Wednesday, September 17, 2008

A challenge.

I'm getting pretty used to people telling me I don't consider the points of feminism, and give credit where it's due. As an MRA, I stand eternally accused of misogyny, and my opposition to feminism is attacked for not “acknowledging feminism's valid points”. These arguments are usually accompanied by remarks about tone and demeanour, and suggestions that I (and others like me) be more polite.

Now, it's no secret that many Men's issues run counter to the best interest (or greed) of women in general, IF you believe the absolute worst of the people involved. 50/50 shared custody and no child support could be perfectly reasonable to one woman, and blasphemy to another..the only difference is motivation.

So let's consider feminist talking points for a couple minutes...

Rape is BAD, and it's an EPIDEMIC!!!! (Rape/sexual assault/unwanted attention/”male gaze”)

Women make less money (on average across the whole population) than men.

Sexism is rampant against women (meaning women are judged on their looks (still), and the hotties get preferential treatment)

Take back the night!!! (Women fear to walk alone at night – men are responsible)

Sexual freedom!!! (Questioning women's sexual behaviour is “Patriarchal (tm)”)

Abortion is a Gaia-given right! (But ONLY for women)

Men owe us because we say they do. (Litany of laws/regulations/social customs that hold men “responsible” for everything from children's welfare (even those not their own), to unsafe sex, to women's success)

That's about all I can come up with, I'm sure there's more (maybe even major points, but I couldn't be arsed).

As to the rape thing, of course rape will become more prevalent when you increase the “radius” of the definition. When these grossly inflated statistics are then placed against the conviction rate for rape (even given the ridiculous standards to which men are held, for “accountability” dontcha know?), the quality of the charges are so low, that very few men are convicted.

One can quibble, but seriously, given the political value of this topic, one can assume everyone involved is busting their butts to get convictions as well. Odds are pretty good it's the low quality evidence, coupled with “no drop” policies, resulting in low conviction rates.

The stress on each and every one of those defendants is real though. The only way one could not care about them, is to assume they're each and every one guilty.

Women make less money... Hmmm, 70+% of middle managers are female. If you don't have a degree, or a trade, you pretty much work in “female dominated” retail or service industry. The vast majority of retail is woman-centric, ergo fewer opportunities for men. Same with service industry (waitresses make the cash, not the busboy/dishwasher/cook). Public sector is completely dominated by women as well, unless – again – you have a trade or degree.

Which leaves dirty and/or dangerous work for the men without education or a trade (even some of those).

Who has the worse employment situation again?

Take back the night? OK, let me know when it's safe to walk alone at night...until then, I'll continue to be cautious.

Sexual freedom would be so great. I wish men had it too.....

If abortion rights are so sacred to feminists, why exactly do they oppose men having the right to disavow the unborn child, thereby absolving himself of all financial/legal obligations in relation to the child? Aside from a “worst case scenario” of feminists wanting the right to force men to finance the babies women will CHOOSE to have, without any input from him, what other motivation can there be?

I'm in favour of bringing men's and women's reproductive rights directly in line (meaning legally indistinguishable, not literal), wherever that line may happen to fall. Anywhere from “no one can have one” to “no one can be forced to be/finance a parent”, I'm good wherever. Seriously.

As to the “men owe us” bit... Well, that depends on whether or not you accept “Patriarchy Theory” at face value or not. Taking the stance that men oppressed women, and therefore what women are doing is OK is “accepting Patriarchy Theory at face value” by the way...

If you, like me, reject the ridiculous notion as the unprovable, even unquantifiable bullsh*t that it is... well then you see the whole “men owe us” line for what it is.....sexism in the nastiest sense of the word. Justification for the pillaging of men's goodwill. Ego soothing balm for a guilty conscience.

In actual fact, the only time in North America a gender has been singled out for attack and dehumanization is now, and by feminists. These same feminists are now focussing on the TONE we use in our posts, the “offensiveness” of said posts.

They never address the actual arguments.

When they do, they say “You guys should really do something about that”. But only when they've got no other false arguments to give.

And yet we MRA's are being “insensitive” and “unwelcoming”.

Nevermind that we can't (and haven't been able to for years) discuss these things on feminist forums, either real life or virtual – because we're censored out of existence quickly. They're just “empowered” to provide a “safe and nurturing environment” for feminism.

We're the real pricks.

But, leaving aside all these things....all these tired arguments that are no less true today than they were 5 years ago...let's drop all that and consider...

What would you, as a feminist, have us do?

Seriously, shoot. Give me your list of actions that we as a society must take, and results that must be achieved, before we FINALLY consider some MRM points without the nit-picky criticisms of language and demeanour?

While you're at it, please explain to me how being “more polite” will acieve results, when said tactic hasn't worked in the past (especially in light of the success of more “extreme” actions in garnering attention AND public sympathy).? And just for good measure, tell me again why I have to rein in my opinion simply to avoid offending someone, since I think Political Correctness is an equally damaging force similar to (and spawn of ) feminism?

I'm willing to hear you out. Be straightforward, and honest, and you will be dealt with with respect.


  1. Hi Factory. I see no-one has responded to your challenge yet.

    It's a little off-topic, but I think Jeana may have stopped posting on GS.

    On a humorous note, I posted a comment saying that maybe we should have a party to celebrate Jeana going. Glenn deleted it, on the grounds that it "contributes nothing and is a personal attack". Too funny. LOL.

    You'd think after months of Jeana's disruptive and trolling behaviour, that maybe I would be permitted a little snark. But no. Not only are the trolls allowed to stay, but we must be civil to them as well.

  2. I kind of understand why Glenn is doing that. He wants to try and turn his site from a "men's rights" site to a "gender discussion" site.

    I want to try and convince men to think for themselves, and damn the torpedoes.

    I think both approaches are neccessary.

    And Jeana is welcome to post here if she wants. She's a man-hating, illogical, wrong feminist but I like poking holes in them. :)

  3. Hi Factory. Glenn deleted another comment of mine about Jeana.

    I suggested in a reply to Perspicacious that Jeana has a habit of going after soft targets and applying extra shaming tactics and hyperbole. My exact words were that she "goes after people who are more susceptible to her emotional abuse" (such as Jason and Perspicacious).

    Glenn deleted it, on the grounds that it breaches two rules on blog comments:
    - personal attacks on other posters
    - people acting on a personal grudge instead of the issue at hand.

    WTF? Jeana spends endless amounts of time engaging in ad hominem attacks and villification of other posters without any sort of censure. Yet I get canned as soon as I give it back to her.

    It's one thing to allow trolls to remain. But we have to be more civil to the trolls than the trolls are towards others.

    It is all on the thread "What Would An Advice Columnist Say if the Genders Were Reversed?". Jason rightly points out that Jeana engages in personal attacks all the time without censure.

    And yet all Glenn can keep saying is that feminists have as much right to post there. This conveniently ignores the fact that no-one objects to other feminists like Lisa, Annie, Melissa etc.

    Glenn doesn't seem to understand the difference between allowing opposing views and allowing people to troll to their heart's content.

  4. Allowing feminists to be as belligerent as they wish while requiring MRA's to "keep their cool". It helps with debating in the real world, where keeping your cool in the face of obviously sexist and insulting statements will win you the argument, regardless of "factual outcome".

    I don't think he should be censoring anyone myself, but I've seen what a whine fest and accusation flinging monkey party things can descend I take the compromise.

  5. I know what you are getting at. But I wasn't just letting loose with whatever insults I could find. I was actually trying to carefully define her (not to mention warn other posters who are more naive and trusting than I am).

    The ridiculous thing is that Jeana indulges in endless ad hominem attacks like claiming that all us MRAs are emotional abusers. Yet when I turn the argument around and point out that she is the emotional bully, I get deleted.

    It's one thing to expect people to tolerate the trolls. But it's quite another to expect us to be more civil to them than they have to be to us.

    I've been thinking about whether Jeana might have emailed Glenn to complain about her treatment. She likes picking fights and then running off to Daddy when she cannot win.

  6. "Take back the night!!! (Women fear to walk alone at night – men are responsible)"

    Yes, men are responsible for violence. Let's take a look at that.

    A man goes out and robs someone. He gets reported. As he's making his escape, a cop shows up. The cop chases him, and then tackles the man to the ground. The man manages to punch the cop in the face before getting carted off to jail.

    Who was robbed?

    Chances are 3 in 4 that he robbed another man.

    Men make up 75% of the victims of violent crime, even when rape is included and considering the fact that men are less apt to report being a victim of a crime.

    Then you have the jobs, like police officer (mostly male), in which men are subjected to violence daily. And then of course you have the army (again, mostly male), in which men are subjected to violence on a mass scale in combat.

    So most violence is perpetuated by men- AGAINST other men.

    Yet the feminists go on and on and on and on and on and on and on ad nauseum about the same issues of "domestic violence" and then they wonder why so many men are starting to stand up and say "HEY BITCH. FUCK YOU."

    The Wage Gap - This myth has been debunked almost completely when you add controls for experience, hours worked, qualifications, what jobs men and women work, etc etc. Yet the fembots still rail on and on ad nauseum about it.