Venting! Misogyny, White Knighting and Misandry · 1:07am May 30th, 2017
So yea, this happened today.
I was discussing some men's rights issues at work, like I admit I probably shouldn't have been doing, and a customer overheard. At the time I was talking about men's lack of reproductive rights, men being forced to pay child support to women rapists, and Hillary's speech about how women suffer more than men during war, because their men are killed, tortured and imprisoned (I actually quietly gave a "hiel Hillary" on that note). A customer decided to say I hated women and that is was impossible for a man to be raped, and this was all validated because he was a veteran... so am I... one who understands male biology... kay...? Anyway, so me saying men and women should have equal rights, makes me a woman hater!
It gets better though! This is the first day of my two weeks notice to that job. It is also the first day of me dealing with a manager who tried to start a malicious rumor about a female co-worker of mine. I wrote a letter to my General Manager, I'm going to ask how to contact the Regional Manager and if I even get a hint that they won't deal with this, the two weeks notice are over and I'm walking. I also put in a good word with my next job for my co-worker and will be heading over later tonight to help her see her options for a different job if she so desires. Ya know, because I hate women and all, that's why I'm helping one, because I just hate women.
Guess this is bringing up a few instances of anti-male sexism that really tweaked me in the past. Both of them, at a freaking house of God!
To any Methodists, please tell me there's hope for your denomination and these were standouts, because both of these instances happened at Methodist churches. Really, it used to be a good denomination... this has to be a coincidence.
The first one I went to had a father's day message that consisted entirely of female former abuse victims getting on stage and lecturing all of the men and boys on how to better behave. Would LOVE to see women sitting down and taking it if men decided to do something like that on mother's day.
The second church I eventually talked to the assistant pastor, a woman herself. She insisted that I must believe in the patriarchy and that women are the ones who experience real sexism, though she did acknowledge women are capable of abuse, just not as often. And because HER church realized women could be nasty too, she was proud to tell me they not only had a women's ONLY abuse shelter, with absolutely no shelter for men, but also a women's ONLY reform center, with... I don't know, prisons for men. (Abusers belong in prison, to be clear, or paying out the nose, but no one should be let go from a charge of abuse on the grounds of "duh, she got boobies!".) It was like talking to.... just an idiot! How was she that blatantly supporting anti male sexism, with that much of a straight face and then telling me, misandry was a minor issue and men barely even know what discrimination is like? Yes, that was basically her contention! I just... how can someone be that dumb? Is it a lack of empathy, a lack of self reflection, a lack of critical thinking... what? Not long ago, any second grader could tell you a sign saying "no men allowed" is sexist against men. How do you... just... how?
Sigh... vent over.
Okay, I’ll engage. There’s a couple things you’ve said here that I think miss the point. In the interest of healthy dialogue I’ll present an alternative view.
1.)
This is the same argument racist, anti-semites, homophobes etc use. “I have black friends, therefore I can’t be racist”. The guy you were arguing shouldn’t have said you hate women, he doesn’t know that, he doesn’t know you. BUT what he could have said is “your rant is misogynistic”. I don’t necessarily know that it was because I didn’t hear it. BUT AGAIN, if you’re comparing HIllary to Hitler and complaining about woman raping men then I’m guessing it wasn’t the most female friendly rant. Which leads me to my next point.
2.) Women CAN rape men. By and large they don’t. It’s not nearly as big a problem as men raping women. And if you want Men and Women to have equal rights then you can’t just rail against all the times society is unfair to men, because it’s hard not to hear that as a rebuke to the complaints people have about being female in society. Women are paid less, objectified more and not taken as seriously as their male counterparts, across the spectrum of workplaces etc. The first step towards equality should be dealing with that. So the whole fathers day, teach your sons to be better...
3.) Again men abuse women far more then women abuse men. It’s not even close. No one should abuse anyone. But teaching boys that being a man means treating a woman with respect, (not in an old school patronizing way either), is a bigger concern then teaching girls not to demean men when they get older, (society already teaches them that.) I will concede maybe fathers day wasn’t the best day to hold that forum...though part of being a father is teaching your son the values of “manliness”.
In conclusion, I probably disagree with you on a number of “Men's rights issues”, that’s okay. You’re certainly entitled to your beliefs, I’m not trying to take them away. But when you rail against women with the vitriol you displayed above, any salient points you have get lost. Consider dialing it back if you want to have a constructive dialogue. Just my two cents. Carry on.
4561761
1. Hillary’s speech basically made men sound like dogs. When someone’s dog dies or goes through extreme pain you feel more sympathy for them than the dog because, no matter how you slice it, you generally see the animal as a lesser creature.
2. I said nothing against women in general. I said bad women exist and men should be allowed the same protections as women. (Also no one should EVER be forced to pay their own rapist.)
3. Would you say the same things to a feminist who never wants to address men’s issues, aside from them “not sharing their feelings” which is so useful outside a shelter that says “no men allowed”?
4. Actually my understanding is, if the standard wasn’t doubled between men and women, domestic abuse would be something women do more often than men. It’s simply well known that due to a man’s sheer size, the physical damage he can take is far greater and the damage she can inflict is far less. Basically, women hit more than men.
4. Also many studies show the gap between men and women on rape, does exist, but is no where near as significant as most have been lead to believe. Probably around a 20% gap. Big, yes. But put it this way, men successfully commit suicide at three times the rate of women. So, should we then treat suicide as a “men’s issue” and make special allowances for men that we exclude women from?
5. Finally, the gap between male and female VICTIMS of rape is harder to determine. There may actually be more male victims, though yes, they would be victims of other men.
Oh, and before i forget, you do know you’re NOT an exception right? MOST men, don’t rape either. Figured I should point that out, even though I’m guessing that was just worded wrong.
4561761
I will point something out. My point wasn’t “women are bad!”. My point was mostly “men need help when women are bad and the law is unfair”. I also think Hillary is a sexist ass.
Also, if my speaking was mysogenist, you would think the WOMEN I was talking to would think so, not only the over hearing man.
The issue isn't what percentage of men rape, its of rapist what percentage are men? I don't know the number but its probably above 75%. (repirting bias probably exist, let's ignore it for now)
We could treat sucide as a mens issue but what would that look like? Is there a way to approach sucide from a gendered viewpoint? In contrast since most domestic abuse victims are women abused by their male partners, it makes pragmatic sense to adress it along gendered lines. This does not preclude education about how all abuse is bad.
The womens only shelter is a pragmatic solution not a moral one. Women who have been abused by men may need a male free environment to feel safe in the short term, I'm not convinced that's a bad thing. If the population of men seeking shelter from abusive women were high enough I'd suppirt scarce resources going to mens only shelters, but it's not.
I'd tell men hating feminist the same things but there aren't any in this discussion.
4561863
Good to see you’re consistent.
Um... you do realize I was meaning to say we SHOULDN’T treat suicide as a men’s only issue right? And hey, really, we could in act similar measures, we would just have to accept that they would be just as cruel and ultimately pointless. Why don’t we ban women thinking of killing themselves from therapy places where those thinking of suicide are going for help? After all, I could give a similar excuse for my blatant sexism to the common “the men might abuse the women”, like say, “the women might further emotionally manipulate the men!”. Why don’t we have a men’s only hotline and then let’s ban young girls from seeking help as well because... ya know, reasons (yes, boys and young as 9 are often banned from shelters based solely on their gender, most people acknowledge this is wrong, but it’s still common practice). Honestly, if someone made a men’s suicide line, that would be okay in my book (based solely on a libertarian view of freedom, I would STILL call it into question morally), but if they went out of their way to single out women and girls as villains and there was no equivalent service to women, yea, I’d say that was something that needed to change post haste! Basically the message of a situation like that would be... well it would mean we didn’t value women as much as men, there’s no charitable way to slice it really.
Sorry, no a women’s only shelter is a sexist solution, end of sentence. Let me ask you, if we didn’t advertise like crazy that women report and get help, how many do you think would do so? Truth is, before the modern age of shelters and add campaigns about this issue, not many did. So then, just how sure are you that men aren’t in a similar position? Past studies have shown that men and women are abused at a similar rate.
But let’s be unreasonably fair to your side and give you 100% of your contentions. Let’s say the gap between abusers is NOT the most likely scenario 60% male abusers 40% female and it’s actually the Australian laughable statistic of 95% men and only 5% women... because right there, sense has been made (sorry, don’t mean to sound condescending and I realize I do, it’s just kinda hard to take arguments like that seriously). You’re banning those 5% from receiving help because... why? What’s the point? It’s like saying to the only black kid in the neighborhood, “you’re dad abuses you? Well you can’t come into the refuge and we won’t call the cops, because, after all, most kids who are abused around here, don’t look like you.”. What bearing does their gender have on them being offered services? I’m not even asking for men’s only shelters, though I wouldn’t shut down that idea either I suppose... well actually I might. I actually just want the shelters to allow anyone abused refuge REGARDLESS of gender.
Next, I’m guessing you didn’t think of this, as most don’t, but you realize shelters do not exist solely for adults right? So again, even giving you your contentions, it’s still true that 70% of child abusers are women and around 60% of cases of abuse towards children have been shown to be a woman acting alone. The statistics on infanticide are not more charitable towards the fairer sex either. A shelter is also often a place where you can go to WITH the kids, fleeing not only for your safety (which MAY not be as big of a concern with a man) but theirs as well. You then won’t be automatically accused of kidnapping. So, let’s say we continue to ban men from shelters. What do you tell the all too common man, whose wife hurts him and his children and is threatening to kill the children if he talks, he should do? There is no shelter for him to run to... just call the police and hope she doesn’t kill their two daughters? Run and hope the law doesn’t take them away calling him a kidnapper even if he wins the case by some miracle? You are basically putting him in a position where now, in order to protect his daughters, he has to fight both his spouse and the law.
And yes, I said daughters, do you have any idea how many girls and women have a situation like this in their past? My best friend’s mother abused her and her father who then had to go to one trial to remove custody, another trial to refuse the woman child support for a child she had no rights to that she hit and yet ANOTHER trial to not have to pay his own abuser alimony. I think he even had to go to a fourth trial to get alimony himself, which, in my book, should automatically be awarded to objective an victim from an objective abuser, again, regardless of gender. Really, I don’t think alimony should exist save as a penalty for abuse, but that’s another issue.
I’m sorry, but I’ve heard these arguments before. Just like in the story “The Coming Storm” they fall apart easily and barely make any sense. They just sound like logic you would NEVER want applied to yourself or someone you love.
4561965
The difference between a hotline and a shelter is that soneone else calling a hotline doesn't affect anyone else who's calling it. (Cept maybe wait times) Where your sucide analaogy fails is that sucide isn't something someone does to you.
The hypothetical man in your story has options. All victims of abuse can call the police
fuck, i hit post befire i was finished. I'm tired of this argument. i don't mean that in a negative way just i don't feel like arguing about this anymore. Tally-ho good chap.
4562002
Up to you. Freedom of speech means freedom to speak as well as freedom not to. It both protects you so you can engage and so you don’t have to. It’s fine.
Also, you should probably do more research into the subject of suicide before commenting on it’s nature.
4562008
I know a lot about sucide. My thoughts were still in the process of being formed when i hit post. (I'm typing on a phone)
4562018
I guess then. Just irks me when someone take a situation that’s very complicated, and boils it down to black and white. I guess you can tell, the inverse bothers me as well.