welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

MRA 101
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 11, 12, 13 ... 32, 33, 34  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Monkey Mcdermott



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3277

PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2013 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thenadathor wrote:
Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
Thenadathor wrote:
stripeypants wrote:
I think radfems are a part of feminism, as any extremist group is part of the parent group. I think they're wrong, but I acknowledge and accept their existence.

What is the greater group that MRAs are extremists for?


people, mostly men, I guess, who understand the subtlety of gender politics?


The entire point of most MRA is precisely that they don't understand the subtlety of gender politics.


I agree that they don't understand the subtlety of gender politics. I don't think calling that the point makes sense, though.


Then you clearly haven't spent a lot of time surrounded by people who self-identify as mens rights activists.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3147
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2013 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think Thenadthor was trying o say MRAs would be the wacky part of 'men who understand gender' that have got it all wrong. I don't think that its, though.

Women's shelters will also turn away trans people. They have problems, and that makes me angry and I want to see them fixed. If the MRA thing were about actually fixing problems and not indulging in utter bullshit, I'd be all for their cause, even though I also think people who want gender equality should work under the banner of feminism.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ShadowCell



Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 6024
Location: California

PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2013 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yeah, the problem with most Men's Rights Activists is that by "Men's Rights Activism," what they mean is asserting the traditional rights accorded to men in patriarchal society vis-a-vis women. so you'll probably find them arguing, for example, that penalties for rape are too harsh because as we all know most rape accusations are just from sluts who regret sleeping with that guy and want money or something, and actual rapists are few and far between, so rape isn't really a problem and the feminists are just getting bent out of shape about nothing.

that is, in the most literal sense of the phrase, "men's rights activism." it's just asserting the right of a man to rape a woman and have that action not really be taken seriously by anybody else. and yet once you pull that mask off, you find that they're standing for the rights accorded to them by an unjust system. so fuck that, this system is unjust, let's bring it down. and only a person like crayven or Rothide or Guest would object to that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9458

PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2013 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah it's like the difference between social justice and Social Justice. In the case of Men's Rights Activism, you're looking at something where 'men's rights activism' is an odd but .. well, essentially valid form of activism? about a few concerning things created by the patriarchal gender divide? But "Men's Rights Activism" is something literally registered as a hate group by the SPLC.

Sometimes, the worst part of an erstwhile ideology is its followers. The filter for entry and the general makeup of the demographic that would self-identify as being part of the ideology take the ideology and twist it into something completely terrible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Usagi Miyamoto



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 2219
Location: wish you were here

PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2013 11:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I remember that once upon a time not that long ago, it was practically unheard of for men to be considered for primary custody of their children after a divorce in many states. It was one of those very rare but legitimate areas where men's rights could use some bolstering. With lower courts in civil cases unlikely to buck precedent or the law, this meant it often required legislative action at the state level to address, across those many states, driven by a few activists who felt strongly that tying the courts' hands in this way was fundamentally unfair. You would not confuse one of those men's rights activists with the other sort, as they generally allied themselves with the ACLU, anathema to the Men's Rights Activists as that unholy Alliance Contrary to Life's Universals, which include people knowing their place in the rightful order of things and not getting all uppity.
_________________
The reward for a good life is a good life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3147
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2013 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I love the ACLU because they are so straightforward for everyone's rights.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Him



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 4175
Location: On edge

PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
Thenadathor wrote:
stripeypants wrote:
I think radfems are a part of feminism, as any extremist group is part of the parent group. I think they're wrong, but I acknowledge and accept their existence.

What is the greater group that MRAs are extremists for?


people, mostly men, I guess, who understand the subtlety of gender politics?


The entire point of most MRA is precisely that they don't understand the subtlety of gender politics.

+1
As for the greater group "Men's Rights Activists" are a part of I guess you could them douche bags. Also ShadowCell is pretty much spot on with this:

Quote:
yeah, the problem with most Men's Rights Activists is that by "Men's Rights Activism," what they mean is asserting the traditional rights accorded to men in patriarchal society vis-a-vis women. so you'll probably find them arguing, for example, that penalties for rape are too harsh because as we all know most rape accusations are just from sluts who regret sleeping with that guy and want money or something, and actual rapists are few and far between, so rape isn't really a problem and the feminists are just getting bent out of shape about nothing.

that is, in the most literal sense of the phrase, "men's rights activism." it's just asserting the right of a man to rape a woman and have that action not really be taken seriously by anybody else. and yet once you pull that mask off, you find that they're standing for the rights accorded to them by an unjust system. so fuck that, this system is unjust, let's bring it down. and only a person like crayven or Rothide or Guest would object to that.


CTrees wrote:
For instance, in abusive relationships, it's often the man that's the victim

I'm not sure I understand your use of the word "often" here.

stripeypants wrote:
I think Thenadthor was trying o say MRAs would be the wacky part of 'men who understand gender' that have got it all wrong. I don't think that its, though.

Women's shelters will also turn away trans people. They have problems, and that makes me angry and I want to see them fixed. If the MRA thing were about actually fixing problems and not indulging in utter bullshit, I'd be all for their cause, even though I also think people who want gender equality should work under the banner of feminism.

The trans versus radfem debate just makes me profoundly depressed.
_________________
A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure. It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want? ~Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Monkey Mcdermott



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3277

PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Usagi Miyamoto wrote:
I remember that once upon a time not that long ago, it was practically unheard of for men to be considered for primary custody of their children after a divorce in many states. It was one of those very rare but legitimate areas where men's rights could use some bolstering. With lower courts in civil cases unlikely to buck precedent or the law, this meant it often required legislative action at the state level to address, across those many states, driven by a few activists who felt strongly that tying the courts' hands in this way was fundamentally unfair. You would not confuse one of those men's rights activists with the other sort, as they generally allied themselves with the ACLU, anathema to the Men's Rights Activists as that unholy Alliance Contrary to Life's Universals, which include people knowing their place in the rightful order of things and not getting all uppity.


BOOM I'll just put this here. Fact is, men who actually seek custody and don't give up tend to end up with it, either sole or joint.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Usagi Miyamoto



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 2219
Location: wish you were here

PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BOOM wrote:
In the mid-1800s, the Industrial Revolution swept fathers out of jobs at or near home and into factories and businesses, prompting the courts to reverse course on custody. Under the “tender years” doctrine, eventually adopted in every state, the mother was presumed to be the proper custodian, especially for young children.

In the 1970s, this doctrine was replaced by the ostensibly gender-neutral “best interest of the child” standard. Today, only five states—Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee—have some form of maternal preference in custody statutes or case law, says Jeffrey Atkinson, author of Modern Child Custody Practice, 2d ed., and professor at DePaul University College of Law in Chicago.

Although the U.S. Supreme Court has not ruled on maternal preferences, Atkinson believes these holdout states are on shaky constitutional ground. “A presumption that women are inherently better able to care for children than men is not a legitimate, accurate method for determining custody,” he says.

Pretty much what I was thinking.

Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
Fact is, men who actually seek custody and don't give up tend to end up with it, either sole or joint.

I can't tell if this reflects any systematic bias or not. The fraction of men seeking primary custody in the studies was always small, something like 8%, and this may have been weighted toward the fraction of fathers who had more compelling arguments for custody. There's no easy way to tell. The studies seemed to concentrate on Massachusetts and California, which may not be representative of the country as a whole. I also note the studies are now pretty old, dating back to 1990 or before. Did the bias pendulum swing the other way after the laws were changed in the '70s and '80s? There's been a lot of social change since then, but it's not evenly distributed. I could easily see it going either way, depending on where you live, but I don't have any data to back my notion up.
_________________
The reward for a good life is a good life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thenadathor



Joined: 17 Jul 2012
Posts: 63

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 3:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CTrees wrote:
It's not the worst thing about them, by far, but the thing that gets on my nerves the most about "Men's Rights Advocates" is the name.

I care about men's rights. For instance, in abusive relationships, it's often the man that's the victim - the lack of men's shelters (despite the plethora of women's shelters) seems like a real problem. Further, many women's shelters ban male children over a certain age -a woman fleeing an abusive spouse with her also-abused children should be able to bring them with her, even if one happens to be a sixteen year old boy. Different tack, the issues and suspicions facing male teachers have demonstrably led to our current dearth of male teachers, particularly in lower grades.

So, yeah, men's rights are important, too! And hey, look at that - those guys are men's rights advocates! This should be great; some real discussion about serious and oft ignored problems faced on the spear half of the gender politics spectrum! Only... wait, why are these guys terrible? Why am I reminded of the irony of groups that are "pro-life" killing doctors? Guys... stahp... Well, maybe it's just this one group. And... nope, "MRA" turns out to be a code word not for people that advocate on behalf of the rights of men, but rather for terrible neanderthals. And they've so horribly tainted the very term "men's rights" that bringing up any men's issues, even with massive caveats and cited studies backing up your commentary, is veiwed with at best suspicion and more commonly with outright rage.

...

Welp, that was a coffee-fueled, incoherent ramble. But my point is, the terminology bothers me.


I agree completely. good summary.
_________________
Don`t give up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thenadathor



Joined: 17 Jul 2012
Posts: 63

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 4:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

woah I just has a really fucked up thought. Sinfest incorporates certain things I associate with the radfem community, like focusing on the societal issues of gender over the individual level, or being porn-critical to the point of rejecting sex-positivism. So...

what if tat comes down on the side of transcritical?
_________________
Don`t give up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ShadowCell



Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 6024
Location: California

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 4:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

then he's gonna take a lot of shit from his forum
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10607
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 6:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thenadathor wrote:
Sinfest incorporates certain things I associate with the radfem community, like focusing on the societal issues of gender over the individual level, or being porn-critical to the point of rejecting sex-positivism. So...

what if tat comes down on the side of transcritical?

I don't... I don't even. What makes you think Tat rejects sex positivism? And how are societal issues more radical than individual issues? Like, only radical feminists care about rape culture, or the way women are portrayed in advertising? And why can't a person reject porn as an industry while being totally cool with you doing whatever you want in your own home?
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. I’ll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3147
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 7:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ShadowCell wrote:
then he's gonna take a lot of shit from his forum


And I would never stop using all caps.

Really, if that happened, I would complain about the offensive strips he would doubtless write, and debate the non-offensive strips. I would wait around to see how he evolved on the issue, and I would debate forum members and write stupid illustrative stories. Not much would change, except I'd be pissed off both at Tat and that something I enjoyed so immensely had been poisoned.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3147
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 7:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Btw, Sinfest incorporates things I associate with Hitler, like a human owning a dog.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 11, 12, 13 ... 32, 33, 34  Next
Page 12 of 34

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group