It’s really sad the way he was treated and extra aggravating that the bigoted side of the men’s rights movement has tried to take advantage of his death for themselves rather than to actually progress anything involving men’s rights issues.
On that note, I’m going to go ahead and remove the quote sentence from the bigoted and extremely misogynistic A Voice For Men publication in the Legacy section. It’s not even referenced anyways.
I’d just like to make the note that the men’s liberation movement is the exact opposite of the men’s rights movement, despite the two sounding similar.
The men’s lib movement was founded specifically as being complementary to women’s lib and uses many of the same approaches and intellectual analyses. It explicitly rejects the MRA/red pill narratives while still trying to figure out masculine toxicity and honor cultures, as well as trying to elevate the idea that too few men seek or are able to receive the care they deserve. It’s very much against the patriarchy.
Unfortunately, like many communities on lemmy, it’s less active here than it was on Reddit, but it’s worth using the term as a search of nothing else.
The Reddit Mens Lib group are atrocious. They in no way accept that men are not fully to blame for whatever rubbish that radical feminists come up with.
The men’s lib group here on Lemmy is just as pathetic. Read any of their posts and they do not sound like men, but instead like a beaten down, passive group of people that cannot stand up for themselves.
Yes, exactly what this guy is saying is true. This is the kind of person whose presence is unwelcome in the men’s lib movement. This is the kind of crap up with which we shall not put, which is why I feel comfortable recommending it to people.
So, buddy, let me be clear. The harms we see and talk about and try to deal with are inflicted by toxic masculinity. It has nothing to do with “radical feminism” and I honestly have no idea what that means to you. I’ve heard the term used for everyone ranging from women who point out and fight against rape culture to women with purple hair. But, yeah, if you’re the kind of man who complains about radical feminism, especially when the discussion is centering around issues affecting men including everything from education to economics to the culture of violence and racism… well, your input is probably going to be disregarded.
Not OP, but you’re omitting what people actually mean by radical feminists. And it’s not purple hair, you’re being ridiculous. People usually mean women who say all men all rapists, all men should die and so on.
And you need to join anti-feminist groups and claim Men who advocate for men don’t “sound like men” to fight against these people? Give me an estimate how many feminists do you believe think that all men are rapists or that all men should die. Just a guess.
Oh, I don’t, I haven’t joined any such group, I pretty much consider myself feminist and even donated quite a lot of money to feminist causes before I had to focus my attention on saving some money for personal reasons (though I plan on returning to donating when I have some significant spare money again).
I was just explaining what people really mean by radical feminist and that the claim that it’s about hair color is ridiculous (though I’m sure you’ll find such people, but to paraphrase your question - how many percent do you believe mean just hair color by “radical feminist”?).
To answer your question, my guess would be in the 5-10% range.
You believe 5-10 % of people who call themselves feminists want to kill all men or believe all men are rapists? That is absolutely sad. Do you mind to explain to me what makes you arrive at such a conclusion?
Well, not only those, but something in the general direction of “all men are bad and should be punished”.
Statistics, mainly, in any large enough group there are 10-20% idiots/extremists/trolls. Sometimes more, sometimes less, depends really on the group/topic. Sadly they’re usually also the loudest group further feeding the illusion that they’re the majority.
I think you mean “critical of” and not “critical to.”
And while there is welcomed and active debate in the community on our approaches and domains of concern, people who are actively hostile and unwilling to engage in a well-intended discussion are not welcome, in the same way that homophobes aren’t welcome in the LGBT community and far-right types aren’t welcome in socialist communities. We don’t want racists in spaces for Black persons, and we don’t want to engage with transphobes in trans spaces.
In men’s lib, we study the semantics and semiotics of masculinity both in specific cultures and how the ideas developed over time. We study sex, sexuality, and gender. Most importantly, we try to understand these things as they impact the communities we live in. While most people would be happy to discuss any of those issues, someone coming in from a “feminism bad” perspective is not going to be interested in discussion. They have a lot of learning to do before they’re ready, and they’re usually more interested in arguing than learning.
extra aggravating that the bigoted side of the men’s rights movement has tried to take advantage of his death for themselves rather than to actually progress anything involving men’s rights issues
This seems quite inflammatory. Is it true? Where have you seen this happening? Can you please link to where you see this happening, so I know what you’re referring to?
It’s really sad the way he was treated and extra aggravating that the bigoted side of the men’s rights movement has tried to take advantage of his death for themselves rather than to actually progress anything involving men’s rights issues.
On that note, I’m going to go ahead and remove the quote sentence from the bigoted and extremely misogynistic A Voice For Men publication in the Legacy section. It’s not even referenced anyways.
I’d just like to make the note that the men’s liberation movement is the exact opposite of the men’s rights movement, despite the two sounding similar.
The men’s lib movement was founded specifically as being complementary to women’s lib and uses many of the same approaches and intellectual analyses. It explicitly rejects the MRA/red pill narratives while still trying to figure out masculine toxicity and honor cultures, as well as trying to elevate the idea that too few men seek or are able to receive the care they deserve. It’s very much against the patriarchy.
Unfortunately, like many communities on lemmy, it’s less active here than it was on Reddit, but it’s worth using the term as a search of nothing else.
The Reddit Mens Lib group are atrocious. They in no way accept that men are not fully to blame for whatever rubbish that radical feminists come up with.
The men’s lib group here on Lemmy is just as pathetic. Read any of their posts and they do not sound like men, but instead like a beaten down, passive group of people that cannot stand up for themselves.
Ah I see. So, what are men supposed to sound like?! That misandry, right there.
Clearly like your average Facebook comment section under some inflammatory post. That’s how real men™ sound like.
Yes, exactly what this guy is saying is true. This is the kind of person whose presence is unwelcome in the men’s lib movement. This is the kind of crap up with which we shall not put, which is why I feel comfortable recommending it to people.
So, buddy, let me be clear. The harms we see and talk about and try to deal with are inflicted by toxic masculinity. It has nothing to do with “radical feminism” and I honestly have no idea what that means to you. I’ve heard the term used for everyone ranging from women who point out and fight against rape culture to women with purple hair. But, yeah, if you’re the kind of man who complains about radical feminism, especially when the discussion is centering around issues affecting men including everything from education to economics to the culture of violence and racism… well, your input is probably going to be disregarded.
Not OP, but you’re omitting what people actually mean by radical feminists. And it’s not purple hair, you’re being ridiculous. People usually mean women who say all men all rapists, all men should die and so on.
And you need to join anti-feminist groups and claim Men who advocate for men don’t “sound like men” to fight against these people? Give me an estimate how many feminists do you believe think that all men are rapists or that all men should die. Just a guess.
Oh, I don’t, I haven’t joined any such group, I pretty much consider myself feminist and even donated quite a lot of money to feminist causes before I had to focus my attention on saving some money for personal reasons (though I plan on returning to donating when I have some significant spare money again).
I was just explaining what people really mean by radical feminist and that the claim that it’s about hair color is ridiculous (though I’m sure you’ll find such people, but to paraphrase your question - how many percent do you believe mean just hair color by “radical feminist”?).
To answer your question, my guess would be in the 5-10% range.
You believe 5-10 % of people who call themselves feminists want to kill all men or believe all men are rapists? That is absolutely sad. Do you mind to explain to me what makes you arrive at such a conclusion?
Well, not only those, but something in the general direction of “all men are bad and should be punished”.
Statistics, mainly, in any large enough group there are 10-20% idiots/extremists/trolls. Sometimes more, sometimes less, depends really on the group/topic. Sadly they’re usually also the loudest group further feeding the illusion that they’re the majority.
So you’re saying people critical to the Men’s Lib movement aren’t welcome in the Men’s Lib movement?
That tells me everything I need to know about it’s “intellectual methods”.
I think you mean “critical of” and not “critical to.”
And while there is welcomed and active debate in the community on our approaches and domains of concern, people who are actively hostile and unwilling to engage in a well-intended discussion are not welcome, in the same way that homophobes aren’t welcome in the LGBT community and far-right types aren’t welcome in socialist communities. We don’t want racists in spaces for Black persons, and we don’t want to engage with transphobes in trans spaces.
In men’s lib, we study the semantics and semiotics of masculinity both in specific cultures and how the ideas developed over time. We study sex, sexuality, and gender. Most importantly, we try to understand these things as they impact the communities we live in. While most people would be happy to discuss any of those issues, someone coming in from a “feminism bad” perspective is not going to be interested in discussion. They have a lot of learning to do before they’re ready, and they’re usually more interested in arguing than learning.
This seems quite inflammatory. Is it true? Where have you seen this happening? Can you please link to where you see this happening, so I know what you’re referring to?