pales in comparison to the woman's?
Original post by Antifazian
Probably because a lot of these same men are going to be the ones committing sexual violence against women - 'normal', outwardly innocent appearing men are the exact people who are doing this. Rapists, gropers etc. do not hide in alleys and all wear club badges, they are 'normal' men. Our society socialises normal men into violence against women, by seeing them as inferior, sub-human and merely extras in a male life story.
"
http://www.brissc.org.au/resources/for/for_3.html
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/18/my-wife-was-murdered-by-a-monster-but-most-perpetrators-of-violence-are-normal-guys
Can you tell the difference between a rapist and a men's magazine? Apparently most people couldn't. Does that not seem wrong to you.
http://jezebel.com/5866602/can-you-tell-the-difference-between-a-mens-magazine-and-a-rapist
The reason feminists need to focus on this other stuff is that this stuff, sexism on a mundane level, escalates into the bigger stuff.
Do you know how many women are killed each year by their partners or former partners? These 'normal', apparently innocent men just catching the tube to work each day...
http://www.womensaid.org.uk/default.asp
'Counting Dead Women' - http://kareningalasmith.com/counting-dead-women/
My point is not to attack individual men, but to demonstrate that we live in a society that socialises men as a gender group into behaviours that are seriously damaging, even killing, women. This is a fact, this is what is actually happening every day. It is infuriating to see men trying to deny that this even happens, when the evidence is so abundant - if it isn't happening, why are men killing women far, far more than the reverse? Why is sexual violence against, and rape of, women so common? Why is it far less common for men? None of these things are coincidences, this is what patriarchy is.
"
http://www.brissc.org.au/resources/for/for_3.html
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/18/my-wife-was-murdered-by-a-monster-but-most-perpetrators-of-violence-are-normal-guys
Can you tell the difference between a rapist and a men's magazine? Apparently most people couldn't. Does that not seem wrong to you.
http://jezebel.com/5866602/can-you-tell-the-difference-between-a-mens-magazine-and-a-rapist
The reason feminists need to focus on this other stuff is that this stuff, sexism on a mundane level, escalates into the bigger stuff.
Do you know how many women are killed each year by their partners or former partners? These 'normal', apparently innocent men just catching the tube to work each day...
http://www.womensaid.org.uk/default.asp
'Counting Dead Women' - http://kareningalasmith.com/counting-dead-women/
My point is not to attack individual men, but to demonstrate that we live in a society that socialises men as a gender group into behaviours that are seriously damaging, even killing, women. This is a fact, this is what is actually happening every day. It is infuriating to see men trying to deny that this even happens, when the evidence is so abundant - if it isn't happening, why are men killing women far, far more than the reverse? Why is sexual violence against, and rape of, women so common? Why is it far less common for men? None of these things are coincidences, this is what patriarchy is.
Yes, I've heard it all before. The fact that rapists do not walk around with a huge sign on their forehead means any man could be a rapist and therefore women should be afraid of every man they see and join the feminist fold. Modus operandi for cults down the ages.
How about, you know, not persecuting all men just because 0.01% of them will rape someone, and simply bringing rapists to justice when rapes occur?
There is absolutely no reason to connect rape with men sitting on the train in their natural sitting position - do you know how mad you sound trying to say there is a connection?
Basically by saying you can't tell which men are part of the tiny minority of rapists anything any innocent man does he should be bullied for by a feminist campaign. As someone said above it looks like feminists don't like men talking, sitting or breathing.
These women are no better than the disgusting Islamophobes who persecute Muslims because a tiny minority of them are extremists.
Original post by Antifazian
Why is sexual violence against, and rape of, women so common? Why is it far less common for men? None of these things are coincidences, this is what patriarchy is.
Since rape can only be committed by a man that would mean that only 50% of the population could ever be guilty of it. Then we look at the sexual orientation of most men and you will find that around 98% are straight.
The next logical step would be to assume that straight men would rape or assault a member of the opposite sex based on their sexual preference. So we would probably see that 98% of rape happens to women.
It is nothing to do with the patriarchy. It has everything to do with nature.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
