#WomenAgainstFeminism

[Joeternal]

My purpose in starting this thread was not to create arguments between men and women, but to get reactions to #WomenAgainstFeminism. Here's the link again: http://womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com/

I can try to summarize what seem to be the main points in case anybody doesn't want to take the time to read through it. It seems there are a large number of women who reject feminism because they feel:

- It is anti-male.
- It fosters a mindset of fear and victimhood rather than empowerment.
- It denigrates "traditional" lifestyle choices that many women embrace.
- They do not feel that women are systematically oppressed in modern society.

 

[KudosKids]

My purpose in starting this thread was not to create arguments between men and women, but to get reactions to #WomenAgainstFeminism. Here's the link again: http://womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com/

I can try to summarize what seem to be the main points in case anybody doesn't want to take the time to read through it. It seems there are a large number of women who reject feminism because they feel:

- It is anti-male.
- It fosters a mindset of fear and victimhood rather empowerment.
- It denigrates "traditional" lifestyle choices that many women embrace.
- They do not feel that women are systematically oppressed in modern society.

Your intentions were good ones. I'm sure we can all agree. But you picked a subject, where people all over the world get killed for. Therefore you can't expect anymore then controversy. Everyone should be equal. All your points are true, And All there points are true too. The percentage of housewives have gone down over the years, and yes women nowadays are looked at funny or called lazy because they want to be housewives in modern society. There are feminists who hate males, not all of them. Some just want to be equal to them. No matter where we live, I think alot of women feel fear that something terrible could happen to them. We live in a dangerous world, its not safe anywhere. I think these women have these opinions because of there own life experiences which has changed them to think this way. You may not agree with it. But you should respect it.

 

[Joeternal]

One point I would add is that feminism, like every other agenda promoted by political activists, regardless of the subject or whether they're right, left, Republican, Democrat, whatever - is driven by organizations that have to raise money to survive. That includes political parties. Those organizations therefore have a vested interest in hyping up fear and threat, and convincing people that they need to send in money (or turn out to vote in the case of politicians) to protect themselves from the evil, bad people who want to do them harm. The news media has the same type of agenda. Ratings = money, so the latest scare over some food that can kill you gets exaggerated.

 

[AlexLady]

I'm all for Women Against Feminism.



... I'd share my opinions, but as you can clearly see people would try to "correct" me. :roll:


That and I don't care to offend the ladies of the forum, many who I respect and consider friends. I'd be friends with a feminist and not debate it with her, although I did once because she had seen me talk about my views on feminism before.



But I do like Women Against Feminism. I'm against it for different reasons; but it is nice to know I'm not the only female to disagree with it.

 

[AllisonWilder]

Whatever, probably shouldn't of said anything.

I disagree with this. The more people say things, ask questions and openly discuss, the better.

---

And jumping on someone for saying 'weird' IS silly. Some people say 'weird' in place of 'hmm' or some other inquisitive type of word. I'm not trying to go all white knight here or anything, but just because Punk used a word that someone else wouldn't have used doesn't make it a poor language choice on his part, it just makes it a word that you wouldn't have used.
:twocents-02cents:

 

[PunkInDrublic]

^Thanks!! Sucks having someone say you're devaluing or putting down someone when you aren't at all. Sucks when someone tries to tell you what you meant when you use a word. Sucks being called super defensive when you were suprisingly not that defensive and just genuinely curious. All good tho, just confusing.

 

[Alexandra Cole]

^Thanks!! Sucks having someone say you're devaluing or putting down someone when you aren't at all. Sucks when someone tries to tell you what you meant when you use a word. Sucks being called super defensive when you were suprisingly not that defensive and just genuinely curious. All good tho, just confusing.

Yeah... I'm late on this - I'm just catching up now - but I took what you said to be out of curiosity. I was pretty curious about that too.

 

[PlayboyMegan]

I see both sides of the "weird" thing.
Violet probably should have asked your intentions instead of assumed.
On the other hand, you know you have a history of saying rude shit on here, so I can see why she made that assumption.
You are being super cool in this thread so thanks!

 

[PlayboyMegan]

I get weird looks and shamed when I wear a crop top.

Town sounds awful, no offence. Mine kinda sucks too but the women around here aren't afraid to walk around in bikinis at least.

Some women, like me, ARE afraid but do not let their fear dictate their actions.
It's kind of like rollercoasters. I'm terrified before I go on them, but I do it anyways because I enjoy the ride. There is a rare chance I could get injured but I don't allow that to stop me. But sexual harassment is FAR more common than a rollercoaster accident.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

My purpose in starting this thread was not to create arguments between men and women, but to get reactions to #WomenAgainstFeminism. Here's the link again: http://womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com/

I can try to summarize what seem to be the main points in case anybody doesn't want to take the time to read through it. It seems there are a large number of women who reject feminism because they feel:

- It is anti-male.
- It fosters a mindset of fear and victimhood rather than empowerment.
- It denigrates "traditional" lifestyle choices that many women embrace.
- They do not feel that women are systematically oppressed in modern society.

Another issue that I see anti feminism woman raise is questioning the basic premise do we really want a truly equal society which ignores the differences between the sexes?

A couple of examples. As formerly male only occupations get opened up to woman, there is increasing pressure to lower the physical standards to allow more woman get these jobs. A classic example is firefighters. I'm 220lbs if I am unconscious in a burning building, it isn't easy for a man wearing 50 lbs of gear to put me on a his shoulder and carry me to safety. The number of woman who could do this is very small. Same thing is true for opening up infantryman (person?) to woman. If you trying to pull your wounded buddy to safety, opening up a door, or tossing a grenade physical strength matters. Now there is more to being either a firefighter or infantryman than just being strong, brains matters a lot also but there is also no substitute for physical strength.

The Marines require 3 pull ups as a minimum to pass basic training. Yet less than 1/2 the woman Marine can do it, so Marine corps for the last few years has been allowing a waiver. Now there a plenty of jobs in the Marine Corp where being able to do a pull up doesn't matter, but there are also quite a few where it does. One of the premises of the Marine corp is that everybody man is a rifleman so by lowering the standards we are changing the corp. During peacetime or even now with the war in Afghanistan winding down this doesn't matter but in big war it would.

In most state's custody hearings the welfare of the child is the first priority. It is better to have both parents involved in raising a child. However, it many situations that is not possible (one has to move). In those situation everything else being equal the woman generally gets custody. Although the data isn't clear cut, most of the research I've seen is that when you control for income, children raised by single mothers are more successful than those raised by single dads. So in fact the traditional way of handling child custody dispute is in fact in the best interest of the children, even if it is not political correct.

It seems to me that much of the backlash against feminism by woman, is totally justified. Having on average less capable, firefighters, soldiers, and single parents is pretty high price to pay for true gender equality.

 

[SexySteph]

My purpose in starting this thread was not to create arguments between men and women, but to get reactions to #WomenAgainstFeminism. Here's the link again: http://womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com/

I can try to summarize what seem to be the main points in case anybody doesn't want to take the time to read through it. It seems there are a large number of women who reject feminism because they feel:

- It is anti-male.
- It fosters a mindset of fear and victimhood rather than empowerment.
- It denigrates "traditional" lifestyle choices that many women embrace.
- They do not feel that women are systematically oppressed in modern society.

Another issue that I see anti feminism woman raise is questioning the basic premise do we really want a truly equal society which ignores the differences between the sexes?

A couple of examples. As formerly male only occupations get opened up to woman, there is increasing pressure to lower the physical standards to allow more woman get these jobs. A classic example is firefighters. I'm 220lbs if I am unconscious in a burning building, it isn't easy for a man wearing 50 lbs of gear to put me on a his shoulder and carry me to safety. The number of woman who could do this is very small. Same thing is true for opening up infantryman (person?) to woman. If you trying to pull your wounded buddy to safety, opening up a door, or tossing a grenade physical strength matters. Now there is more to being either a firefighter or infantryman than just being strong, brains matters a lot also but there is also no substitute for physical strength.

The Marines require 3 pull ups as a minimum to pass basic training. Yet less than 1/2 the woman Marine can do it, so Marine corps for the last few years has been allowing a waiver. Now there a plenty of jobs in the Marine Corp where being able to do a pull up doesn't matter, but there are also quite a few where it does. One of the premises of the Marine corp is that everybody man is a rifleman so by lowering the standards we are changing the corp. During peacetime or even now with the war in Afghanistan winding down this doesn't matter but in big war it would.

In most state's custody hearings the welfare of the child is the first priority. It is better to have both parents involved in raising a child. However, it many situations that is not possible (one has to move). In those situation everything else being equal the woman generally gets custody. Although the data isn't clear cut, most of the research I've seen is that when you control for income, children raised by single mothers are more successful than those raised by single dads. So in fact the traditional way of handling child custody dispute is in fact in the best interest of the children, even if it is not political correct.

It seems to me that much of the backlash against feminism by woman, is totally justified. Having on average less capable, firefighters, soldiers, and single parents is pretty high price to pay for true gender equality.

I don't think feminists want standards lowered. They just want women allowed to be there. They're not saying "I know that a man is required to do xyz for a strength test but for us you should lower it to pqr" they're saying "if a woman can also pass the standard of xyz why can't she get the job". If the industries are lowering standards so that they can fit a quot and prove they're being "equal" they're the ones makin the mistakes.
As for child rearing, I'd love to see the studies.

 

[HarmlessSquirrel]

Having on average less capable, firefighters, soldiers, and single parents is pretty high price to pay for true gender equality.

While this is a fair statement, outright exclusion of a gender from a given role is not the only (or best) solution.

For instance, the marines could keep their strength standards, and there would be *some* women who would still qualify (and men who would not, which was always true). Yes, there would probably be more men, but if strength is absolutely necessary, at least they would be selecting based on what is actually important and not making a blanket assumption based on some other attribute that might not matter (gender, in this case).

I was going to go on in more detail, but I see Steph's new post, which pretty much states my point, so I'll just quote her and make a few last comments.

I don't think feminists want standards lowered. They just want women allowed to be there. They're not saying "I know that a man is required to do xyz for a strength test but for us you should lower it to pqr" they're saying "if a woman can also pass the standard of xyz why can't she get the job". If the industries are lowering standards so that they can fit a quot and prove they're being "equal" they're the ones makin the mistakes.
As for child rearing, I'd love to see the studies.

The feminists described by Steph here make complete sense to me. It's true though, as we can see by the discussion directly related to the overall topic here, what the feminist position on an issue is depends on who you ask. There are people who do call for quotas and even some government agencies that require them (not only with respect to gender). The capability to do whatever job is in question should be the requirement. Whether a candidate fits the traditional sterotype of someone in that role is irrelevant.

 

[Violet October]

Another issue that I see anti feminism woman raise is questioning the basic premise do we really want a truly equal society which ignores the differences between the sexes?

This is a prime example of why I think feminists should say they want justice, not equality. There are things women need more of, and things men need more of. I just think they are defining equality as justice and, thus, using the word wrong.

Men and women's bodies are built differently, and so are their psychologies. You can't treat them the same, because they are not. Neither is better, but both have their pros and cons, as well as their specific needs.

A couple of examples. As formerly male only occupations get opened up to woman, there is increasing pressure to lower the physical standards to allow more woman get these jobs.

I think it's bullshit to lower standards for any job. I just think if a woman CAN do a "man's" job equally as well, she should be allowed to do so and paid the same.

Having on average less capable, firefighters, soldiers, and single parents is pretty high price to pay for true gender equality.

COMPLETELY AGREED. Again, justice. Not equality.

 

[PlayboyMegan]

My purpose in starting this thread was not to create arguments between men and women, but to get reactions to #WomenAgainstFeminism. Here's the link again: http://womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com/

I can try to summarize what seem to be the main points in case anybody doesn't want to take the time to read through it. It seems there are a large number of women who reject feminism because they feel:

- It is anti-male.
- It fosters a mindset of fear and victimhood rather than empowerment.
- It denigrates "traditional" lifestyle choices that many women embrace.
- They do not feel that women are systematically oppressed in modern society.

Another issue that I see anti feminism woman raise is questioning the basic premise do we really want a truly equal society which ignores the differences between the sexes?

A couple of examples. As formerly male only occupations get opened up to woman, there is increasing pressure to lower the physical standards to allow more woman get these jobs. A classic example is firefighters. I'm 220lbs if I am unconscious in a burning building, it isn't easy for a man wearing 50 lbs of gear to put me on a his shoulder and carry me to safety. The number of woman who could do this is very small. Same thing is true for opening up infantryman (person?) to woman. If you trying to pull your wounded buddy to safety, opening up a door, or tossing a grenade physical strength matters. Now there is more to being either a firefighter or infantryman than just being strong, brains matters a lot also but there is also no substitute for physical strength.

The Marines require 3 pull ups as a minimum to pass basic training. Yet less than 1/2 the woman Marine can do it, so Marine corps for the last few years has been allowing a waiver. Now there a plenty of jobs in the Marine Corp where being able to do a pull up doesn't matter, but there are also quite a few where it does. One of the premises of the Marine corp is that everybody man is a rifleman so by lowering the standards we are changing the corp. During peacetime or even now with the war in Afghanistan winding down this doesn't matter but in big war it would.

In most state's custody hearings the welfare of the child is the first priority. It is better to have both parents involved in raising a child. However, it many situations that is not possible (one has to move). In those situation everything else being equal the woman generally gets custody. Although the data isn't clear cut, most of the research I've seen is that when you control for income, children raised by single mothers are more successful than those raised by single dads. So in fact the traditional way of handling child custody dispute is in fact in the best interest of the children, even if it is not political correct.

It seems to me that much of the backlash against feminism by woman, is totally justified. Having on average less capable, firefighters, soldiers, and single parents is pretty high price to pay for true gender equality.

I don't think feminists want standards lowered. They just want women allowed to be there. They're not saying "I know that a man is required to do xyz for a strength test but for us you should lower it to pqr" they're saying "if a woman can also pass the standard of xyz why can't she get the job". If the industries are lowering standards so that they can fit a quot and prove they're being "equal" they're the ones makin the mistakes.
As for child rearing, I'd love to see the studies.

This.
They have studies on gay male parents and have concluded they do just as well of job as women. So I'm not buying that.
Guys do tend to abandon their children more often than women, but how much of that is because society let's men get away with it and not women?
When a woman abandons her child it's shock and horror (as it should be) but when a dad does the same, it's usually accepted by the majority.

 

[Violet October]

I see both sides of the "weird" thing.
Violet probably should have asked your intentions instead of assumed.
On the other hand, you know you have a history of saying rude shit on here, so I can see why she made that assumption.
You are being super cool in this thread so thanks!

I even said I didn't *assume* he meant anything, only showed how language can be problematic. I pulled up the definitions of the word. And none of them included "interesting" which is what he used to define weird. I even pointed out the he apologized for being offensive & said that wasn't his intention. I also even said it wasn't his definitions that was a problem, just his language. When you use a word completely wrong, you can't be flabbergasted when people assume you man what the word actually means. He got emotionally attached to his definition and didn't see how other definitions (the real ones) were problematic. That was my only purpose.

Punk used a word that someone else wouldn't have used doesn't make it a poor language choice on his part, it just makes it a word that you wouldn't have used.
:twocents-02cents:

Using word wrong is a poor choice. All I was doing was trying to point out that we ALL do it. Even in my comment to him, I said it was a problem with feminism too. I wasn't attacking him or trying to belittle him or anything. I even said that. Pointing out that someone is interjecting their own meaning into a word is not wrong. Someone can very easily go "oh shit, I used the word wrong. Sorry! I really meant this: ____" and be done. He said "I meant this:___" But was still attached to his own meaning when it's not right.

I believe that an important part of being involved in discussions about social justice issues is being open to other people telling you that your language choices are problematic for them. It isn't something personal, but we should be able to learn and grow from that.

^That is perfect. I wasn't personally attacking him. Only pointing out his language was problematic. People being too emotionally attached to their own definitions of words is a huge problem in human communication.


ETA: I also noticed how much cooler he's being in this thread than he has been in the past, and I definitely did have to do a double take because "whaaaaat?!"

 

[JickyJuly]

Even if they have studies on single dads, it would be hard for them to be relevant. There are too many factors to consider. Friend of the court/custody hearings lean so far into the mother's favor that for a father to end up as the single parent one of two things has to happen 1. the mother has to display complete negligence and irresponsibility or major abuse or 2. the mother has to abandon the child or voluntarily give up the role of primary parent. Those things are so hurtful that a single dad starts out in the negative, don't they? Parental rights is one of the main reasons men SHOULD be demanding gender equality. What's more important than having a right to be an equal parent to your child really?

 

[Violet October]

Parental rights is one of the main reasons men SHOULD be demanding gender equality. What's more important than having a right to be an equal parent to your child really?

THIS. I feel like this is a legitimate things men should be fighting for. And also fuck alimony. If MRA's weren't such jaded assholes and actually prevalent in society with these issues, they'd have my support %100.

But, again, equality is so not the right word to use. They should be demanding justice.

 

[PlayboyMegan]

Even if they have studies on single dads, it would be hard for them to be relevant. There are too many factors to consider. Friend of the court/custody hearings lean so far into the mother's favor that for a father to end up as the single parent one of two things has to happen 1. the mother has to display complete negligence and irresponsibility or major abuse or 2. the mother has to abandon the child or voluntarily give up the role of primary parent. Those things are so hurtful that a single dad starts out in the negative, don't they? Parental rights is one of the main reasons men SHOULD be demanding gender equality. What's more important than having a right to be an equal parent to your child really?

Exactly.
Plus, how can you really decide what constitutes a "good parent?"
In the gay studies they mentioned the child's grades being good. Does that really make a parent a good one? I've known several children with bad grades and good parents who often had a learning disability. I've also known overly strict parents that physically harmed their children for getting bad grades. And in these studies what are they really looking for? An interview with the child to see how happy they are? There's just too many factors and conflicting opinions on what a "good parent" is.

 

[Nordling]

Parental rights is one of the main reasons men SHOULD be demanding gender equality. What's more important than having a right to be an equal parent to your child really?

THIS. I feel like this is a legitimate things men should be fighting for. And also fuck alimony. If MRA's weren't such jaded assholes and actually prevalent in society with these issues, they'd have my support %100.

But, again, equality is so not the right word to use. They should be demanding justice.

My only problem with substituting "justice," is it's such an ambiguous term; everyone and their chihuahua defines it differently. Sure, the same prevails with "equality," but I just think it may be easier to agree on what we mean by it. Equality, when it comes to humans, does not mean "identical." It means equal rights, and that we are judged on our merits and not our ethnicity, gender, or any other group oriented classification.

 

[zachminor79]

If MRA's weren't such jaded assholes and actually prevalent in society with these issues, they'd have my support %100.

Do you think it's fair or right to generalize like that and label them all as "jaded assholes"? Seems kind of harsh and uncalled for.

 

[Violet October]

If MRA's weren't such jaded assholes and actually prevalent in society with these issues, they'd have my support %100.

Do you think it's fair or right to generalize like that and label them all as "jaded assholes"? Seems kind of harsh and uncalled for.

I know my words are harsh. I have yet to find a community of MRA's that wasn't jaded and just hated women. If you find me a community of MRA's who are rational and fight for things they should be fighting for, I would easily retract that statement.

I know it's not as important, but in my personal experience I've never physically met an MRA who wasn't jaded or immediately hated any woman who identified as a feminist.

MRA's don't' seem to exist in the same quantity of feminists. (So there's not much diversity in the group.) So yes, as for now, I feel it's a fair statement, though harsh.

Parental rights is one of the main reasons men SHOULD be demanding gender equality. What's more important than having a right to be an equal parent to your child really?

THIS. I feel like this is a legitimate things men should be fighting for. And also fuck alimony. If MRA's weren't such jaded assholes and actually prevalent in society with these issues, they'd have my support %100.

But, again, equality is so not the right word to use. They should be demanding justice.

My only problem with substituting "justice," is it's such an ambiguous term; everyone and their chihuahua defines it differently. Sure, the same prevails with "equality," but I just think it may be easier to agree on what we mean by it. Equality, when it comes to humans, does not mean "identical." It means equal rights, and that we are judged on our merits and not our ethnicity, gender, or any other group oriented classification.

Finally, an actual discussion on the two words. I don't disagree with you at all on that. I just feel the exact same way about the word equality. And in my opinion, feel like it's an even more ambiguous word because of the two very different definitions. "justice", in my opinion, is harder to confuse unless someone just doesn't know what it means. But I full see your point and don't disagree with it.

 

[SexySteph]

Parental rights is one of the main reasons men SHOULD be demanding gender equality. What's more important than having a right to be an equal parent to your child really?

THIS. I feel like this is a legitimate things men should be fighting for. And also fuck alimony. If MRA's weren't such jaded assholes and actually prevalent in society with these issues, they'd have my support %100.

But, again, equality is so not the right word to use. They should be demanding justice.

But alimony goes both ways. :/

If two people are married and decide "let's be a single income family so that you can stay home and take care of the kids/home/whatever" and then divorces 20 years later, should the one who left the job force and has a huge gap in employment history just be screwed financially? No matter the gender, that kind of gap pretty much renders you unemployable. And saying that those people shouldn't be entitled to some support from the person who made the decision WITH them that they should leave the job force sort of devalues domestic work.

 

[Violet October]

Parental rights is one of the main reasons men SHOULD be demanding gender equality. What's more important than having a right to be an equal parent to your child really?

THIS. I feel like this is a legitimate things men should be fighting for. And also fuck alimony. If MRA's weren't such jaded assholes and actually prevalent in society with these issues, they'd have my support %100.

But, again, equality is so not the right word to use. They should be demanding justice.

But alimony goes both ways. :/

If two people are married and decide "let's be a single income family so that you can stay home and take care of the kids/home/whatever" and then divorces 20 years later, should the one who left the job force and has a huge gap in employment history just be screwed financially? No matter the gender, that kind of gap pretty much renders you unemployable. And saying that those people shouldn't be entitled to some support from the person who made the decision WITH them that they should leave the job force sort of devalues domestic work.

This was actually a problem that was opened to my eyes just today, so I'm actually looking for more information on it before I form solid opinions on it. I was introduced to it the same time I was introduced to hypergamy - the act of women marrying up in class to take care of themselevs/their family (something that has been going on pretty much since time began.) The information I've found suggested the alimony generally had the man give up - even in cases where the woman decided to leave the husband and even in cases where it wasn't necessary.
And to tie it in to a sore subject (which is how I was introduced to it, and had me in tears this morning); one of Robin William's ex-wives married him after she was a nanny to his son from his previous marriage. She was worth almost nothing before she married him - and then she was worth millions when *she* left *him*. He even took shitty movie roles, and I quote, "just to pay the bills" and was about to go on what was (sadly) joking called his "alimony tour" before he went to rehab a month ago. It seems alimony affects more men than women. But I'd love to do more research on this subject and figure out how many divorces end in alimony and which way it's slanted gender-wise.

I will say that "support" is different than "half" of someones everything/value. And if you don't need it, you shouldn't get it.

And based on the first part of your post, alimony should ONLY happen when one partner decides to be a stay at home mom/dad to raise a family. If you have ghad a job/career throughout the marriage, you should not be entitled to their money. Unless you need child support. And that's different than alimony.

 

[PlayboyMegan]

I think alimony seems one sided because we still have a lot of women that quit their jobs to be full time mommy's and need it. There are much less stay at home dads, than there are mothers, affecting the scale quit a bit.
My uncle got cancer about 15years ago and continued getting cancer throughout the years, making it impossible to work. My aunt supported him financially the entire time. Now he is old, still has health problems, and has been out of work for a decade. They were going to get a divorce (decided against it later) and she was told she would definitely have to pay alimony.
So I don't think it's one-sided. I just think it seems that way because less women work than men when they have children.

 

[AllisonWilder]

I think alimony seems one sided because we still have a lot of women that quit their jobs to be full time mommy's and need it. There are much less stay at home dads, than there are mothers, affecting the scale quit a bit.
My uncle got cancer about 15years ago and continued getting cancer throughout the years, making it impossible to work. My aunt supported him financially the entire time. Now he is old, still has health problems, and has been out of work for a decade. They were going to get a divorce (decided against it later) and she was told she would definitely have to pay alimony.
So I don't think it's one-sided. I just think it seems that way because less women work than men when they have children.

It's definitely not one-sided. We looked into this issue a bit when we were making the decision for my boyfriend to quit work and do the stay-at-home dad thing while I worked and we found that even in some common law situations (which will include us in a couple of years) if we split, I could easily end up paying alimony.

 

[zachminor79]

I know my words are harsh. I have yet to find a community of MRA's that wasn't jaded and just hated women. If you find me a community of MRA's who are rational and fight for things they should be fighting for, I would easily retract that statement.

I know it's not as important, but in my personal experience I've never physically met an MRA who wasn't jaded or immediately hated any woman who identified as a feminist.

MRA's don't' seem to exist in the same quantity of feminists. (So there's not much diversity in the group.) So yes, as for now, I feel it's a fair statement, though harsh.

While there are definitely extremist in the MRA community who do "hate any woman identified as a feminist", you could also say there are extremist in the feminist community who "hate any man" or "hate any man identified as an MRA". To judge a movement on the actions or views of the small extremist portion is a dangerous thing to do. Unfortunately, they are also the loudest and cause it harder to find the what the real community is fighting for.

I encourage you to take the time and read more about MRA to see that there are indeed men involved who do care about issues such as child custody and who do not "hate feminist". Please, don't let the loudest and most annoying dictate your view on any group, be it a movement, religion, politics, etc.

It's pretty well documented how it's a huge concern:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men's_righ ... ld_custody

For the record, I personally do NOT label myself as an MRA or feminist, I just personally feel that every human should be treated as that, a human. It doesn't matter what your sex is, your sexual preference, your race, or your beliefs, etc; you're still a human and that should not change how you're treated or viewed. We have a ways to go but hopefully we get there one day where the need for such groups as MRA and feminists are unnecessary.

 

[JoleneBrody]

This thread is turning me into a thank whore. THANK THANK THANK! Even if I disagree I gotta thank, everyone who posts is giving me a brain boner. Everyone has just been so elequant and well worded.

 

[Violet October]

It's pretty well documented how it's a huge concern:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men's_righ ... ld_custody

You brought up some valid points so I'll come back later when I'm not in the middle of something.

But this is taken from that article and is a very important part to read:

Critics argue that empirical research does not support the notion of judicial bias against men[64] and that men's rights advocates interpret statistics in a way that ignores the fact that the majority of men do not contest custody and do not seem to want it.[67] Academics critique the rhetorical framing of custody decisions, stating that men's rights advocates appeal for "equal rights" without specifying the constitutional rights that they believe have been violated.[73] Critics assert that the men's rights rhetoric of children's "needs" that accompanies their plea for equal rights helps deflect criticism that it is motivated by self-interest and masks men's rights advocates' own claims.[40][74] Deborah Rhode argues that contrary to the claims of some men's rights activists, research shows that joint legal custody does not increase the likelihood that fathers will pay child support or remain involved parents.[75]

I think alimony seems one sided because we still have a lot of women that quit their jobs to be full time mommy's and need it. There are much less stay at home dads, than there are mothers, affecting the scale quit a bit.
My uncle got cancer about 15years ago and continued getting cancer throughout the years, making it impossible to work. My aunt supported him financially the entire time. Now he is old, still has health problems, and has been out of work for a decade. They were going to get a divorce (decided against it later) and she was told she would definitely have to pay alimony.
So I don't think it's one-sided. I just think it seems that way because less women work than men when they have children.

It's definitely not one-sided. We looked into this issue a bit when we were making the decision for my boyfriend to quit work and do the stay-at-home dad thing while I worked and we found that even in some common law situations (which will include us in a couple of years) if we split, I could easily end up paying alimony.

Holy fucking shit. Thank you for sharing that. In between games and works, I'l be doing research on this.


ETA: Got caught up in research instead of games. This shit is fascinating. Really, thank you for sharing that. I liek having my eyes opened to stuff, and as I said this idea was just introduced to me today.

 

[PunkInDrublic]

I even said I didn't *assume* he meant anything, only showed how language can be problematic. I pulled up the definitions of the word. And none of them included "interesting" which is what he used to define weird.

Hate to be a bother but could you maybe like stop completely making shit up? Not sure why you continue to make things up or try to put words in my mouth but please stop.

Using word wrong is a poor choice.

Again, didn't use the word wrong, not sure why this is so hard for you to understand. Nothing problematic about using weird to describe something you find strange. I understand that you might not like me using weird but please stop pretending like I was using the word wrong.

 

[Violet October]

I even said I didn't *assume* he meant anything, only showed how language can be problematic. I pulled up the definitions of the word. And none of them included "interesting" which is what he used to define weird.

Hate to be a bother but could you maybe like stop completely making shit up? Not sure why you continue to make things up or try to put words in my mouth but please stop.

Using word wrong is a poor choice.

Again, didn't use the word wrong, not sure why this is so hard for you to understand. Nothing problematic about using weird to describe something you find strange. I understand that you might not like me using weird but please stop pretending like I was using the word wrong.

lololol. and done with this part. super useless side step in conversation. sorry. back to the real shit.





On alimony stuff: I do agree with Megan now in the fact that it may seem one sided simply because more women stay at home to take care of children or be house wives than men. I think that skews the statistics quite a bit and has a bit to do with gender roles that feminism wants to and tries to address. I just found out that the supreme court ruled against the gender bias in alimony (that doesn't mean it's completely gone, just illegal), so that's cool as hell to know. I had no idea.