DemetriDominov wrote:
With anything that gets mass media attention, it's always the most radical of a population that gets the most attention.

As previously said - feminists who could also be considered misandrist are like terrorists of the Islamic world - they grossly misrepresent the population as a whole and are usually held at least at arms length -at best. That's also not to say there aren't many extremely angry women in the movement, especially considering that the global average of women who will suffer sexual assault during their lifetime is 1 in 3.

Let us also consider the effect of media on both the male and female population. Males are manipulated at just about every angle to be strong, indifferent to emotion, competitive, and become some sort of leader or independent from the support of a community. Women on the other hand are generally considered weaker, emotional, a follower, a mother, or if all else fails, an independent woman making her money on a pole in a club.

It should come to no surprise then that the majority of the population is actually buying into these stereotypes; that our prisons (the US's new mental institutions) are filled with men who have warped that image of a "man" into one of dominance and control over others because they themselves lack a certain amount of control over their own lives. It should come as no surprise then that when the majority of women are taught from day 1 to obey, to focus on her self image, and to perfect her social appearance. Only the truly mentally ill and the unfortunate few are going to prison.

TL;DR: Social constructs dictate the evidence of men being less moral than women. Men are taught to take risks and to rise above all others no matter the cost. Women are taught the opposite, and well behaved women rarely make history.

Chongara wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

Chongara wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
I think that on a whole, women are not morally superior to men, but I feel that with the changes in the women's rights movement, the idea that men are useless, disgusting, rape mongering pigs (Read: The rise in misandry over the past 40 years) are starting to lead to the idea that men only think about sex with women, and that if we like a woman physically, we will take physical action against them if we could.

I've never actually heard anyone espouse this idea in person. When I've seen it the media it's almost entirely been relegated to almost cartoonish fictional caricatures. In terms of the actual feminists I've seen maybe a handful of writers that would back the kind of thinking you're outlining here and they hardly have the widest acceptance

I'm not really sure where people are finding all these "feminists" or aspects of the "women's rights movement" that are putting forward the idea that men are rape-mongering pigs, or anything else that could be genuinely be called misandry. I've not been able to find many examples out in the wild save for some clear trolls commenting on social media, and some really fringe blogs.

tumblr.com... search for misandry... You'll get plenty of people that are serious and not on the fringe of society...

I'm not really sure I'd take random ramblings of some random person on tumblr as any signs of mainstream acceptance of the idea. Could you maybe point to something from a major network broadcast, newspaper, or other widely-circulated publication endorsing these ideas? I mean even a couple of major blogs would better serve your point. Really the closest I've seen in that last category is iblamethepatriarcy, and even that is honestly on the smallish-side and doesn't seem to garner much respect in the wider sample of feminist blogs I've seen.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
There are people that feel that way, but they are certainly on the fringe.

Are they a minority? Yes, but they're still growing, especially here in the states when politicians feel that anything that deals with a woman and her body is gross and icky, and should be swiftly monitored and controlled... Well the man hating comes into light a lot more...


Note: In case my post wasn't clear: an addendum to my first few posts in this thread...

Equal Rights for all Genders = Very good thing
Misogyny = Bad
Misandry = Just as Bad

First what you're citing in your first paragraph is far closer to misogyny and disadvantageous for women than it is men. Secondly on average men have more social, economic and political power than women do, in spite of individual examples that may buck the trend. Additionally the vast majority of positions of social, economic and political power are stilled filled with men and largely men who grew up in era when women's rights were either not a thing, or still in their infancy did not have the level of mainstream acceptance they do today.

In light of that I think it's safe to say that Misogyny tends to be actively more harmful than Misandry and at least on practical level is in fact "worse than misandry".

 Alfndrate wrote:
Wendy McElroy wrote a book in 2001 called: Sexual Correctness: The Gender-Feminist Attack on Women. in which she says, that the feminist movement had changed from an anger towards men to a full on hatred in which the misandric position was becoming apparent in which the feminist movement was beginning to see men (as a whole) as irreformable and rapists.

The problem with the idea of misandry is that it classifies all men as "pigs", simply because we are men. It is just as discriminatory as someone who thinks that all gay men and women are going to ruin the sanctity of marriage.

Some quick news links related to misandry:
http://my.hsj.org/Schools/Newspaper/tabid/100/view/frontpage/articleid/580914/newspaperid/4482/Misandry.aspx
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roy-speckhardt/some-arguments-just-dont-_b_2639935.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/abuse-your-boyfriend-app-it-promotes-outdated-stereotypes-and-the-idea-that-violence-is-acceptable-8480181.html

 DemetriDominov wrote:

Let us also consider the effect of media on both the male and female population. Males are manipulated at just about every angle to be strong, indifferent to emotion, competitive, and become some sort of leader or independent from the support of a community. Women on the other hand are generally considered weaker, emotional, a follower, a mother, or if all else fails, an independent woman making her money on a pole in a club.

 Seaward wrote:

 DemetriDominov wrote:

Let us also consider the effect of media on both the male and female population. Males are manipulated at just about every angle to be strong, indifferent to emotion, competitive, and become some sort of leader or independent from the support of a community. Women on the other hand are generally considered weaker, emotional, a follower, a mother, or if all else fails, an independent woman making her money on a pole in a club.

Are we considering media only from twenty years ago or something?

 Seaward wrote:

 DemetriDominov wrote:

Let us also consider the effect of media on both the male and female population. Males are manipulated at just about every angle to be strong, indifferent to emotion, competitive, and become some sort of leader or independent from the support of a community. Women on the other hand are generally considered weaker, emotional, a follower, a mother, or if all else fails, an independent woman making her money on a pole in a club.

Are we considering media only from twenty years ago or something?

 Rented Tritium wrote:
Nearly everything still fails the bechdel test.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bechdel_test

Chongara wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

You hardly have to do that. While there certainly is wider acceptance of different male & female roles, in general men are still make up the majority of active risk-taking characters and women still make up the majority of passive or supportive characters. For every kick-ass action woman out there, you've got 5 damsels in distress/support characters/girlfriends and maybe another awfully executed "Strong woman" character, that is really just a straw-feminist caricature of the sort that Alfrndrate seems to run into IRL all the time.

That's quite a bit different from what you said prior, but I'll let it slide.

And we must watch wildly different movies.

 Seaward wrote:

 Rented Tritium wrote:
Nearly everything still fails the bechdel test.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bechdel_test

Including real life most of the time.

 Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
Men have more testosterone pumping through their veins. We do more stupid stuff. I'd say there's definitely some bias for a hot chick, but those are but a small percentage.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
Wait.

You're suggesting that real life women fail the bechdel test?

Ok, I've found the problem. It's you. You're the problem. You don't think women are actual people when you aren't around.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
I know a ton of self described feminists and I've never actually met one that says things like that. I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm saying that they don't exist in any serious numbers.

They're a rare unicorn in the wilderness, basically used as a strawman.

 Seaward wrote:

 Rented Tritium wrote:
Wait.

You're suggesting that real life women fail the bechdel test?

Ok, I've found the problem. It's you. You're the problem. You don't think women are actual people when you aren't around.

You think two women have never spoken about a man while together? That's a little on the insane edge of things, don't you think?

 Seaward wrote:

 Rented Tritium wrote:
Wait.

You're suggesting that real life women fail the bechdel test?

Ok, I've found the problem. It's you. You're the problem. You don't think women are actual people when you aren't around.

You think two women have never spoken about a man while together? That's a little on the insane edge of things, don't you think?

 DemetriDominov wrote:
I think a lot of people who misunderstand the feminist movement don't understand the difference between misandry and the movement to end patriarchal privilege.

Misandry - the simple hatred of men and is often tied with a woman's superiority over men.

Patriarchal privilege - The reality that men, to this day, are in many positions of power over women. They earn more, they have more de facto rights, and yes they do more prison time and don't get away with many crimes (unless you are also an affluent -*cough* white- male).

The argument of giving equality to women (or classes, or races) often says that we must raise up those who have less rights than "us". The fact of the matter is though, when a pair of scales are unbalanced, you cannot merely raise one side of the scales to the exact level of an object much higher above normal. It is as artificial as someone just putting their hand under the weight and forcing them to hold it there like Atlas.

What people don't talk about as much, or at least fail to convey is that if you want equality, privileges (not rights) must be relinquished by those in power. This isn't as grand as having our next president an Asian woman, but every day things like having the general male population understand that rape and sexual assault are never ok under any circumstance and that even the language we use continues to aggravate and perpetuate the problem because it normalizes the idea that women are still less than men.

 Rented Tritium wrote:

 DemetriDominov wrote:
I think a lot of people who misunderstand the feminist movement don't understand the difference between misandry and the movement to end patriarchal privilege.

Misandry - the simple hatred of men and is often tied with a woman's superiority over men.

Patriarchal privilege - The reality that men, to this day, are in many positions of power over women. They earn more, they have more de facto rights, and yes they do more prison time and don't get away with many crimes (unless you are also an affluent -*cough* white- male).

The argument of giving equality to women (or classes, or races) often says that we must raise up those who have less rights than "us". The fact of the matter is though, when a pair of scales are unbalanced, you cannot merely raise one side of the scales to the exact level of an object much higher above normal. It is as artificial as someone just putting their hand under the weight and forcing them to hold it there like Atlas.

What people don't talk about as much, or at least fail to convey is that if you want equality, privileges (not rights) must be relinquished by those in power. This isn't as grand as having our next president an Asian woman, but every day things like having the general male population understand that rape and sexual assault are never ok under any circumstance and that even the language we use continues to aggravate and perpetuate the problem because it normalizes the idea that women are still less than men.

Bottom line is the patriarchy hurts everyone.

 DemetriDominov wrote:
I think a lot of people who misunderstand the feminist movement don't understand the difference between misandry and the movement to end patriarchal privilege.

Misandry - the simple hatred of men and is often tied with a woman's superiority over men.

Patriarchal privilege - The reality that men, to this day, are in many positions of power over women. They earn more, they have more de facto rights, and yes they do more prison time and don't get away with many crimes (unless you are also an affluent -*cough* white- male).

The argument of giving equality to women (or classes, or races) often says that we must raise up those who have less rights than "us". The fact of the matter is though, when a pair of scales are unbalanced, you cannot merely raise one side of the scales to the exact level of an object much higher above normal. It is as artificial as someone just putting their hand under the weight and forcing them to hold it there like Atlas.

What people don't talk about as much, or at least fail to convey is that if you want equality, privileges (not rights) must be relinquished by those in power. This isn't as grand as having our next president an Asian woman, but every day things like having the general male population understand that rape and sexual assault are never ok under any circumstance and that even the language we use continues to aggravate and perpetuate the problem because it normalizes the idea that women are still less than men.

 whembly wrote:


I'll throw a reverse at ya'll... just look at the divorce laws. You'll see how screwed men are...

 Frazzled wrote:

 whembly wrote:


I'll throw a reverse at ya'll... just look at the divorce laws. You'll see how screwed men are...

How are they screwed again?

 Frazzled wrote:

Not if you're the partriarch.

 whembly wrote:

I'll throw a reverse at ya'll... just look at the divorce laws. You'll see how screwed men are...

 rockerbikie wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 whembly wrote:


I'll throw a reverse at ya'll... just look at the divorce laws. You'll see how screwed men are...

How are they screwed again?

Custody laws.

 Frazzled wrote:

 rockerbikie wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 whembly wrote:


I'll throw a reverse at ya'll... just look at the divorce laws. You'll see how screwed men are...

How are they screwed again?

Custody laws.

I'll repeat. How are they screwed again?

 rockerbikie wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 rockerbikie wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 whembly wrote:


I'll throw a reverse at ya'll... just look at the divorce laws. You'll see how screwed men are...

How are they screwed again?

Custody laws.

I'll repeat. How are they screwed again?

90% of court cases the wife gets the children in a custody despiutes. You can find regular cases throughout your community where it happened but in your opinion there is probably no such thing as inequality for men and you wear the blinders.

 Frazzled wrote:
... or the draft
---I'll give you that. Although thats going to be gone now.

, gender in the military,
-what about it.
gender work roles
-what roles? how does that discriminate?

, gender in sports,
-wait, are you just typing gender in front of everything now?

gender in sexuality,
-yep I was right.

gender in prison
-wow, people in prison are girls and boys.

, gender in poverty,
-I like ice cream

gender in lifespan
-chocolate icecream

gender in income
-see now you're just babbling. statistics show women make less. You can argue the statistics' assumptions but that doesn't help you argument that men are discriminated against.

, gender in fame,
-I like chocolate topping on my chocolate ice cream

gender in family
-surprisingly we haven't invented cloning yet.

, or lets go all the way back to woman's suffrage; when women were given the right to vote less than a century ago - they immediately got congress to pass prohibition because they were sick of being beaten by their drunken husbands.
-this is an example of what again? Oh yes, I like M&Ms in my chocolate ice cream.

This is a latent sixty years after the US had enough sense to abolish slavery during a war over state rights. If there's anything we know about the US, is that our laws are not very sensible. Prohibition caused more problems than they solved, and women are still waiting almost a century later for their husbands to stop killing them.
-I like my ice cream in cups, not cones.

 Frazzled wrote:
... or the draft
---I'll give you that. Although thats going to be gone now.

, gender in the military,
-what about it.
gender work roles
-what roles? how does that discriminate?

, gender in sports,
-wait, are you just typing gender in front of everything now?

gender in sexuality,
-yep I was right.

gender in prison
-wow, people in prison are girls and boys.

, gender in poverty,
-I like ice cream

gender in lifespan
-chocolate icecream

gender in income
-see now you're just babbling. statistics show women make less. You can argue the statistics' assumptions but that doesn't help you argument that men are discriminated against.

, gender in fame,
-I like chocolate topping on my chocolate ice cream

gender in family
-surprisingly we haven't invented cloning yet.

, or lets go all the way back to woman's suffrage; when women were given the right to vote less than a century ago - they immediately got congress to pass prohibition because they were sick of being beaten by their drunken husbands.
-this is an example of what again? Oh yes, I like M&Ms in my chocolate ice cream.

This is a latent sixty years after the US had enough sense to abolish slavery during a war over state rights. If there's anything we know about the US, is that our laws are not very sensible. Prohibition caused more problems than they solved, and women are still waiting almost a century later for their husbands to stop killing them.
-I like my ice cream in cups, not cones.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rockerbikie wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 rockerbikie wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 whembly wrote:


I'll throw a reverse at ya'll... just look at the divorce laws. You'll see how screwed men are...

How are they screwed again?

Custody laws.

You mean Aussie right?

I'll repeat. How are they screwed again?

90% of court cases the wife gets the children in a custody despiutes. You can find regular cases throughout your community where it happened but in your opinion there is probably no such thing as inequality for men and you wear the blinders.

Maybe in Kiwie town but thats changing here. In Texas its now standard court practice to award 50/50 custody.

 Frazzled wrote:
So you're not arguing women have an advantage, despite what you posted? Frazzled confused now.