Unless you're pulling the extreme/radical feminists and basing everything upon them -- and they're just about as representative of mainstream feminism as the Westboro Baptist Church is of Christianity -- feminists are not working to oppress men.
Er, a point on terminology. "Radical feminism" is a subset of feminism which basically says that gender inequality runs very deep and society will have to be greatly changed to get rid of it.
The term "radical feminist" applies to people who believe that, not feminists with bizarre/dangerous ideas.
I won't say anything about the O.P's specific case because you can never be sure what did and did not happen. And more importantly the subject matter is very delicate and difficult because where there are rules they will always be abused.
So if you want to prevent actual sexual harrasment there will always be those that take advantage of it.
What I do agree on is that we should be very carefull to always cling to innocent until proven guilty, and never the other way around.
And finally I do think it is VERY disturbing that male teachers are told to make absolutly sure they are NEVER alone in a room with just girls. They are told that at teacher school, thats just horrible, girls that pull shit like that should be confronted with how viciously they destroy a teachers life if they falsely accuse them.
I think that if false claims would be more harshly punished it might become a bit less of a problem (and by punish I mean along the lines of having to sit through lectures and talking to victims rather then jail time, putting young woman in jail for something like that would be stupid)
Unless you're pulling the extreme/radical feminists and basing everything upon them -- and they're just about as representative of mainstream feminism as the Westboro Baptist Church is of Christianity -- feminists are not working to oppress men.
Er, a point on terminology. "Radical feminism" is a subset of feminism which basically says that gender inequality runs very deep and society will have to be greatly changed to get rid of it.
The term "radical feminist" applies to people who believe that, not feminists with bizarre/dangerous ideas.
You know, as terrible as this stuff is, it really doesn't shock me. I have a friend who, when going through his divorce, was pretty much branded a pedophile by the court (simply because his wife said so, it was all utter lies), lost his job, lost his position on his kids' schools parent teacher board, lost all his friends and a vast quantity of his money. The worse thing was, that the British justice system didn't even invite him to the divorce hearings, they didn't even tell him about them. So he wasn't able to get into court and defend his position. Naturally, she won.
I'm not a fan of feminism. Why? Because all the "feminist" friends I have all say the same thing. "Feminism is about equality".
No.
Equality is about equality.
Feminism was created in the early 20th century as a reaction to the wrongful, extreme cultural and lawful oppression of women. Those women, rightfully stood up for themselves, and won themselves the vote and tons of other things over that century. Nowadays, feminism is a shell of what it used to be, and has actually become the thing it is supposedly against. It's now just an exclusive club for women to rant about men in society and the remaining inequalities. It personifies exclusion.
Me personally? I stand for equality. Equality for women, LGBT's, disabled individuals, etc. I stand for equality in all aspects of life, cultural, lawful, work etc. I speak and act consistent to this belief, I treat all people as equally as my flawed personality allows. Any inconsistencies get learned from and I move on.
Feminism is redundant, it now comes under the wider and more powerful banner of equality, for everyone.
Just give me a minute to get my flame suit on, this is clearly going to rile some people.
I think that if false claims would be more harshly punished it might become a bit less of a problem (and by punish I mean along the lines of having to sit through lectures and talking to victims rather then jail time, putting young woman in jail for something like that would be stupid)
Ok, forgoing the obvious and tired bullshit about feminism having had it's day and now being sexist, how does something being part of a larger, broadly similar thing mean its redundant? Yes, feminism is only part of the whole, but that doesn't stop it from being a worthwhile part.
The 1970s was the early 20th century? I know what you mean, but the suffragette movement has very little in common with modern feminism.
I think I see way too many men getting misty eyed about the suffragette movement as a way of disavowing the more immediate demands contemporary feminism makes on their lives. It's not because the suffragette movement was somehow right on, they were hated at the time and accused of promoting all kinds of social evil (they were also a lot more exclusive). The reason a lot of men like them is because they're not here, they're sufficiently irrelevant now to be dismissed.
Griffolion said:
Nowadays, feminism is a shell of what it used to be, and has actually become the thing it is supposedly against. It's now just an exclusive club for women to rant about men in society and the remaining inequalities. It personifies exclusion.
I'm a man, I studied at a gender studies department, I've been involved with feminist organizations and to feminist protests. Where's the exclusive club which I'm not being invited to?
I'm never good at explaining this, so here's a video.
To summarize (because I know how shitty it is to just post a long video and expect people to watch it) feminism is primarily concerned with women because most men just don't see the point.
Now, it doesn't get there in the video but Michael goes on to say that this is totally understandable, a lot of the assumptions of feminism just don't make sense when you try and explain them to men, but that doesn't make them wrong, it means that most men can only view discrimination as a purely individual concern.
This whole thread is a perfect example, we look at superficial advantage and disadvantage in various situations and we conclude that men are being discriminated against and it's all down to vindictive, entitled women. We don't consider what the underlying structure is or what gendered social forces actually make this possible. That's what feminism allows us to do, and that's why even though I wouldn't call myself a feminist I take massive issue with the argument that feminism isn't relevant, it's still the most important tool we have for understanding gender relations on a level deeper than "who deserves more sympathy".
There should be a separate forum for these threads, or even one big thread where people can have this argument out, over and over, so they can see how fucking repetitive it is.
OP: 'This women did something shitty, feminism is bad and women get preferential treatment all of the time. Men always get the shitty deal. Here's one account from my personal experience and some broad, vague generalizations to further back up my point.'
Followed by several posts in agreement.
Woman objects, rightfully.
More posts about the unfair treatment of men. Rape and domestic violence is mentioned. Declare society's bias, neglect to mention how the biases were created by ye olde gender stereotypes which were largely created in patriarchal system, cite feminism as the creators of said injustices instead.
Several people throw around the word 'strawman'.
Someone stupidly posts the AssholeAthiest or whatever the fuck his name is, pretending he's all knowing and clever even though he's just a douchebag with anger issues who has no idea what the fuck he's talking about.
Poster: 'Feminism has no purpose anymore, feminazis takin' our jobs and our rights, even though this exact thread shows how much it is still needed.'
I find it strange that Women CANNOT legally rape a man, since rape is only "official" when the offender penetrates the victim, which isn't entirely the case when a woman ties you up and f*cks the living shit out of you
In British law, for example, we have several offences which cover this kind of thing.
'Assault by penetration' does what it says on the tin and is completely legally equivalent to rape in every way, it just doesn't involve a penis. The distinction exists to acknowledge that rape is a sexual crime, whereas assault by penetration is more likely to have the intention of hurting or humiliating the victim. They are equally severe under the law, but the judge may wish to tailor the court proceedings to the crime. I used to have a huge problem with this, but the more I look at the law the more I think it makes sense.
There's also an offence called 'causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent', which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years (still more than the vast majority of rape convictions). This would apply if a guy was force fed Viagra and made to penetrate someone else against their will.
From my experience it's noticeable that the only people who believe that rape should apply to any sexual activity have never been penetrated themselves. Forced penetration can kill you or leave you permanently disabled. The level of physical trauma can be enormous, and by forcibly penetrating someone you are taking the risk of inflicting serious injury on them. The accompanying levels of psychological trauma also tend to be noticeably higher, probably because it's simply more painful. I see no reason not to call it a more serious crime, except some flawed effort to only use gender neutral language to describe a crime which is itself highly gendered.
In fact, Canada did that. They got rid of the crime of "rape" altogether and made all sexual crimes count as sexual assault. The reports I have heard suggest it's caused a few problems, namely around the ambiguity of the "categories" of sexual assault and the way the police tend to report them. I'm not surprised.
I am ethically obligated to inform you that the same guy who made that video also said the following to a rape survivor on reddit:
stuff i wasn't aware of
Also, a couple points for people who are still bothering to read new posts here:
1) You're not doing your side (or yourself, or anyone else) any favors by being hostile and adversarial about everything. Make your point and then move the fuck on, like a civilized adult. Sometimes I wish I could be Moderator Of The Internet so I could enforce this rule everywhere, but no doubt I'd receive complaints from people saying that I'm oppressing their right to act like a four-year-old throwing a tantrum.
2) No one would deny that there are indeed some men who have been treated unfairly by women (or by the system), and it's important to recognize that feminists are not cheering when this happens. Unless you're pulling the extremist feminists and basing everything upon them -- and they're just about as representative of mainstream feminism as the Westboro Baptist Church is of Christianity -- feminists are not working to oppress men.
You see, the question that they're primarily interested in is not "How are women being treated unfairly by men?" or "how are men being treated unfairly by women?", but rather, "How do gender stereotypes (or gender itself, as a construct) create a culture in which both genders are treated unfairly, and what can we do about it?"
first, thanks for the info in the spoiler-box, i wasn't aware of that; that being said, i am still convinced that in the video i linked, he makes a valid point; also, i do not have the impression that he's against *equal* treatment of both genders by both genders (at least i cannot come to this conclusion from the videos of the amazing atheist i have seen so far(which aren't many)), but rather against feminazis - which i can only support; feminazis are just as wrong as chauvinists
i am also well aware that there are lots of cases of sexual harassment or even rape, that do not get taken care of the way they should - that is, getting the slimebag and lock him behind bars; due to the reasons you posted
nevertheless, at work i often got the impression that today it is ok for women to act like pubertal little kids and correspondingly talk about which sports/film/music-star is the "tastiest", while you as a man have to carefully tip-toe around the topic because one has to be afraid of being confronted with accusations of sexual harassment by a female coworker
one also has to be careful in crowded places, like bars, concerts etc when passing by women and accidentally touching them somewhere, like buttocks on leg (you can usually put your hands somewhere up to get through the crowd, but i need my legs where they are to get through, just as others cannot put themselves out of the way)
now don't get me wrong, i do not say it's ok to downplay each and every encounter, but some (some, as in not the majority and most certainly not all) women have become overly sensitive and are very quick at pointing fingers, shouting accusations and getting the authorities involved, while the offending thing was just purely accidental, and, like in crowded places, unavoidable
maybe that's part of the explanation why on the one hand one might have the impression that a woman only has to shout "sex-offender!!" and the guy loses his job, money, family and reputation immediately and by default, while on the other hand the exact is the case and no-one is going to believe a genuine victim; and maybe the latter leads to a "come one, grow some thick skin already" attitude (making the person and in the worst case all men look like dickheads), which in turn encourages hasty accusations; i don't know
now that being said, i totally agree on equal treatment of the genders, but it has to be *equal*
I like your posts. They're relatively eloquent, interesting, and well-informed. You're civil and don't toss insults, and you also don't post 10,000 times in a row to try to show everyone that you're capable of yelling louder and longer than the person you're arguing against.
Apparently this needs saying, because we are all five. There are terrible PEOPLE. Some PEOPLE are terrible. Yes?
It is very hard for legitimate victims of sexual assault/harrassment at work to get recognised, and stupid statements like `Women expect X` dont HELP anyone.
Women are not one being.
Women are not all out for money at work.
Some PEOPLE are out for money at work.
And terrible WOMEN are not TERRIBLE BECAUSE THEY ARE WOMEN.
Yes, it sucks that she was believed, I'm really suprised the dude couldn't appeal.
Being a woman on this forum is getting fucking tiring.
As other people have said, it does sound like your friend could be leaving things out.
Can we just get over this, gaming community?
Because I'm getting worried about you.
I hate to do this because I wholeheartedly agree with you but in your last couple of sentences you are doing exactly what you were just complaining about which I think is undermining your entirely valid point.
What about alimony? Women claim they are equal and yet they are entitled to some of an ex-husband's money forever, presumably because they are unable to pay their own way in life. As George Orwell would say, "we are all equal, but some of us are more equal than others." Feminism is one of the most unrealistic and hypocritical movements of the modern age. They claim to pursue "equality" by viciously attacking anything that treats them as inferiors but they pointedly ignore anything that treats them as superior, or claim that they deserve it for no reason other than the fact that they are women, while fighting for male/female equality. It makes me sick to my stomach honestly.
Also OP, sorry to hear about your friend, hope everything works out for him. Shit like this disgusts me to my core, almost as much as the fact that our government allows it to happen.
I'm somewhat skeptical regarding your anecdotal story. Even in a country with outlandishly frivolous lawsuits, that one sounds a bit far fetched. Especially considering a group of witnesses who could have testified on his behalf. Something seems amiss.
You'll get no argument from me regarding the various double standards the genders have to face in various facets of their lives. But I'd like to know more about your friends situation.
"No Judge or Jury with integrity" You said it right there. Very very few people have integrity in this day and age, and Just because you are a Judge or a member of a Jury doesn't mean squat. As for the story, if it went how he said it, I suspect that he tried to defend himself and he got screwed because he wasn't familiar enough with the law, but I would not be surprised at all if she won this case purely because she got the right judge, or the right jury. Most people are in no way qualified to be an impartial judge or Jury member.
You get pissed at the phrase "women expect X", but it goes both ways. Not all men are pigs, not all guys are assholes, it's human nature to blame the actions of a few on their whole group. No use getting overly frustrated about it, human nature isn't going to change overnight.
Also, I can see how being a woman on this forum could be annoying, but you should try being religious.
Freechoice said:
To anyone who thinks that the gender divisions are equal, look at the TV Tropes page linked below. Nearly all of the male examples are either bodily or psychologically harmful if they occur. A lot of the female examples only occur as tropes in entertainment/art works.
Link [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoubleStandard?from=Main.DoubleStandards]
That's rough. I wish I could say that I was surprised, but I'm not at all.
renegade7 said:
snip
As other people have said, it does sound like your friend could be leaving things out.
Can we just get over this, gaming community?
Because I'm getting worried about you.
If a woman brushed up against me by accident and I accused her of harassment, I wouldn't see a red cent.
snip[/quote]
I imagine in fact that the judge would award her your money to pay for legal fees, and you would probably be counter charged with harassment for taking her to court.
dobahci said:
Swyftstar said:
snip
Why do women fear sexual harassment? Why do they constantly fear rape? Because it happens, and it happens all the time.
Yeah, well call it reparations for women being treated like animals for....thousands of years. I'm sorry worse than animals. I'm pretty sure the family dog was treated better than the wife, in some cases.
I'm calling BS. Just because you carried that kid doesn't mean squat. Ask all the kids in foster care. Ask all the kids in the adoption system. Ask all the kids who live with their fathers because they don't even know where their mother is. Ask all the kids who've been abused by their mothers. Carrying the kid doesn't mean shit, raising them, and caring for them does, and any parent who is worthy of that title would tell you the exact same damn thing.
Mortai Gravesend said:
snip There's a reason they conduct studies instead of pulling some random know-it-all and asking about his personal experiences.snip
snip
I can't even articulate how much this argument pisses me off, and how much of a cop-out it is. It's like saying that a single person has no means of understanding anything about the world around them. Now, I'm not trying to say that anecdotal evidence is all-powerful, I'm not even saying that it's as good as a study, but it is evidence, and it's worthy of examination. You can't just automatically dismiss it because it doesn't meet your standards, a true scientist examines all the evidence at hand, while being mindful of where it came from. Some studies aren't worth the paper the conclusions are written on. Look at myth-busters. They follow the scientific method, but no scientist would call their results conclusive, or even reliable. Anecdotal evidence has value, "One sure mark of a fool is to dismiss anything that falls outside his experience as impossible." That's why you need to look at anecdotal evidence just as much as you need to look at the studies.
thaluikhain said:
Phasmal said:
snip
Yes, there are instances when gender bias works against men, but that's because you can't have a massive gender bias such as our society has and have it work for the benefit of one gender all the time.snip
No. Just no. Just because a bias is large, doesn't mean that it can't benefit only one side. Frankly, look at the bias between white and black during the 1700s, or even the 1800s, you won't find any benefits for the blacks. ANY. The reasons that there are biases against men are much deeper than, oh it has to go both ways.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
