A Crash Course in Feminism Mk. II (or, why everyone should be a feminist)

[eldargal]

Agreeing with Deadlift on that, found the book insufferable.

“Yes, being in a female dominated field, I do know what it means to be marginalized. “
oh
my
god
omg
oh my ****ing god

The really ugly part is they’ve actually done multiple sociological studies on this, and guess what the result is? Men in female-dominated fields aren’t marginalized at all; they get special treatment and are fast-tracked to the top, getting more credit for their work, faster promotions, and greater pay and benefits than their female colleagues.
[URL="http://dspace.brunel.ac.uk/bitstream/2438/3799/1/Work%20Employment%20and%20Society.pdf"]Here’s one study[/URL]. [URL="http://books.google.com/books/about/Still_a_Man_s_World.html?id=3cXIvGbwWx0C"]Here’s another.[/URL] [URL="http://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520201088"]And another.[/URL]

My favourite part is how this sexist graphic inadvertently illustrates why feminism is a serious and necessary movement and “men’s rights” is a ****ing joke.
"MRAs" have the luxury of “calmly explaining their points” because they aren’t actually being oppressed at all. It’s a calm (non-)issue. They’re not being actively hurt. They’re not living in a society that marginalizes and erases them and blames them for the assaults and rapes they suffer. They’re the most privileged, high-paid, pampered class of people on the planet. Being an “MRA” is a hobby; it means nothing - the failure of their “movement” would have no consequences, because they’d still be at the top. They’ve nothing to lose, so there’s no pressure on them.
Feminists, on the other hand? It’s serious. Women are marginalized and are erased and are oppressed and are earning only cents on the dollar and are living in a culture that encourages assault and rapeof them and then blames them for it. Feminism isn’t just “making some point,” it’s a real struggle against a system that continually hurts women every single day. Wouldn’t you be a little bit angry too? Wouldn’t you get a little bit frustrated? Wouldn’t that probably explode into ****ing rage if you were told that you’re going to be ignored if you’re not “civil” in fighting back against the system that is actively hurting you daily?
To even suggest that feminists need to be “civil” in “explaining their points” is a slap in the face because our entire society has not been civil to women for centuries.
And oh yeah, the supposed “problems” MRAs whine about tend to exclusively be products of the ****ing patriarchy they support anyway.
GO **** YOURSELVES, MRAS.

On staying 'calm' when discussing feminist issues.

[URL="http://www.jneurosci.org/content/34/12/4161"]Also a study which finds that people who care about justice and equality[/URL] (ie feminists) use hte logic and rational parts of their brains more, in other words it isn't driven by emotion but logic and feminists etc. are angry not because of irrationality but because of a rational and logical hatred of oppression.

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

Also a study which finds that people who care about justice and equality (ie feminists) use hte logic and rational parts of their brains more, in other words it isn't driven by emotion but logic and feminists etc. are angry not because of irrationality but because of a rational and logical hatred of oppression.


Wish this site had a "like" button /\

[TBM]

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hydgpgm8xw[/url]

illustrates why feminism is a serious and necessary movement and “men’s rights” is a ****ing joke.
"MRAs" have the luxury of “calmly explaining their points” because they aren’t actually being oppressed at all

.

Except they are, and you're simply too gynocentric to see it.

They’re the most privileged, high-paid, pampered class of people on the planet.

Men are almost 80% of suicide victims. 62% of the homeless in the US are male.

[url]http://www.cultural-misandry.com/mens-rights/[/url]

Note that extremely long list of MRA grievances. Which doesn't even get into Yes means yes policy, the fact that a man's entire academic career can be ruined with a single accusation, no evidence required.

So no, I won't be calling myself a feminist, as I don't engage in the infantile lie that men's issues are all a result of patriarchy and will automatically (magically) resolve itself once we resolve all the women's issues and attain feminist "equality". Prove that feminism is improving a single MRA issue. How is calling ourselves feminists going to end male genital mutilation and other mens issues when feminists like you are the ones who trivialize it as a quote "supposed problem" and a "calm (non-)issue" It won't. You're so bigoted and childishly egocentric that you can't stand another gender rights movement making gains that does not fit under the feminist umbrella.

[Kirsten]

men do not need to make gains, men are so far beyond women when it comes to rights, to access, to opportunities that it is beyond a joke.

you have no idea what you are talking about.

[TBM]

men do not need to make gains, men are so far beyond women when it comes to rights

Women have superior reproductive rights. Women have the right to abandon their motherhood at will and drop off the child at a haven, men cannot abandon fatherhood and must pay the consequences.

Women receive custody of the children in about 84% of custody cases

[url]http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2006/0802sacks.html[/url] - National Organisation for Women OPPOSING shared custody.

But go ahead, name these rights in the western world that men are so far beyond women. I'll make it simpler: Beyond women at all.

[url]http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/mar/18/doj-white-male-bullying-victims-tough-luck/[/url]

, to access, to opportunities

[url]http://collegesportscouncil.org/newsroom/display_releases.cfm?id=28[/url]
Anti male scholarship discrimination.

[url]http://www.wnd.com/2006/02/34861/[/url]

that it is beyond a joke.

you have no idea what you are talking about.

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0[/url]

Feminists blocking free speech on mens issues ^

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbBJLGnCSOc[/url]

Feminists instigating violence at mens rights event. ^

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfzUG70nN6k[/url]

Feminists drowning out free speech using noise pollution with university employees saying this intolerance is par for the course in US universities. ^

All because a group wishes to assemble to discuss mens issues without the feminist narrative that male patriarchy is to blame for all of society's problems. All because they want to put men first for once.

By calling yourself a feminist, you provide plausible deniability and cover from criticism to these fascists.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Youtube videos aren't proof. If we have people coming here demanding we cite empirical evidence of trends, then we will ask the same of you, TBM. Citing deliberately anti-feminists sites with a natural bias is also not the best approach.

The site you linked with regards to rape laws merely collects a series of self-supporting new articles to embellish its points, giving no regard to the other side of the argument, which is at-best bad debating technique. It smells of bias by claiming that rape allegations can end a career, despite constant evidence to the contrary, particularly in the case of famous or athletic men. I'm sure you'll know at least a few examples of these sorts of men, being informed in men's rights.

The other thing is that you cite suicide rates for males, which is a very fair point. Now, what do you think may cause them?

- A sense that the man alone must provide for the family, and thus, when they lose their job, they feel inadequate?
- The belief that they cannot talk about issues like this, or issues of mental health, lest they seem, "weak?"
- Issues of body image, or acting 'gay' leading them to take their own lives?

Because if it's those factors, then sects of Feminism are aiming to address them. You refer to Feminism as a whole, when, like any other political movement, it's a fragmented push rather than a coherent assault as MRAs seem to believe. There is no organised unity for much of it, and it has its extremism as much as any other faction of people. Sure, the people yelling, "cut their balls off, death to all men." exist, but there are Christian cults who demand the same of foreigners and gays, not to mention the very publicised Islamic militants who commit atrocity.

There are also MRAs who throw death threats, rape threats and even escalating up to threats to commit a mass shooting against feminism. We'll disregard your militant minority in the likes of Gamergate and such, if you disregard ours' as we do.

Women have superior reproductive rights? Why the deluge of abortion laws that are attempted to be passed in America by a predominantly-male Senate? Child custody? That's an issue feminists would like to deal with - we don't want the woman to be the stereotypical caregiver, it's about liquidising gender roles exactly like those.

I have to say, as a guy, that I really do not understand your argument. Have you ever talked to women about what it's like to be female? Have you ever looked at your life and tried to look at what you have, rather than what you don't?

/EDIT/

Sorry sorry sorry, just had to address this:

All because a group wishes to assemble to discuss mens issues without the feminist narrative that male patriarchy is to blame for all of society's problems. All because they want to put men first for once.

That right there shows a bias in your own perception. Go look up the gender of the world leaders, the richest people in almost any country, the most highly-paid athletes, et cetera, et cetera. You'll notice an incredibly startling trend that may shock you to your core.

[Mr Mystery]

Men cannot abandon Fatherhood....

Men. Cannot. Abandon. Fatherhood.

If you're in the UK, tune into ITV1 around 9:25, because I think you Uncle Jeremy might just be able to teach a thing or two.

Absent Father isn't a band you know (and if it is, it's either Punk or Hipster).

But overall, thank you for making this a day upon which it is very, very easy to be a feminist.

[Psychosplodge]

That explains every comment thread on the Frontpage 40K Articles...

True...

Unplayed with toys don't break......but where's the fun in that.

Indeed, you make a good point.

[Gotthammer]

Women receive custody of the children in about 84% of custody cases

Courts can't be expected to award what they're not asked to. It turns out that fathers who ask for custody (and don't give up) are very likely to get either sole or joint custody:

From a state of Massachusetts study of custody awards at the state and national level come these studies of cases where fathers requested custody:

Study 1: MASS
2100 cases where fathers sought custody (100%)
5 year duration

29% of fathers got primary custody
65% of fathers got joint custody
7% of mothers got primary custody

Study 2: MASS
700 cases. In 57, (8.14%) father sought custody
6 years

67% of fathers got primary custody
23% of mothers got primary custody

Study 3: MASS
500 cases. In 8% of these cases, father sought custody
6 years

41% of fathers got sole custody
38% of fathers got joint custody
15% of mothers got sole custody

Study 4: Los Angeles
63% of fathers who sought sole custody were successful

Study 5: US appellate custody cases
51% of fathers who sought custody were successful (not clear from wording whether this includes just sole or sole/joint custody)

The study concluded:

The high success rate of fathers does not by itself establish gender bias against women. Additional evidence, however, indicates that women may be less able to afford the lawyers and experts needed in contested custody cases (see “Family Law Overview”) and that, in contested cases, different and stricter standards are applied to mothers.
More on fathers and custody:

Through most of Anglo-American legal history, there was little custody litigation because there was nothing to fight over. Dad always got the kids. Under English and early American common law, children were regarded as paternal property.
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.

Old stereotypes die hard, though, and fathers’ rights advocates say neutral statutory language has done little to change the courts’ pro-mother leanings. Moms are granted custody in 85 percent of all cases, notes Dianna Thompson, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based American Coalition for Fathers and Children. She says the expense of litigation and likelihood of losing discourages many dads from even fighting for custody.

However, statistics on custody awards can be deceiving, since most custody orders are uncontested or negotiated by the parties. A 1992 study of California cases showed that fathers were awarded primary or joint custody in about half of contested custody matters.

Some lawyers believe the gender gap in custody awards reflects a preference for the status quo, rather than bias against fathers. “Family law is a case-by-case, judge-by-judge affair,” says Joel Bigatel, a family lawyer in Narberth, Pa. “If there’s a bias in awarding custody, it’s in favor of primary caretakers. If dad is the working parent, and mom is the stay-at-home, she generally has a leg up.”

Working fathers have the best shot at being named primary caretakers if they have flexible schedules, or if the mother is also working and the children are already in day care or school, says Bigatel.

-

the fact that a man's entire academic career can be ruined with a single accusation, no evidence required.

Can be but it never happens.

False rape accusation stats:

FBI reports from 1996 consistently put the number of "unfounded" rape accusations around 8%. In contrast, the average rate of unfounded reports for "Index crimes" tracked by the FBI is 2%.

However, "unfounded" is not synonymous with false allegation. Bruce Gross of the Forensic Examiner says that:

This statistic is almost meaningless, as many of the jurisdictions from which the FBI collects data on crime use different definitions of, or criteria for, "unfounded." That is, a report of rape might be classified as unfounded (rather than as forcible rape) if the alleged victim did not try to fight off the suspect, if the alleged perpetrator did not use physical force or a weapon of some sort, if the alleged victim did not sustain any physical injuries, or if the alleged victim and the accused had a prior sexual relationship. Similarly, a report might be deemed unfounded if there is no physical evidence or too many inconsistencies between the accuser's statement and what evidence does exist. As such, although some unfounded cases of rape may be false or fabricated, not all unfounded cases are false.

A 2005 study by the British Home Office, "A gap or a chasm? Attrition in reported rape cases" was the largest and most rigorous study to date commissioned by the British Home Office on UK rape crime, from the initial reporting of a rape through to legal prosecutions. The study was based on 2,643 sexual assault cases (Kelly, Lovett, and Regan, 2005). Of these, police departments classified 8% as false reports.

The researchers noted that some of these classifications were based simply on the personal judgements of the police investigators and were made in violation of official criteria for establishing a false allegation. Closer analysis of this category applying the Home Office counting rules for establishing a false allegation and excluding cases where the application of the cases where confirmation of the designation was uncertain reduced the percentage of false reports to 3%. The researchers concluded that "one cannot take all police designations at face value" and that "[t]here is an over-estimation of the scale of false allegations by both police officers and prosecutors." Moreover, they added:

"The interviews with police officers and complainants’ responses show that despite the focus on victim care, a culture of suspicion remains within the police, even amongst some of those who are specialists in rape investigations. There is also a tendency to conflate false allegations with retractions and withdrawals, as if in all such cases no sexual assault occurred. This reproduces an investigative culture in which elements that might permit a designation of a false complaint are emphasised (later sections reveal how this also feeds into withdrawals and designation of ‘insufficient evidence’), at the expense of a careful investigation, in which the evidence collected is evaluated."


A report by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) examined rape allegations in England and Wales over a 17-month period between January 2011 and May 2012. It showed that in 35 cases authorities prosecuted a person for making a false allegation, while they brought 5,651 prosecutions for rape. Keir Starmer, the head of the CPS, said that the "mere fact that someone did not pursue a complaint or retracted it, is not of itself evidence that it was false" and that it is a "misplaced belief" that false accusations of rape are commonplace.
He added that the report also showed that a significant number of false allegations of rape (and domestic violence) "involved young, often vulnerable people. About half of the cases involved people aged 21 years old and under, and some involved people with mental health difficulties. In some cases, the person alleged to have made the false report had undoubtedly been the victim of some kind of offence, even if not the one that he or she had reported."


A study of 812 rape accusations made to police in Victoria Australia between 2000 and 2003 found that 2.1% were ultimately classified by police as false, with the complainants then charged or threatened with charges for filing a false police report.

This matter was investigated by the Denver-based Research Unit of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts which performed a 2-year study which explored the incidence and validity of sexual abuse allegations in custody cases. Contrary to the popular myth that sexual allegations in custody cases are relatively common, the study found that, in the 12 states participating in the study, only 6% of custody cases involved allegations of sexual abuse. The belief that these allegations are typically false was also challenged by the study findings. Half of the allegations were believed by the investigators to be true, and in another 17% determination of the validity could not be made with any degree of certainty. The remaining third of the cases were not believed to involve abuse. However, in most of the cases where abuse was not substantiated, the allegations were believed to have been made in good faith and based on genuine suspicions.
Similar results have been found by other researchers. An Australian study (Brown et al., 1997) found the overall rate of false allegations during divorce to be about 9%, similar to the rate of false allegations at any other time. Schuman (2000) reviewed research that found a range of 1-5% for rates of deliberately false allegations, and 14-21% for mistaken allegations.

It is also important to note that when false allegations are raised, it is not always mothers accusing fathers. Nicholas Bala and John Schuman, two Queen's University law professors, reviewed Canadian judges' written decisions where allegations of either physical or sexual abuse were raised in the context of parental separation. They examined 196 family law cases that were adjudicated between 1990 and 1998. The results revealed that the judges felt that only a third of unproven cases of child abuse stemming from custody battles involved someone deliberately lying in court. In these cases, the judges found that fathers were more likely to fabricate the accusations than mothers. Of female-initiated allegations, just 1.3% were deemed intentionally false by civil courts, compared with 21% when the man in the failed relationship brought similar allegations.

Also the fact you use the term "gynocentric" (especially about EG who is the best trans ally I know) indicates a narrow, transphobic, view of gender.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Anyone remember Fathers for Justice? I think it was just a British thing. There's a reason they broke up and stopped breaking into Buckingham Palace to have tea with the Queen.

They got what they wanted, because they were men, and they could wield power to get what they wanted. Any luck on closing that wage gap women suffer from, despite a larger and more concerted effort involving far less trespassing on royal property?

Not an awful lot, no.

It's interesting to see how much someone's viewpoint can be clouded by their bias. You assume equality is already here, and explain all the problems women have brought up as lies and, "women secretly like that stuff, they're just coy." Thus, attempts by women to get more status are putting themselves above men, rather than climbing up to stand next to them.

Interesting, and rather sad.