If Being Compassionate Towards Mens Suffering Could Prevent Violence Would You

goin to prison is so cool! I wanna go to prison so I can be cool, and everyone will know I must be really really smart.

 

Your sources are irrelevant, they make the same mistakes you do i.e. comparing incomes of men and women who work in different jobs. This is like comparing apples and oranges, you can't conclude anything coherent with that. Here are some (canadian) stats about income comparision between men and women for the same job, same hours of work:

- Construction: in some fields women's salary is equivalent (painters for example), while in some others there can be up to a 30% gap in between men's and women's salaries. For electricians there is a 13% gap while as for carpenters, the gap is actually 29%.
(Source: www.ccq.org)
- Office work: the original 24% gap from 1988 has been reduced by half, to set at 12% as of 2008.
- Management: even though women are being more and more promoted, this workfield has one of the strongest gap. High management and other high-paid fields have wage gaps much superior to the national average of 17% gap between men and women's salaries.
(Source: Statistics Canada, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2011001/article/11394-fra.htm#a1)

I strongly disagree with that. There is much more differences betweem individuals of a same gender than between both genders in general. Both genders have pretty much the same potential, but the education they receive can reinforce or reverse tendencies. Most differences between males and females are cultural, not biological (exept maybe when you look at how our bodies are built). A baby's brain is neutral at first, no matter if a boy or a girl, but the education each one gets is biased and specific to its gender from the start. We don't buy the same toys to little girls or little boys, we don't talk to them the same way or about the same things, we don't react the same to their behavior, we don't socialize them the same way... Of course with time this will produce males and females that are very different from each other, the opposite would be quite surprising. But it's been observed in societies that provide kids with a non gender based education that those differences tend to diminish drastically. So, cultural or biological? Maybe a bit of both. There's differences between a boy and a girl, but there is just as much between a boy and another boy.

And those men often resort to insults to vent out their resentment about that single female, sad but true.

I'd like you to give me examples of what you call "gentlemanly courtship" to make sure we're on the same page. A problem I've often seen (and had to deal with sometimes) is that some men think they're being courtuous and flirty, while they're just being obnoxious. Different perceptions I guess. To be able to say more though, I'll wait till you tell me more about what you think "gentlemanly courtship" is exactly.

Once again, you put words in my mouth. I get you might like it, but for the sake of the conversation you should stop and stick to what I really write instead.

Your college was very cautious about the question, and, once again, props to them. (Tho I'm sure they did it to cover their own asses to prevent a lawsuit, just as much as they did it to protect their female students.) It's a bit extreme I concur, but sometimes it's better to be safe than sorry. I guess it's like many other laws and regulations that exist: they felt the necessity to create it because some stupid people somewhere didn't have enough judgement to behave or do what's right, so in the end everyone gets penalized because of one or two idiots. If that is so then you should be mad at those idiots, not feminists, because they are the real cause of those regulations being put in place. If people had enough judgement and common sense NOT to take advantage of a passed-out girl or simply being able to tell when somebody obviously isn't consent (gestures and facial expressions can tell a lot if the person is so intoxicated they can't speak), nobody would feel the need to create such laws.

 

What I understand is oppression and institutionalization, not privilege, so you're correct that I, as a whitey, don't understand white privilege. Institutionalization is something I understand, having served 20 years in that bogus industry, psychiatry. Psychiatric incarceration is really just another form of imprisonment. I've been locked up a LOT of times (I ain't even black). I don't know, if anything I think I'm more familiar with male privilege and middle-class privilege.

In the UK, black people are more likely to be psychiatrically incarcerated than white people but in the USA, the National Alliance on Mental Illness says that African Americans (and Hispanic Americans) use mental health services at half the rate as Caucasian people.

How does it factor in when "13.2% of the U.S. population, or roughly 42 million people, identify themselves as African American, according to 2013 US Census Bureau numbers."? How can anyone honestly determine white privilege when the percentage of the African American population is already so small? It isn't even a quarter of the population. One would have to look at what percentage of that 13.2% is considered successful and living a Quality of Life, and what percentage is damned to unholy Hell.

I totally don't get the white and black thing. I never did and I never will. They don't teach me about it in cuckoo school.

 

you almost just illustrated white privilege - or "black oppression" if you'd rather call it that.

if black people only make up 13.6% of the population...why do they make up 39.4% of the US prison population?!

because "the system" favors white people. it's pretty simple to recognize.

 

Love It!

Told you I'm equally hated by MRA's as I am by Feminists, both groups only care about inequality when it effects their gender and are incapable of acknowledging inequalities when they affect the other gender.

 

I didn't say I'm only MRA.

I'm egalatarian.

Many self-proclaimed feminists would, if they heard me speak without hearing what I consider myself or what I think of feminism, think me a feminist.

The thing about feminism is that it has a great sounding dictionary definition - and there's a wide acceptence of it as some sort of feel-good populist movement for the wellbeing of women and men and equality and blah blah blah.... but then there's what it really is, which is an academic and political movement led by specific people with specific (generally self-serving) goals and lines of rhetoric which really do not reflect reality or justice.

I'm an MRA because feminism has no interest in protecting the rights of men (though it will magically all be better when the patriarchy is toppled - sort of like the free-market religion: feminism only tramples everything in it's path because you don't bow down and be trampled, as soon as you do that they'll stop, just like wages would work themselves out of we destroyed labor organizations and minimum wage laws). In fact, these feminist leaders generally support women over men in issues where there was already bias against men, and in issues where women have overtaken men - but where women actually need help, they do nothing - why? Because if we fixed the real issues, we'd have no need of a feminist intelligencia or power structure, which some people curretly profit greatly from. MRA doesn't mean anything about attacking women, that's feminist bull - it's about attacking the injustices of feminism.

The grassroots populist feminists who are oblivious to what feminism actually is (and will argue to the death that it's not, even if you show them, because well, THEY'RE not that, and they want to use the word) agree with everything I say, until the word feminism comes up. If you accept their (incorrect) definition of feminism, I'm a feminist.

 

I hate feminism and I hate the men's rights movement. I hate black power and the gay agenda. I hate all the other civil rights movements too.

I stand for EQUALITY. Not attention whoring. That's all your freaking movement is. Another attention whoring self centered pity party who can't get much done because it's divided under different leaders and names. I wish all of them would shut the fuck up and actually stand for EQUALITY for EVERYONE. One group's problems are not any more or less important than the next's, because inequality in and of itself is wrong. All you really do with these different movements is bring negative emotions into the world, even if you're trying to make a change for the better. I mean, you can't seriously expect to bring change about when you're standing there screaming at each other like a couple of children fighting about who gets to play in the sandbox? What's needed isn't finger pointing and statistics proving one side more right than the other. What's needed is love, compassion, and understanding, which is the very thing you're supposed to be standing for in the first place. Grow up

/rant

 

When there's injustice, it often taken a coordinated group with certain goals to be able to cause any real change.

Unfortionately, groups with wide goals are generally not as effectual and not taken as seriously. Baby steps are often necessary.

In the case of feminism, well there's obviously lots of womens rights and issues that need fixing, it's just that the feminist movement in particular is full of toxic despicable bullshit. The MRM is the answer to that toxic bullshit - it does not argue against equality, but for equality, focusing on specific but very important issues where feminism either has gone overboard, or where there was always inequality in favor of women.

There may be situations where I can support bad groups fighting the good fight - the black panthers were a necessity, the PLO is totally understandable, etc. - however those movements de-radicalize and/or dissolve as the situations that caused their formation improve - women are the majority of people on earth, so having a rabid group trying to take equality, and the kids and house and money and car and boat, not to mention generally argue that men (the minority of the population) are violent semi-human untrustworthy rape/violence machines, is NOT going to help equality, or voluntarially de-radicalize.

 

Of course. That's why the MRM has been classified as a hate group and NOT feminism - far less toxic bullshit, we all know that.

Source: http://radfemworldnews.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/southern-poverty-law-center-names-mens-rights-activists-mras-as-hate-group/

 

Yes, feminism pretty much runs politics - if you bring the logic, they bring the screaming, and you lose, because you're attacking women and blah blah blah.

Feminism doesn't like being questioned - and feminism has a lot of power. How would you NOT see MRA's being demonized? Do a little research on the issue.

Of course, that is disheartening, the southern poverty law center is usually on top of their shit. Not surprising though.

Anything that doesn't agree whole-heartedly with anything said by feminists is anti-woman and pro-hate and the patriarchy oppressing women - because feminists wrote the definition of feminism, and it's roundly accepted - if you disagree with the definition, well it's right there in the dictionary where the feminists put it, so you're obviously wrong, and hate women.

Yay, circular logic!

I attack the feminist label because of the terrible things it stands for, that are accepted as good or at least neutral, because they're defended by feminism. Feminism has turned around and attacked the MRA label, because if they can do so successfully they don't have to address the issues brought up by MRA's. It's pure ad hominem bullshit.

 

39.4% is less than 1 million inmates, correct? US pop is over 300 million, with only 42 million African Americans. So not even 1 million out of 42 million are in prison. There are more white people in the general population, and more white people in jail.

I still very much fail to see black oppression. When I wrote about oppression and institutionalization I was thinking more about impoverished and disadvantaged white people and the other prison system, psychiatry.

 

Maybe something like affirmative action should exist, but I don't think it should be based on race and gender, socioeconmics regardless of race and gender, yes, but race and gender, no.

For those that believe in affirmative action as it is do you really think Colin Powell's kids, or Condaleeza Rice's kids, or Micheal Jordan's kids ec cetera should be given preference over a white kid who grew up in a trailor on food stamps in appelachia????

 

In the first sentence are you saying that socioeconomics should be the basis for affirmative action and, regardless of other criteria?

 

Yes that is what I'm saying....

I wonder if there is an office of white male privilege I can go to, so I can get my white male privilege because I am a white male and I never got mine

Anyone know where it is, the office of white male privilege???

 

The unemployment office? Is this a trick question? .lol

I agree, socioeconomics as the basis for affirmative action. I'm not into dicing myself into bits for classification purposes (it hurts). I'm a long list of specified things, human being rarely makes that list sometimes. jeez.

I'm a statistic! I'm a social security number! Didn't George Carlin help us out about this stuff?

 

Even though George Carlin was an athiest, I like to think he's giving them hell in heaven.

I wonder what George Carlin would have to say about the interweb if he were around today

 

Probably something about all of us being spidery pests. I dunno.

 

Well, if MRA's were spending more time actually doing something to help men, rather than bashing feminism and harass or threaten feminist militants, they wouldn't be classified as a hate group. Any sane person would conclude the same of any other group acting the same way and using the same intimidation tactics, it's just logical. Nobody pressured the southern poverty law center to classify the MRM as a hate group because it wasn't needed, you guys REALLY don't need feminists to make yourselves look bad as you do a pretty good job at it on your own. And if feminism was such a powerful hate movement as you said, MRM would be punishable by death penalty, which is not the case. There is some points MRA's bring that have validity, but the real problem is what they do to "fix" those problems.

 

Apparently you cherrypicked information and missed the part where they DID compare the same positions in the same industries (video from http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/09/22/female-scholar-gender-pay-gap-so-deeply-misleading-its-almost-an-outright-falsehood/)
I don't know too much about Canada's labor issues. But even the US Dept of Labor busted the gender-gap myth:
http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf

"The gap is commonly measured as the ratio of the median earnings of women and the median earnings of
men, which indicates the proportion of the median male earnings that the median female earnings
represent When the ratio is calculated for all men and women who are paid wages or salaries, or for all
wage and salary earners who work full-time and year-round, the measure is often called the raw gender
wage gap."

The article you posted hardly mentions or accounts for factors like: occupation, work experience, or career interruptions such as motherhood

I partially agree with you. I won't deny there are cultural influences that define who we are and who we become. However you can look at male and female toddlers and know there are intrinsic behavioral differences. Little boys engage in more rough and tumble play, and throw things at each other. Girls tend to engage in more make-believe games and aren't as rambunctious as boys. Just simple observations of early age children can show there's psychological differences between the genders. As these kids grow into men and women, they also take in their intrinsic differences that make men and women uniquely different from each other. I think that it's totally OK to step outside gender-role stereotyes if one wishes to do so. But I think it's morally wrong to try and raise a generation of girls to be more masculine and boys to be more feminine only for the sake of breaking norms.

And if she thinks she's too good for him, why would she give a shit about what the inferior guy thinks?

Holding doors open for women, men finding you hot is considered sexist, being told you're attractive is creepy, a guy asking for your number is also considered creepy. Glancing at her features is considered sexual assault. Feminism has killed chivalry and bullied men into guilt and fear of consequences. It's no wonder so many women out there are sick and tired of spineless nice guys who make doormats of themselves.

When you say things like: "props to your former college, they obviously didn't wanna take any chance on that matter and I can only congratulate them."

You're implying that you basically support criminalizing the majority of all sex in the world. Basically, it turns a romantic wedding anniversary dinner with champagne and wine into a rape scene. Just like my college did.

Feminists are the real cause of these laws being put in place. It's a supremacy movement that victimizes women and vilifies males by equating petty sexisms to heinous crimes like rape. Laws like this give females the power to Feminism is the reason so many are complaining there's no real men left anymore, because they've all been debased into spineless nice guys who think putting women on the pedestal is the only way to succeed as a man in the dating world. Feminists prey on young women to perpetuate a "woe is me" mentality in order to further their Marxist agenda.

 

I hate the MRM too. Even though they shine light on the evils of feminism, they still use the same exact victim-bating tactics and play into the EXACT same divide-and-conquer tactics that feminists use. That's what feminists and MRAs are all about: Divide-and-Conquer to turn women and men against each other. Why not be an egalitarian instead, and realize that there are intrinsic differences between males and females and just deal with it?

Actually, Feminism is a hate group as well. Here's some quotes from famous 3rd wave feminist pioneers and authors, enjoy:

• “I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” – Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor

• “To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.” -– Valerie Solanas

• “I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” — Andrea Dworkin

• “Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear” — Susan Brownmiller

• “The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men.” — Sharon Stone

• “In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent.” — Catherine MacKinnon

• “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” — Sally Miller Gearhart

• “Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience.” – Catherine Comins

• “All men are rapists and that’s all they are” — Marilyn French

• “Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.” — Germaine Greer