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?????

:wow: :wow: ... :wow:


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 with. Oh, look what the feminist movement has wrought with that nasty, nasty bias against men in the family courts. But there's no numbers that actually show this. It's easy for men who've been through a nasty divorce battle to believe. But plenty of both sexes have been through the divorce/custody wringer. Men aren't the only ones. When men want this forum, it's usually one of the issues they say they want to discuss. But this issue very often breeds more resentment against women and the feminist movement.

[lumberjack_jeff]

283. You "addressed" each of the points without actually speaking to any of them.

Setting aside the demonstrable accuracy of the points the previous poster made (men are more likely do die of suicide, less likely to get an education, much more likely to die on the job, less likely to get a fair shake in family court and far more likely to lose their job) the only reason that a progressive discussion board should systematically exclude mens viewpoints is because the interests of men are inconsistent with progressive values.

In other words, to be a progressive, one must believe that those things are all good things.

[TicketyBoo]

286. Nobody is

"excluding mens viewpoints."

They are expressed here, are they not?

I've never visited the women's forums here, and don't plan to.

The validity of WHY women usually get custody is undeniable. If Daddy does all the things for the kids I enumerated above, he will get them in a custody battle. Yes, he will.

Until then, quit griping about how "unfair" things are to men.

Besides, whoever said life was fair? If anyone expects life to be fair, they're going to go life bitterly disappointed at every turn.

Men and women alike.

[seabeyond]

43. wavin....

bah hahahah. jsut checkin. lol

hey, that is what i see, not only aggressive moderation, but a desire from the whole to want to create the site you invision and not allowing the behavior. that will accomplish more than anything else. it will be the guys to succeed or fail. i agree

and i would really like to see success.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

25. Honestly

I don't think a "men's issue" could be affective on a board like this. Just look at your response to my first post. When I said "people" I meant both women and men. Such a sub forum would attract "people" who are looking to be offended.

There are actually a lot of good and large message boards on the net that deal with mens issues. All you have to do a google search and you will find them.

[PretzelWarrior]

29. well then someone link them here before this thread is shut down then. because it is difficult

I've searched a number of times and not been thrilled with the results.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

35. I'll send you a PM

There are a few personal interest boards that I post on that are heavily populated by men. Within these boards, there are sub forums that deal with general issues. At that point, you can have discussions on a whole host of topics.

[lumberjack_jeff]

84. Unfortunately, all of them come with a big dose of libertarianism and conservatism.

I want a place for progressive men to discuss what that means. Is that too much?

[MyNameGoesHere]

146. I wouldn't say sensitive woman

but you sure got your antennae sticking out looking for some kind of trouble from men, and you didn't say it, and were smart enough not to say it, but it was implied.

[Pithlet]

269. I wasn't going to post anymore in this thread

But it wasn't long before. The trouble has been here since DU has been around. I didn't need to look for it. It was already here in the multiple threads that were locked the first time this was asked for a few days ago.

[TexasObserver]

18. Good luck against the matriarchy.

They don't like uppity men.

[seabeyond]

21. and this is really how you see it happening. your post. hm.

maybe i had more faith in you guys.

[TexasObserver]

27. Thanks for proving the point.

[PretzelWarrior]

31. that probably wasn't called for.

[TexasObserver]

34. Yeah, it was. I saw yesterday when discussion was attempted on this topic.

Like I said, good luck against the matriarchy. We'll see if those who want to shut this idea down will try to stop it in this thread.

[Starry Messenger]

46. I think three or four women posted.

I was among them. I merely questioned who would get to decide what was misogynistic. I'm sorry you felt oppressed.

[TexasObserver]

48. Men want a forum and I don't feel the attitude displayed about that is progressive.

[Starry Messenger]

49. What insult was that?

I offered an olive branch. You seem a little sensitive. :hug:

[TexasObserver]

51. Oops. Wrong poster.

I changed the post, after realizing you weren't the poster I thought. I got confused about who wrote the post, and thought it was a different poster with a different set of posts in this thread.

Sorry.

[JonQ]

73. Who gets to decide what is

misandry on the womens issues forum?

You know how women get when they get together to chat, I think some pretty strict regulations are in order for any forum dedicated exclusively to women.

[lumberjack_jeff]

85. Probably the mods ought to send some menfolk over there to keep an eye on 'em.

Who knows what they'll say if we let 'em talk among themselves.

:sarcasm: cuz it's not only a good idea, it's the law.

[JonQ]

101. I think that's fair

I mean, I like women, have nothing against them. But they when left on their own they tend to get in to trouble and often are too immature to work things out without guidance. You know how they gossip and bicker when men aren't around to reign them in.

[Shell Beau]

239. I am guessing you left off the sarcasm tag.

[TicketyBoo]

275. "reign them in"

As in "King of the Castle," "Lord of the Manor"?

Yes, Your Majesty.

Yep. Speaks to the need of a Men's Forum, all right. Not. Unless you want to be confined there, in which case that might not be such a bad idea.

[Starry Messenger]

105. I asked the question in the context of another thread.

Another OP wanted a group of presumably all men to have relaxed rules in which they would discuss women but being "un-PC". I think this is ridiculous. I think a men's issues forum sounds great and if it gets off the ground then it will be held to the same standards as the posters in the women's and feminism forums: the rules of DU. There are no forums here dedicated exclusively to women, men post in those forums too.

I know what men are like when they get together to chat, I think some pretty strict regulations are in order for any forum dedicated exclusively to men. Men cluck like hens.

[JonQ]

106. Heh, you tried to parody my parody

You see I was making fun of the blatant sexism several women have shown on this thread. The assumption that if left to their own devices men would immediately start behaving like idiots, that they need to be monitored (presumably by women) to make them behave.

So I turned that notion around, and no doubt many women will find that offensive.



That's the point. If it's offensive to treat one gender this way then it's offensive to treat the other gender that way as well (I'm not sure how previously mentioned women feel about transsexuals so I'll leave them out for the moment).

And as has been shown on this thread, attacking and belittling men is considered PC, saying anything negative (even in jest) about women is not. So perhaps the rules would have to be changed, or at least reinterpreted.

[Starry Messenger]

111. Again, I was replying in the context of another thread.

Where another OP stated that he wanted to be left to his own devices, and behave in a way he felt could be potentially offensive to women. It got his thread locked, so the rules worked fine in that instance. This whole thread is a continuation of a locked thread, which makes this conversation difficult to navigate since I cannot link to it and break the rules.

[JonQ]

115. Comment 46

who gets to decide what is misogynistic?

I think the reverse question is fair as well don't you? Who get's to decide what is misandry?

Obviously as this was referring to a mens forum the assumption would be the women get to regulate it.

So presumably men should be able to regulate the womens forum.

[Starry Messenger]

120. I answered it already.

The rules of DU should regulate both issues quite nicely. I don't think male posters should decide what is or is not misogynistic. The male admins already regulate the women's forum with the help of male & female mods. Presumably they would do the same with the men's forum. In my ideal world there would be a female admin here at DU because I think it would provide another point of view, but we work with what we have.

[JonQ]

129. So if the rules are already adequate then why not have a mens forum?

The only arguments I've seen are A) men will immediately use it to start bashing women and B) there's no need as mens issues are irrelevant.

I can see valid counterarguments to both.

[Starry Messenger]

134. Is that a rhetorical question?

I said in reply #105 that I thought that a properly regulated Men's Issues forum would be "great". If you look closely you will see this sub-thread started when I replied to TexasObserver who made a rather wild claim about what women (like me) had said in a previous thread. :hi: I'm done here.

[JonQ]

135. I don't think you're getting my point; the assumption you made

that men would need some sort of special regulation above and beyond the existing regulation (that serves for all discussions including womens issues) was in itself misandry. You assumed men couldn't handle such a forum on their own and required moderation above and beyond the current level

[Starry Messenger]

136. lol

[JonQ]

141. Nice try, but not at all correct

your statement was about who get's to decide what is misogyny in a hypothetical mens forum correct? I could quote you if you like but I don't think that's necessary.

Presumably you know we have mods already, and rules against sexist comments right? So that you felt the need to ask such a question implies that you believe men will need some regulation different than exists for everyone else.

Take yourself out of this conversation for a moment and imagine this; some DUer proposes setting up a forum for black users. You ask how it will be regulated to ensure they don't act inappropriately or say racist things. Do you think that would be well received by the black population on here?

No. Why? Because you have made an unstated, but very clear assertion that you believe they will require special regulation to prevent them from misbehaving.

Understood? Good, now apply that to what you have actually done.

I think the worst part of this is your probably don't even understand your misandry, it's so well ingrained and sub-conscious.

[Starry Messenger]

143. Sorry. You are having this arguement with yourself.

:shrug: I think I was more than clear.

[JonQ]

144. I suppose once you stopped listening

then yes it became an argument with myself.

Unfortunately that means you won't change your ways and will continue holding these negative views of men. I really wished I could have made a dent in that.

[Pithlet]

40. Yes. The matriarchy.

Neatly and succinctly making my point for me. This is exactly what I'm talking about pretzelwarrior. It's why it can't work here. You'd have to set up your own forum and set your own rules. I'd fully support you in it, and if you'd let me, I'd be a member.

[seabeyond]

44. well... it is still accessible to any member on du. all forums are open to all. restrictions

though and behavior monitored not to interfere with group or cause problems.

[Pithlet]

50. Again. It's the overwhelming nature of those proposing it.

The fact I've been a moderator for many, many terms may be coloring my view that it isn't feasible. But it's just the principle of the thing for me. I know what the OP wants it to be. But I just don't think it's possible even with moderation.

I hate to be blunt, but because DU allows such a big tent, and those with objectionable viewpoints on feminism are allowed to be here and at times express that viewpoint, I would be offended at its existence. They would flock to it, and because their viewpoints are too often not moderated enough on GD, it would probably be given even more leeway in a men's group.

[TexasObserver]

53. There's the problem, right there.

You think that men need to have your permission to think independent of your oversight.

You're part of the ongoing double standard.

You accept that women can have such a forum, but you want men to meet a "needs test" of your choosing. Your gender bias is the problem, not the bias you imagine others have.

Here's a progressive ideal: Don't think you have to approve everything said here, every forum here, or every poster here.

[Pithlet]

54. Women have such a forum

because inequality still exists. Do you want a forum in part to discuss the fact that it does not? If so, then yes indeed I find that objectionable. I'm sorry. You're right. I think that doesn't belong at DU. That belongs at Men's Rights forums and at Free Repbulic. If that's so, then you're absolutely right. You do indeed confirm my suspicions about what that forum would be about.

Needing permission? Is my view any different than the fact that I don't think any right wing talking points deserve a place here? I don't think it is. It's no different.

[TexasObserver]

55. Then Men should have a forum.

Because inequality against men is rampant in some areas of society, and definitely in some venues.

You have to know that in all matters involving child custody, divorce, and criminal cases, the bias in favor of women over men is ridiculous.

When I use the term "matriarchy," I'm talking about those here at DU who think that men can't possibly have a good reason to have a forum. There's a great deal of gender bias by posters here, and almost 100% of it is against men and rightly wouldn't be allowed if the target was females.

[Pithlet]

57. As I posted, I don't think that men don't have a good reason for a forum.

I stated that they do. Repeatedly. To put it bluntly, I just stated that the misogynists here ruin that possibility. If I thought this were a case of progressive men simply wanting a case to discuss actual men's issues, I wouldn't even give it a thought. But that's not what's going on here, and you're making a real good case to back me up, I'm sorry to say. Even the issues of child custody are fraught with danger. While there are areas where valid discussion can take place, the Men's Rights movement, which is virulently anti-feminist, also uses this issue as one of their banners. The courts aren't always perfect, but they aren't tilted all the way against men either. It isn't that simple.

[TexasObserver]

58. That's gender bias.

You think my opinion is misogynistic because I don't appreciate persons who think they should be the clearing house for progressive thought suppressing the ability of others to discuss their opinions.

Your statement that the issue of child custody is "fraught with danger" means you don't want men talking about how the justice system grotesquely favors women. You want to censor posters because YOUR personal opinion is that any discussion that doesn't meet your political approval should be stopped.

[Pithlet]

59. Oh, I'm sure I've evdienced my gender bias to you

because I've declared my support of feminism. Feminism clearly means gender bias to you. Teh feminists hates the menz. They're scary.

I didn't say the issue of child custody itself is fraught with danger. I said the discussion when it's presented from the point of view of the Men's Right's movement is, in the context of discussion whether or not a forum is meant to be a valid discussion or a woman bashing fest. Reading comprehension is essential in a good debate. I'm sure you'd present me with all kinds of valid non biased data if we actually discussed the issue, right?

[TexasObserver]

63. If I want a good debate, I'll find a discussion partner here who is skilled and knowledgeable.

So Thanks, but no thanks on the debate thing.

[snooper2]

87. Reading comprehension?

"I said the discussion when it's presented from the point of view of the Men's Right's movement is, in the context of discussion whether or not a forum is meant to be a valid discussion or a woman bashing fest."

:rofl:

[JonQ]

104. Try this

I think gender inequality in salaries is fraught with danger and really shouldn't be discussed here because it risks bringing out the angry male bashing element of DU.

So perhaps the women of DU just aren't ready to have their own forum yet, they may use it incorrectly so it shouldn't be tolerated.

[Pithlet]

108. Continue to prove my point.

Twist what I'm saying and paint me as the male basher. That's what you'd do in the men's forum, isn't it?

[JonQ]

116. I don't know if you are or aren't

however you have said some objectionable things on here. Most notably treating men as if they were irresponsible children.

[Pithlet]

121. I'm not doing that.

I'm refusing to support the idea of giving the anti-feminists of DU their own forum. That's all the proposal would be doing. I know there are some with legitimate intentions who think it would just be a men's issues forum, and that it could merely be moderated and shut down if the worst happened. It's just the cynic and me that's very highly skeptical of that. This thread told me all I need to know. Maybe those who came into this thread and confirmed my deep suspicions are indeed irresponsible.

[JonQ]

128. You have already made the assumption that any frank discussion

of mens issues would necessarily be anti-feminist and hence anti-women.

You don't seem to even realize the unconcious assumptions you've had to have made to get to this conclusion. That would be another thing that could be discussed in such a forum. I imagine if it were brought up in the womens forum (the negative assumptions some women seem to hold of me) then you would be banned pretty quick.

[Caliman73]

140. I understand your trepidation

However I think that you are going too far in your projection of what might happen in a Mens' Forum. The responses of some of the men here no doubt give you more ammunition, especially when using terms like "matriarchy" and such, but I have to say that you are already too biased against the idea, whether you think your bias is valid or not, to have an objective opinion about the subject.

I think that there should be a Men's forum for those men who want to speak about issues specific to men and it should be allowed to succeed or fail on its own merits rather than on what might happen.

[Pithlet]

148. True, I don't think anyone in this thread is at all unbiased, including myself.

Yeah, my arguments have focused primarily on what might happen. I'll be honest though. I'd lay quite a hefty chunk of change. Some who are proposing and supporting it do have legitimate intentions. It's the ones who don't who are leading me to oppose it before it's even out of the gate. They have icky intentions from the start. It's all about having an opposing forum rather than just simply one to discuss issues. It's a jab at the feminists they hate. A common tactic against minority groups. "Why isn't there a white beauty pageant? It's not fair" In that vein. It's meant to marginalize a movement, not to make things equal. Boy will I get flack for saying this, but I feel it's the truth. I'm being painted in a corner and being made to look like a bad guy for opposing something that looks so legitimate. But I have my reasons for feeling this way, and I suspect I'm not the only one.

[Caliman73]

213. Again, I hear what you are saying...

There are remedies for the situation you are anticipating though, without having to quash something before it begins. I admit that I do not play well with other men. I like sports, I like cars, and I am attracted to women, but I have a strong sense of anger for men who treat women as inferiors or objects. I would like a place to perhaps meet like minded individuals. I would be right there with you shutting the forum down if it descended into misogyny, but I think it deserves a chance to be attempted.

I don't think that you are the bad person in this argument at all, but I think that digging in your heels about your belief in the forum's failure before it even starts, is antagonizing some men who believe they deserve the benefit of the doubt.

[Pithlet]

216. I know it's antagonizing, and I regret that.

I'm in a bad position, because there's an aspect of my argument I can't make because of DU rules. It would explain my position a lot better and really clarify things. I wish I could explain but I can't.

[seabeyond]

152. i wasnt bias. missed a whole lot of posts. read down them all and became

well, disillusioned, a bit

[Caliman73]

215. I hear what you are saying

When people get riled up, they stop listening and go for the buttons to push that can really heat up an already volatile situation. I haven't read all the posts, but there were already some that made me shake my head. The longer this conversation goes on, the more irrational it may become. I think that people need to step back a bit and approach later from a better place.

[seabeyond]

149. unfortunately.... reading down the thread now. i hear ya. sad. nt

[Pithlet]

151. I wish I weren't right, seabeyond.

It isn't fun being right, here.

[seabeyond]

154. this is such a huge issue in our society today. and something i feel strongly about

and as i have concluded in the past, if this is truly where we are at.... we are ALL hurting.

[JonQ]

76. Inequalities exist

but not all of them favor men.

Sentencings for crimes, particularly violent or sex based ones, divorce and child custody, high school and college dropout rates, incarceration, drug abuse, and suicide rates and lately unemployment. All these are stacked against men.

[lumberjack_jeff]

80. "women have a forum because inequality still exists"

Acutally they have several, which makes the main DU inequality obvious. There is no mens forum.

[MellonCollie]

123. Well said! n/t

[JonQ]

75. Rather sexist there

Consider this:

I have no problem with a womans forum in general terms, but the type of women who would flock there makes the entire idea unfeasible. I hate to be blunt but because DU allows sucha big tent, and those with objectionable viewpoints on males in general are allowed to be here and at times express that viewpoint, I would be offended at its existence. They would flock to it, and because their viewpoints are too often not moderated enough on GD, it would probably be given even more leeway in a women's group.

It would immediately be filled with angry, man-hating women seeking only to engage in sexist rants and broad generalizations against all men and as such should not be tolerated. Frankly I don't think the women on here are mature enough to have their own forum.

How does that sound to you?

[Pithlet]

97. It sounds ludicrous. n/t

[JonQ]

100. Bingo

a broad unfair generalization used to attack one gender.

You see that it is ludicrous if done against women, now work on appreciating that it is likewise ludicrous when used to attack men.

[Pithlet]

109. No, it's ludicrous to take a genuine cause

and bastardize it as you have done. To say that men need an equal fight on par with feminism is ludicrous. But you know what? I'm not even going to do this anymore. I think it's demonstrating exactly what the men's forum would be. An anti-feminist movement. Quite a few of the usual suspects I was thinking of who are salivating over this idea have shown up and have done exactly what I knew they would do. That's exactly what I was afraid of. I think I've demonstrated it. So I'm done.

[JonQ]

119. I think you've illustrated the flawed thinking that makes

criticism of the so called feminist movement necessary and justified.

I have criticized your unfair generalization of men. And how have you responded? You call me anti-feminist. Responses like that are exactly why we need a mens forum.

For instance:
me: men have higher suicide rates.

You: do you think that compensates for how horrible women have it?
Me; no that's not what I was getting at at all. I think you are mistaken and this doesn't relate to the feminist movement.

You: anti-feminist! I'm telling the mods!

You and I both know I've said nothing against women or all feminists, that I've raised fair points and noted unfair generalizations against men. It doesn't matter, you and others will still label me as anti-feminist and anti-woman. No evidence will be necessary for such a conviction.

[Pithlet]

131. How have I made an unfair generalization against men? My beef has been against a specific group!

Those who are against feminism. Period. No one else. I have ascribed no viewpoints against you. You are the one who has chosen to come in and respond to posts I've made. Posts that I have then answered point by point. Show me where I've called you in particular anti-feminists? Show me. I haven't. I've been defending my position.

So that's how I'd respond if you made the statement that men have higher suicide rates? Um, actually no. That's not how I'd respond at all! Do you think I'd respond that way because I'm a feminist? If so, you're mistaken.

[JonQ]

137. And who exactly is against feminism?

Anyone who says they hate all feminists and the feminist movement? Sure. How about those who have issues with particular feminists and particular protests they have raised? Apparently them as well as you won't tolerate anyone who states they have any complaints at all in this field.

Anyone who isn't with you is with the terorri . . er misogynists.

And as for specific examples of you doing this:
I think it's demonstrating exactly what the men's forum would be. An anti-feminist movement. Quite a few of the usual suspects I was thinking of who are salivating over this idea have shown up and have done exactly what I knew they would do. That's exactly what I was afraid of. I think I've demonstrated it. So I'm done.

In response to my comments.

Also:
Twist what I'm saying and paint me as the male basher. That's what you'd do in the men's forum, isn't it?

[lumberjack_jeff]

125. Oh, I see. It's ludicrous because unlike women, men really do suck.

But that's not sexism, because they deserve it.

[Pithlet]

127. I have no clue how you get that from what I wrote. n/t

[TexasObserver]

112. You were quoting her earlier post, with minor alterations.

Your point is well taken. You were quoting from a ridiculous post, whether it was made by a man or a woman about the other gender. There are female sexists just as there are male sexists, and around here, there's a lot more misandry than misogyny. The discussions about a men's forum make that painfully clear, if anyone had any doubt about it.

This is why a men's forum is badly needed. From false accusations of sexual assault, to false allegations of parenthood, to bias in the way almost every dispute between men and women in our society is handled, there are women getting away with murder, and men getting screwed because of sexism against males. These injustices should be the concern of all true progressives.

We can care about women's issues and men's issues, too. Fair treatment for children and their parents in divorce and custody is everyone's issue. We don't want dad winning because he has power or money, and we don't want mom winning because the system is rigged to believe her and favor her, or because she accused dad of some ridiculous and untrue allegations. Both of those are bad results.

[winyanstaz]

65. As the Matriarch of my family...I forgive you for saying we wouldn't like it.....

because how would you know until we answered?
I think a men's issues room is a great idea.
And just so you know? I love an "uppity" man same as a quiet man, same as a wild man, same as a gentleman.....they are all beautiful. However, I love none so much as I love my man. ;)

[BoneDaddy]

69. How beautiful

and thank you very much

[BoneDaddy]

70. A Men's forum would be a wonderful idea

where men and women of like mind can work at healing the rift between the sexes.

I struggle often in here with those ( a small minority)who would love to tar and feather and silence every man...shame. Great idea

[JonQ]

77. Thank you

there seem to be too many who took the other stance.

[Caliman73]

132. That is not cool or funny

That doesn't do anything to promote non-sexist attitudes. There is no matriarchy. As society becomes more equal, men, who still maintain a significant portion of the power in most societies, are having to share that power and redefine some of our roles. Joking about a matriarchy is offensive given the historical and present treatment of women in many societies including the Unites States.

[seabeyond]

155. see. this is what we are talking about. and other posts are what we fear

the need, i think is great... for all guys who would like a forum. but man.....

then again, i think if enough men are talking in this manner (and it isnt about sticking up for women, it is about reality) then it would be good for all. insight, listening to fellow men.

[EndersDame]

20. My boyfriend has been called "fag" for supporting women's rights

I think he would benefit from having other progressive dudes to talk about and deal with a-holes. I have also overheard my guy friends talk about how they could not deal with a non independent girlfriend and getting laughed at buy other guys who think women should cook clean etc..
I think that a men's group could be a positive thing for progressive men to get together and discuss stuff like:
Fathers issues
Dealing with pressures from a male perspective (body image pressure to fit certain sterotype etc)
Defining/Redefining masculinity in a 21st century
and probably a whole slew of other stuff that just is not part of the female experience

[PretzelWarrior]

33. thank you for your experiences. you get where I'm coming from obviously

and I would expect that forum to be just as sensitive and politically correct to everyone as any DU discussion board.

[EndersDame]

60. We just moved from a very small rural area and he is not a "macho" man

and was continually chastised for the fact. I tried to help as best as I could but feel that he would have benefited more from a dude's perspective.The internet is a godsend for left of the dial people living in BFE type towns. I really hope y'all get your group.

[jonnyblitz]

26. what got everybody riled up yesterday was the comment

that men needed a forum where they didn't have to be politically correct, which is the usual complaint of people who are tired of being called out on their bigotry and mysogyny.:shrug:

what everybody is discussing in THIS thread sounds quite reasonable.

[seabeyond]

38. yes. though the more he explored and refined his issues, the more he stepped

away from the statement. stating he had said it incorrectly and it didnt belong.

i was impressed with the thread and refinement of expectation of forum.

[jonnyblitz]

56. I didn't return to that thread so i missed it. Thanks for updating

me!:hi:

[lumberjack_jeff]

81. We could benefit from some discussion of our doctrinal biases.

One of the more fundamental of which is the discussion of whether "equality for women" (the NOW mission) really equals "equality, period."

[Odin2005]

61. Why not just have a un-segregated single "Gender Equality" forum for both men and women?

:shrug:

[DavidDvorkin]

67. Should the Feminists and Women's groups be eliminated, if that's done?

[lumberjack_jeff]

86. Because advocacy isn't like that.

And in fact advocacy isn't a bad thing.

[winyanstaz]

62. I think that is a good idea..

[proteus_lives]

64. I would support one.

I think it's warranted.

[tammywammy]

66. I support there being a Men's Forum. n/t

[ezgoingrl]

68. My brother was awarded custody of his two kids and I live in Oklahoma. I think

that's saying something for the judge. His poor kids have one of those moms, I just call her absent. She shows up from time to time, just to screw with them, I think. There absolutely needs to be a place for men to go for support and advice.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

71. Men's issues forum......

....I'm guessing it would be about violence, porn and sexualizing young girls. I mean to listen to some women who post here, that's all men are interested in around here, right?

Good luck, but it will never happen.

[BolivarianHero]

78. Why not?

It will be a good place to expose people who use pseudo-feminist rhetoric to justify the Palin family restricting Levi's access to his own kid while still expecting him to pay. Normally, dads should not be deadbeat, but in a case where an elite family is using its political clout and social prestige to restrict an ordinary guy's access to his own kid while still expecting said guy to pay, anybody intelligent ought to realise that the crux of the issue is class rather than gender, and the elites should be forced to foot the bill for raising the kid until they are willing to play nice.

The Levi case is an exception rather than the rule, but a venue for exposing such exceptions is necessary if we want to hold the elites accountable for their behaviour toward ordinary people.

[Dora]

88. I'm not a man, but I think it's a good idea.

=

[MilesColtrane]

91. K&R

[snooper2]

92. I think it would be a good idea...about to have a daughter in a couple days

And I can think of many uses a men's forum would have for myself...threads, etc.,

[Caliman73]

220. Congratulations man!! That is awesome.

My wife and I had a son 9 months ago. I have 2 boys but would love to have a daughter although I am afraid the my wife and my mother would spoil her rotten.

A men's forum would be a great thing to talk about the joys and the not so joys of child rearing.

[TicketyBoo]

277. Why would you think that

your wife and mother would spoil a daughter more than your sons?

(Not really a good attitude. It never happened in my life that way, not with my mother, and not with my mother-in-law. In fact, my mother-in-law actually shows preference for the boys. That is a puzzling perception you have there.)

[seabeyond]

279. good point. in our family, the mothers are tougher on daughter. my case, nieces than with sons and

nephews. whereas my niece has grandpa and the fathers wrapped around finger.

i keep telling them to toughen up. girls are manipulating them. in our family brothers are raising the duaghters and they dont have a mother around.

[Caliman73]

284. Well, I am delighted to hear your experience...

Since you and I have had the same exact family and life and all, I am relieved that my experience in life and my perception of what my family dynamic is wrong and I should just take your word for it despite what my mother and wife have said, despite that they were both wanting desperately to have a little girl they could dress and do girl things with. Despite that their reaction to hearing the baby was going to be a boy was less than stellar. I should really check myself...
:eyes:

I know that my wife would not show favoritism for our daughter, were we fortunate enough to have one. The statement was lighthearted and part of a congratulations to the poster on the pending birth of his daughter.

You know nothing of what my attitudes are, what my experiences have been, and how I form my opinions. Perhaps you should have left the question without the judgmental remark at the end. Perhaps that is why a Men's forum is desirable.

[TicketyBoo]

285. Perhaps that is exactly why

a Men's forum is not desirable.

I'm happy to know that you do not have a daughter. May it ever be thus.

And best of luck to the new Daddy who does have a daughter. I'm sure she already has him wrapped around her tiny finger.

[Caliman73]

287. What a disgusting thing to say.

You are mean spirited and ridiculous in your assessment of this entire situation. I feel sorry for whoever has to interact with you.

[uppityperson]

99. There is a way to make a new forum, sounds like you have supporters of the idea

I think you need to make a mission statement, then get a certain number of people who support it, send it off to admin and see what they do with it.

If you want to start one, there is a way to do that.

If you want to just snark, not saying you do, but just IF you do, then post things in gd with snark in them.

Good luck with getting the process going, sounds like a possibly good forum.

[PretzelWarrior]

103. yep. just before I read your post I was thinking enough input has occurred

to send off a note to an administrator. I'll see how it goes.

[lumberjack_jeff]

122. When it was tried, the thread was locked.

The topic was too controversial.

The mods have since locked every thread on the topic until this one.

Several of us have petitioned the admins for permission to post a new thread with a mission statement, but as yet we've heard nothing.

[PretzelWarrior]

124. well, I've sent a note off to an admin linking to this thread

perhaps the spirit of the original posts on this subject were to acerbic and not in the spirit of wanting a fair and open dialogue. who knows?

the point is...I'll hear from them shortly, I would guess.

[H2O Man]

139. I would participate.

[H2O Man]

179. Part Two .......

Years ago, I co-founded a support group for men going through the experiences of separation and divorce. There was a wide range of guys in the group. I kept a number of journals, and have kicked about the idea of doing some editing, and publishing them as "Diary of an Angry House Husband."

I've been a single father with custody of two young sons, who worked full-time. Had numerous experiences in Family Court, none that I initiated. I've been subjected to sexual harassment from a female supervisor at my place of employment.

And, in time, I got re-married, am married to my best friend, my Yoko Only, and have two daughters. The six of us are a happy family, though we experience all the odd things that other families do.

I want the best for myself, my wife, my sons and daughters. And that is the approach I would attempt to take in this much-needed forum. This thread demonstrates that need, by the way.

[TexasObserver]

183. You would be a great choice to moderate such a forum.

You are a solid, well respected poster who understands that men do have issues women do not have, or that women experience differently than men. For example, you use the term "house husband." We all know that the predominant view in America is that women who stay home to raise kids are saints, while men who do so are forcing their wife to support them. This is something men who are house husbands sometimes or often have to face.

One of my nephews deals with that now.

[seabeyond]

188. men who do so are forcing their wife to support them... NOT ANY woman on du would think

or suggest this. we have had threads or chat with a few of the men that stay at home, and it is very positive and supportive.

why would you paint us in this manner?

[redqueen]

195. He said most in this country... and he is right, IMO.

Men who stay home to raise kids while the wife works are most often looked down on. It's unfair.

[seabeyond]

200. my bad. thanks for clarification. and yes....

i agree. being a stay at home myself i know how valuable it is. matters not on gender.

[H2O Man]

204. At this time,

I "stay at home," and my wife works. My employer opted to retire me, early, after I was diabled in an incident while at work. Still, though not by my choice, my staying home while my wife works gets strange reactions from some people, male and female.

[seabeyond]

210. mmmm. well, same here, and being female and a forever thing, well,

just part of being stay at home, that women have had to reconcile within self. know our own worth. my choice, as opposed to your situation, and happy with the choice. and not need the validation of those around me.

people in the work force dont think much of my choice either.

but i am ok with that

yes, i know you get it X's worse than i.

[TexasObserver]

221. Thanks. My nephew puts up with it from relatives and acquaintances.

He not only takes care of the kids, he has a home based business that pays about one third the family budget. Even in Austin, there is prejudice against stay at home dads. They have an organization of such guys who get together there and interact, have play dates for their kids, and talk about dealing with the abuse that never stops.

[redqueen]

267. "even in Austin"...

Yes gender issues are one of the areas where a good chunk of liberals/progressives still have a very long way to go... and that goes for both sexes.

[H2O Man]

189. Well, thank you.

I do think that I could offer a valuable contribution to such a forum. Not only from my own experiences, but also from my connections with many, many people who have been caught up in the conflicts between the sexes -- and decades of work in human services.

As this thread shows, there are tensions between the sexes -- they are real -- and we have the option of using tension in a creative manner, or allowing those exact same tensions to further divide, embitter, and destroy relationships on all levels. That choice belongs to us, even here on DU.

[TexasObserver]

224. You have a judicial temperment. Most don't, including me.

You understand the issues, and you're not given to harsh comments so many of us adopt as a second language here.

I would favor forums for men and women that are only open to that gender, adding two forums at once. Each would be open to that gender, and would be moderated by someone whose job it is to simply do the job for every forum: keep it inside DU bounds of acceptability for a topic forum.

[PretzelWarrior]

153. How would people classify this thread in "women's rights"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=229&topic_id=3488&mesg_id=3488

is it inclusive and focused on women's issues? Or is it male bashing?

[seabeyond]

157. i dont think it is bashing. i have not read every one on that list. not big on list

i also know female privilege. i also know white privilege. i know it exists. it is a reality in our society. i am honest enough to admit and own it.

i think though the difference between the female privilege and male privilege is power and that is the patriarchal society we live in.

i dont think it is bashing to talk about patriarchal society.

[PretzelWarrior]

161. well, it sounds snarky and not having to do with solving problems

it's just using guys as a punching bag to say "ha ha. see? they're all so jerky and think they are so entitled."

it does nothing to discuss women's rights and how women work to fight together. would I lock the discussion? No. you have every right to vent those frustrations.

but I have a feeling there are some who would be only too willing to go after threads where guys share legitimate tales of woe when it has to do with dealing with ex-wives or something along those lines.

[seabeyond]

163. but no. this is where the issue is. why women are concerned about a forum

seeing the difference in your thinking. you see it as an attack. no one is saying you personally are responsible for the way society is. it is not a slap against you personally. it is a reality we women live

so what if, you read it without feeling the need to defend. without taking it personally. not hearing a snarky, but someone sharing what is seen as a male privilege. and you actually thought about it.

wouldn't that make you more aware of what was happening in your world. what is happening in the womans world

and with that knowledge.... aren't you a more insightful person

and isn't insightfulness a good thing. something we strive for

i like to remember the privileges of female or white. i need to remember them. so that i can be on a more level even playing ground. so i am fair, balanced and just.

it isn't a bad thing. or painful thing or even an insult

it is merely reality

[redqueen]

181. So very very very well said.

:yourock:

[JonQ]

160. That wasn't male bashing, however

a similiar post showing the reverse about women would be woman bashing.

It's a gender based double standard they seem to rather enjoy on the womens issues board.

[Pithlet]

166. Yes, it would. You know why?

Because there isn't an equivalent female privilege. That's why. Quite simple, really. Not a double standard.

[PretzelWarrior]

169. give me a break. maybe not in the job field. I will give you that.

but there are so many female and male stereotypes that women are able to enjoy derived benefits from.

[Pithlet]

171. Yeah, see. The whole "who needs feminism?"

Old Rushbo has really done a number on all of us, hasn't he?

[PretzelWarrior]

173. I never said that. how did you get that out of my comments?

[Pithlet]

176. If you honestly think that men and women are equally privileged

then I don't see any other way to read what you said. Who needs feminism?

[JonQ]

186. Ha, yeah, everything is stacked against women

they have nothing working in their favor.

You're adorable.

[Pithlet]

196. Yes, because that's exactly what I said!

Except it isn't!

[JonQ]

199. Pretty much

you've consistently refused to address female privileges. Instead you blow them off and say they are irrelevant and men shouldn't complain so much.

[Pithlet]

207. No, I said there wasn't an equivalent female privelege.

I didn't say females had no sort of privilege whatsoever.

[JonQ]

208. Ah now we're getting somewhere!

And what privileges would those be?

And should men be able to address them (as a privileges for one gender could be considered a detriment to the other)?

If so, what might be a good forum for men to address them in?

[seabeyond]

211. hubby takes care of mouse trap. both setting of and taking away dead mouse

sure.... talk away, lol

just a jest

cause it is true. and if hubby doesnt do it, oldest son has inherited the job

[Pithlet]

214. Heh. My husband kills the spiders.

But that's more because I have a serious case of arachnophobia and that knows no gender. I have a friend who has to kill the spiders for her arachnophobic husband.

[Pithlet]

212. We're more likely to get a seat on the train?

Notions of chivalry sometimes affords us some privilege, though a lot of that tends to fade when we get old and more invisible. GD is a perfectly good place to bring it up as it sometimes is. But it shouldn't be too hard for the average progressive to understand how distasteful it would be for the gender who, taking all things into consideration comes out ahead, to have a forum to discuss how the one less in power has some advantages and how it isn't right. That goes to my whole point of having a whites forum, or a straights forum, etc. You might be able to pic nits and find areas where we come out ahead, but looking at the scorecard, men are still on top.

[JonQ]

217. Would you say

women live the same length of time as men?

Are exactly as likely to kill themselves, drop out of school, end up on the unemployed and/or on the streets?

What about if you commit statutory rape (or are falsely accused of it) do you think your chances are the same as a man in the the same situation?

Would you rather in a divorce case, be a man or a woman? How about if there were kids involved.

You seem to be willfully ignoring quite a bit.

[Pithlet]

219. Willfully ignoring? Or just not reading your mind?

Can I think up some male privileges and then claim a gotcha moment on you, too?

[JonQ]

222. Oh gee if only there were an existing location

for you to post and discuss those issues?

I mean, there couldn't be, otherwise your argument would be invalid.

[JonQ]

223. I'm still not getting what exactly you fear will happen

kind of reminds me of the gay marriage opponents. If we let them marry then who knows what will happen? Chaos!

They are very intent on the notion that if this occurs something terrible will happen, but if you ask them for details they usually come up with nothing.

So specifically, what part of the bible opposes a mens forum? Oh sorry, mixing up my ideologues. What exactly is it about the progressive agenda (in your opinion) that forbids men from discussing mens issues in a well regulated forum? You've acknowledged that there are such things as mens issues just as there are womens. You must realize that it would be regulated by the same people who currently regulate the site. So what exactly is your counter argument against this?

Will the sky fall? Will it bring the site crashing down? Will it even (gasp!) allow people to click on a link that will then allow them to read something they would rather not see?

[Pithlet]

225. I've come up with nothing? I've been pretty clear what I'm against. Women and feminism bashing.

[PretzelWarrior]

226. then you clearly treat us as an inferior gender

unable to hold a civilized conversation on our issues without bashing women. Isn't that on its very face a kind of knock on all males?

[Pithlet]

228. No, I don't. I've been clear from the beginning I think that it's a particular group of men

that I have a problem with. I think they would overwhelm that forum, particularly because they've usually been the ones that propose and endorse it. Look at the initial proposal this go around as an example? How can you claim that it's a knock on all males when I've stated more than once that I would support and join a forum elswehere. You're making me come out and say it and it pains me. But it's not a knock on males. It's a knock on DU. Not on the admins because I think the fact they try to make this place inclusive and big tent is a good thing. But there is an unfortunate downside to it. And not on the mods, because I know how hard it is. I've been one. Because of how it's been proposed 99% of the time, I know what it would be. Like I said before. I'd lay down good money.

[JonQ]

230. When I say there is a paritcular minority of feminists

that I don't get along with you equate that with hating all feminists, and indeed all women.

Wouldn't it then be fair to take your issues with "a particular group of men" and equate that with hating all men?

[Pithlet]

234. I don't do that weird thing you do

where you ascribe views to people they don't take. So, no. I don't think that would be fair.

[JonQ]

235. Ah yes, deflect, now you just need to add

that you have many male friends and even tolerate men being in your house, or working for you.

[JonQ]

232. Also, do you believe maligning and excluding men

and setting them up as the enemy to be controlled, contained and ultimately defeated rather than working with them is the best strategy to achieve equality and tolerance?

[Pithlet]

244. Seeing as I've said I would support such a forum, just not here

basically negates what you're saying, I think that answers your question. My problem is purely with the dynamics of DU and some of the people who participate here. Not with men in general. I've said that more than once. Anyone who's firmly on the side of feminism will see my point for what it is and won't turn against feminism so I'm not that worried about it.

[JonQ]

247. So you would support one elsewhere

just not where it is being discussed, separate but equal, eh?

I think womens issues have a place on the internet too and are certainly an interesting, if quaint, subject. But they certainly don't belong here. Far too divisive. And they're only relevant to half the population, so too exclusive. I have an issue also with the type of woman DU tends to attract, they can't behave when left to their own devices.

Anyone who's firmly on the side of gender equality will see my point for what it is and won't turn against equality so I'm not that worried about it.


-------

You really don't see it do you?


But essentially you are slandering the men of DU. Not the women, no they are perfectly capable of maintaining an adult atmosphere. But the men that DU foolishly allows in to its "big tent" are far to barbaric and sexist to be granted the same regard.

Maybe there could be one DU for men, and one for women. That would maintain and expand your ideal of segregation.

[Pithlet]

250. No slander

Is the first part of your comment supposed to be sarcasm? Because it represents the opinion of the people who constantly harp about "mens' rights" pretty much to a T. You can talk that talk very well.

As for slander, that is either a foolish reading of this discussion or a deliberately dishonest one. Once again, only a liar or a blind man cannot see that the history of gender issues and so-called men's rights are largely the history of anti-progressive males attacking feminism in particular and women in general. Even in this thread, right wing tropes have been repeated and regurgitated and feminism has been attacked. Considering that legitimate men's issues are discussed all the time in the main forum without repercussion or stifling, it is clear that a "men's rights" forum is nothing more than an attempt to legitimize the anti-progressive positions of men's rights advocates. Logic and the history of men's rights and feminist discussions simply bear that out. It is disingenuous at best to claim otherwise. History at DU and the attitudes expressed in this thread have shown a men's rights forum to be nothing more than a stalking horse for legitimizing anti-feminists, and thus anti-progressive views.

The issue isn't about all DU men. Progressive men discuss progressive issues in the main forums all the time form a male perspective. The issue is the proven history of a minority of DU men who attempt to legitimize conservative anti-woman positions at DU.

[JonQ]

251. You keep relying on this so called

"proven history" of male abuse on here that doesn't ever seem to materialize. No doubt you want to be oppressed, as that would help your case. I apologize that hasn't happened yet.

And who exactly has attacked feminism in general, rather than a few individuals (I hardly see how you could complain about that)? Name and quotes please, otherwise you are just making stuff up.


And you have yet to provide real concerns. So far your entire basis for this argument has been unsubstantiated attacks on male DUers based on events that never occured (or you have speculated about happening in the future).

You accuse me of slander for accurately representing your views. And yet you then go on to attack some large portion of all males on DU without confronting them directly or providing actual evidence.

So to sum up: it is wrong (in your opinion) for me to disagree with you and somehow anti-feminist and anti-woman. However it is right (in your opinion) to malign some large number of males on this site without evidence based only on your own preconceived notions of how "men behave" that fail to materialize.

In fact given the way some women have acted on this thread I would think a better case could be made for disbanding the womens forum on the grounds that too many women on here seem to hold prejudiced views of men.

[Pithlet]

253. This is growing tedious

First, I notice that you cannot provide a reason to have a mens forum. I just want to note that you cannot do that, since you refuse to admit it yourself. Again: the only reason to have such a forum is to use it to legitimize anti-feminism.

Second, you constantly claim that I am attacking the majority of men on DU despite the fact that I have several times made it clear that mens issues are discussed openly and rationally by the majority of DU men and have always been so. Either you are incapable of understanding English or you are lying.

You have also asked for proof, claiming I have provided none. The history of gender discussions on this board is well known and not in dispute. If you are ignorant of that history, then avail yourself of the search function. but I find it amusing that a man who pretends that it is okay to call feminists man hating and who compared feminism to the KKK is complaining about the sexism of someone else.

By the way: why is comparing feminism to the KKK and being man haters not sexism?

[JonQ]

256. I can't?

So you are now retracting your statement that men have valid issues to discuss?

And since when does one gender need to "prove" it's right to have a group to radical anti-elements of the other gender? If that were the case, and as you claim there are all these anti-women DUers hanging around, then shouldn't the womens forum be disbanded? Or is that yet another genderbased double standard you endorse?

"Second, you constantly claim that I am attacking the majority of men on DU despite the fact that I have several times made it clear that mens issues are discussed openly and rationally by the majority of DU men and have always been so. Either you are incapable of understanding English or you are lying."

You have yet to name any, and also assume that the majority of men will do nothing to reign in their radicals. Yeah, I would say that's pretty insulting.

"You have also asked for proof, claiming I have provided none. The history of gender discussions on this board is well known and not in dispute."

Oh well, in absence of evidence I suppose I am forced to accept your opinion as fact.

"but I find it amusing that a man who pretends that it is okay to call feminists man hating and who compared feminism to the KKK is complaining about the sexism of someone else.'

hehe, find where I did that. Because I recall saying that about a small fringe of them, but not all. But go ahead and find those quotes. Either you are incapable of understanding English or you are lying.

"By the way: why is comparing feminism to the KKK and being man haters not sexism?"

I suppose it would be. Who has done that? Who compared all feminists to the KKK and called all feminsists man-haters?

You seem to project on to me many of the things you do.

[TicketyBoo]

278. "Quaint"?

That is a very bigoted word when used the way you've used it.

[JonQ]

227. According to the rules of the site:

Bigotry and Broad-Brush Smears

When discussing race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, or other highly-sensitive personal issues, please exercise the appropriate level of sensitivity toward others and take extra care to clearly express your point of view.

Do not post messages that are bigoted against (or grossly insensitive toward) any person or group of people based on their race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, lack of religion, disability, physical characteristics, or region of residence.

While specific words are not automatically forbidden, members should avoid using racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted terminology.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

So are you saying the mods would ignore the rules for a mens issues forum regarding female bashing? And isn't it odd that you have no question that women will be able to "behave" in their own forum, but are absolutely certain that men will not? Do you view men and women as equal or do you think women are superior? Because right now you're coming off as a misandrist.

And feminism is a political ideology, and as such is very much open to criticism. Are you saying feminists are above critique?

For instance, andrea dworkin said this: Since the paradigm for sex has been one of conquest, possession, and violation, I think many men believe they need an unfair advantage, which at its extreme would be called rape. I do not think they need it.

Essentially equating "many" men with rapists. Do I have to agree with her or can I voice my disagreement, that I don't feel the need to "possess" or "violate" women? Would that be acceptable to you, to respond directly to this one feminist who has said something I disagree with? Or would that be feminist bashing?

[Pithlet]

231. Isn't it odd

how you just completely ascribe viewpoints to people like that. It's like we're all your little puppets.

[JonQ]

233. Acribe viewpoints, based on your very clear statements

now respond to the question please.

[Pithlet]

236. No, I won't

Point out to me where I said it.

[JonQ]

238. You state that men should not have a forum

because the standard of civility won't be high enough there, essentially we will resort (despite moderation) to sexist comments.

How do you not get how offensive that is?

Here consider: a womans forum would be a disaster because it will attract a certain type of woman (you know the type) that will use it as a soap box for male bashing. No not all, but too many and it would be too difficult to control.

Do you understand now?

[Pithlet]

240. Way oversimplifying my point. That's not the gist of it at all.

It isn't because I believe men aren't capable of behaving themselves. It's because the vocal group who can't are very determined. I think that determined group is the main reason behind the push for this group because they're usually the ones who bring up the suggestion for it whenever it comes up. There is a war of the sexes that is a strong undercurrent here at DU. That is a part of the context that you're leaving out of my argument. You may not even be aware of it, but it's there. The other part is the inequality that exists in society. You're framing your argument from an all things are equal stance. But they aren't. I'm aware that there may be some who are coming into this fracas who aren't aware of it and are thinking hmm, sounds reasonable, a good idea, what is she talking about, how could she be against this? But I'm not crazy. My reasons are valid and they don't come from an inherent distrust or hatred of men. They come from a knowledge of circumstances here at DU that some may not be aware of.

[JonQ]

245. And why exactly is the converse not true?

Are there not a vocal group of women with objectionable opinions on men who are likewise determined? Or is that a male-only affliction??

[Pithlet]

248. Missing the point again

Determination is not the point. You are arguing apples and oranges. The history of gender discussions on this board clearly demonstrate that the feminist forum is NOT a man-bashing haven and, conversely that so called "men's rights" issues are nothing more than a thinly-veiled attack on feminism. And attacks on feminism should not be acceptable on a progressive board.

There are no shortage of discussions of men's issues in the "main" forums, and, unlike feminist issues, there is no evidence that those issues and topics are overwhelmed by attacks on the basic premises of those issues like there is with feminists discussions. Not to the same degree.

[JonQ]

249. You said, and I'll quote you so you won't deny it again:

"It isn't because I believe men aren't capable of behaving themselves. It's because the vocal group who can't are very determined. I think that determined group is the main reason behind the push for this group because they're usually the ones who bring up the suggestion for it whenever it comes up."

A determined, vocal minority who disrupts an otherwise valid conversation. That is exactly what I presented to you. So don't try that nonsense again.

"The history of gender discussions on this board clearly demonstrate that the feminist forum is NOT a man-bashing haven and, conversely that so called "men's rights" issues are nothing more than a thinly-veiled attack on feminism. And attacks on feminism should not be acceptable on a progressive board."

So feminists, who some might have claimed were strident man-haters were given their own forum and it worked out just fine? Hmm, and somehow in your mind that proves men should not even be given a chance because it would immediately turn out the exact opposite.

Yeah, you sound exactly like the fanatics opposed to gay marriage. You know it's wrong and will fail and you know this without even giving it a shot because "those people" just don't know how to behave.

"There are no shortage of discussions of men's issues in the "main" forums, and, unlike feminist issues, there is no evidence that those issues and topics are overwhelmed by attacks on the basic premises of those issues like there is with feminists discussions. Not to the same degree."

Alright, you used the "e" word. Prove that all womens issues are "overwhelmed by attacks on feminists". Again you are unfairly maligning the men of DU. This would not be acceptable the other way around and you would be banned most likely. Your sexism is profound and disturbing.

[Pithlet]

252. No denials

Please demonstrate where I denied any of this, because it might help your quest for better reading comprehension.

"A determined, vocal minority who disrupts an otherwise valid conversation. That is exactly what I presented to you. So don't try that nonsense again."

No. A determined group intent on legitimizing anti-progressive positions at DU. To be plain, since issues affecting men are discussed openly and without disruption from a progressive standpoint in the main forums, then really their only purpose of a men's forum is to legitimize anti-progressive, anti-woman discussion.

"So feminists, who some might have claimed were strident man-haters were given their own forum and it worked out just fine? Hmm, and somehow in your mind that proves men should not even be given a chance because it would immediately turn out the exact opposite."

No progressive would label feminists man haters. Your sexism is showing. And, again, men don't need a chance to prove anything on DU. Men's issues are discussed all the time in the main forums.

"Alright, you used the "e" word. Prove that all womens issues are "overwhelmed by attacks on feminists". Again you are unfairly maligning the men of DU. This would not be acceptable the other way around and you would be banned most likely. Your sexism is profound and disturbing."

Your inability to comprehend the written word is profound and disturbing. I have stated over and over again that the men of DU are perfectly capable of discussing progressive issues from a men's point of view and in fact that they are already do so. To pretend that is evidence of sexism on my part either shows a lack of reading comprehension that would make your English teachers weep or a deliberate disregard for the truth.

As for proof, go back and look at the history of this board. If you think that feminist posts aren't flamed to a crisp on a regular basis, then, frankly, you probably think the world is flat. If you cannot see the anti-feminist nonsense even in this thread then you are blind or simply do not want to see.

Since we are talking about proof, please demonstrate to me what issues you think cannot be discussed outside the extra protection of a men's forum? I have yet to see even a real attempt to do so.

[JonQ]

237. Do you really not understand why what your saying is highly offensive?

I've assumed you were just being oblique.

But do you really not see why people might take offense to your assumption that men simply won't be able to behave according to your standards?

[Pithlet]

242. No, because I'm not saying that n/t

[JonQ]

246. So no,

you don't understand why you are being offensive.

I really can't work with that. I can keep pointing out what you're doing wrong but that won't be successful as you don't even consider it wrong.

[PretzelWarrior]

218. not in my marriage. we are experimental

[Pithlet]

167. Not male bashing.

So, male privilege t isn't something we face? Yeah, we're not allowed to discuss the issues we face without it being declared man bashing. That's exactly the problem. It's bad enough it's everywhere. Let's just concentrate that in a forum of your own. Am I to assume this is an example of a topic that might be raised in your forum? Look, I'm not saying you have to agree with every single thing on that particular list. I don't agree with all of them. But to say it's flat out male bashing is stretching it. Not everything that points out the struggles that women face is male bashing. Otherwise we couldn't ever discuss anything at all.

[PretzelWarrior]

172. EXACTLY my point. I actually don't have a problem with that thread.

but if I posted a thread in a "Men's Rights" forum or whatever it was called that decried the inherent bias against men in custody matters or for certain jobs like nursing or teaching, I would probably be called out for female bashing.

I may actually contribute to the women's rights forum so you know I'm not out seeking to engage in anti-women type of rhetoric.

I know and completely acknowledge the role women were subjected to through most of human history and continue to fight against every single day of their lives.

But that doesn't take away from men's issues and a need to discuss them in an honest and respectful way.

[Pithlet]

175. I was astounded when you sneared at my contention that women don't have

an equivalent female privilege. So now I have to wonder.. Unless there was a misunderstanding there or something.

But anyway. It's not true. You wouldn't necessary get slammed for female bashing for posting those things. Plenty of men have brought those topics up on DU and nary a claim of female bashing occurred. Plenty of times. It's in how a topic is framed. For instance, someone could have easily done a similar male privilege thread but framed it in a much less respectful way and rightfully earned a male bashing accusation. I'm all for honest and respectful discussion. I'm also a realist. There's no reason that discussion can't take place anywhere else on DU. I'm sorry. If that place you want could happen here, I would be for it.

[PretzelWarrior]

177. excellent. I do think we agree largely on these issues

and I appreciate your considered support of such a board/discussion group. I would personally welcome you to listen to ideas mentioned and chime in wherever you felt like it.

[Pithlet]

178. You misread me. I'm completely opposed to it here on DU.

But I would support a progressive men's forum elsewhere.

[PretzelWarrior]

180. oh. well....then you may be overruled.

sometimes those things happen on a democratic forum.

[Pithlet]

185. Well, I appreciate that bit of knowledge there.

For I had no idea how it worked around here ;)

[snooper2]

241. You know..

I guess it's a good thing you are just one in 1000's

eom

[Piwi2009]

164. We women are quick to jump to conclusions

We see what looks like women-bashing on men's forums. But I think it's just men's natural competitiveness that just has to come out, no matter what the situation. Mark my words any such forum would turn into "I've been treated worse than you have!" "No I am, listen to this," and "No, me! I am the most victimized male of all time!"

[PretzelWarrior]

174. that's possible. but then it might run it's course

and then on to the next topic. Why is it automatically assumed a group of men aren't allowed their natural progression of feelings as they seek out the truth of what they're dealing with?

[JonQ]

229. Stereotype much?

All men behave a certain way.

Wow. You've managed to intimately know over 3 billion people and understand their motivations and actions (ahead of time apparently).

There's something I want you to read.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html

Particularly the part labeled "Bigotry and Broad-Brush Smears "

[EFerrari]

262. Speak for yourself, thanks.

[redqueen]

182. I support the creation of a men's issues forum.

I hope such a place would encourage men to throw off the 'we are unfeeling, sex-crazed, filthy, thoughtless simpletons' shackles that so many men seem quite content to stay locked inside.

[Swede]

209. I support the idea.

Heck we have forums for lots of things,why not this.

[smoochpooch]

254. I think it would be very interesting, go for it. n/t

[PretzelWarrior]

255. well, I've got a PM into a couple of admins...so we'll see.

[PretzelWarrior]

259. ok folks. requests are in for a review

if Skinner gives a green light, I'll post an idea for a group and try to get at least 10 gold star people to support it and vouch to be regular contributors.

Well, that is all for now.

[lumberjack_jeff]

274. Have you heard anything from the admins? n/t

[Lance_Boyle]

281. still no word?

C'mon admin - how long does this take? How long did it take to decide it was OK to create the women's issues forum?

[ourbluenation]

276. I'm a dv and sa advocate which means that I work mostly with woman...

because women are by and large victims of dv/sa abuse, however, I also know that male victims are underreported. I especially think this is true for sa (sexual abuse) and the underreporting of young male victims of abuse because of the culture we live in and the lack of advocacy for males with people working to create an atmosphere where men feel comfortable coming forward.

This is my long-winded way of saying I totally support your efforts and will join the discussions as time allows.

[NashVegas]

260. Good Luck

Sincerely.

You'll need a charter that makes it perfectly clear that the discussion is about mens' issues; if your frustrations with women are one of them, however, I don't see it happening.

[EFerrari]

263. I think this is a good idea. My brother could use a forum like that just now.

Good luck, guys.

[woo me with science]

272. I support this. nt