Masculism

[Anti-Fascist]

This is how feminist ideology is anti-men (source is Wikipedia/antirape.hypermart.net):

-Child custody strongly favoring mothers
-Men incarcerated for inability to pay unrealistic child support payments
-Children aborted or given up for adoption without fathers' consent
-Men risking their lives in military service
-High-risk employment, but receiving no special honor for doing so
-Men charged in domestic violence cases, even when victims
-Men charged in rape and sexual harassment cases with no evidence beyond the plaintiff's claim, where the accusation frequently destroys a man's life
Research and free speech repressed unless pro-feminist
-Men fired from their jobs for dissenting with feminist ideology in the workplace
-Hate crimes against men
-Relative lack of funding for men's health
-Lack of advocacy for men's rights and entitlement programs for women only
-Special government agencies for women's affairs with no corresponding agencies for men's affairs

Masculism fights for equity between the sexes with the equity as close to equality as nature will allow.

Masculism does recognise that there are sex based difference between men and women; however, it holds that many of the differences which are claimed today, and in the past, are in fact based on false gender stereotypes.

Masculism holds that both men and women have been victims of their assigned gender roles.

Masculism does not blame one sex for that predicament wherein we find ourselves because both sexes have contributed to the definition of traditional gender roles.

Masculism believes that a patriachy/matriachy existed in the past, with men and women being given power in the spheres of life which impacted their sex the most, e.g., women had inordinate power in the areas of sexuality, reproduction, child rearing, family, and home, whereas men has inordinate powers in areas related to paid work, government, overall decision making concerned with community survival.

Masculism wants to end the patriachy/matriachy by expanding the definition of what it means to be a man or a woman so that both sexes are given equal opportunities and responsibilities in areas from which they have been traditionally excluded.

Masculism wants to end all forms of sex-based discrimination against men and women.

[Invader Zim]

Im not even going to touch this thread further than saying that there is massive discrimination against women when it comes to job candidate selection.

[Anti-Fascist]

Im [sic] not even going to touch this thread

And you have not. Tell me, did you even read my post? What you have stated does not conflict with masculism in the slightest. Masculism is pro-women, anti-patriarchy.

[redstar2000]

Ok, let's run this nonsense down...


Child custody strongly favoring mothers

The vast majority of divorced men do not seek custody of their children and are often quite indifferent to their fate.


Men incarcerated for inability to pay unrealistic child support payments

After divorce, the net wealth of men increases...women and children are often plunged into poverty.


Children aborted or given up for adoption without fathers' consent

Impregnation of a woman does not confer ownership of a woman's body or the right to participate in any decision she may make regarding the outcome of the pregnancy.


Men risking their lives in military service

Women do that too now.

And if military service does not appeal to you, may I suggest that you look to capitalism and imperialism as the source of your problem, not feminism.


High-risk employment, but receiving no special honor for doing so

How is feminism responsible for this?


Men charged in domestic violence cases, even when victims

How do you know they are "victims"? Are you suggesting that women beat up their partners and then have them arrested as well?


Men charged in rape and sexual harassment cases with no evidence beyond the plaintiff's claim, where the accusation frequently destroys a man's life

What does it do for a woman's life to be raped?


Research and free speech repressed unless pro-feminist

:lol: Haven't been reading the "evolutionary psychologists", have you?

Don't you know the latest "intellectual" fashion? Women are "genetically predisposed" to mate with/submit to "high status males" because they (the males) have "superior genes".


Men fired from their jobs for dissenting with feminist ideology in the workplace

Yes, that probably happens two or three times a year.


Hate crimes against men

Like blowing up women's clinics?


Relative lack of funding for men's health

There are very few ailments that are specific to one sex (even men can get breast cancer, for example).

The usual example mentioned in this context is the discrepancy in funding for research into breast cancer (mostly women) and prostrate cancer (all men, to my knowledge).

What the example overlooks is that breast cancer is extremely dangerous and often kills within a few years; prostrate cancer is almost the most benign cancer there is, and men who have it usually die from some other condition connected with old age long before their prostrate cancer can do them in.

The research priority for breast cancer is clearly justified.


Lack of advocacy for men's rights and entitlement programs for women only

What special "men's rights" need advocacy?

What entitlement programs are limited to women only?


Special government agencies for women's affairs with no corresponding agencies for men's affairs

What do you think the Department of Commerce is?

The reason that there are "special agencies" for women's affairs is that men's affairs are the norm, the "default option" for all normal government operations.

Whenever a government department is set up to do something for women, it's because it was already being done for men as "standard operating procedure".


Masculism wants to end all forms of sex-based discrimination against men and women.

You could've fooled me.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Guest1]

I'm sorry to tell you this Anti-Fascist, you know jack-squat about feminism.

read some real feminist works and you'll undertsand that you saying this stupid masculism is the way to end sexual prejudice is like white nationalists telling me that Martin Luther King Jr. is really racist and they're the ones who support racial equality.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Impregnation of a woman does not confer ownership of a woman's body or the right to participate in any decision she may make regarding the outcome of the pregnancy.

No one argues that "ownership" of the woman is absurd, however please explain why you think that the male who also has a genetic bond with the child does not have the right to participate in a decision that will subsequently affect his psychological well being.

You went well over the top on this one Hack.

[Xvall]

I've never really heard about any women on men hate crimes. I'm curious as to what you meant by that, and how feminism is the source of the problem.

[dopediana]

Originally posted by Drake [email protected] 6 2003, 09:19 PM
I've never really heard about any women on men hate crimes. I'm curious as to what you meant by that, and how feminism is the source of the problem.
i'm sure his past girlfriend would beat him up and sodomize him with a broom handle. honestly, women can be such *****es. RAF, that was very good.

anti-fascist, name some hate crimes against men. and some cases where men have been on the receiving end of abuse inflicted by a woman where the woman was NOT their mommy who was disciplining.

[Rastafari]

Masculism is pro-women, anti-patriarchy.
Whatever arguement you had shattered at this point. Masculism is clearly pro-man (so anti-woman) and pro-patriarchy (thats what Masculanism is, dipshit).

Without women, nothing would happen. Noone would fucking be here!
Are you going to doubt the role of your mother in the first 18 years of your life? A woman is carrying the child and, by nature, is more suited to care for it. Get used to it

[Anti-Fascist]

OKay, I shall get to all of you. But first I want to respond to this . . .


Whatever arguement you had shattered at this point. Masculism is clearly pro-man (so anti-woman) and pro-patriarchy (thats what Masculanism is, dipshit).

How is being "pro-man" being "anti-woman"? Just because I like the colour green, does not therefore mean that I hate the colour red. In like manner, just because I am pro-man, does not therefore mean that I am anti-woman.

Masculism is not pro-patriacrhy.


Without women, nothing would happen. Noone would fucking be here!

What are you talking about? You are acting as if I hate women, as if I wish there to be no women. Why do you believe this? And by the way, no one would be here without men, either. But I ask again . . how is this relevant?


Are you going to doubt the role of your mother in the first 18 years of your life?

Who is doubting the importance of women? What are you talking about?

The fact that so many "ad hominem" arguments are being used makes it clear that there is a general unwillingness, or inability, to refute the theses of masculism.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Without women, nothing would happen. No one would fucking be here!



The same can be said for the male. This argument is not a good one.



Are you going to doubt the role of your mother in the first 18 years of your life? A woman is chauvinist line of poop. In all actuality, you simply have reaffirmed a point he is trying to make, that men carrying the child and, by nature, is more suited to care for it. Get used to it

This statement really does not mean much in the way of exposing AF's rhetoric for what it is, a crypto-are seen as less able to care for a child after it has been weened due to a reason of genetics.

The social construct may be there however I can hardly see it as a relevant point in society. I'm sure ANY man that qant's to take on the role of full-time parent will find his spouse will be ready for the switch WITH BELLS ON.


I'm not targeting you specifically Rasta, I just think you may have let your emotions affect your judgement.

[Rastafari]

just think you may have let your emotions affect your judgement.

Of course they do, man!

The child has to be in contact with his mother at some point in time in their fetal stage to survive (this test-tube baby stuff doesn't last for very long.) A man doesn't even have to be present. Just use a semen-popsicle from a center that specializes in that kind of stuff.

If womyn are biologically better at nuturing their children (they have the b00bies!), then they should always be awarded custody, unless they are unfit.

I'd type more bullshit, but I've been hit on the wrist with a Kendo Sword. I fear I have broken my wrist

[Silent Eye]

I agree with Comrade RAF and Anti Fascist

What about these ridiculous femi"nazis" as some call them, with their spelling "woman" with a y. Get over yourselves. And just because the man doesn't carry the child doesnt mean anything. He is tied to it and has to pay for it for the rest of his life, so he should have a voice in what is to be done with it.

[Hampton]

What about these ridiculous femi"nazis" as some call them, with their spelling "woman" with a y. Get over yourselves.

Why is this ridiculous, it's people trying to form their own identity not have no forced upon them.

[Silent Eye]

They have their own identity. But they are NOT men. Sure we should be equal in the eyes of the law, but this is too far.

And this attitude "women can do anything men can do" and vice versa is idiotic. Women are generally not as strong as men. "Womyn" is just an idiotic ultra PC term. All it does is serve to irritate people who would otherwise have no problem with women's rights. Its a "turn off" from feminism.

[BuyOurEverything]

-Child custody strongly favoring mothers
-Men incarcerated for inability to pay unrealistic child support payments


This is sometimes the case. It has nothing to do with feminism however and alot to do with our fucked up legal system. Both sides try and hire the best most expensive lawyer they can and try to fuck the other party out of as much money as they can and win custody of as many kids as they can.


-Children aborted or given up for adoption without fathers' consent

That's bullshit. It's not the man's body, it's none of his buisness. You can't have custody of an internal growth on another person's body. Adoption is different though. If the father is the legal guardian of the child too, he has the right to not put the kid up for adoption. Can you show me some cases where this has happened?


-Men risking their lives in military service

Like redstar said, women do too. Nothing to do with feminism.


-High-risk employment, but receiving no special honor for doing so

Again, nothing to do with feminism. That's something to take up with a union.


-Men charged in domestic violence cases, even when victims

This happens very rarely. Men are the victims of domestic violence but tend to not report it as they're embarrassed to go to the police and say their wife kicked their ass. This isn't women's fault. It is a problem but one with the macho image of men and not with feminism.


-Men charged in rape and sexual harassment cases with no evidence beyond the plaintiff's claim, where the accusation frequently destroys a man's life

Yes but again, nothing to do with feminism. This happens in all kinds of cases not just those of rape. When someone is charged with something, people just assume they're guilty and even if they are aquitted, it can severely damage their reputation.


Research and free speech repressed unless pro-feminist

What the fuck are you talking about?


-Men fired from their jobs for dissenting with feminist ideology in the workplace

Good. Anyone who preaches against inequality, knowing full well the consequences would be fired.


-Hate crimes against men

Such as...? Men can be the victims of domestic violence but I think hate crimes is pushing it.


The child has to be in contact with his mother at some point in time in their fetal stage to survive (this test-tube baby stuff doesn't last for very long.) A man doesn't even have to be present. Just use a semen-popsicle from a center that specializes in that kind of stuff.

If womyn are biologically better at nuturing their children (they have the b00bies!), then they should always be awarded custody, unless they are unfit.

That's bullshit. Women may be genetically better at nurtering babies but men are just as important in a child's upbringing. However, people can adapt and a man could do just as good a job raising a baby as a woman could. If you're going to go down the path of making laws based on gender stereotypes (even if they're true) goes completely against feminism. While you're at it, why not pass a law that says all men have to go out and hunt to provide for their families and all women have to stay home and look after the kids? We've evolved from that. Taking a kid away from a parent is a horrible thing to do and should only be done in extreme cases.

[Hampton]

Originally posted by Silent [email protected] 6 2003, 06:34 PM
"Womyn" is just an idiotic ultra PC term. All it does is serve to irritate people who would otherwise have no problem with women's rights.
If that's all the spelling of the word woymn was meant to do, I'd say it did a pretty good job pissing you off. And I'd continue to use it just to annoy people like yourself.

[Rastafari]

mission accomplished!

[Socialmalfunction]

wow, people actually get pissed off debating this stuff... that's interesting. well i don't think i'd say that i'm feminist or masculist. i just think we should stop the name thing and go for all around equality... that's just me though. but i do think that if a woman is willing to get her insides ripped out by way of abortion why shouldnt she be willing to have her inside ripped out having the baby if the father wants it? i say he has EVERY right to ask that the child be brought to term and then given to him. (dont get all mad at me now people. i happen to be against abortion simply because i'm a female and i see the life a future child as being percious. i've always wanted children so i'm biased.) oh and excuse the crude way i put it... i'm kinda working on other stuff too and dont have enough time to be all proper or necessarily accurate in my terminology.

[swapna]

/*Child custody strongly favoring mothers*/

A child needs a mother more than a father while it is growing. Noone loves a person as mothers do:)

-/*Men incarcerated for inability to pay unrealistic child support payments */

He cant just sleep with women and just escape the responsibilities.

/*-Children aborted or given up for adoption without fathers' consent */
I think everyone discussed in the postiong named abortion

/*-Men risking their lives in military service */
First,They generally dont recurit women in military service because they think women are physically and emotionally weak than men.


/*-High-risk employment, but receiving no special honor for doing so */
Do women get any??

/*-Men charged in domestic violence cases, even when victims */

Really?? I dont know in US but in India i never heard of such a case. It is always the man who constantly bullies and beats the women.

/*-Men charged in rape and sexual harassment cases with no evidence beyond the plaintiff's claim, where the accusation frequently destroys a man's life */

With lot of sexual harrassment and abuse going around unless there are strict laws it will be difficult to avoid it.

For all the rest of the things you pointed out, women are given more rights because they are more abused,more oppressed.
Unless you give those rights for a while and bring them back from the oppression, you cant have a fair society

[Rastafari]

socialmalfunction, you might want to get Guerillero changed.

Anyway, she just destroyed my point. That being, that this debate (on womyn's issues) had only one female present. Isn't this indicative of our society today, where a council of men decides what a womyn's body is worth?



edit:
but to sidetrack on a useless musical note, swapna's post reminded me of an Eric Clapton song:

/*Child custody strongly favoring mothers*/

A child needs a mother more than a father while it is growing. Noone loves a person as mothers do:)


Originally by the Bluegrass Carter Family from the 30's:
Motherless Children

Motherless children have a hard time when mother is dead, lord.
Motherless children have a hard time when mother is dead, lord.
They don’t have anywhere to go;
Wandering around from door to door.
Nobody treats you like a mother will when your mother is dead, lord.

Father will do the best he can when your mother is dead, lord.
Father will do the best he can when your mother is dead, lord.
Father will do the best he can;
So many things a father can’t understand.
Nobody treats you like a mother will when your mother is dead, lord.

Sister will do the best she can when your mother is dead, lord.
Sister will do the best she can when your mother is dead, lord.
Sister will do the best she can;
So many things a sister can’t understand.
Nobody treats you like a mother will when your mother is dead.

When your mother is dead, when your mother is dead.
When your mother is dead, lord, when your mother is dead.

[Socialmalfunction]

hmm... well i would get guerillero changed if i knew how... <_< . yeah alot of things changed in the like 6 month gap where i stopped coming here and making posts. but i&#39;m not totally sure about how i destroyed your point. you&#39;re gonna have to explain that for me because i made like 3 short points and am kinda confused. i shouldnt be doing homework at the same time as this... well the other way around. so yeah. thanks alot. and if you know how i can get guerillero changed let me know, anyone.

[Rastafari]

Go to lounge. Should be stickied


you destroyed my "womyn aren&#39;t posting here" discussion

[Socialmalfunction]

oh hahaha. then the fact that i destroyed your point should be a good thing, shouldn&#39;t it? women need to take part in everything too if they want to be considered equal. oh and what would i call myself because im for equality on all fronts and think that fighting for equality under the name of feminism shoots the equality idea in the foot. (that makes it sound more like supremacy than equality which i question in my feminism thread in theory if anyone would like to answer my question on what they are fighting for please post there.)

[Soul Rebel]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2003, 07:39 PM
This is how feminist ideology is anti-men (source is Wikipedia/antirape.hypermart.net):

-Child custody strongly favoring mothers
-Men incarcerated for inability to pay unrealistic child support payments
-Children aborted or given up for adoption without fathers&#39; consent
-Men risking their lives in military service
-High-risk employment, but receiving no special honor for doing so
-Men charged in domestic violence cases, even when victims
-Men charged in rape and sexual harassment cases with no evidence beyond the plaintiff&#39;s claim, where the accusation frequently destroys a man&#39;s life
Research and free speech repressed unless pro-feminist
-Men fired from their jobs for dissenting with feminist ideology in the workplace
-Hate crimes against men
-Relative lack of funding for men&#39;s health
-Lack of advocacy for men&#39;s rights and entitlement programs for women only
-Special government agencies for women&#39;s affairs with no corresponding agencies for men&#39;s affairs

Masculism fights for equity between the sexes with the equity as close to equality as nature will allow.

Masculism does recognise that there are sex based difference between men and women; however, it holds that many of the differences which are claimed today, and in the past, are in fact based on false gender stereotypes.

Masculism holds that both men and women have been victims of their assigned gender roles.

Masculism does not blame one sex for that predicament wherein we find ourselves because both sexes have contributed to the definition of traditional gender roles.

Masculism believes that a patriachy/matriachy existed in the past, with men and women being given power in the spheres of life which impacted their sex the most, e.g., women had inordinate power in the areas of sexuality, reproduction, child rearing, family, and home, whereas men has inordinate powers in areas related to paid work, government, overall decision making concerned with community survival.

Masculism wants to end the patriachy/matriachy by expanding the definition of what it means to be a man or a woman so that both sexes are given equal opportunities and responsibilities in areas from which they have been traditionally excluded.

Masculism wants to end all forms of sex-based discrimination against men and women.
This is such a bunch a crap.

*men do not ask for custody. also, most courts just automatically give the child to the mother. theres still this idea that womyn are supposed to be the care provider.
*thats the way it should be. womyn always end up worse after a divorce and are more likely to be poor (hence the term "the feminization of poverty"). reality check- its hard to be a single mother: having to work, pay for child care, pay bills, etc. If a man is willing to have a child (agreed with the mother to have it) then he should be willing to pay for the care of the child as well. Why should the mother have to do all the work.
*why should the mother have to get the fathers consent. Its the woman who carries the child for 9 months, not the father. Also, the father can always take off and leave the mother to care for the child alone. The woman basically always has to stay to care for it. If the woman doesnt want the child then she shouldnt have it. Its her body, her choice. No man can tell or should tell a woman what to do with her body.
*You can thank the law for that. Law basically prohibits womyn from the frontline. It was not the choice of womyn, but of men (government officials)- men made this choice for you and for womyn.
*What you dont think womyn dont have risky jobs? Hardly ever does anyone get special honor for doing it, so get over it.
*By law someone has to get arrested if there is a d.v. complaint. You ever consider that maybe men do hit womyn and this is why they get arrested? And many times d.v. complaints go unattended so there is no arrest whatsoever. And many men dont fess up to being victims because that is not a masculine trait- or so society has taught them. Try working at a domestic violence shelter- you will notice certain things quite quickly.
*Why shouldnt a womans word be enough in a rape case?That is fucking absurd and insensitive. Many times its really hard to have any kind of evidence in a rape case. Rape is not what you think it is- bruises, cuts, blood, etc. Many times there is none of that stuff. Also, many womyn unknowingly destroy evidence because they are not educated on how to react after a rape. They take a shower, they go to sleep, etc.- all which destroys the evidence. You are supposed to go to the hospital right afterwards, so they can take samples. Also, most rapes go unreported or take a long time to go unreported, which can screw up everything. What you dont think rape screws up a woman&#39;s life? My fucking goodness, where have you been? Do you not know what rape means to a survivor.
*Oh please. Everything is censored unless it is capitalist and patriotic crap. The only to get your shit published is to conform or make an underground magizine or create your own zine.
*Where the fuck have you heard this- men getting fired over that. Its such bull. If anything a woman who is challenging and strong is more likely to get fired, because the men hate her for it.
*What hate crimes against men? You need to specify what kind of men. Gay men? They get beat up by other men- who are homophobes and dont like "feminine"men. Minority men? Once again- get beaten up by other men, white men.
*Sorry, but its actually the opposite. Until recently any study done on health was done on men and mens health. Nothing was known on womyns health for the longest time because no time and money were being put into it. Studies done on men were just applied to womyn.
*Our society is based on the advocacy for men&#39;s rights. Think about it. There wouldnt be a need for a womyns movement if there wasnt such an emphasis on mens rights (unearned priviledges).
*Once again, many womyn need extra help because they are the ones who are most likely to live in poverty.

And one more thing: before you start talking shit about feminism i suggest you educate your ignorant self about what feminism really is. You, like many others, have no fucking clue what its about. Let me give you a few bits of info.
*it is feminism that recognized that society created separate gender roles and that both females and males suffered and still do suffer from them. Feminism, from day one has challenged these roles in order to help both females and males.
*Feminism does not blame any gender for what has happened but the structure of society. Feminism recognized long ago that it is the structure in society that has created and pushed along racism, sexism, agism, etc. And this is the reason why they are fighting side by side with other groups to change the structure of society.

Everything that you posted about "masculism" was taken from feminism. If you knew anything about feminsim you would realize that those are the words that have been used to describe the feminist movement forever. Your so-called "masculinists" stole the words right from feminist theory books.


this is great- i started a trend with the WOMYN spelling. To hampton and rasta- i cherish you guys- you totally understand it all.

[redstar2000]

No one argues that "ownership" of the woman is absurd, however please explain why you think that the male who also has a genetic bond with the child does not have the right to participate in a decision that will subsequently affect his psychological well being.

There&#39;s no such thing as a "genetic bond" with a fetus any more than there&#39;s a "genetic bond" with some pieces of Kleenex©. Once the guy ejaculates, the genes are "on their own" to survive or not as the woman wishes.

He may possibly feel an "emotional bond" with a fetus and may be depressed if that fetus is aborted. That happens. He&#39;ll get over it.

It would be preferable, in my view, that if a man wishes to father a child that he ascertain the woman&#39;s enthusiastic agreement to that course of action ahead of time.

It strikes me as hypocritical when some guys go out in search of casual sex and then suddenly transform themselves into "wannabe fathers" if a woman becomes pregnant.

Especially when after a few months of living with an infant, they suddenly transform themselves again...into "dontwannabe fathers".

Bottom line: woman&#39;s body; woman&#39;s future; woman&#39;s choice.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Ian]

I used Womyn in the abortion thread... it beats spelling it the MIM way &#39;Wimmin&#39; :lol:

Plus spelling it this way is a good way to be a poseur

[suffianr]

Masculism does recognise that there are sex based difference between men and women; however, it holds that many of the differences which are claimed today, and in the past, are in fact based on false gender stereotypes.

:lol:

When are we going to have a Stupid Ideas thread? Oh no, the above statement might be better on an Obviously Stating the Obvious thread.

[Anti-Fascist]

The implication in too many of the responses is that by addressing men&#39;s rights, I am somehow ignoring women&#39;s rights; that by being pro-man, I am somehow being anti-woman. In fact, I, as a Masculist, am just as much a feminist as any feminist, that is, if feminism is defined as a doctrine which advocates equal rights for women - which therefore exposes as absurd the "ad hominem" criticisms above.

I have realised that to justify masculism I have to demonstrate the veracity of certain subdivisions within the masculist doctrine first, each quite complicated itself and must be considered and criticised separately. Endocrinological, neurological, pyschological, etc. studies which confirm the biological foundation of sex differences, for instance. Another issue which must needs be criticised is the men&#39;s rights issue in light of these differences. And there are a few other points which I need to make manifest, for I am eagerly awaiting criticism of my masculist doctrine, but firstly I need to clearly define it so that it is my masculist doctrine, not some imagined one, which is being criticised. These complicated issues I shall address in a few essays which I shall post in these fora.

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2003, 11:47 PM

-Child custody strongly favoring mothers
-Men incarcerated for inability to pay unrealistic child support payments


This is sometimes the case. It has nothing to do with feminism however and alot to do with our fucked up legal system. Both sides try and hire the best most expensive lawyer they can and try to fuck the other party out of as much money as they can and win custody of as many kids as they can.


-Children aborted or given up for adoption without fathers&#39; consent

That&#39;s bullshit. It&#39;s not the man&#39;s body, it&#39;s none of his buisness. You can&#39;t have custody of an internal growth on another person&#39;s body. Adoption is different though. If the father is the legal guardian of the child too, he has the right to not put the kid up for adoption. Can you show me some cases where this has happened?


-Men risking their lives in military service

Like redstar said, women do too. Nothing to do with feminism.


-High-risk employment, but receiving no special honor for doing so

Again, nothing to do with feminism. That&#39;s something to take up with a union.


-Men charged in domestic violence cases, even when victims

This happens very rarely. Men are the victims of domestic violence but tend to not report it as they&#39;re embarrassed to go to the police and say their wife kicked their ass. This isn&#39;t women&#39;s fault. It is a problem but one with the macho image of men and not with feminism.


-Men charged in rape and sexual harassment cases with no evidence beyond the plaintiff&#39;s claim, where the accusation frequently destroys a man&#39;s life

Yes but again, nothing to do with feminism. This happens in all kinds of cases not just those of rape. When someone is charged with something, people just assume they&#39;re guilty and even if they are aquitted, it can severely damage their reputation.


Research and free speech repressed unless pro-feminist

What the fuck are you talking about?


-Men fired from their jobs for dissenting with feminist ideology in the workplace

Good. Anyone who preaches against inequality, knowing full well the consequences would be fired.


-Hate crimes against men

Such as...? Men can be the victims of domestic violence but I think hate crimes is pushing it.


The child has to be in contact with his mother at some point in time in their fetal stage to survive (this test-tube baby stuff doesn&#39;t last for very long.) A man doesn&#39;t even have to be present. Just use a semen-popsicle from a center that specializes in that kind of stuff.

If womyn are biologically better at nuturing their children (they have the b00bies&#33;), then they should always be awarded custody, unless they are unfit.

That&#39;s bullshit. Women may be genetically better at nurtering babies but men are just as important in a child&#39;s upbringing. However, people can adapt and a man could do just as good a job raising a baby as a woman could. If you&#39;re going to go down the path of making laws based on gender stereotypes (even if they&#39;re true) goes completely against feminism. While you&#39;re at it, why not pass a law that says all men have to go out and hunt to provide for their families and all women have to stay home and look after the kids? We&#39;ve evolved from that. Taking a kid away from a parent is a horrible thing to do and should only be done in extreme cases.
You are correct; many of those have little to do with feminism. They have more to do with men&#39;s rights, with Masculism.

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by Hampton+Oct 7 2003, 12:00 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Hampton @ Oct 7 2003, 12:00 AM)
Silent [email protected] 6 2003, 06:34 PM
"Womyn" is just an idiotic ultra PC term. All it does is serve to irritate people who would otherwise have no problem with women&#39;s rights.
If that&#39;s all the spelling of the word woymn was meant to do, I&#39;d say it did a pretty good job pissing you off. And I&#39;d continue to use it just to annoy people like yourself. [/b]
Whilst I use "mankind" and "he" (as a pronoun for anyone regardless of sex) just to anger feminists.

Senora et. al - I shall address your criticism in the above mentioned essay.

[Guest1]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2003, 09:07 AM
The implication in too many of the responses is that by addressing men&#39;s rights, I am somehow ignoring women&#39;s rights; that by being pro-man, I am somehow being anti-woman.
It&#39;s the issue of the majority creating a group focused on furthering its aims. when it&#39;s an ethnic or sexual minority (either in numbers or in power), nothing wrong with it. But what you&#39;re doing is exactly like:

The implication in too many of the responses is that by addressing white rights, I am somehow ignoring black rights; that by being pro-white, I am somehow being anti-black.

I just changed a few words, you see the problem now? :P

[elijahcraig]

Have any of you ever read Beavoir’s “The Second Sex”?

I have to say, this thread reminds me of a Reaganite “reverse racism” very much.

Is it possible for an oppressed race to oppress the oppressor? Meaning, can Blacks oppress Whites when they do not have the majority, or the economic platform to do so? I say no. The same goes for Women. They are living under Patriarchy. They have not the ability to “oppress” Men, or “Masculism”.

Nietzsche speaks harshly of “feminine” morals; he does this to show that women should step out of their, to use Beavoir’s term, ‘second sex’ and embrace the full role of a human: masculinity. This is used in its relative place: meaning, since men have the power, to become the powerful, women must embrace power, embrace the morality of man: dominance.

I don’t exactly agree, but the point is there nonetheless.


In fact, I, as a Masculist, am just as much a feminist as any feminist, that is, if feminism is defined as a doctrine which advocates equal rights for women - which therefore exposes as absurd the "ad hominem" criticisms above.

That has to be one of the stupidest things you’ve ever written Huzington (and you have a long record of “stupid posts”. Remember Nietzsche not being a philosopher?).

With the reasoning you use, there is absolutely no reason to use the term “Masculist”. It is merely you exposing your ignorance to us all (that was ad hominem my friend).

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by Che y Marijuana+Oct 8 2003, 01:14 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Che y Marijuana @ Oct 8 2003, 01:14 AM)
[email protected] 7 2003, 09:07 AM
The implication in too many of the responses is that by addressing men&#39;s rights, I am somehow ignoring women&#39;s rights; that by being pro-man, I am somehow being anti-woman.
It&#39;s the issue of the majority creating a group focused on furthering its aims. when it&#39;s an ethnic or sexual minority (either in numbers or in power), nothing wrong with it. But what you&#39;re doing is exactly like:

The implication in too many of the responses is that by addressing white rights, I am somehow ignoring black rights; that by being pro-white, I am somehow being anti-black.

I just changed a few words, you see the problem now? :P [/b]
You can change the words round yet again to get the feminist position:

The implication in too many of the responses is that by addressing women&#39;s rights, I am somehow ignoring men&#39;s rights; that by being pro-woman, I am somehow being anti-man.

And yet as regards this everybody is silent.

[elijahcraig]

You can change the words round yet again to get the feminist position:

The implication in too many of the responses is that by addressing women&#39;s rights, I am somehow ignoring men&#39;s rights; that by being pro-woman, I am somehow being anti-man.

And yet as regards this everybody is silent.

Spoken like a true Reaganite.

[BuyOurEverything]

A child needs a mother more than a father while it is growing. Noone loves a person as mothers do:)

This is total bullshit. Anyone that says one gender can love more than another is totally full of shit.

[elijahcraig]

This is total bullshit. Anyone that says one gender can love more than another is totally full of shit.

Why?

Is it not true that some species of animal have one parent eat the babies if the other does not protect it and nurture it?

Equality of the sexes in all realms is not necessarily a reality.

[Guest1]

most the instinctual residue we have left from when we actually used our instincts is eliminated in the first 5 years of a childs life (except basics like food, water, etc...), this is the process of socialization, where societal norms replace instinctive behaviour. so the point that mothers are more adapted to bringing up children is a moot one, cause society is moving beyond that (slowly) and into the two working parents model. if a father chose to bring up the kids, his being a father and not a mother does not affect his ability to do so.

other than that, cheers elijah, I&#39;m definitely with you on this one :)

[redstar2000]

Equality of the sexes in all realms is not necessarily a reality.

Women are noticeable on central committees, for example, by their absence.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[elijahcraig]

Elaborate Gunther RS.

[El Brujo]

The way I see it, both extremes are bad. Woman are still discriminated against socio-economically and now are seen as sex objects by some people, I don&#39;t think I need to go into how "masculinism" or whatnot is out of the question. At the same time, male-bashing, uber-PC "feminism" is also pretty ridiculous and counter-sexist to an extent. By trying to give a more "masculine" image to woman and criticizing men for being "masculine" people are not only acknowleging that being feminin is "inferior", but it seems like they are trying to reverse roles with men. Destroying gender distinctions is very unnatural as well as unnecessary for socio-economic equality. Just because people are different does not mean one is inferior and the other is superior (anyone who sees it as such is no leftist). The USSR is a perfect example of how people of every culture, gender or whatever else can live with socio-economic equality while preserving their identity.

To make things short, I believe men and women are equal but men will be men and women will be women.