Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AngryRedhead)
    I understand the point you're trying to make but using your own example focusing on ourselves hasn't really worked out for the people suffering in other nations, has it? We have legalised gay marriage but in Pakistan homosexuals are still being executed, aren't they? Therefore your argument that we have to be perfect to be influential is false because homosexuals are still executed in other parts of the world.

    We need to act on issues such as child trafficking, homophobia in those other parts on the world if we want to make a difference.
    Negative! It's not false because we haven't yet pushed on Pakistan with our full diplomatic and economic power, and to try and stop Pakistan from doing such a thing you're taking on Islam itself.

    Secondly it could be argued that we are not YET the perfect bastion of gay-rights, there's still everyday bullying and stigma attached. Moreover you're simplifying my argument about us being perfect to influence others. My main point was really that We should try our best to level the playing field in our own country before we take on any other nations. That has our highest chance of success, but it's not inevitable/imminent. Especially when the illegal nature of homosexuality has been so-long embedded in Pakistan's national psyche as well as it being looked down upon at best and worthy-of-death at worst according to the teachings of Islam which is the national religion of Pakistan.

    We can't start imposing morality on the world when our own record is not very apt. Moreover we should focus on a multinational effort, an effort from groups of nations that have helped (for the most part) nullify these issues in their own countries.

    Finally it's naive to expect us to be capable of changing too much across the world, criminally such as trafficking, well yes we can target that because we have the resources. However ideological issues such as the death penalty, egalitarianism, homosexuality, no matter how right we feel in our opinions of these issues. Are unlikely to change in foreign nations anytime soon. Not unless we applied full economic pressure e.g sanctions, and we might look a bit odd trying to get that through the UN.

    Thank you for replying though and i look forward to seeing your reply of this, it's nice to have an intelligent discussion of this without any name-calling/offensiveness. So thank you for the polite debate.

    Best regards to ya!
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AngryRedhead)
    Okay, so maybe a couple of isolated cases in the western world compared to the suffering that still goes in developing and third world countries. My point is not that sexism against men doesn't happen or that it isn't wrong; I just think it's a little self indulgent (aside from the heinous example above) when there are millions of more severe human rights violations going on in the world
    By that standard the same could be said of feminism.

    Based on what you say we should forget about making things in the uk any more equal until we sort out the rest of the world.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AngryRedhead)
    Do you or do you not agree that the vast majority of world leaders, CEO's, law makers etc are male? Do you or do you not agree that people in these positions wield massive power, influence and responsibility?
    Who gives presidents and prime ministers power?
    It is the people who vote for them.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ethereal World)
    Thanks for quoting me in and yes this is an issue.

    I take two issues with how the OP has started this off though.

    'Real sexism' implies pretty obviously that the sexism woman are complaining about is not 'real' and what men have is worse, so automatically it is advocating for male issues in the same breath as insulting woman's so called issues.

    What I said to you is that talking about men's issues should be a positive-only force. It should be inclusive and respectful of woman's but different and equally important issues. Straight away this has gone in at the wrong side of things and it only serves to create the battle with which sex is worse off and ruins the whole mission of achieving equality on both sides.

    Oh and talking about woman's issues or what we seem to be now referring to as feminism should be exactly the same but there are some Instances where men have to be exposed for the resolution of female equality because of the natural dynamic of oppression in the system.

    Both sides should also take into account biological determinism which is something feminism, in general, seems very unaware of.

    I have said recently that I believe that what feminism promotes will create a female version of emasculation where women who do want to carry out their biological role of breeding and investing in children will feel judged and as though they haven't made it in life because they didn't do everything and take on the world and try to be a man. We just need to be respectful of everyone's choices, work together and reduce the real issues that face both sides.

    Most importantly there should be space for men to speak up and I would support them entirely to that measure but speak up and take the upper hand. Don't ***** about feminism and woman to advocate what you're fighting for.
    Yep, as much as I agree that all of OP's points are genuine problems, I hate the idea of calling it "real" sexism. As if anything else is either fake or irrelevant.
    I don't see why it has to always be a pissing contest, like being oppressed is something to be proud of.

    I'm not sure what you mean in the red paragraph, are you saying men should be sometimes be deliberately disadvantaged in the pursuit of womens rights? I might be reading wrong because it goes against the rest of what you've said.

    The rest I agree with fully, especially biological determinism.

    Basically, both sides need to get rid of their extremists so the rational moderates can come together and discuss their thoughts and opinions on what needs to happen.

    By getting rid of radicals on both sides I don't just mean saying "yeah radicals are bad, not all X-movement though".
    They need to challenge the views themselves, those campaigning for male rights need to call out the idiots assuming every rape victim is lying because of a personal agenda (don't confuse this with innocent until proven guilty, that isn't the same thing) ect. Women's rights campaigners, feminists, whatever you want to call them need to call out the radfems calling all men rapists or *****ing about manspreading ect.

    Until then, all discussion is going to devolve into the Oppression Olympics. With either side just flinging **** at each other.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ethereal World)

    Both sides should also take into account biological determinism which is something feminism, in general, seems very unaware of.

    This. Third wave, middle class, white, gender feminism completely dismisses the innate gender differences. I bet in 10 years social ''scientists'' will teach students that testosterone is a socially constructed patriachal myth. Just accepting even a few of them as real (or at least possible in theory) would at least partially explain many of the current ''issues'' : the wage gap, the lifestyle choices, the lack of women in the STEM or company boards, sexual behiavour ...****, even manspreading. It's not exactly a surprise that the most gender equal countries in the world (Sweden, Norway, etc) have some of the most unequal outcomes. You can lead a horse to water...
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minimarshmallow)
    I'll be honest, I skimmed this because it's the same list of things I've seen over and over. The problems are caused by patriarchal gender roles. Feminists are fighting against these oppressive patriarchal gender roles that harm both (and indeed ALL) genders.
    So the patriarchy is sexist against men? As in a male controlled society discriminates against men? How does that work logically, i dont remember Hitler discriminating against Aryans. No system where a single group are in control negatively affects that individual group. Why on earth would a system that benefits men sentence them for longer?

    Also what to gender roles have to do with anything that was brought up on this thread.

    Some of these are legitimate points some are more a case of thats how life works get used to it but people advocating mens rights need to be careful not to advocate in the same way of other radicals, MGTOW and MRA has been co-opted by nutters as feminism was and nothing productive gets done in that circumstance.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BENJISAURUS)
    Feminism is the pursuit of equality of the sexes- it encompasses both male and female equality. I believe both fighting for women's equality and fighting for men's equality are two sides of the same coin, and neither should contradict nor interrupt the other.
    No it isn't. It is about women's rights and women's rights alone

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Oh the great irony. Apparently women fighting for their rights is abhorrent because we live in a meritocracy or something, but men fighting for their rights is fine.

    Sort it out mra, either both men and women can campaign for their rights or neither can.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
    They shouldn't, but feminism is inherently woman-focused and much of the modern feminist movement seems decidedly anti-masculinity and hostile towards men in general, which doesn't breed any kind of aid to equality.
    Far more of the mens movement is hostile to women...
    Unlike mra thiugh feminism has actually achieved a lot.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
    I just don't see any attempt to reshape the movement as being potentially successful; it seems too dogmatic and aggressive.
    What has it really done for men's rights and awareness of male issues though? I agree that a united movement is a positive thing, but the current one seems too toxic to be transformed in such a way as to effect this.
    It's done a lot for men in challenging gender stereotypes. Challenging the idea that men must be masculine and macho. Mental health awareness too, whereas mra say its unacceptable to show emorione, feminism has encouraged people to speak out when they are upset and seek help, rather than being ashamed for being upset or unmacho.

    The mra would have you believe men showing emotion is weakeness.and that harms men.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I agree.

    men are legally inferior to women in the UK (and there are ways in which culturally they are as well)
    and it's the same in many western nations
    sure women are often legally inferior in countries like the middle east, but *this isn't the middle east*
    you can't tell me that men aren't legally unequal because women have it worse in the middle east - that's idiotic
    in our own country, in 2016, men shouldn't have this kind of middle eastern-esque status regarding their gender.
    we're meant to know better than those repressive degenerative middle eastern cultures/governments. we're meant to be the enlightened and liberated ones.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    I agree.

    men are legally inferior to women in the UK (and there are ways in which culturally they are as well)
    and it's the same in many western nations
    sure women are often legally inferior in countries like the middle east, but *this isn't the middle east*
    you can't tell me that men aren't legally unequal because women have it worse in the middle east - that's idiotic
    in our own country, in 2016, men shouldn't have this kind of middle eastern-esque status regarding their gender.
    we're meant to know better than those repressive degenerative middle eastern cultures/governments. we're meant to be the enlightened and liberated ones.
    You're still pretending to care about men while supporting policies that make them worse off and more likely to commit suicide.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    You're still pretending to care about men while supporting policies that make them worse off and more likely to commit suicide.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    what policies am I apparently supporting without my knowledge? is it socialism? *sigh*
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Far more of the mens movement is hostile to women...
    Unlike mra thiugh feminism has actually achieved a lot.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I don't really support the men's movement; I haven't seen much positive from MRA. However it seems quite a fringe thing which doesn't influence much so I don't see much worth in criticising it. MRA isn't doing anything to stop the train of feminism, but I think feminism does make it difficult to speak about men's rights and be taken seriously, unless it's something like "we hate femininity as a society so men can't express their emotions".
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    It's done a lot for men in challenging gender stereotypes. Challenging the idea that men must be masculine and macho. Mental health awareness too, whereas mra say its unacceptable to show emorione, feminism has encouraged people to speak out when they are upset and seek help, rather than being ashamed for being upset or unmacho.

    The mra would have you believe men showing emotion is weakeness.and that harms men.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Perhaps some feminists speak on these issues, but it is always one step forward, one step back; look at the prominence of stuff like "male tears". Feminism panders to and exploits traditional preconceptions of male disposability and female value; it doesn't serve to do away with them. Consider the immediate frenzy to attack men accused of rape and disregard for the consequences. Consider Tim Hunt; I am sure they cared about his emotions a lot. Because he is a man, he can be made an example of; he was disposable. It's all very well saying that men shouldn't have to be stoic and emotionless but it means nothing if they remain expected to be able to take more hardships than women. Feminists complain about how women are harassed online on twitter and the like, while treating the harassment that men get, often just as bad or worse, as trivial. Women show more in-group bias than men, and the feminist movement seems to just reflect this to be honest. A movement claiming to attempt to bring about equality obviously can not be successful if its actions are blatantly reflective of perceptive inequalities, in particular people's immediate wish to always protect the woman over the man, and assumption that men can handle more than women.

    I also think that men showing emotion has never been that taboo. It has always been acceptable in certain contexts, and nobody sane really thinks that men are emotionless or should be. People just don't expect men to be disproportionately emotional, which for the most part is a reasonable expectation of any adult.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
    I don't really support the men's movement; I haven't seen much positive from MRA. However it seems quite a fringe thing which doesn't influence much so I don't see much worth in criticising it. MRA isn't doing anything to stop the train of feminism, but I think feminism does make it difficult to speak about men's rights and be taken seriously, unless it's something like "we hate femininity as a society so men can't express their emotions".
    Partly because mra the representative ; is genuinely full of women haters who spend far more time hating feminism then they do supporting anything connected with men's rights:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    No it isn't. It is about women's rights and women's rights alone

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That's a cool story bro, I liked the part where you backed up your point with all dat intelligent argument and all.

    Modern feminism is an umbrella term, but most would agree that at the core of the feminist agenda is gender equality. If we're talking about gender equality, we're talking about both men and women. We've already touched on this- feminists challenge conventional gender roles, and by doing so help alleviate gender inequalities which negatively affect both men and women.

    More recently, feminism has consciously evolved into something which pretty squarely aims to challenge all forms of inequality. Most feminists nowadays would identify as advocates of LGBTQ+ rights, for example. Sure, feminism might have a focus on women's issues, but that's because on the whole women have it pretty **** compared with men. I'm confident that the majority of feminists are either sympathetic towards or actively involved in tackling issues affecting men.

    My hope is that one day 'feminism' will just become a synonym for 'decent human being', or 'pretty chill motherf*cker'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    **** off stop censoring my ****ing posts
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GonvilleBromhead)
    So the patriarchy is sexist against men? As in a male controlled society discriminates against men? How does that work logically, i dont remember Hitler discriminating against Aryans. No system where a single group are in control negatively affects that individual group. Why on earth would a system that benefits men sentence them for longer?

    Also what to gender roles have to do with anything that was brought up on this thread.

    Some of these are legitimate points some are more a case of thats how life works get used to it but people advocating mens rights need to be careful not to advocate in the same way of other radicals, MGTOW and MRA has been co-opted by nutters as feminism was and nothing productive gets done in that circumstance.
    Men might be better off financially etc. in a patriarchal society, but what about gay men or the gender fluid? What about men who want their mental health to be taken seriously? What about men who can't express themselves freely in such a society? A patriarchal society might benefit some men, but it also puts us in boxes- our roles are predefined for us and pretty narrow. If we step outside these boxes we'll be judged. The only men a patriarchal society benefits are those who conform to traditional gender roles.

    The key thing to recognise with feminism is it's all about the freedom living without inequality affords us all; it's not about getting every woman a high flying STEM career, but to be able to choose to do so without a barrier would be nice. Equally, it's not about bringing men down in the world, but for a man to be a stay at home dad or seek treatment for mental ill health free of any perceived judgement, for example, would be pretty cool too.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BENJISAURUS)
    That's a cool story bro, I liked the part where you backed up your point with all dat intelligent argument and all.

    Modern feminism is an umbrella term, but most would agree that at the core of the feminist agenda is gender equality. If we're talking about gender equality, we're talking about both men and women. We've already touched on this- feminists challenge conventional gender roles, and by doing so help alleviate gender inequalities which negatively affect both men and women.

    More recently, feminism has consciously evolved into something which pretty squarely aims to challenge all forms of inequality. Most feminists nowadays would identify as advocates of LGBTQ+ rights, for example. Sure, feminism might have a focus on women's issues, but that's because on the whole women have it pretty **** compared with men. I'm confident that the majority of feminists are either sympathetic towards or actively involved in tackling issues affecting men.

    My hope is that one day 'feminism' will just become a synonym for 'decent human being', or 'pretty chill motherf*cker'.
    How do women have it pretty *****y?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.