Both my brother and I have endured divorces involving kids. I support

[PretzelWarrior]

a men's issues forum. There are so many things we could share in support of one another. Just as women have been subjected to bias in a patriarchal society, so some men who don't wish to fit into the stereotypes of patriarchal society are also subjected to bias.

I heartily endorse the notion. IF this place is interested in being truly inclusive.

[Ten Bears]

1. I'll second that

[Behind the Aegis]

2. I agree.

There are certainly a plethora of men's issues which could warrant a DU'er group.

[notadmblnd]

3. I think that a man who takes care of his kids deserves a voice and to have a say in their lives

However, I don't think deadbeat dads do.

[PretzelWarrior]

5. the same goes for dead beat moms

I think it is self evident that if a man for whatever reason doesn't pay child support, he shouldn't get preferential treatment.

However, I'm talking about even before that is an issue. States should do a better job of looking at all circumstances of a couple that is divorcing when awarding custody.

[notadmblnd]

7. O yeah, what's good for the gander.....

[JonQ]

10. It always struck me as odd that we have a term

for bad fathers, but not one for bad mothers.

There are plenty of great dads out there and terrible mothers, and yet moms are generally assumed to be selfless and hardworking and fathers are (at best) inept and clueless.

A mens issues forum would be valuable.

[notadmblnd]

12. You're absolutely right. There are horrible mothers out there.

And you guys do have names for them. Maybe their not said in court, but you have the names.

[raccoon]

268. Used to be a woman who drank was an "unfit mother." Can you imagine a man who drank being

called an "unfit father?"

But there are good and bad mothers and fathers.

[lumberjack_jeff]

82. Parents should support their kids.

Both financially as well as personally.

But punishing a non-custodial parent for poor financial support by withholding visitation punishes the kid more.

[uppityperson]

95. "parent" is such a good term to use for a parent.

Deadbeat parent, for instance, doesn't matter what sex they are but addresses the issue. I have had this discussion with parents who "babysit" their kid(s) when the other parent goes out to do something. It is called "parenting", not "babysitting".

I agree with what you write here.

[villager]

4. I also agree....

n/t

[DearAbby]

6. This would be a good idea

GD isn't the forum for these issues, but they are important.

[notadmblnd]

8. I disagree that GD isn't the place.

How men are treated in the family courts is political and is an issue that should not be shoved in a corner. I don't believe that there is a problem having another forum just for the purpose, but it definitely belongs in GD too.

[PretzelWarrior]

9. I agree it could get contentious in a general forum

so that's not the issue. the issue is having some place where people can come together and share ideas. Just like the GBLT and Gun people.

[lumberjack_jeff]

83. ... and the book people, and the crocheting people, and the bicycle people...

... and the cars people, and the businesspeople, and the gardening people and the DIY people, and the farming people, and the poets and the anthropologists...

There are about 200 discrete groups on DU. The fact that men are singled out as the single group too controversial to accommodate is ridiculous.

Remember this any time a poster complains about the rampant sexism on DU. They have it 180° backwards.

[seabeyond]

90. bullshit. that is such bullshit to "pretend" there is not reason.

we are told by the males this is all they are. dna. they cant help themselves. biological. little ehad, not the big head adn everything else. by far it is the males that are saying that to us.

it is the behavior of males on this board that has created this lumberjack jeff and to be vicitim instead of ownership for sitting exactly where the males are, ... i call bullshit

i have also been one that has defended male inevitably and consistently telling SOME males that is not all they are. i knnow better

then i am told,.... if a man says otherwise he is lying

so .... bullshit

if people are wary to allow the forum, there is reason

and better to own up to it and then do what is needed to make sure the forum doesnt become that is the solution

denying it though.... bullshit

and i want you guys to have a forum

[lumberjack_jeff]

93. DU has rules, so opposing it on the basis that it will be a cesspool of misogyny is a red herring.

I am really beginning to empathize with the percieved sense among GLBT DU'ers that their conversations were only allowed on a case-by-case basis with the suffrage of straights.

If it's not against the rules, it's no one's business what "the men" talk about.

... and it is not generally the men here who are promoting the view that mens biology makes them substandard.

[seabeyond]

94. it isn't a red herring. rule is well known, yet continually found on du, and gd

a thread gets slipped in and the guys (SOME guys) go wild..... having the best of times, until it is locked. not many men are found saying, hey guys... that is crap and doesn't belong on du. most all stay out of the threads until they are locked.

no red herring

but you are right, there are rules, and moderated, and the mens desire to have their forum, one would hope it could be done.

[JonQ]

158. Ah, it's always guys

women never misbehave or "go wild" on threads?

And who is doing the locking and banning? Are the moderators all women? If not then obviously some men are saying "hey this is crap and doesn't belong on du".

And frankly I've seen as many men standing up to other sexist men as I've seen women standing up to other sexist women.

[seabeyond]

159. repugs do the same. they really try to make their shit smell sweet by saying both equally

do it.

either blantant lying to self or illusion you live in, but not a reality

[JonQ]

162. In your opinion

tinted by preconcieved notions about men.

Misandry is far less likely to get you banned or blocked on here than misogyny.

Like if you were to say, imply that a womens forum would immediately devolve in to sexist rants because women can't behave themselves and need to be controlled. That would not be tolerated.

But the reverse has been tolerated, even extolled by a great many on here. Sad day.

[Gwendolyn]

114. Actually, it's mostly you who posts this stuff about dna and big head vs little head...

blah blah blah etc... over and over and over and over and over again on every single thread that has a connection between the genders. Same recriminations and accusations without reason or cause, just like you're doing right now. It's a real bee in your bonnet. Hope you get over it some day.

[seabeyond]

145. gwen, .... you are wrong..... again. i do not promote it, i challenge it, every. single. time.

but then, you know that, dont you.

[Gwendolyn]

168. You bring this stuff up constantly when no one else has.

It's virtually guaranteed in any thread that is remotely concerned with gender. The comment on this thread is a perfect example and practically a cut and paste of countless others.

The way men express themselves seems to be of utmost concern to you. It's just interesting.

[EFerrari]

261. So you think that a mother shouldn't be interested in gender roles,

or dynamics or their interplay? What do you think mothers do, anyway?

[Gwendolyn]

264. Huh? Who the hell said anything about gender roles?

It was more the repetitive obsession over something imagined and the bossiness that was interesting. In any case, it's been clarified downthread. The way that stranger, random men talk on a message board really is an extremely important issue to her.

[EFerrari]

265. She did. Apparently it went right over your head.

As usual, you are demonizing something that you don't seem to understand. Nice going!

[Gwendolyn]

266. I'm not demonizing anything. This is message board silliness, not a life and death matter.

And nothing's gone over my head. I understand the motivation and reason why people hang obsessively around message board threads, aching to impose their point of view on others quite well.

[EFerrari]

270. "Obsessively"? "Aching"?

Right, you're not demonizing anyone.

[sendero]

11. Exactly..

... shove another issue off to siberia. excellent.

[seabeyond]

13. i fully support a mens forum. as i have said before,

men need probably more than women. women will talk about these issues anytime, anywhere. men, not so much. a safe place to discuss this is important, i think, for men.

it will also be up to the men in this forum to keep the forum respectful and not a sexist, ball grabbing environment. it will be up to men if they keep the forum or if the forum is shut down

as far as the custody issue.... i have two brothers raising their kids. two mothers that didnt do their job in different ways. and i have a lot to say about the equality in the court system pertaining to males.

[Pithlet]

14. I would be willing to support it

if I didn't know full well what men's issues is code for. If DU were ever to have such a forum, I'd have no part of DU. There is absolutely nothing progressive about it. Of course there are legitimate issues of discussion for men. I have a husband and sons, and as a feminist I know full well how the patriarchy can negatively effect them as well as the OP states, plus a variety of other issues as you say. But Men's Issues is too often code for anti-feminism at best, and good old fashioned misogyny at worst. It would turn into Men's Rights DU, without a doubt. The posts in defense of the forum reek of it. In the locked threads in support of it, I've seen a post declaring the feminization of society for example. Another post talking about abortion rights for men. Big time red flags. That's just a start. In fact the only post I've seen that sounds remotely reasonable is the OP's, and yet I still remain skeptical. I've been a member of DU for too long to know where a forum like that would go. There's no place for it on DU, I'm sorry. And it's a shame it has to be that way. Too many with an anti-feminist point of view have proposed this and are gunning for it. No way. I'll be slammed for saying so, probably hatefully.

And it's not as though there aren't are plenty of places on the net to get the kinds of discussions they're going for. It's probably better that they do because they'd be a lot freer in their discussion anyway. They wouldn't have everyone looking over their shoulders and alerting on everything to make sure they were keeping their forum within DU regulations, not to mention the cross board wars with the feminist and women's rights groups. But dare I suggest it, maybe that's the point, at least for some? Another reason why it's just a bad idea. I feel badly for anyone who genuinely wants the non-inflammatory discussion. As a feminist, boy can I relate. It's not as if having a separate basement forum makes it that much easier.

[seabeyond]

15. of course your post is valid and should be heard because it is exactly the concern so many have

all of us with sons... especially, but men in our lives know how important a place for men to feel safe to talk about this stuff is. we also equally, if not more realistically know the pitfalls.

i couldnt agree with you more.

[PretzelWarrior]

24. well, I appreciate your thoughts and honest take

I just think it could be highly moderated and a jumping off point for things like private discussions between members and who knows what else.

I just don't think it needs to be anti woman to talk about issues of concern for men who end up in tough circumstances.

[Pithlet]

36. And I appreciate your kind response

I think it could be too if it weren't for the presence of quite a few gadflys here at DU. You're absolutely right. It doesn't need to be anti woman to talk about issues of concern for men, and I don't immediately take all issues concerning men as automatically anti-woman. But it's sadly true that a significant portion of posters pushing for this do take an anti-feminist bend to their viewpoint, sadly. Just looking at all the locked threads on the issue, some of the sources they link to and some of the arguements they make show this. I don't want to run afoul of the rules so I can't really go into details, but I'm familiar with a few of the posters who support this. Let's just say I'm skeptical of their motives in supporting it to feel there's much hope it would go well. If this were overwhemingly a group of progressive minded feminist friendly DUers? I'd be all for it.
'

[TexasObserver]

32. Give us a kick, if you will, Your Majesty!

To quote Anna from The King and I.

There are many forums here, and you don't have to like them. Don't click on them.

[Pithlet]

39. Well

if any of those forums would be equally against a similar progressive movement, you can bet I'd do more than just not click in those instances, too. There doesn't seem to be one currently in existence.

[cynatnite]

47. Agree completely. n/t

[Fading Captain]

74. LOL. Get over yourself

Feeling like God much?

[lumberjack_jeff]

79. DU has rules

Sexism and homophobia are against them. A men's group would be no different in this regard.

There is no place for progressive men to discuss what that means, and creating one shouldn't be subject to your veto.

Hard to moderate? Surely no more so than GD.

[tekisui]

96. I agree 100%.

[Last Stand]

243. "Men's Issues is too often code for anti-feminism"

Just as Feminism being too often a code for man-hating. And just because that is the case, and let's also say that that's not good reason not to have a forum to discuss it. If you're worried about DU sometimes being unfair, then you are correct. Just try defending the accused on the Duke Rape case and wait for the name calling to begin. But that's freedom of speech. It's also about equal rights, something Feminists should always demand. If you're a woman who has been turned down for a job because of gender discrimination, just try being a man who is automatically deemed an inferior parent in court because of his gender. These are meaningful topics that men (and women if they choose) deserve a place to discuss.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

16. Not going to happen

There are too many defensive/sensitive people on this board for there to be any meaningful discussion in that sub forum. Just read post #14. Just the idea of a men's forum it too scary for her to comprehend that she threatens to leave DU if a men's issue sub forum is created.

[seabeyond]

17. or one can take personal responsibility for why this may be so, and then discuss opening

to see about resolving, but hey... i think the concern is valid and there is a responsiblity.

if you were to go into feminism anyway, you wont see a site about lessening, demeaning, ridiculing, degrading male. i dont think you will find it in the woman forum either.

there is a responsibility in gaining this environment. and if it is important enough for the men who are looking for it, then they will insure the crap isnt on their site.

[Pithlet]

19. It wasn't a threat.

I really doubt it's going to happen. But thanks for proving my point. I'm just one of those sensitive females, right? Oh, you were at least smart enough to say "people", but it was implied. This is exactly why such a forum would be a spectacularly bad idea. I know this not because I'm a scardy cat female, but because I've been a member here for years. I have a pretty good idea how it would go down if it were to happen.

[Robb]

22. I've been here for a spell too.

And I'm grossly offended by your assertions that a men's issues group somehow wouldn't "behave."

You claim to be a feminist. Act like one.

[Pithlet]

23. You never see the sexist posts, huh?

You're not at all familiar with the posting habits of a lot of the posters pushing for this? Totally unaware of the sex wars? Please! Another thread I just participated in. The guy uses a completely anti-feminist misogynistic source. And the whole thing was supposed to be an example of why that forum was needed.

[PretzelWarrior]

28. well, I've also seen "breeder" posts and posts slamming men in general

despite the many who participate on this forum and are clearly trying for equality among all no matter the gender, sexual preference, religion, color, etc.

[Robb]

30. You're behaving as if there's nothing offensive to anyone, anywhere on DU.

There is. Shall we shut down the whole board?

[Pithlet]

37. No, I'm behaving as if there's a specific problem.

That I'm being quite specific in spelling out. And some of the perpetrators of that problem are proposing a forum to congregate and perpetrate that problem further and I oppose that. I'm really sorry you have a problem with that, Robb. Oh well. Not much I can do about that.

[Robb]

41. You're seeing a problem without a solution.

First of all, to be fair, I have to admit I see quite a few "ignored" posts in this thread. I've found the feature works wonders for my blood pressure, but I also have philosophical reservations about using it. No surprise on either point, I expect.

So yes, there are clearly "perpetrators," as you describe them, and I've obviously got a few of them on "ignore."

But there are also legitimate issues for men to discuss. You admitted this.

My solution would be aggressive moderating and, when an individual doesn't think that goes far enough, the "ignore" feature. It's the solution in the I/P forum and in any other contentious region, or contentious debate, of DU. Why would it not work here?

[Pithlet]

42. I just gave a solution.

I think such forums can and do exist outside of DU. Someone who actually has progressive motives and wants progressive discussion of men's issues and not just "Man, the matriarchy is putting us down!" could set up a forum and set the rules. But honeslty, DU is just not the place for it. Those ignore posts? You're lucky you've missed them. Yes, "matriarchy" was used, and not ironically. DU is just too big tent.

[Robb]

45. I don't like the idea

...That it has to exist outside of DU because some folks would jackass it up. One could make the same argument for several topic forums we already keep running around here.

I'd rather see it fail than not do it, because if it worked out it would be extremely valuable -- worth the risk, put another way -- and I know if it turned out as you fear, it would be killed off by mods and admins.

[Pithlet]

52. It isn't "some folks would jackass it up"

it would be an anti-feminist forum. I have very little doubt about that. Maybe speckled here and there with the occasional non-jackass post. But the usual suspects would flock and that's what it would surely turn into. I'm sorry to be such a cynic. But given my experiences here, some of them in this very thread, I can't help it.

[Pithlet]

72. After thinkng about it some more.

I know It's a touchy issue. I might be okay with this if this were a forum that were explicitly against bashing women and feminism. I just really have my hackles up the way the idea has been presented so many times in the past and how it was presented recently, with the PC stuff, you know? And I'm still just so highly skeptical. It will be so attractive to the ninnies who think feminists is a dirty word. And once it's up, how easy will it be to shut down if it does turn into feminist bashing?

[lumberjack_jeff]

89. Misogyny and misandry are against DU rules.

Feminism is advocacy for the interests of women, it should be no more off-limits as a topic of discussion and criticism than the mens rights movement is.

Both are advocacy, neither should be confused with equality.

[Pithlet]

98. The men's rights movement is merely the anti-feminist movement.

It isn't progressive in the least. Sorry. Their argument that the movement for equality hurts men. It's bogus and it doesn't have a place on a progressive site.

[pipoman]

113. And a share of the feminist movement is cover for

misandry. The simple solution is DON"T FUCKING GO THERE IF YOU DON"T FUCKING LIKE IT..jeeeezuz keeeerist already

[lumberjack_jeff]

118. You're welcome to your opinion. You're not welcome to veto mine.

Advocacy for men, just like for women, DOES belong on a progressive site. In fact, I'd argue that its necessary for the survival of the progressive movement.

[Pithlet]

126. Survival of the progessive movement?

Are you implying the feminist movement is bad for it? Yeah, I've seen the Men's Rights web pages. I've seen the arguments those here at DU make. I know exactly what that advocacy is. A repression of feminism. Yeah, survival of the progressive movement depends on quashing it. Protect it from those feminists. I know the score. That's exactly why I think it has no place here. Discussion of real men's issues they actually face is one thing. Advocating that they're somehow marginalized by the evil womenz is quite another. No thanks.

And I haven't vetoed your opinion. No one has ever stopped you from posting it here. Believe me, I've seen that point of view all too often here at DU. I just don't think it needs the implicit legitimization that a forum gives.

[lumberjack_jeff]

130. I'm saying that marginalizing half the population is bad for the progressive movement.

The mens rights web pages are part of the problem and a big reason that the progressive movement needs to come up with a better answer than;

[Pithlet]

138. And is that what you think the feminist movement does, too?

You may not ascribe to the viewpoints of those men's rights pages. But plenty of others do, even here on DU. I see it all the time. And even if they don't, the dismissive ugly attitudes against women and anything dealing with feminism is very common. Sexism is also sadly common. If you think feminism is bad for the progressive movement, then I have to strongly disagree with you. The feminist movement has been struggling for quite some time, and a big part of that is a general movement backwards in attitudes. I don't have all the answers for that. But I don't think another move in the wrong direction would help matters either.

You know, I think it's bad enough that feminist topics have basically been relegated to the basement. There are some who are shouting about how unfair it is that we have a forum and men don't. You know what? I think it's sad we even need one. The reason we pushed for one and then another one is precisely because we got so tired of every time we brought up a topic dealing with women's issues it turned into a giant flaming war when some men came into the threads and crapped all over it. There are men who think that it's equal. That the issues men face are the same and just as urgent. Well it isn't. It's hard enough that we're fighting against this backward push. To be minimized even further by this claim that everything is equal, or that it's even harmful for the progressive movement? Yeah, that's why I'm reacting the way I am.

[lumberjack_jeff]

170. You claim to be speaking on behalf of feminism.

Marginalizing DU's men is what you are doing.

Is it fair to generalize? Probably not, because there are a great many women here who have voiced support for the idea.

[Pithlet]

184. I do? Don't be absurd.

I'm stating my feelings on the issue. This is the oldest trick in the book, the You Don't Speak For ALL Women, Look There's Women Who Doesn't Agree With You! retort. Really! We aren't a monolithic group?! Why, I had no idea! Duh... Here's a clue. The fact that all women everywhere don't agree with me isn't evidence one way or the other that what I'm saying has any validity. So put that trick back in the bag. It is old.

[JonQ]

102. Did you have the same concerns

about the womens forum turning in to a men-bashing site?

[Pithlet]

107. No. For one thng, feminism isn't about men bashing.

That's what the kind of men who make me opposed to the whole thing think. Number two, men bashing isn't nearly as prevalent in our society or on this board. Look, I know the anti-feminists don't believe it, but the feminist movement is still a part of the progressive movement, and is still very much necessary. It grinds their gears, I know. The push to minimize it is nothing new.

[JonQ]

110. Mens rights is not about women bashing

but you seemed to assume it was.

And I have known many self-described feminists who very vocally hate men. I knew one, a professor (not one of mine thankfully) who when asked about the successes women have enjoyed recently in academia, even exceeding men in acceptance and graduation rates said "great, we need to keep pushing until we hold all the positions and all the power". I asked if she was serious and she said absolutely. At that point I ended the converstaion.

She called herself a feminist. Obviously she didn't want equality.

"Number two, men bashing isn't nearly as prevalent in our society or on this board. "

Ever watched a family based sitcom, or commercial with a family in it? Quick question, who is almost always portrayed as the incompetent idiot needing help, the mom or the dad? Think about it next time you watch TV, once you're looking for it the contrast is rather striking.


"Look, I know the anti-feminists don't believe it, but the feminist movement "

Any movement, no matter how noble it's intentions will have extremists and runs the risk of getting off course from it's original purpose. There are people who take environmentalism way too far for instance (ELF) and feminism is no exception. There are women who are not interested in equality any more but are interested in revenge and dominance, and putting men in their place. Not all, or most but some. And that small amount should be used to discredit all feminists, just as the small number of men who bash women should be used to discredit all men interested looking and issues concerning men.

PS: did you notice your assumption there? That all feminists care about equality, anyone who would argue with them (ie, men) only care about bashing women.

[Pithlet]

117. Did I say men bashing didn't exist? No, I didn't.

I just said it isn't as prevalent. I stand by that statement. It isn't. By far. So the feminist movement isn't perfect and you know some feminists who hate men? So what? That doesn't mean it isn't still a legitimate movement that's very necessary. The vast majority of feminists don't hate men. It's a myth that the Rush Limbaughs o the world propagate and too many men seem willing to lap right up. Oh, they know a feminist who hates men so it must be true!

And the dad as the incompetent boob thing always enrages me, too. Lots of us feminists hate that! We can thank patriarchal attitudes for crap like that. Plenty of men think that way, too. Who do you think writes those commercials and sitcoms a majority of the time?

[JonQ]

133. On this site I'd say men bashing is far more common

than the reverse. Mostly because misogyny is met with swift action, whereas misandry (as seen on this thread) is tolerated.

"So the feminist movement isn't perfect and you know some feminists who hate men? So what? That doesn't mean it isn't still a legitimate movement that's very necessary."

So the mens rights movement isn't perfect and you know some who hate women? So what? That doesn't mean it isn't still a legitimate movement that's very necessary. Easy huh?

You used the existence of a minority of men who bash women as proof that such a movement should not be tolerated. Why can't I do the same to you? Or is that a gender based double standard that you are ok with?

"And the dad as the incompetent boob thing always enrages me, too. Lots of us feminists hate that! We can thank patriarchal attitudes for crap like that. Plenty of men think that way, too. Who do you think writes those commercials and sitcoms a majority of the time?"

You can tell that by all the times feminists bring such discrepencies to our attentions and work to correct them. Snicker.

So defending mens rights should also be the purview of feminists? If a man has an issue with some part of our culture he could just tell his girlfriend and she will act on his behalf. How thoughtful. Like back when men decided what was best for women, I think that worked out well.

That sounds great and all but why not let men have their own forum where they could discuss such matters themselves?

And I think writers do that because for the jokes to work they need one parent to be an idiot, and if it's the mother then they will be protested and sued.

[Pithlet]

142. Oh please.

Now this isn't even a serious discussion anymore. You are clearly in the feminism as men bashing school now. I'm not jumping to that conclusion after having read this post. You haven't been around that many feminists and seriously given them unprejudiced consideration if you haven't heard us rant all the time against those stupid unfair depictions. Snicker indeed.

Why not let them have it? Because the anti-feminism and sexism already exists all over the board. Why concentrate it neatly in a forum and afford it some legitimization? I don't want to be a member of a board that does that, quite frankly.

[JonQ]

147. See you're doing it again

you assume mens rights =women bashing.

Then you go on to complain about how some people equate womens rights with men bashing.


You really don't see the irony of that do you?

You and the limbaughs of the world (whom you claim to hate) have a lot in common. Assign to your opponent those traits you most exhibit.

You have issues with men, so you assume all men have issues with women and act according.

I assure you that is not the case, and a mens forum would not threaten your feminist ideology. At least, not if your personal ideology is based on equality rather than gender hegemony. I fail to see how discussing the inequalities that harm men will discredit the feminist movement. You seem to believe that will, which suggests you are one of the fringe feminists who doesn't care for equality between the sexes, but rather retribution.

[Pithlet]

150. I assume it because for the most part it's true.

A big part of the movement is indeed women bashing. In fact, most of it us. Start pointing me to key movements that aren't and I'll be happy to change my mind. Show me how it isn't and I'll be happy to change my mind. What rights exactly are men fighting for that don't run counter to progress that women are fighting for, exactly? If you're going to bring up custody, then I'm sorry. That's a bannr that the men's rights movmeent loves to take up to make it look legitimate, but there's little data to back up their claim that courts are just so heavily biased against men. Are family courts perfect? No. Clearly there's work to be done. But both men and women can and do get screwed. The fact is men aren't marginalized in this society. There isn't a sweeping men's movement needed a la feminism. There just isn't.

[JonQ]

156. Ah so that's the standard now

A big part of the feminist movement is indeed male bashing. In fact, most of it is. Start pointing out key components that aren't and I'll be happy to change my mind.

In other words, I'll go ahead and assume the worst and it's up to you to convince me otherwise.

And as for mens issues, no doubt you will deny that any of them matter at all (they only affect men, not people) but here goes:
Custody, deny it all you want it still favors mothers.
Child support, ditto.
Sentences for equivalent crimes, would you rather be a 40 year old male or 40 year old female sleeping with a 15 year old student of the opposite sex?
Suicide.
Unemployment.
Homelessness.
Overall health and life expectancy.
Highschool graduation rates.
Higher education rates.

And of course there are plenty of health issues that relate only to men.

I'm sure none of those rise to the level of acceptable discourse in your opinion and men should continue to suck it up a "be a man about it", but no doubt there are some who feel otherwise. And perhaps you would consider allowing them to have a voice?

[Pithlet]

165. Yeah, because there isn't loads of information available about the feminst movement

A movement that goes back over a hundred years. The feminist movement? Has scores of progressive leaders. And thousands of progressives that support it. The Men's Rights movement? Not so much. Then there are the Men's Rights websites filled with vitriol against women. Where are all the ones with progressive ideals to counter them? Should be easy to find. But they aren't. So, hardly equal. Hardly the same thing at all.

[JonQ]

187. Possibly because so-called progressive such as yourself

actively work to shut them out of the discussion?

The klan has been around for over a 100 years, it has had many political leaders. And yet no black people have stood up at their meetings and offered a reasoned rebuttal to their claims. Why do you suppose that is?

[redqueen]

190. What?

Did you just copmpare the feminist movement to the KKK?

I must be reading that wrong... what are you trying to say there?

[JonQ]

192. I compared a group of intolerant ideologues

who are unwilling to hear any opposition to their beliefs to another group of intolerant ideologues who are unwilling to listen to opposition.

Are all or even most feminists this way? No, but there is a strident minority who does seem intent to not merely gaining equal rights but actively suppressing mens rights.

[redqueen]

201. Which minority is that?

I hear a lot about these man-hating feminists, who want to supress mens' rights... but where are they?

(And sorry, but this exchange reminds me of Rush's "feminazi" rants...)

[JonQ]

203. I think that's pretty obvious

the minority of feminists who rant about men and seem more interested in hate than equality.

I notice you haven't asked for clarification on what other posters have meant by suggesting that all or most men will immediately start spouting sexist comments if given a free forum of their own.

So labeling an entire gender as evil = good.

Labeling and clearly defining an intolerant minority of a political movement as evil = bad.

Do you know what a double standard is? (and you think it's *men* that need to be watched to prevent them from saying sexist and derogatory things?)

[redqueen]

258. It seemed like you were talking about organized groups... e.g. the KKK.

A whole group dedicated to bashing men and preventing any progress on their issues. I don't think that is anywhere near the case.

I do agree there are a minority of people who bash men... just like a minority of men bash women. No real news there.

Those who expect bad things in the forum aren't "labeling an entire gender as evil"... that's silly hyperbole.

The concerns re: this forum are not completely unfounded. I just think it's better to have the forum and let those possible problems get out into the light and address them rather than just ignore them, though.

[JonQ]

271. No, I was talking about that mentality

a very bigoted mentality that strives to eliminate whatever it views as the enemy. The fringe hate-filled part of feminists exhibit this. Not all or most, but like the person who is rabidly opposed to the idea, there are definitely some.

"I do agree there are a minority of people who bash men... just like a minority of men bash women. No real news there."

But for some reason to certain individuals that minority who bash men doesn't count, but the minority who bash women does.

"Those who expect bad things in the forum aren't "labeling an entire gender as evil"... that's silly hyperbole. "

Essentially they are. They have stated on numerous occasions that the other men in that forum would not reign in the minority who do act that way. So some men will actively do this, the rest will passively support them.

"
The concerns re: this forum are not completely unfounded."

Their concerns with a mens forum perfectly mirror concerns for a womens forum. But no one is seriously suggesting doing away with the womens forum based on those concerns. That is a double standard.

[LooseWilly]

282. You compared a group of intolerant ideologues...

... to another group of intolerant ideologues?????

...


I've known ex-neo nazis who couldn't make such a comparison with a straight face. Impressive...

[Pithlet]

191. Wow!

I mean, how does one respond to that??? Holy crap!

[JonQ]

193. In your usual manner:

label all men as evil sexists and point out how all feminists are saints.

[seabeyond]

197. i think he did compare feminism with KKK. wow. uh hu. nt

[JonQ]

202. Only if you suffer from a reading disability

In fact I compared people who are unwillingly to listen to the opposition using the oppositions unwillingness to engage in a debate as proof that they aren't worth listening to.

[lumberjack_jeff]

194. The fact that there are few progressive mens forums

Is a good argument to support the creation of one here.

[redqueen]

198. I agree.

The ones out in internetland are doubtless frequented more often by... well... just look at the comments on most sites.

The one here would be much better.

[Pithlet]

205. I just can't look at the comments in this thread alone and feel that optimistic about it.

I wish I could. And that's only a small part of my trepidation.

[redqueen]

257. Well consider this...

there are some women who post here who say some pretty bigoted stuff about men. There are also men who do the same thing about women. Rules are rules and they do get broken, but I think if stuff like that is said here it has a better chance of being called out and addressed... and not solely in a (counterproductive) 'shut up you stupid fucker' manner... but in a manner that is more of an actual exchange of ideas and feelings.

When these subjects come up in GD, there seem to be more-heat-less-light type posts (which with the popularity of snark is hardly surprising)... but in these subforums I think there'd be a better chance for more of the actual discussion type exchanges to take place. Which would only help, IMO.

Just my .02.

[JonQ]

206. Perhaps then you should explain this to your colleagues

Who seem intent on stamping out any such proposal here in its infancy.

[TicketyBoo]

273. Okay. I usually wait until I've read all the replies

before addressing a post in case someone else has already made my point(s), but this one, I can't wait.

Custody, deny it all you want it still favors mothers.

Who takes off work and stays home with the child(ren) when they're sick? Who does the school call at work to come get the children if there is a snow cancellation or the child gets sick school? Which parent keeps track of when the children need vaccinations? Which parent takes them to get them? Which parent makes their breakfasts and lunches? Washes their clothes? Mends their clothes? Purchases their clothes? Buys the groceries?

Child support, ditto.

Which parent makes the most money? Still, still, still, it's usually the MAN, even if the two parents are working at EXACTLY THE SAME job.

Sentences for equivalent crimes, would you rather be a 40 year old male or 40 year old female sleeping with a 15 year old student of the opposite sex?

Since I'm not a teacher, and have no interest in having sex with children, this hardly applies.

Suicide

Not sure about that one? Care to link to several studies on the matter? Suffice to say, each gender suffers pressure to live up to expectations.

Unemployment

Get the wages equal, and they'll be laying off as many women as men. Right now, they're laying of the MOST EXPENSIVE labor, and that means MEN.

Homelessness

I haven't seen any actual studies, but I can guess that women are homeless less often because they have children in tow and qualify for assistance more often than men do. (See first response as to WHY women have the children more often.)

Overall health and life expectancy

That Y chromosome can be a pesky critter as far as life expectancy is concerned, I'll grant you. More men qualify for health insurance at work, I would wager. Personally, my mother died seven years before my father. She died at the age of 70; he at the age of 80.

Highschool graduation rates

None of my child's grandparents graduated from high school (male nor female). Both of his parents did.

Higher education rates

Our son has graduated from college. When I graduated from high school, it was generally assumed that boys would go to college; girls would get married. Being a dutiful daughter, I got married.

Maybe things are changing, but things SHOULD change. Ever hear of affirmative action? If you haven't been there, you just can't know. And it's not equal yet. Not by a long shot.

I, too, think that a "Men's Forum" is not such a good idea.

Personal notes: when I applied for a job at the post office in the early 70s, it was assumed that I couldn't cut it because I was a woman. The interviewer slung a 35-pound carrier pouch over my shoulder and asked me if I thought I could handle that. I said, "Pfft! I have purses at home that weigh more than this!" (NOBODY ever asks a woman if she can handle that 35-pound toddler she's carrying on her hip.) I have never divorced, I love my husband and my son, I never lived through a divorce of my parents. So my thoughts on this are not tinged by some bitterness about divorce, if that's what you're thinking. No. I have been faced with discrimination in the job market because a "man needs the job worse than you do." Yep. Pink collar ghetto. Keep 'em down. Let 'em know their place. One guy on the job asked me, "Why aren't you home baking cookies?" (Before Hillary Clinton said she could have done that, but didn't.) You just don't know until somebody tells you to "know your place." You just don't know.

[Pithlet]

280. Well said.

You know, I wonder if anyone truly thinks that divorce with kids is a walk in the park for women either? The fact that child custody issues and child support is often the big issue that men seem to want to tackle every time it's brought up makes me uneasy. I've never known a single woman who's gone through it who had it easy. Just got the kids without a fight. The numbers don't actually show this bias. Men are more often likely to afford the better lawyers. They usually come out better financially in divorce to begin