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

TSR is a forum where males are more vocal, and abuse/sexism/arrogance is rewarded? Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    I find a couple of things questionable about this. The first is that it seems to be aimed solely at women, and although I understand that women bear the brunt of these issues it's sort of a kick in the teeth to any men who have suffered abuse like that. Maybe the more important issue though is how vague this proposal seems. Who gets to decide what falls under this legislation?
    In my opinion your premise is based on a politically correct popular myth.

    Women are not subject to sexism any more than men are. They simply complain about their lot in life at a disproportionate level. If it is the case that after 40 years of feminist policymaking, women are the unhappiest they have ever been (supported in the literature), to the level where they are so depressedly sensitive that they feel the need to support the criminalisation of minor remarks, the problem is not with the free speech of men but with the failure of feminist policy.

    Secondly, the fundamental problem of this law is not in its implementation but in its sheer Orwellian insanity. We seem to be literally approaching a point where calling my girlfriend sweetheart, or whistling at an acquaintance I am courting, will become a potential criminal offence.

    In my view no reasonable person, man, woman, feminist or antifeminist can abide by such gross totalitarianism. The idea that this is treated respectably in public debate, like you have just demonstrated, suggests there is something deeply wrong in the public mindset and with our democracy.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Foo.mp3)
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...awyer-then-me/. I don't think it good for society, if you read my comments you'll see I think it reflects poorly, but I do think it can help people get ahead in life, hence 'desirable'

    I don't need their sympathy, I need their granddaughters :shakecane:
    I found this recently. It might be of interest to you: http://no-maam.blogspot.co.uk/2012/0...arketplace.htm
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    I find a couple of things questionable about this. The first is that it seems to be aimed solely at women, and although I understand that women bear the brunt of these issues it's sort of a kick in the teeth to any men who have suffered abuse like that. Maybe the more important issue though is how vague this proposal seems. Who gets to decide what falls under this legislation?
    Oh lol you forget that men who get abused are thought to be pussies, just like.men who face anything which is in some way in their control. I hate it too but I don't see it changing anytime soon, certainly.not cos i crx about it
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    Oh lol you forget that men who get abused are thought to be pussies, just like.men who face anything which is in some way in their control. I hate it too but I don't see it changing anytime soon, certainly.not cos i crx about it
    A thoughtful point coherently made.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 41b)
    Secondly, the fundamental problem of this law is not in its implementation but in its sheer Orwellian insanity. We seem to be literally approaching a point where calling my girlfriend sweetheart, or whistling at an acquaintance I am courting, will become a potential criminal offence.

    In my view no reasonable person, man, woman, feminist or antifeminist can abide by such gross totalitarianism. The idea that this is treated respectably in public debate, like you have just demonstrated, suggests there is something deeply wrong in the public mindset and with our democracy.
    Don't be so dramatic. I dislike internet feminism and radical feminism as much as the next person but what you have described is an exaggeration. For a long time yet there will be for women a heightened sensitivity towards sexism, however minor, simply because of their unforgivable social status a hundred, even fifty years ago. That's understandable. I agree that currently the feminist movement is being undermined by extremists who nitpick and who ignore the very obvious biological and psychological differences between men and women that have contributed to our completely normal and desirable gender roles. They have forgotten we are wired differently and they are fixated not on equality but revenge and of a merging of the two very distinct sexes.

    But please, for crying out loud, stop talking of "totalitarianism" when we live in a democracy which is, in general, pushing for fairness - the UK is far from authoritarian. It's just cringe-worthy; your post reads like a GCSE student who just read 1984 and a Grace Dent article.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by macromicro)
    Don't be so dramatic. I dislike internet feminism and radical feminism as much as the next person but what you have described is an exaggeration. For a long time yet there will be for women a heightened sensitivity towards sexism, however minor, simply because of their unforgivable social status a hundred, even fifty years ago. That's understandable. I agree that currently the feminist movement is being undermined by extremists who nitpick and who ignore the very obvious biological and psychological differences between men and women that have contributed to our completely normal and desirable gender roles. They have forgotten we are wired differently and they are fixated not on equality but revenge and of a merging of the two very distinct sexes.

    But please, for crying out loud, stop talking of "totalitarianism" when we live in a democracy which is, in general, pushing for fairness - the UK is far from authoritarian. It's just cringe-worthy; your post reads like a GCSE student who just read 1984 and a Grace Dent article.
    Oh really.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    it's called the internet sweetcheeks
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Sounds pretty accurate. I think there may have been a brief stormfront merger, and this is just the mere legacy of it.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ironandwine)
    it's called the internet sweetcheeks
    I can't tell if this is intentional or...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Truths)
    I can't tell if this is intentional or...
    who knows
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    -That's not the UK.

    -That organisation's beliefs are not indicative of society's beliefs (i.e. the general public/the state) and certainly don't point to totalitarianism.

    -The article has somewhat misinterpreted the organisation - as far as I can tell, they're not saying that logic is abuse, they're saying that "logic" is abuse, i.e. that false logic as a way to emotionally manipulate your partner is abuse; this is what traps domestic abuse victims as much as the physical violence itself.

    -The article is correct that the organisation does not take into account domestic abuse of men but the statistics of male domestic abuse is a difficult area. I don't tend to believe that domestic abuse for men is as bad as for women. By this I don't just mean the number of cases but the severity, motives, effect and repetition of each. There is a lot of debate about what the actual statistics are and what to include in these statistics. I definitely agree that male domestic abuse is underestimated in society, but there still appears to be a large difference between domestic abuse against men and women.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by macromicro)
    -That's not the UK.

    -That organisation's beliefs are not indicative of society's beliefs (i.e. the general public/the state) and certainly don't point to totalitarianism.

    -The article has somewhat misinterpreted the organisation - as far as I can tell, they're not saying that logic is abuse, they're saying that "logic" is abuse, i.e. that false logic as a way to emotionally manipulate your partner is abuse; this is what traps domestic abuse victims as much as the physical violence itself.

    -The article is correct that the organisation does not take into account domestic abuse of men but the statistics of male domestic abuse is a difficult area. I don't tend to believe that domestic abuse for men is as bad as for women. By this I don't just mean the number of cases but the severity, motives, effect and repetition of each. There is a lot of debate about what the actual statistics are and what to include in these statistics. I definitely agree that male domestic abuse is underestimated in society, but there still appears to be a large difference between domestic abuse against men and women.
    :rolleyes:
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by macromicro)
    -That's not the UK.

    -That organisation's beliefs are not indicative of society's beliefs (i.e. the general public/the state) and certainly don't point to totalitarianism.

    -The article has somewhat misinterpreted the organisation - as far as I can tell, they're not saying that logic is abuse, they're saying that "logic" is abuse, i.e. that false logic as a way to emotionally manipulate your partner is abuse; this is what traps domestic abuse victims as much as the physical violence itself.

    -The article is correct that the organisation does not take into account domestic abuse of men but the statistics of male domestic abuse is a difficult area. I don't tend to believe that domestic abuse for men is as bad as for women. By this I don't just mean the number of cases but the severity, motives, effect and repetition of each. There is a lot of debate about what the actual statistics are and what to include in these statistics. I definitely agree that male domestic abuse is underestimated in society, but there still appears to be a large difference between domestic abuse against men and women.
    It's almost as if you think shrink4men.com is not a 100% reliable source. Next you will be telling us that the article on "Why Your Wife's Excuses for Not Working Are Lame" may contain inaccuracies too! Or perhaps the fairly uncontroversial piece entitled "Men Have Emotions, but Women Don't Listen."

    I think it's pretty disappointing that the feminazis have obviously got to you and smeared 41b's perfectly reputable source :nn:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    bring out the big guns

    http://www.cracked.com/article_21884...ackedfbfanpage
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmashConcept)
    It's almost as if you think shrink4men.com is not a 100% reliable source. Next you will be telling us that the article on "Why Your Wife's Excuses for Not Working Are Lame" may contain inaccuracies too! Or perhaps the fairly uncontroversial piece entitled "Men Have Emotions, but Women Don't Listen."
    The Guardian is also reputable, it doesn't mean I don't critically analyse its articles. I gave a fair and unbiased analysis of the link he posted and I'm yet to hear a rebuttal of the points I made from either of you.

    (Original post by SmashConcept)
    I think it's pretty disappointing that the feminazis have obviously got to you and smeared 41b's perfectly reputable source :nn:
    You must not have read my initial reply to him which directly opposed radical feminism.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by macromicro)
    The Guardian is also reputable, it doesn't mean I don't critically analyse its articles. I gave a fair and unbiased analysis of the link he posted and I'm yet to hear a rebuttal of the points I made from either of you.



    You must not have read my initial reply to him which directly opposed radical feminism.
    I think you might have missed something.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    bring out the big guns

    http://www.cracked.com/article_21884...ackedfbfanpage
    That link is irrelevant. We are discussing domestic abuse.

    90% of sexual domestic violence is against females, by the way.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    bring out the big guns

    http://www.cracked.com/article_21884...ackedfbfanpage
    The number 1 item on his list is being used as a political football.

    Your response to this is to go ahead and use him as a political football.

    Just copy and paste the top couple of posts from /r/theredpill next time. Or better yet, try not sharing your opinion on this particular issue :dontknow:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I always wonder why feminists (most of whom are white themselves) are so obsessed with White men. White/Western culture is probably the feminised and most gynocentric, I mean this is the race which gave you Ed Sheeran, who is hardly this ruthless agent of the patriarchy.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by macromicro)
    I've noticed you outline this problem or "crisis" on many occasions. However, it's very easy to make negative claims - where are your positive claims? How should masculinity be defined to save us from crisis? What is a better model? What exactly are you trying to say? Your prose is very cryptic and dense and your posts don't ever seem to conclude with anything of substance, just vagueness like "masculinity crisis".
    Unfortunately there are only 3 models which fit

    i) The traditionalist 'alpha male' model of masculinity: Men Dominant, Women Submissive, alpha-beta social hierarchy stemming back to feudalism and the ancient empires, etc.

    ii) The impossible Misandrist Superman model issued by the radfems-this is the absurdity of Tumblr feminism's 'a real man never…[insert 100 misandrist and obscene rules for men]

    iii) The specific mould of attractiveness that individual heterosexual woman desires. This is typically sensitive to her needs yet stoic in the face of how own adversity.

    I am trying to say that it is inevitable that as women's power increases since the suffrage movement, their expectations of men shall increase as well, and thus their satisfaction with them shall decline. This is easily demonstrated by the exponential increase in one night stands and rising divorce statistics; why stay of a man you perceive as low value if there are no longer financial or social repercussions for leaving?

    Sure reasonable feminists are working towards a world of gender equality but in practice this is now a privilege they could easily revoke. Practical third wave feminism is a meticulous philosophy with a plethora of loopholes which makes it nigh on impossible for men to protest it without being labelled Part of the Problem and silenced. Practice would find that most hetero adult women do not like men being free; our chains as disposable products to the patriarchal system are considered the bread and butter of industry and commerce. It's only been in the past 20 years that it has been remotely socially acceptable for men to have a long period of unemployment or take up the role of 'stay at home dad', for example, that we have had this growth of articles on the rise of man-children, the patronisation of men in the media, etc. In particular there is now exploitation in the media of a disparity between the disappointing average Joe and the aspirational Alpha Male (male model, celebrity, actor, athlete, musician, powerful businessman etc.) Rules against objectifying women in such a way enforced in the early Noughties have made this a one-way process.

    The areas that third wave feminism is most beneficial in are the breakdown of homophobia and transphobia, making the world a better safer place for the LGBT and non-white-cisgender community. By definition to feminism, heterosexual WAS (White Anglo-Saxon) males are the Other. In terms of gender roles in a sexual/romantic environment this artificial construction of men becoming submissive is poison to their attraction to men. Even more now, at this current time of recovery from financial crisis, than in the early years of 3rd wave fem prior to it.

    All of this is to say that women as a whole dislike the consequences of a liberalised atmosphere for men, however they may seem to like it in public. Once again I shall use myself as the butt of the joke-but for such an atmosphere man-children held with contempt such as myself would not be produced.

    None of this is to say that women like being belittled or viewed as submissive, vulnerable, inferior-not at all. That's misogyny. But I have never encountered nor read of nor heard of a woman who can handle the idea of a man ultimately failing to lead the flock.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 4, 2015
  • 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • 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.