It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Men - The Forgotten Gender

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Oh yes, objective measures clearly demonstrate that men are being abused by women:

Women are paid about 78 percent of what men are paid, across the board, for decades

The number of American troops killed in Afghanistan and Iraq between 2001 and 2012 was 6,488. The number of American women who were murdered by current or ex male partners during that time was 11,766. That's nearly double the amount of casualties lost during war.

That's in the US alone. If you start considering data from across the world, disparity between the way men are treated versus the way women are treated explodes geometrically.




posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:14 AM
link   
I wanted to introduce the ATS people here to the 'HeForShe' - a paradigm shift, which is much needed now. Emma Watson gives an excellent speech in the video at the link below.




“How can we effect change in the world when only half of it is invited to participate in the conversation? Men, I would like to take this opportunity to extend your formal invitation. Gender equality is your issue, too.”

“I’ve seen my father’s role as a parent being valued less by society. I’ve seen young men suffering from illness, unable to ask for help for fear it will make them less of a man …. I’ve seen men fragile and insecure by a distorted sense of what constitutes male success. Men don’t have the benefits of equality, either. We don’t often talk about men being imprisoned by gender stereotypes but I can see that they are.”

Watson said liberating men from stereotypes ultimately benefits women.


www.rappler.com...



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Evil_Santa

Don´t assume anything.. I only provided some stats and how it's all related to old stuck traditions India has. This has nothing to do what is going on in US, UK or other modern countries when there are glitches between the sexes, those are totally different stories and my opinion in divorce messes what is going on in modern societies is that MAN is as capable to provide good grounds for children to grow up and thrive as women if not even better but it all depends how they are acting as parents ( My mother died when i was 10 and my little brother was still a toddler.. so i am raised by a man.. Army man).
In modern countries, females have an opportunity to educate themselves and become self-contained IF they choose to and it's not even close as hard as getting a good education in countries like India and actually being self-contained. No, they are not banning the education of females there, but the old traditions come to play when girls have to drop out of their studies to get married which is arranged by others and after the marriage they are property of their husbands ( and extended family ) and that is very often where it ends. This is one reason why

Its about common sense, what is right and what is wrong. What's your sense of right and wrong tells you about this?

Now assume whatever you want.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:48 AM
link   
You poor men and women with your gender plights. No gender is holding another gender back. If you're behind in any way, it's because you never did anything to get ahead. No one is going to hand you anything on a silver platter, which seems to be the modus operandi of both feminism and men's rights.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight

I think there is a problem with how men are viewed, look at some of the comments on here about how men are feminised and how many more gay men there are now than their used ot be.
This is all part of the same issue, say there is something wrong with men who are trying to move away from the stereotypes they been forced into in the past.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
a reply to: InTheLight

I think there is a problem with how men are viewed, look at some of the comments on here about how men are feminised and how many more gay men there are now than their used ot be.
This is all part of the same issue, say there is something wrong with men who are trying to move away from the stereotypes they been forced into in the past.


I believe there are underlying (unconscious) societal paradigms and biases that need to be hammered at, relentlessly, by both genders.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: WilsonWilson

I hate to spoil any easy dichotomy, but, as a rule, I don't believe we can judge gay men as more feminine than anyone else, including their straight counterparts.

Being gay doesn't make one automatically effeminate. Just ask a Lesbian.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Blah sorry Grphon66, you're a nice person and mean well but as a feminist some of this type of statistics winds me up!

It's just baseless powerful sounding sentences which appear to actively avoid any details. In fact, some of them enforce sexist ideas when you break it down.

The pay gap one is actually an incredibly nuanced discussion about a real issue, but the way its presented implies something quite bombastic.


originally posted by: Gryphon66
The number of American troops killed in Afghanistan and Iraq between 2001 and 2012 was 6,488. The number of American women who were murdered by current or ex male partners during that time was 11,766. That's nearly double the amount of casualties lost during war.

This one is a shocker.

You're comparing a population of almost 320 million to one (being incredibly generous) of around 500, 000 to 1 million. Even the most generous comparison of those ratios will demonstrate that you're far more likely to get killed serving in Iraq than you are by your partner in America per capita. This number shifting is also happening in country where 70 - 80% of homicide victims are men in the first place.

Why do we do this? It just makes real feminist issues look silly when we take statistics and shroud them in bombastic language and word games. Sometimes I swear we're a step away from becoming the history channel. 'Did you know that 250, 000 women are oppressed every year? That's almost as much as 250 football pitches, or 38 whales if we stacked those women side by side.' It just makes me have to look at my feet any time I mention being a feminist near maths persons.

Why do I say this supports sexist notions? Because it implies that somehow men's lives are more valuable than womens and that male on male violence is somehow an expected norm. Surprisingly many male criminals actively target men instead of women, because they're taught that women and children are special. Perhaps if we taught our men to value each other, some of the knock on effect would be a general decrease in violence against everyone? (A decrease that has been happening for some decades that no one wants to take credit for!) Men seem to do just fine at hating men if we're discussing America frankly, and yes that is absolutely a gendered problem. Domestic violence etc ... is horrible. So is male on male violence. Both coexist oddly.

Note, its difficult to even begin to discuss issues like this on ATS without it being derailed in all directions. India has some horrible human and women's rights problems, but its also a very diverse place. One part is completely alien to the other and I'm prepared to say I'd need to do more research. That said, is it really surprising that all genders will leverage legal pressure or other social violence when its available to them? Especially if its in reaction to inequality?



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

Okay.

You don't think there's any significant problem with the differences in pay between American men and American women? Given.

Bombastic or not, correlation or causation (or not), you are not concerned with the prevalence of male against female violence in this country? Okay ...

As to your critique, I compared a number of people who were killed in two different situations over a distinct time period. Seems reasonable for a general comparison, but, ...

Ah, the "per capita" manipulation. But okay, okay, point ceded because we're not arguing statistics or semantics; it does look like a ridiculous concern if you look at it that way.

In fact, if you used the world population as the "per capita" for both numbers of victims, why it'd look like no problem at all.

Moving on.

I am very aware of the abyssal statistics about violence in same-sex households having been in that situation once myself.

I am also (PAINFULLY) aware that discussions on ATS aren't very reasonable or academic. Anytime people aren't shooting virtual spit-balls at each other, I consider a fine discussion.

I'm not sure, in the end, what you're trying to say to me, but if you were offended, you have my apology.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: WilsonWilson

You do understand that hired straight out of college men and women make the same rates at the same jobs? The differences come from what each gender is willing to put into their work. Men tend to work longer hours with less time off. Women want more flex time and accommodations for their families even today, so they are slowed in wage progression.

I employers actually could get away with paying women less, they only would hire women because they could save a lot of money.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: WilsonWilson

I hate to spoil any easy dichotomy, but, as a rule, I don't believe we can judge gay men as more feminine than anyone else, including their straight counterparts.

Being gay doesn't make one automatically effeminate. Just ask a Lesbian.


How sexist of you



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 03:30 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: WilsonWilson

I hate to spoil any easy dichotomy, but, as a rule, I don't believe we can judge gay men as more feminine than anyone else, including their straight counterparts.

Being gay doesn't make one automatically effeminate. Just ask a Lesbian.


Sorry if your hormonally compromised , with high amounts of dietary oestrogen, and drink moderate amounts of alcohol. in men the alcohol gets turned into oestrogen, and in women it gets turned into testosterone. It doesn't take long for females to show male characteristics ,and males feminine, and start to think like a female hunting testosterone male. Once the imbalance institutionalises, you have a new norm, just like we have, now. If you doubt this gets some testosterone cream and rub it on ,within hours all you will think about is sex. Sadly I'm not joking.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
You poor men and women with your gender plights. No gender is holding another gender back. If you're behind in any way, it's because you never did anything to get ahead. No one is going to hand you anything on a silver platter, which seems to be the modus operandi of both feminism and men's rights.


Because very few people actually believe in equality.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
a reply to: maddy21

oh come on, who holds the power here in the UK? public school educated posh boys, yet they got there through merit?
No they didnt, they got there through connections and knowing the right people and the boys club mentality.
Your basically syaing women dont hold many positions or power because we are incapable of it, which is a load of mysogynistic rubbish.
The fact is many countries are now starting to look at not having enough evidence to prosecute for rape as beinga false acccusation but this is patently not true.


Again, people get to powerful positions through Merit. Very few people actually have the connections. Gender has nothing to do with it. If a person has the right connections then it isn't really a gender problem. Stop making excuses and blaming men for everything. If you want to get on top you have to work just like the majority of us. The problem with women is the complete inability to accept their own faults and blame everyone else for their problems.
edit on 4-3-2015 by maddy21 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Uh the 11,766 number traces back to an upworthy page with the original link going back to a tumblr site for Ann Tagonist.

What a great pen name.

The page has 404'd too.
edit on 5-3-2015 by Evil_Santa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 01:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Pinke
You don't think there's any significant problem with the differences in pay between American men and American women? Given.

Where did I say that? Nowhere, that's where.

I have a problem specifically with how you're handling of the issue. There are various issues with women in work places internationally and locally (to me) related to paternity, hours, promotions, the (de)valuation of traditionally female occupied professions, and various other things. When you turn that issue into a glib statement Dudebro CEO of Dudebro INC calls HR, asks if they are paying women of the same level different rates in say the programming department, and when the response comes back as a 'no, we're not,' they completely miss all the other issues that are being discussed thinking they're a good little feminist or (worse) that all feminists are crazy. Briebart then publishes an article claiming these issues are the 'reason' the gap doesn't exist; it's already happening in this thread.

Every time you do this you should say a prayer to the great Bill O'Reily and donate $250 to your local 'get women back in the kitchen' organization because that's how helpful glib statistics are.


Bombastic or not, correlation or causation (or not), you are not concerned with the prevalence of male against female violence in this country? Okay ...

You are not concerned with the disproportionate number of men dying of war related causes in your country? Okay. See what I did there? It was stupid, no? Especially when no such thing has been said.

This is what bothers me about the current direction of feminist discourse. Outside of the academic areas is this kind of binary 'with us or against us' policing both within and outside the community which lets in any voice so long as its going along with the tidal wave no matter how ridiculous it is. It leads to damaging nonsense. Supporting nonsense and failing to do research whilst making glib statements does not = being concerned with male on female violence. If anything it's being concerned with looking concerned.

My pointing out the fact that the statistic comparison you used is invalid and contains sexist undertones does not = 'Pinke doesn't care.' It's the opposite. My issue is that you belittle the problem by comparing it to completely irrelevant things. If a Men's Rights Activist brought up war casualties when we were discussing domestic violence I'd tell them 'other conversation, other time.' Fact of the matter is, by making the comparison you give them a written invitation, a red carpet, and an all you can eat buffet. You might as well walk around handing out fliers saying 'please derail my conversation and misrepresent my topic. Sincerely, Gryphon66.'

Do we honestly need to compare domestic homi and familicide to wars to have a discussion about it? No! It just devalues the discussion. You can talk about it without these distracting comparisons. The numbers are their own justification without sexying them up. The fact American statistics about war casualties were brought up in a conversation about dowry laws in India is just all kinds of ... O.o and cultural hegemony.


Ah, the "per capita" manipulation. But okay, okay, point ceded because we're not arguing statistics or semantics; it does look like a ridiculous concern if you look at it that way.

In fact, if you used the world population as the "per capita" for both numbers of victims, why it'd look like no problem at all.

No, we are arguing statistics. You made a very specific claim using statistics in a glib way, and now you're implying the statistics don't matter.

Wearing a top hat and monocle and swinging your pocket watch smugly about 'per capita' manipulations doesn't make your maths make any more sense than they did a couple of posts ago. If you want to say 'violence bad!' say 'violence bad!' If you want to say 'women have it worse,' by all means, but don't make a clown of the issue.

When you bend numbers like a pretzel you encourage not only your own dismissal but also the dismissal of the feminist standing beside you (me in this case), so please don't. Take a glance at Dollukka's posts. Discussing the actual issue on the table in context gets a lot more mileage.


Anytime people aren't shooting virtual spit-balls at each other, I consider a fine discussion.

You left a few 'spit-balls' on the floor in this conversation.


I'm not sure, in the end, what you're trying to say to me, but if you were offended, you have my apology.

Please don't apologize when you don't mean it. I'm about 10% more offended than I was pre-apology.



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

You're expending a lot of energy attacking another woman who presumably shares your agenda. Talk about counterproductive.



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: maddy21

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
a reply to: maddy21

oh come on, who holds the power here in the UK? public school educated posh boys, yet they got there through merit?
No they didnt, they got there through connections and knowing the right people and the boys club mentality.
Your basically syaing women dont hold many positions or power because we are incapable of it, which is a load of mysogynistic rubbish.
The fact is many countries are now starting to look at not having enough evidence to prosecute for rape as beinga false acccusation but this is patently not true.


Again, people get to powerful positions through Merit. Very few people actually have the connections. Gender has nothing to do with it. If a person has the right connections then it isn't really a gender problem. Stop making excuses and blaming men for everything. If you want to get on top you have to work just like the majority of us. The problem with women is the complete inability to accept their own faults and blame everyone else for their problems.


The fault is not with women, the fault is the way corporations are managed and operate as a boy's club or geared to men and women who agree (or have no other choice but) to be married to their job and sacrifice much.




Two U.S. researchers, Luce and Hewlett, studied the career trajectories of a large number of women and noted that female executives were more likely to follow paths filled with “horizontal” career interruptions. Reasons vary and include motherhood, a husband’s career, family commitments to children or aging parents, or personal preferences. Women consider such temporary exits from their career a natural thing. However, reintegrating back into the organisation and finding a job that suits their talents often proves impossible.





The conclusion to all this is clear: the barriers (behaviors, labels, biases…) that prohibit the progression of women to the top are deep-rooted, pernicious, and ubiquitous … and much more prevalent than we imagine and recognise.

Ending this unfair discrimination against women requires understanding, creativity, commitment and perseverance, and foremost positive action by both men and women. As my colleague Jean-François Manzoni points out, “We do not see the world as it is, we see it as we are.” The implication is that the first change we need to make is to see the world as it really is.

The idea that this discrimination will, or ought to, end “voluntarily” just flatly defies the research we have mentioned. Things are too ingrained. Patterns must be broken. And that is where regulation – such as a quota for women - has its place. Hopefully temporarily …


Read more: forbesindia.com...



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 11:59 AM
link   
I submit this thread, and the many examples inside, as evidence that men are abused.

Man could face jail time for not paying child support for boy that isn’t his

Men are far more likely to lose in domestic custody battles.
Men are far more likely to lose their livlihoods in the case of a divorce.
Men are far more likely to lose the custodial rights of their children.

Men have no rights in the case of pregnancy. In fact, if the mother has the child, when the father does not, the father can be required to pay 18 years of child support. If the father wants the child, and the mother does not, it can be aborted without father's consent. If the father and mother both want the child, the mother can deny access and get sole custody and the father is required to pay 18 years of child support for a child he cannot see.

A woman can give up a child for adoption without the father's consent.

Fathers sue Utah over law allowing mothers to secretly give up babies for adoption

Parental Rights: Unmarried Fathers and Adoption

A woman can absolutely destroy a man's reputation with a simple accusation of sexual assault or domestic violence. A friend of mine, after being broke up with, had a judge grant an EPO against him for a year. This was for no reason other than that she was mad at him and had claimed she was scared.


So please, those who claim men are not abused, try to discuss the above referenced issues. Abuse doesn't always have to be a physical thing.
edit on 3/5/2015 by EternalSolace because: Clarity



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join