I am curious to hear from you, whether you consider this as a potential factor uniting feminists and the men's right activists. So, could You as feminists be interested in improving the life of men - by reducing the oppression caused by the bipolar gender system?

Below are some examples of this oppression. Men are expected

- to pay costs on dates, being a supporter of the woman

- to be ready for sex all the time as that is the stereotype of men

- not to feel pain, for example, when being hit to face by their female mate

- to provide a nice looking house to their family and therefore, to work very long weekly hours

Some concepts also are loaded with patriarchal ideology and gender stereotypes. For example

- romanticism is "defined" as an action from men to women and as a consequence, it is only a dream of many men to be treated romantically by their women

These were just a couple of examples of the oppression of men by the bipolar gender system. (Maybe you can find a better term for oppression, if that sounds too severe).

Could the analysis of these problems and pressures be a uniting field for feminists and men's right activists?

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]

I do think patriarchy is by it's nature oppressive to both genders. But, I think guys like a lot of it and many probably feel it doesn't oppress them because their sensibilities aren't hurt by it. Also, they adopt things as their 'own'. Like crying. Now, it's okay to cry if you're a tough guy. But, only a stoic kind of crying, I think.

Nelly McCLung said during World War one, that men go to war because they like it. I think there is some truth to that, but they still suffer from it.

And, of course, Granola's photo says it all.

(forgive the massive generalizing)

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: Blueiris46 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Granola Girl:
Ah yes. Men are so oppressed.

---

It seems that you either do not know what a straw man is, or then you actually like creating them.

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blueiris46:
I do think patriarchy is by it's nature oppressive to both genders. But, I think guys like a lot of it

---

Sounds similar to the argument that "actually a lot of female victims enjoy being raped". (In other words, your argument is not very convincing).

quote:

---

Originally posted by nonesuch:
Every system with a designated elite oppresses a much larger majority.

---

According to feminism the bipolar gender system oppresses men (too). That does not contain an assumption of an elite oppressing somebody. It is an idea of an IDEOLOGY oppressing women and men. According to this feminist theory, also women may carry ideologies, values and belief that oppress men and women.

As agreed in the sex role chain, a strict bipolar gender system is harmful both for men and for women. So, why is it so difficult to say that it oppresses both sexes? (Is the word oppression too strong of a term?)

quote:

---

Any -archy automatically oppresses (more or less severely) everyone who isn't, and has no no hope of becoming, an -arch.

---

When I am oppressed (or harmed) by the strict gender system, who are the members of the elite that oppress me?

quote:

---

And, if i may point out one more time, SosiologiR, dating is rather a superficial measure of political systems.

---

Dating was only one of my several examples. You must also note that what happens in the private lives of people is also a bit political and public. For example, when a person is assaulted in a relationship by his/her partner, it is not completely private. It is also the issue of the public prosectutor.

Did you know that men who live in macho cultures have a higher probability of being assaulted by their wives than men living in northern European or angloamerican families?

This is a good case of the patriarchal ideology oppressing men: In the macho cultures men are pressured and trained to be "so tough" that they feel no pain when their furious wife hits them to face in an argument. The true machos are tought to believe that an angry woman is "charming" and that women could not possibly cause them damage with their "tiny, little hands".

Nonesuch, are you trying to tell me that when women are oppressed in their personal lives it is a serious phenomenon, but when men are oppressed in their private lives it is insignificant?

quote:

---

Men are expected

- to pay costs on dates, being a supporter of the woman

---

Well, clearly this privileges men who can afford to pay for lavish dates, making them more desirable than they'd otherwise be based on their personality or physical attractiveness. I don't presently have time to go into your other examples, but there are clearly some men who feel they benefit from traditional, patriarchy systems which is why feminism frightens them.

It is also why I have to answer your question,

quote:

---

Could the analysis of these problems and pressures be a uniting field for feminists and men's right activists?

---

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: Blueiris46 ]

My statement is nothing like the statement 'women enjoy being raped'.

You're comments are a gross misrepresentation and I suspect you find a perceived matriarchal oppression more distressful than any oppression by the patriarchy.

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: Blueiris46 ]

When I was younger, I always insisted in paying exactly half (or my share of a meal etc) and would not let a boyfriend "take me out", but now a lot of us say why on earth can't it be pro-rata? My sweetie (long-distance, alas) makes several times what I make, and it is due to gender stereotyping - he has a highly-skilled blue-collar job, I'm one of those underpaid arts types...

Women are still far more often poor than men are, and highly female jobs and professions still more often undervalued.

No man should have to put up with a woman hitting him any more than any woman should put up with a man doing so - the same applies to same-sex couples, unless it is a playful thing agreed upon by both, so that is really a straw man. I don't doubt that more macho cultures lead to more violence against men (who are weaker than their spouse) as well as to women as in macho culture a man can't admit such weakness. But the rate of serious violence against women remains higher. (I'm thinking of the current campaign against family violence by the Socialist coalition government in Spain).

I sure know a lot of men who were very harmed by the tough guy stereotype. Fortunately some of them now are more open to challenging it. But they are squarely opposed to "men's rights activists".

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: lagatta ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blueiris46:
I suggest that you may be unaware of some of the ways in which you may be oppressed by the patriarchy and also the ways in which you enjoy it. Let me give you a hint.

---

Do you see the double standard: If I were to tell you that some women actually do not see how much they enjoy the benefits of the patriarchal system, you would probably say "Do you really think that women need your big masculinity to tell them what benefits them"?

You, on the other hand, tell me you know better how I am oppressed than I do. That is called patronizing. You are patronizing me.

quote:

---

Some men's unconscious (or, conscious) misogynistic attitudes prevent them from entering into a true partnership with a woman.

---

What does that have to do with me? Are you telling that I am not living in a true partnership with my wife?

quote:

---

Another clue, you enjoy complete and utter privilege, even as you, because you are human, suffer the pangs of life.

---

What priviliges are you talking about? When a man loses his property and kids in a divorce where is the privilige? When a man is hit by his wife, calls police and ends up spending his night in jail, is that also called a privilige? No. Those are both examples of the patriarchal ideology oppressing men, using prejudous stereotypes as a weapon against men.

quote:

---

My guess is that you enjoy this privilege. If you don't see your privilege, or have a conscious relationship with it, start here.

---

I also guess that you as a woman enjoy your privileges. If you don't see them, start there.

quote:

---

My statement is nothing like the statement 'women enjoy being raped'.

---

Yes it is. You are telling that I enjoy something that I truly do not enjoy.

quote:

---

You're comments are a gross misrepresentation and I suspect you find a perceived matriarchal oppression more distressful than any oppression by the patriarchy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagatta:
Patriarchy is a term used by feminists of many stripes, and in many forms of social analysis. Its use is by no means limited to radical feminists.

---

I did not claim that it is limited only to radical feminist. However, the term was first introduced by radical feminists and it means male dominance (according to a Finnish feminist web site). So, you should notice that patriarchy means male dominance whereas patriarchal ideology is something that may be promoted by women as well as men.

quote:

---

It has nothing to do with some kind of plot by men, but is the legacy of a very old division of labour.

---

I was not speaking of a plot. I was speaking of male dominance.

quote:

---

As for the men's rights stuff, it is just tedious. It has no bearing on the pain some men suffer greatly as a result of sex-role stereotyping.

---

I did not get your point. Do you disagree with me that the bipolar gender system may also oppress men? Do you believe that the examples that I gave are not forms of some kind of oppression?

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Sos, it is for men who recognize how oppressive the stereotypes are to them (if much worse for others) to throw off the stereotypes, to free themselves enough to ally themselves to the liberation of women and all others oppressed by the patriarchy.

---

I can see your point. However, it would be easier to throw off the stereotypes in cooperation. For example, if a woman carries patriarchal ideology in her brain, how can her boyfriend "throw off" the ideology without help from some women? Should not women as parents participate in throwing out patriarchal ideology, for example

- by teaching their daughters not to carry patriarchal ideologies that are oppressing men

- by relieving themselves of patriarchal stereotypes, attitudes and values that oppress men?

For example, should women not teach their children not to:

- expect a rich husband that allows them an easy life with no overtime work ever

- expect a husband who takes care of all household maintenance work

quote:

---

Originally posted by SosiologiR:
When a man loses his ... kids in a divorce where is the privilige?[sic]

---

Your domestic examples are, as kurichina says, absurdly trivial compared to the liberation struggles most women have had to go through, to free themselves both materially and mentally. For most of us, those struggles are ongoing -- they are daily struggles.

Men have always expected women to take care of men's feelings first, and traditional women's training has made most of us peculiarly vulnerable to that kind of plea.

Of course we should all wish to deepen our understanding and our alliances, with all humanity. But there's simply no point in taking on an ally who is still pointing fingers at others.

And implying sneakily that women somehow benefit from patriarchal structures as much as men, that men have no distinct privilege to confront for themselves, without pointing fingers at women, makes a debater highly suspect to me.

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: skdadl ]

There is a recent study by Tuulikki Petajaniemi, showing that social workers tend to propose giving the custody of the children to the mother even if all objective measures are equal:

- Both parents have spent equally time with their kids, taking a truly divided responsibility of their nurturing, education, health etc.

- Both parents have an equally demanding career

- Both partners use an equal amount of alcohol

- Neither of the parents has been guilty of domestic violence

quote:

---

Originally posted by SosiologiR:
There is a recent study by Tuulikki Petajaniemi, showing that social workers tend to propose ...

---

1. Kindly provide a link.

http://www.uku.fi/radio/ajankohtaisohjelmat/2005/01/20050114.shtml

In Finland judges decide custody. However, their decisions are based on the written statement of social workers, who are usually women - and who usually recommend that the child is given to mother, even if all objective factors are equal.

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mush:
I understand your point, and I don't doubt that women are more likely to be given custody in Canada too, ceteris paribus. But the "privilege" of sole custody is a pretty dubius one.

---

I agree that sole custody is not a privilige. However, it is a privilige to be able to decide whether one wants the sole custody or not. An average, women have that privilige and men do not.

- -

quote:

---

Do you really need a link for that or can we consider it a fact - and an example of patriarchal ideology oppressing men?

---

What if we assume that things - at least in Finland - are as I wrote? Is it an example of discrimination against men? Is that discrimination caused by patriarchal beliefs, values and stereotypes that are carried by social workers?

quote:

---

And, even if that fact is so, I would take strong issue with deeming it "an example of patriarchal ideology oppressing men". My experiences and observations suggest quite the contrary.

---

Please, clarify your point. Is it not discrimination that two people of different race, sex or religion) are treated in different manner due to their race, sex or religion?

How can you say that "according to your experiences" it would not be discrimination?

How about the following:

- Black people get a 10% longer jail sentence for committing the same crime as white. Is that discrimination?

- Men get a 30% longer jail sentence for committing the same crime as women. Is that discrimination?

Please, consider first this analytically and ethically - then we may try to find a link for you. It is not very fair that you first request for a link, and after given the link, you say, "Noneless, it is not discrimination!".

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]

I'm not sure how I feel about parental rights anyway - as the children's rights and protection must always come first.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Sos, may I ask: is it your main interest, the question of fathers' custody rights?

---

No. My main interest is the equality of the sexes. I believe that women are discriminated in some sectors of the society and life (e.g. labour market) whereas men are discriminated by the legal system (more severe penalties for the same crime and less chances of getting the custody of their children, ceteris paribus).

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagatta:
I think the question of gender stereotypes and the harm they inflict on men may fall within the feminism forum, but "men's rights" and this tedious fathers' rights thing certainly doesn't.

---

It depends on the definition of feminism. If feminism is defined as a social movement that promotes the equality of the sexes, it should be clear that this movement is against all discrimination, no matter what the target is.

If feminism is a frame of reference or a theory, then the consequences of the bipolar gender system and the patriarchal ideology should be part of the discussion - even their oppressive effects to men.

However, if feminism is just an agenda of an interest group, then no other people than the members of the interest group do not need to be taken into account or considered as valuable human beings.

Which of the three descriptions matches feminism best? Is it really nothing than the agenda of an interest group?

quote:

---

I'm not sure how I feel about parental rights anyway - as the children's rights and protection must always come first.

---

If men and women are not equally treated in custody trials, that will mean that in several cases the children's interests are not met: They end up under the custody of the "worse" parent.

For example, a slightly alcoholic woman may be considered better than a man without a drinking problem - all other things being equal. That is not for the benefit of the children. (That is a way of refrasing the statistics, according to which the social workers tend to favor giving custody to the mother).

quote:

---

The poster has been setting up all kinds of straw men. None of the women I know "expect" to marry a rich man and never have to work overtime.

---

[ 15 May 2005: Message edited by: writer ]

It is rather a shame, as without this particular poorly-hidden agenda, I think it would be an interesting subject; I know several men (straight and gay) who were very hurt and harmed by macho stereotypes. (See Billy Eliot!)

Patriarchy means that a social system is ruled by the senior male(s).
It follows that every male in that society (barring only slaves) has at least a theoretical chance of becoming a patriarch. This is an inalienable privilege, bestowed not through merit, but simply by category.

Males in that society can be oppressed only by males of higher rank. The degree of oppression a man may experience is proportional to his distance from the source of power. A man’s ability to affect the law of the land – and thus the terms and conditions of his own oppression - is also proportional to his distance from the source of power.
The king’s eldest son (first in the line of succession for patriarch) is less oppressed and more privileged than the youngest (fifth in the line of succession); the youngest prince is more privileged and less oppressed than his valet (98th in the line of succession); the valet is more privileged and less oppressed than a peasant lad (4,765,603rd in the line of succession.)

How privileged or oppressed each man is depends on his status among other men – and has nothing whatever to do with his relation to women.

The valet may envy the material comforts enjoyed by the princess (nowhere in the line of succession) and the peasant lad may think the valet’s wife (nowhere in the line of succession) is privileged, but the hard fact remains: no woman has any claim, however remote, on the source of power. If a woman has privileges, they come through her father or husband: she has no direct influence on the power-structure, nor on the terms and conditions of her own oppression.

Yes, the law of the land and the social structure do affect domestic arrangements; do affect the respective roles – duties, obligations and expectations - of husband and wife and of courting couples. If you control the money, you have to pay the bills. If you have to take orders, you expect room and board.
So?

Edited to add:
You say that patriarchy is an ideology. I don't see that ideology defined anywhere... hell, i haven't even seen it properly described. I only know it as a political system. I know what various versions of that political system have achieved in the world; we see their legacy in all aspects of life. Your illustrations come from a society in transition from patriarchy to something else - something we haven't seen yet.
Any single phase of a transitional process will contain elements of the preceding state and the subsequent state (as thaw is part ice, part water). In societies, other elements (such as cultural globalization, political movements, the aspirations ethnic of minorities, consumerism) play a part, but are not necessarily integral to the process.
What, exactly, do you want to know about, or do about this phase?

[ 16 May 2005: Message edited by: nonesuch ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by SosiologiR:

I agree that sole custody is not a privilige. However, it is a privilige to be able to decide whether one wants the sole custody or not. An average, women have that privilige and men do not.

---

Sorry to come back to this so late- I was out in the garden.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SosiologiR:
Below are some examples of this oppression. Men are expected ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
Is unpaid work at home counted as overtime?

---

I have no hidden agenda. My agenda is vivid and clear: I want to know whether feminists value the equality of the sexes. If they do, I want to know, how they react to cases in which discrimination occurs against men.

That agenda is no secret.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagatta:
My Fowler's says "the primary sense of feminism is 'the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes'. It reflects the French féminisme used in the same sense and is first recorded in the unsettled days of the last decade of the 19th c." In French, the word (recorded in 1837) is defined by Le Petit Robert as "Doctrine qui préconise l'extension des droits, du rôle de la femme dans la société".

---

My Webster says (if I recall correctly) that feminism is:

1. Action on behalf of women

2. Quest for the equality of the sexes

A hundred years ago there was not much conflict between these definitions as the oppression of women was so clear and men were not oppressed or discriminated on any sector of human life.

However, things are changing and now it is clearly important to ask oneself: Is feminism heading for eternally improving the life and status of women - even after equality has been reached? (This is not to say that equality would already have been reached).

That is a very simple question, but for some reason you ladies, are very reluctant to answer it.

quote:

---

It is rather a shame, as without this particular poorly-hidden agenda, I think it would be an interesting subject; I know several men (straight and gay) who were very hurt and harmed by macho stereotypes.

---

This is still an interesting topic as I do not have any hidden agenda.

quote:

---

Guess your ex likes to have a wee nip, eh? Cheers!

---

Actually, I do not have an ex-wife. I am married to a feminist who works in a managerial position. On contrary to many other feminists, she is an "equalist" as she believes that both sexes should have equal rights and that both sexes are equally valuable.

Well, maybe things are different in US and Canada. Maybe American feminists really are as ferocious as some American MRA web sites are writing.

PS. I got curious. Please, tell me what a wee nip is

[ 16 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]

I appreciate your opinion that fundamental definitions and concepts are important. Please, help me to correct my mistakes on the following definitions, if I have improperly understood them:

1) Patriarchy = male dominance (of older men) that is based on

- the social networks of (older) men
- the ownership and control of the means of production (capital and labour)
- the controlling of the female sexuality and reproduction

The form of patriarchy varies over time as historical societies evolve from hunters to farmers and gradually to the modern industrial or post industrial societies.

2) Patriarchal ideology = Ideology that considers men and women inherently different and masculinity more valuable than femininity in such a fashion that men should be the decision makers and power wielders in the society. The patriarchal ideology is often legitimized by referring to religous beliefs (men having been created before women) or to biological assumptions (men having bigger brains or something like that).

3) Bipolar gender system = Gender system in which there is a clear distinction between masculine and feminine.

Now that we have made this distinction we may notice that the following phrases have a different meaning:

A. "Patriarchy oppresses not only women but also men"

B. "Patriarchal ideology oppresses not only women but also men"

C. "Bipolar gender system oppresses not only women but also men"

My main argument in the starter of this thread was C.

Please note that I am not a native English speaker so I did not know, how strong of a term "oppression" is. That might have caused humorous connotations (as it is unlikely that anyone would light himself to fire because he had to pay for the date).

Maybe we should present my argument in the following form:

"The 20th century bipolar gender system may harm also men, not only women".

quote:

---

Originally posted by nonesuch:
What, exactly, do you want to know about, or do about this phase?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by writer:
[QB]It *could* be, but is it? The initial question was in response to your assertion that there are studies showing that men work more overtime than women. Did the studies include unpaid work at home?

---

I believe that my examples "men are expected to X" have several alternative interpretations:

1. Women expect men to X
2. Society expects men to X
3. Men feel they are expected X

I believe that few women these days expect their husbend to do a lot of overtime work, especially if that means they have to take care of the kids meanwhile. However, for some reason men feel some kind of a pressure (real or imaginary) to get rich and to work overtime, if that is what it takes to get rich.

This kind of pressures may be relieved in cooperation of the sexes or by putting the responsibility of ending the pressure to either of the sexes.

Think about the pressures towards women to wear high heels, skirts and make-up. Of course a woman could independently decide that "no more high heels, skirts and make-up for me". However, the emansipation from this kind of pressure would be easier if some members of the opposite sex encouraged her to emansipate from the pressures.

In the same fashion, men face pressures from the bipolar gender system. Some pressures are real and some imaginary - but they still all feel real. The emansipation from these pressures would be easier for men if they received encouragement from women.

I am sure that many men would like to hear from their girl friend or wife that they would be loved even if they never made a fortune.

quote:

---

. "Patriarchy oppresses not only women but also men"

B. "Patriarchal ideology oppresses not only women but also men"

C. "Bipolar gender system oppresses not only women but also men"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by nonesuch:
Meanwhile, you deal with each manifestation of the old system as it comes up - and live with a whole lot of slush.

---

I agree. However, I might have a different view to the "slush" compared to the majority of American feminists. Here is my perception of the process that is taking us from patriarchy to a new, improved gender system:

Patriarchal ideology and bipolar gender system produce (a lot of) disadvantages to women and also some privileges to women. At the same time it offers (a lot of) privileges to men and some disadvantages to men.

In this kind of situation the emergence of feminism is self evident and it starts as an agenda for equality.

However, after some five to ten decades of feminism, which has concentrated in removing the disadvantages to women and privilages to men, we seem to be going towards a situation in which bipolar gender system offers very few privileges to men and very few disadvantages to women. However, as there has not been an active male counterpart for feminism, the majority of the disadvantages caused to men still remain. (It is natural that it has not been in the agenda of the feminists to remove the ancient female priviliges and the old fashioned disadvantages caused to men).

This is characteristic to the "slush" period before a better word for everybody - not just a better world for women.

Although feminists need not to prioritize very high the removal of ancient female priviliges, they should not fight against "masculinists" who want to emansipate themselves from the ancient gender system, and to remove some female priviliges that are part of the ancient model.

My examples of these old style female privileges are:

- being supported financially by a man (during dating and marriage)

- being allowed to stay home with kids and not to build a career

- being allowed to study interesting and yet, financially not so beneficial topics in university

- being treated like princesses and being the sole target of romanticism

- being allowed to enjoy a variety of hedonistic pleasures, which are not allowed for the "tough and spartan" males

Actually, men are not simply wishing that women would quit acting according to these privileges - but instead, giving the same privileges to men too (so that the privilege ceases to be a privilege).

Unfortunately, most feminists stick the label of an "anti-feminist" to every man who starts fighting for equality, and for the deconstruction of such role models that are harmful to men.

Hope you are not one of them...

[ 17 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]

Ask 100 feminists what you think feminism is, and you may very well get 100 different responses. And can I urge everyone to read stuff about feminism that was, um, written in this century?

So here's this feminist's response to the most general tenor of this thread.

Feminism is a social movement to end oppression caused by: patriarchy/sexism, racism, homophobia, classism, and all the other ways in which people are oppressed. Past versions of feminism, yes, have posited a value in "equality" but this was a very specific "equality": White, middle-class women wanted to be equal to white middle-class men. Period. End of sentence. We can see that the majority of women, and some men, are left out of that version of feminism.

You might argue that given my definition of feminism above, why does it have to be called feminism if it's clearly about many other things besides patriarchy. Well, that's what it's called. By me anyways.

Do men face discrimination? Certainly they may face discrimination, certainly men of colour face discrimination every day, because they are both "men" and "men of colour". If Soc means "do white men face discrimination" (and his answer is of course, "yes they do"), I will agree with that, HOWEVER, let's be clear, which men are we talking about and does the discrimination faced by men have any of the structural and institutional basis that discrimination and oppression of women has?

As for the example of child-custody issues, what else is to happen in a society that sexistly situates mothers as being more important than fathers (look at the overly-sentimentalization of Mother's Day for a perfect example of this)? I'm not saying I agree with this (I don't) but it's a logical offshoot from sexism and patriarchy.

How about other examples?

Hmm, let's see....
*women still make, dollar for dollar, less than men
*women still do more of the household work than men do.
*we are less safe walking the streets at night
*women are psychiatrized and institutionalized at about the same rate as men are imprisoned (around 6% in civilized, advanced north america. and let me tell you this shocked the sh*t out of me when i found that out)
*so many more. My head hurts to think about it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Feminism is a social movement to end oppression caused by: patriarchy/sexism, racism, homophobia, classism, and all the other ways in which people are oppressed.

---

Ok. Sounds good - that is the kind of feminism that I like

quote:

---

Past versions of feminism, yes, have posited a value in "equality" but this was a very specific "equality": White, middle-class women wanted to be equal to white middle-class men. Period. End of sentence. We can see that the majority of women, and some men, are left out of that version of feminism.

---

I hope that problem can be corrected by improving the definition of equality - not by dropping the entire concept and goal from feminism.

quote:

---

If Soc means "do white men face discrimination" I will agree with that

---

Thanks, Bigcitygirl!

** a big hug **

quote:

---

HOWEVER, let's be clear, which men are we talking about and does the discrimination faced by men have any of the structural and institutional basis that discrimination and oppression of women has?

---

I think that the research on the discrimination against men is just at a beginning phase. We have some hints of discrimination, but not enough research data to analyse the reasons of the discrimination. Of course, we may create hypothesis for the reasons. If you may excuse me for vulgar language, we have two or three very different hypothesis on "Why are men discriminated against".

1. Discrimination of men is caused by the bipolar gender system which exists in the head of men. Therefore the best way to end the discrimination would be to change men.

2. Discrimination of men is caused by the bipolar gender system and prejudous stereotypes that are applied by governmental and munipical workers.

3. Discrimination of men is caused by the f***ing feminists.

Hypothesis nr 1 is probably the one most popular among feminists.

Hypothesis 2 is most important, as it would be, if proven correct, a form of serious institutional discrimination.

Hypothesis 3 is most popular among men's right activists. Yet, I do not consider it very important. Feminists have the same rights as any political party or interest group. They may publish what ever statistics that prove how men should be eliminated from this planet, if they wish (only limitation to this is the law that forbids the raising of hatred against an ethnic group, minority or other social group). Therefore, I see this kind of discrimination as a legal form of discrimination.

To me, hypothesis 2 is really important. It should be examined in empirical studies. I wish that I could find at least a couple of feminists on this earth who do not oppose such studies.

quote:

---

As for the example of child-custody issues, what else is to happen in a society that sexistly situates mothers as being more important than fathers? I'm not saying I agree with this but it's a logical offshoot from sexism and patriarchy.

---

Thanks! You agreed with me, that the patriarchy or patriarchal ideology which may oppress men. (BTW, we have a father's day in Finland).

quote:

---

*women still make, dollar for dollar, less than men

---

That is true, but there are very many cases, in which the man does not make more money. In those circumstances it is "oppression" if the woman requires the man to pay for the date. (Of course it is not oppression, if both parties "play the gender game" with equal terms, so that both get benefits and disadvantages to the same degree).

quote:

---

*women still do more of the household work than men do.

---

I have studied a Eurostat research report in which domestic work, household work, studies and travel time (to work) are reported. When counting these figures together, in families with children, we get the following results:

Great Britain, Netherlands, Belgium: Men have about 90 minutes per day less free time than women, on average.

Finland, Denmark: Men have 1-12 minutes more free time per day than women.

Romania, Hungary, Estonia, etc: Women have 90-120 minutes less free time per day than men, on average.

Please, give me a gender neutral and fair interpretation of these statistics.

quote:

---

*we are less safe walking the streets at night

---

That could be true. However, I have seen statistics that say that men get violently assaulted at night whereas women get raped. The total safety for men, is not very good either.

quote:

---

*women are psychiatrized and institutionalized at about the same rate as men are imprisoned

---

If I say that this sounds very alarming, are you willing to consider that the legal system punishes men in an unfair manner, compared to women? For example, male murderers are 20 times more likely to get death penalty than female murderers.

quote:

---

*so many more. My head hurts to think about it.

---

I agree with you. I have a wife and daughter. Of course I want a world in which they are not discriminated in any way. I am ready to fight for that! Also, my wife is ready to fight against discrimination towards men - or at least give me her full support, if I wish to be a men's right activist.

To me it is very sad that in America, the feminists and MRA's seem to be light years away from each other.

[ 17 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]

Let me just add this: Everyone faces some sort of bias or oppression but to drastically varying degrees. My view of feminism includes the pursuit of equality for all individuals in society because we can't have gender equality without equality by race, sexual orientation, language, religion, etc. It is all inter-related.

I believe it is disrespectful to the equality movement for white men to whine about oppression of any sort. A tall man might be more likely to get the promotion than a short man because of perceptions of confidence, strength and leadership. That may be a form of oppression but it is soooo far down the scale it should not be part of an equality conversation on par with the oppression of women or minorities. White heterosexual men are not oppressed except by other more powerful white heterosexual men.

With regard to the custody debate it is predominantly male judges ruling on laws created by predominantly male legislators. So even if there is oppression, but I don’t believe there is, it is once again perpetrated by men likely as a result of stereotypes reinforced by patriarchy.

Back to the origin of this thread: How does patriarchy affect men? I think many men see the destructive nature of patriarchy and now empathize with those who are oppressed but at the same time they maintain their privileged position in society.

I am a classic example of that. As a white, heterosexual man I was born into a society that was going to afford me many opportunities and entitlements that most others will never have. At the same time I grew up as kid who could not express feelings or make intimate friendships because my environment taught to be strong and stoic rather than nurturing and affectionate. As someone who now sees the world differently I often find myself asking whether I would have been better off growing up in a non-patriarchal society. In order for men to honestly say yes to that question they must be willing to relinquish the notion of privilege and entitlement. Thus far most are not. There are men that call themselves feminists because they believe women are of equal value however they are not willing to accept that men even possess entitlement let alone a willingness to discard it.

Children are steered in a direction from a very early age that encourages them to pursue stereotypical roles. In the workforce, male roles automatically pay more than female roles. Why does a construction worker make three times as much money as a daycare worker? Are houses more important than children? Or did our society evolve over time to automatically place more value on male dominated careers.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kellis:
There are men that call themselves feminists because they believe women are of equal value however they are not willing to accept that men even possess entitlement let alone a willingness to discard it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SosiologiR:

My examples of these old style female privileges are:

- being supported financially by a man (during dating and marriage)

- being allowed to stay home with kids and not to build a career

- being allowed to study interesting and yet, financially not so beneficial topics in university

- being treated like princesses and being the sole target of romanticism

- being allowed to enjoy a variety of hedonistic pleasures, which are not allowed for the "tough and spartan" males

---

I'm interested that you consider some of these things "privileges". Financial dependence doesn't sound like much of a privilege: to me, it sounds like the very thing that feminists have been working against for years. And who's doing women the great favour of keeping them out of the workforce and tied to the home?

Being "treated like princesses"? By whom, exactly? And what does this mean anyway? For every man who treats his wife/girlfriend like a princess, there's a woman who treats her husband/boyfriend like a king.

Being "allowed" (since you've stated that English isn't your first language, I'll forgo an attack on this word choice) to study "less financially beneficial" topics in university? Please! I majored in Creative Writing (and let me tell, there is no money in that!) and over half of my classmates were men. So were most of the actors and musicians. If only women are allowed to study these non-financially beneficial topics, someone's doing a piss poor job of enforcing that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kellis:
I believe it is disrespectful to the equality movement for white men to whine about oppression of any sort.

---

I believe it is patriarchal ideology to call men who claim about something as "whiners". It is almost equal to telling men that "do not complain of everything or you are a sissy".

quote:

---

White heterosexual men are not oppressed except by other more powerful white heterosexual men.

---

We have two questions that should be treated separately:

1) If statistics and research reports prove that men are discriminated on the sector X of human life, should feminists argue that this discrimination is to be removed?

2) Are there actually any sectors of life in which white males are discriminated against?

The first question is ethical and the second is factual. I would be very happy to hear your answer to the first question, and then continue to examine question number 2.

quote:

---

With regard to the custody debate it is predominantly male judges ruling on laws created by predominantly male legislators. So even if there is oppression it is once again perpetrated by men likely as a result of stereotypes reinforced by patriarchy.

---

In Finland social workers give a statement in all cases when mother and father argue about custody. Over 95% of social workers are female. Does this mean that females should be accused for discriminating against men. My answer is NO. We should not accuse men or women, instead, we should accuse the society and the legal system.

For example, if we notice that 6-10 year old girls are treated in unequal ways in school, compared to boys, should we accuse women (as the majority of elementary school teachers are women). The answer is again no. The society and school districts are responsible for informing and steering teachers in such a fashion that no discrimination occurs.

Please note also, that in murder trials, rape trials, domestic violence trials etc. there is a jury making decisions. The jury is not 100% male and in some cases the majority of the jury are female. In these cases it would be very wrong to argue that "it is the men who oppress the men".

quote:

---

As a white, heterosexual man ...

---

You speak of your experiences and tell that you have not experienced severe discrimination. That is probably due to the fact that discrimination against men, in its most severe forms, occurs in special conditions:

- criminal trials
- custody trials
- etc.

Have you not studied this kind of discrimination at all? How can you claim that there is no discrimination? I have seen the following claims in MRA web sites. Please correct me, if these statistics are false:

1. Male murderers have 20 times greater chance of being sentenced to death than females. Source: http://www.freewebtown.com/menplace/abuse.htm

2. When a drunk driver kills a white man instead a black man, the punishment is 10% more severe. When the drunk driver kills a female, the punishment is 50% more severe than the average punishment for that crime (http://www.freewebtown.com/menplace/abuse.htm). Does that not suggest to you that legal systems the life of a woman more valuable than the life of a man?

3. In custody trials, children are usually given to mother even if the father could be considered as equally good parent on an objective basis (source: Mari Antikainen, doctoral thesis).

Again, I will be glad if you can prove any of these research reports or statistics false.

quote:

---

...whether I would have been better off growing up in a non-patriarchal society. In order for men to honestly say yes to that question they must be willing to relinquish the notion of privilege and entitlement. Thus far most are not.

---

Please explain me what you mean by the bolded sentence.

quote:

---

In the workforce, male roles automatically pay more than female roles.

---

I will not argue against you on that, as I am willing to admit that there is discrimination against women in the labour market.

quote:

---

Sorry to go off on a tangent. My point is that men are not oppressed relative to women.

---

Well, what if women are oppressed in 5 sectors of human life and men are oppressed in one sector? Does that mean that the oppression of men in the specific sector is insignificant?

quote:

---

Originally posted by kellis:
There are men that call themselves feminists because they believe women are of equal value however they are not willing to accept that men even possess entitlement let alone a willingness to discard it.

---

I call myself a (relatively old fashioned) feminist and I am willing to admit that men posess entitlement (privileges?) in many sectors of human life. However, men are not privileged in all sectors of human life. In some sectors men are discriminated and that is something that should be corrected.

NOTE: If the society and human life are divided to 10 sectors, we should not "sum up" the discrimination against men/woman to one total figure. We should treat every sector of society and human life separately. It is unfair to reason that "men are discriminated only in one sector of life and women are discriminated on so many more sectors - therefore we should not do anything about the discrimination of men in the single sector".

quote:

---

I believe it is disrespectful to the equality movement for white men to whine about oppression of any sort.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrean:
Financial dependence doesn't sound like much of a privilege: to me, it sounds like the very thing that feminists have been working against for years.

---

Please, try to understand my point of view. I am speaking of the social pressures against men. When a man who has a wife and kids, loses his job, it is more "discraceful" than a woman losing her job. Even if unemployment is hard for women too, a married woman with a well payed husband may easily switch working career to house keeping - with very little social pressure from outside. For a man the "housewife" career is not a real option - due to social pressures. (That is an example of the bipolar gender system harming men).

quote:

---

And who's doing women the great favour of keeping them out of the workforce and tied to the home?

---

I do not know. I quess that your answer is "men". However, I do not quite see your answer matching reality, at least here, as Scandinavian women are not tied to their home. Also, in America, should you not blaim the voters if they create a system in which women are tied to the home (and aren't 50% of voters are female?).

quote:

---

Being "treated like princesses"? By whom, exactly?

---

By their boyfriends/husbend.

quote:

---

And what does this mean anyway? For every man who treats his wife/girlfriend like a princess, there's a woman who treats her husband/boyfriend like a king.

---

If the ratio is one to one, there is no problem. However, if women - in the sake of equality - stop treating their men like kings and still insist being treated like princesses, that is unfair.

How do you see this in the American life form, please calculate how many "yes" answers you get to the following questions:

1. Are women usually given more valuable birghday presents while men and women are courting, or when they are married?

2. Is it so that there is a Mother's day but not a Father's day?

3. Is it so that females have usually higher expectations of getting Valentine's day cards than men?

4. Is it so that women would usually expect to get the better pillow or blanket, if husband and wife would notice their pillow/blanket if of different quality?

5. Is it so that it is usually the man who will have to wake up 06.00 in Saturday morning in order to drive the child to hospital due to an ear inflammation (while leaving the mother to sleep)?

6. Is it so that most females consider female sleep more valuable than male sleep - as males are tough and used to spartan treatment (and as the life of women is so hard that they need more sleep).

I guess these are just bits and pieces of reality, and they vary highly in different relationships. However, I assume that ON AVERAGE you would get quite a few yes answers to the questions given.

Actually, it would be fun to do a real "Cinderella test" to see whether women still, in the 21st century expect being treated like princesses by their boyfriends/husbend.

NOTE: There is nothing bad about expecting princess quality treatment if one is ready to give king quality treatment in exchange. However, there are many women who feel that it is their duty, in the name of feminism, not to treat their men like kings. Yet, these same women might expect many forms of Cinderella treatment.

(This is not very convincing as I do not have any statistics - I only have my own observations and what I have been discussing with my friends).

quote:

---

Being "allowed" to study "less financially beneficial" topics in university? Please! I majored in Creative Writing (and let me tell, there is no money in that!) and over half of my classmates were men. So were most of the actors and musicians. If only women are allowed to study these non-financially beneficial topics, someone's doing a piss poor job of enforcing that.

---

Ok. You may be right. Maybe this pressure is just imaginary. Still, many men feel strong pressure towards studying something "economically beneficial" while women are more to study "Greek filology", creative writing etc. (NOTE: This is also patriarchal ideology as many parents consider the most important reason for women to go to college the search for a smart and wealthy husband.)

If we wish to get real statistics, we could compare the willingnes of parents to support their son's/daughter's "unbeneficial university studies". I believe we would find a moderate willingness for parents to support any kind of daughter's university studies - and low willingness to support "unbeneficial" studies of their sons.

quote:

---

I'm not even sure how to answer the "hedonistic pleasures" thing, since the standard title for a woman who ingulges in hedonistic pleasures is "slut" and that's not exactly a title of power or privilege.

---

Well, let's take a look at the infamous John Gray and his gender system, which recommends women to "do a lot of leisure and comfortable things after a working day, e.g. taking a foam bath and listening to classical music" (in order to get in touch with their feminine side). Men, on the other hand are recommended to learn very Spartan habits, e.g. waking up early, not lying on the coach, doing uncomfortable household maintenance work immediately, etc. (to get in touch with their masculine side).

Also, please consider the gender pressure that sanctions men for all "gay like" behavior such as going to a manicyrist 4 times a month or wearing face peeling masks. (This example might be a bit old fashioned as the "gayish" behaviors are not considered so discgraceful to men any longer, partly due to the Fabulous 5).

I might be giving you very bad examples. That means that you will need to try understand what I am aiming at.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SosiologiR:

However, men are not privileged in all sectors of human life. In some sectors men are discriminated and that is something that should be corrected.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
Shall we assume you'll be leaving the way clear for white women to whine?

---

quote:

---

However, I assume that ON AVERAGE you would get quite a few yes answers to the questions given.

---

Can't speak for everyone, but not in my case. It works out to roughly equal. Sometimes I go overboard, sometimes he does.

2. Is it so that there is a Mother's day but not a Father's day?

There is a Father's Day. It's in June.

3. Is it so that females have usually higher expectations of getting Valentine's day cards than men?

I suppose I could give you this one, but I don't think most men feel it a source of oppression not to get Valentine's Day cards. This year, I got exactly one. From my mother. She also sent one to my husband. (Note for nerds - they were Lord of the Rings valentines)

4. Is it so that women would usually expect to get the better pillow or blanket, if husband and wife would notice their pillow/blanket if of different quality?

I wouldn't. What the hell?

5. Is it so that it is usually the man who will have to wake up 06.00 in Saturday morning in order to drive the child to hospital due to an ear inflammation (while leaving the mother to sleep)?

Never seen it happen. And many of my friends have children. In fact, I've more often (and this is more among those of my parents generation) seen it perceived as the "woman's job" to take care of the children when they are sick.

6. Is it so that most females consider female sleep more valuable than male sleep - as males are tough and used to spartan treatment (and as the life of women is so hard that they need more sleep).

Sleep is sleep.

Where the hell are you coming up with these examples?

You keep trying to prove that men are equally "oppressed" - you said once that you weren't sure how strong a word that was in English. It's a very strong word, and I've seen very little proof that men encounter systematic oppression on the level, scale, and impact that women still do in the economic, political and household worlds.

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrean:
I don't believe that you've provided any verifiable proof of this

---

Please, check my examples of death penalties and custody trials. Check also this site
http://www.freewebtown.com/menplace/abuse.htm
and try to refute all of its claims of discrimination. (I am happy if you can proove me that men are not discriminated).

quote:

---

... none that suggests that the oppression that men experience under patriarchy is to the benefit of women.

---

I have not claimed that the discrimination against men is to the benefit of women. However, is it not some kind of a benefit to women, if women get lighter penalties for same crimes?

quote:

---

And I actually do think that patriarchy is oppressive to (some) men but as nonesuch points out, that has more to do with their relationship to power than their relationship to women.

---

Please, do not keep talking of patriarchy all the time as I started the thread with "bipolar gender system" and "patriarchal ideology". As Bigcitygal has noted, the bipolar gender system does oppress men in certain ways.

quote:

---

Please, check my examples of death penalties and custody trials.

---

To tell you the truth, I don't think any of your dogs will hunt, so I won't wade too deep into this thread, but I do think that the stats on murder and capital punishment are interesting.

Last time I checked, women made up approximately 9% of the murderers in the U.S., but accounted for approximately 1-2% of the death row population.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alix:
1. Are women usually given more valuable birghday presents while men and women are courting, or when they are married?
Can't speak for everyone, but not in my case. It works out to roughly equal. Sometimes I go overboard, sometimes he does.

---

I guess I should not ask this from feminists. I assume feminists are more eqalitarian on this respect than the average population.

quote:

---

3. Is it so that females have usually higher expectations of getting Valentine's day cards than men?

I suppose I could give you this one, but I don't think most men feel it a source of oppression not to get Valentine's Day cards.

---

As you said, oppression is too strong of a word for this kind of harm. Yet, this is a sign of inequal treatment and inequal expectations. An equivalent to this could be the pressure to wear lipstick. It is not an example of severe oppression. However, when this kind of small things pile up they may get you really mad.

If feminists have the right to be mad about such things, why should not masculinists wish to emansipate themselves from this kind of "oppression"?

quote:

---

4. Is it so that women would usually expect to get the better pillow or blanket, if husband and wife would notice their pillow/blanket if of different quality?

I wouldn't. What the hell?

---

I assume that you do not expect your man to be chivalrous towards you. Yet, many people who are not feminists do require chivalry - and even some feminists want chivalrous behaviour from their husbend in this kind of small matters.

quote:

---

5. Is it so that it is usually the man who will have to wake up 06.00 in Saturday morning in order to drive the child to hospital due to an ear inflammation (while leaving the mother to sleep)?

Never seen it happen.

And many of my friends have children. In fact, I've more often (and this is more among those of my parents generation) seen it perceived as the "woman's job" to take care of the children when they are sick.

---

According to the old style bipolar gender system men do the rare and really uncomfortable jobs like "dying in war" or "fighting against a black bear to rescue his woman". From this angle, the really uncomfortable tasks like taking the child to hospital in the middle of the night is clearly a man's task (especially driving a car in pouring rain or when it is 0 degrees Farenheit). According to me this old fashionded division of tasks is still functional in all of the families of my friends.

quote:

---

Sleep is sleep.

---

It should be so. However, in many families the female sleep is considered more valuable as men are supposed to be spartan creatures who do not mind a little bit of suffering. (This applies in my friend's families).

quote:

---

Where the hell are you coming up with these examples?

---

I guess I have very weird friends

quote:

---

I want equality between the sexes. But I'm not about to stop fighting for the equality of women in economic, political and social realms to make sure that men aren't feeling slighted.

---

You do not have to stop fighting for the equality of women. Also, I do not request you to fight against men paying for dates, and similar low importance cases of "oppression".

I can't check out most of the sources in your link - they are stats, and most of the sources of the stats aren't online.

But I looked up Warren Fader, most often mention on your page, and found the central premise of his book, frequently cited, to be

"Quite simply what Warren Farrell is saying here is that, effectively speaking, men are slaves, have been slaves, and will continue to be slaves to feminine interests until they are disposed of (i.e., until they drop dead)."

Of the ones that do have links, on is to "www.respectyourman.org" which has lovely bits about Female Chauvinism, which include this explanation of the wage gap, and why it isn't really all that big:

"5% of this gap is occupational segregation. This means that occupations that women do offer less pay than occupations that men do. Female Chauvinists do make this sound as though it relates to EVERY vocation women do and also make it sound like discrimination. More research needs to be done to actually catalogue the vocations and look to see why the rates vary in each one."

and this:

"Do women need to be less material and accept a man with less money than her (in other words actually be interested in a guy that makes you laugh instead of pretending to be) ...YES"

and:

"The reality is Yes mothers do more housework than fathers and Yes mothers do more nurturing than fathers. What you then need to ask is this - what do fathers do with their time?

The answer is...WORK!!!

Men work an average of 8 hours a week more than women, across all ages and personal situations. Other studies have shown that single women and single men work about the same hours and get paid about the same pay.

The difference in hours worked really begins in married couples with no children - women start to favour unpaid home-work (nesting if you like) and men tend towards working extra hours in paid-work."

So you can see how all this oppression of men is because women are in complete control of the situation at all times.

[ 17 May 2005: Message edited by: Alix ]

But having started the research, I'll continue the refutation.

If you go to the very first link on that page that SosiologR has, you'll find a list of sources that "proves" that women are more violent.

In my very first debunking, I'll call your attention to item 4, which states:

"4. M. L. Bernard and J. Bernard, "Violent Intimacy: The Family as a Model for Love Relationships," Family Relations, Vol. 32, 1983, pp. 283-86. Four hundred sixty-one college students revealed that more females than males were abusive in dating Relationships (21% vs. 15%)."

If you look at the actual journal article, it says that 19% of the men in the sample had been abused, and 38% of the women.

Thank goodness for JSTOR!

Item 10:

"10. Lisa Brush, "Violent Acts and Injurious Outcomes in Married Couples: Methodological Issues in the National Survey of Families and Household," Gender and Society, Vol. 4, March 1990, pp. 56-67. A feminist found both sexes agree that 2.8% of women were victims of men; 3.8% of men were victims of women. The survey contained over 13,000 respondents."

Yup, that's what that one says. It's also a study, not comparing male/female violence, but incidence of violence and types of violence in Quaker families as opposed to US national averages.

I'm actually kind of confused about this one, though, as to what they mean by severe violence. I can't find a definition of it in the article, and I'm unfamiliar with the Strauss scale. Because those numbers are there, but then in the body of the article, it says:

"This sample did not report the extreme violence reported by the national sample. Quaker couples did not report beating each other up, or threatening or using knives or guns."

quote:

---

How do you see this in the American life form, please calculate how many "yes" answers you get to the following questions:

1. Are women usually given more valuable birghday presents while men and women are courting, or when they are married?

---

i think this really depends on the relationship. in my own relationship, i give sean (my bf) more gifts than he gives me. when he does give me a gift though, it tends to be more expensive than what i give him. i'd say though, that we generally spend about the same amount of money on each other.

quote:

---

2. Is it so that there is a Mother's day but not a Father's day?

---

(speaking strictly about the us) no, we have both a mother's day and a father's day. however, i believe that father's day existed before mother's day.

quote:

---

3. Is it so that females have usually higher expectations of getting Valentine's day cards than men?

---

again, i think this depends on individuals. in my relationship, he is more likely to get a card, so i guess he has the higher expectation. however, my mother is more likely to get a card from my stepfather, and in my father and stepmother's relationship, i'd say they are both equally likely to get a card.

quote:

---

4. Is it so that women would usually expect to get the better pillow or blanket, if husband and wife would notice their pillow/blanket if of different quality?

---

i wouldn't expect it, but i'd hope he'd at least offer. and i hope i'd offer the better item to him if he happened to get the worse one.

quote:

---

5. Is it so that it is usually the man who will have to wake up 06.00 in Saturday morning in order to drive the child to hospital due to an ear inflammation (while leaving the mother to sleep)?

---

not in my family. my mom is the one who is more likely to stay up all night when someone is sick or wake up early to go with my brother or me to the doctor.

quote:

---

6. Is it so that most females consider female sleep more valuable than male sleep - as males are tough and used to spartan treatment (and as the life of women is so hard that they need more sleep).

---

i haven't noticed this. i don't think i've ever heard someone classify their sleep as more important than someone else's. to do that seems rather selfish and dumb to me.

quote:

---

Actually, it would be fun to do a real "Cinderella test" to see whether women still, in the 21st century expect being treated like princesses by their boyfriends/husbend.

NOTE: There is nothing bad about expecting princess quality treatment if one is ready to give king quality treatment in exchange. However, there are many women who feel that it is their duty, in the name of feminism, not to treat their men like kings. Yet, these same women might expect many forms of Cinderella treatment.

---

quote:

---

(NOTE: This is also patriarchal ideology as many parents consider the most important reason for women to go to college the search for a smart and wealthy husband.)

---

quote:

---

Last time I checked, women made up approximately 9% of the murderers in the U.S., but accounted for approximately 1-2% of the death row population.

---

quote:

---

If a Black/Caucasian stat were that skewed, we'd demand answers.

---

But at least the question is lot less frivolous than valentines.
Has anyone else noticed that the guy buys the gal a card which takes 15 seconds to choose (15 minutes if the clerk is really cute), while the gal cooks the guy a special dinner, with heart-shaped cake, that takes 5 hours to prepare? Or that the expensive birthday present for the wife is probably a washing machine, while the less expensive gift for the husband is golf-clubs? Or that the father drives his kid to the hospital after the mother has been sitting up for three nights?
I don't know about the better pillow, but nobody had better touch my special pillow! And, yes, goddamit, my night's sleep is important - after i've had to tiptoe and whisper, so as not to interrupt his afternoon nap.
SosiologiR, you need a wider lens!

Seriously, i do benefit from and appreciate chivalry. My husband does drive when conditions are difficult. He does go up on the roof to shovel the snow. He does go down in the crawl-space to fix a leak. He does bring in the firewood and clean the chimney. He does lift the heavy stuff and remove the dead skunk from the yard.
He does not consider this oppression or discrimination: every act is voluntary (and prideful, and applauded). He considers it fair exchange for the right to ask, every day: "What are we eating and when?" and for all the times i find his keys and finish the detail-work and rub his back and clean the toilet and change the sheets.

Looking out for each other, being kind to each other, contributing our individual skills to a functional whole is part of the marriage contract. Every contract is different.
There is no average.

[ 18 May 2005: Message edited by: nonesuch ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alix:
Okay, I definitively call troll.

---

Last time I got a troll call was when I was writing to a men's right activist forum. The guys there shouted "Troll alert" and claimed that I am a female in disguise.

quote:

---

I can't check out most of the sources in your link - they are stats, and most of the sources of the stats aren't online.

---

Well, there are about 200 research quotations so that the task of going through all of them would take too much time. (And it would explode this thread to 200 separate arguments).

Instead, would you please consider analysing some of the most severe claims of discrimination against men? Especially the discrimination of men in court (see quotations below).

" Statistics, they found that killing a female instead of a male increased sentences by 40.6 percent. Killing a white instead of a black, in comparison, increased sentences by 26.8 percent.
A drunk driver who kills a black male receives an average sentence of two years. A drunk driver who kills a white male, four years. A drunk driver who kills a white female, six years." (source: Edward Glaeser of Harvard University and Bruce Sacerdote of Dartmouth College)

"Being male increases a murderer's chance of receiving a death sentence by more than 20 times. "Department of Justice

"9% of murderers are female, 1-2% of death penalty convicts are female" (somebody on this forum)

quote:

---

"Quite simply what Warren Farrell is saying here is that, effectively speaking, men are slaves, have been slaves, and will continue to be slaves to feminine interests until they are disposed of (i.e., until they drop dead)."

---

Please, let us concentrate on statistics and research reports - this kind of opinions and counter opinions will explode this thread.

quote:

---

"5% of this gap is occupational segregation. This means that occupations that women do offer less pay than occupations that men do. Female Chauvinists do make this sound as though it relates to EVERY vocation women do and also make it sound like discrimination. More research needs to be done to actually catalogue the vocations and look to see why the rates vary in each one."

---

The wage difference can be analysed from a scientific perspective. Here, it should be possible for MRA's and feminists to try to find the truth - not just pieces of facts supporting their own point of view. Personally I have reached the view that women earn 20% less than men on average (in Finland) and that 15-16% is due to segregation and the remaining 4-5% is due to discrimination.

The analysis of wage differences should be handled in the same fashion as the analysis of the analysis of legal penalties (jail sentences, death penalties etc.).

In Finland the Feminists have a slogan "Woman's euro is equal to 80 cents" meaning that women get less money. In a very same manner, men could launch a slogan "Man's year is 500 days" when talking about jail sentences.

As Nonesuch pointed out, it is very important to analyse statistics concerning the same jobs/salaries and the same crimes/penalties.

quote:

---

"Do women need to be less material and accept a man with less money than her ...YES"

---

As I said, men are irritated with the research reports that prove how women STILL consider male wealth as one of the important criteria when choosing among potential husbend. That causes pressure towards men. The pressure is of the same kind as the pressure women face towards wearing make-up and high heels, staying slim, etc.

quote:

---

"The reality is Yes mothers do more housework than fathers and Yes mothers do more nurturing than fathers. What you then need to ask is this - what do fathers do with their time?

The answer is...WORK!!!

---

That is true in many countries. Men work more than
women, when counting together domestic work, paid work, commuting and time used for studies.

quote:

---

So you can see how all this oppression of men is because women are in complete control of the situation at all times.

---

That is a straw man. I have not said that women are in complete control of the situation all the time - and neither have the MRA's said so (unless you provide me with a precise quotation).

Why do you need to fight against men who try to be more equal with women? In all of the points you quoted I saw very clearly the reasons behind the quote - and your only counter comment was a straw man.

Why do you not want to listen to men and understand their point of view?

[ 19 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShyViolet:
good god...
the parents i know sent their daughters to college so that they can become smart and wealthy women with satisfying careers. we have more important things to do than worry about "catching a man."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alix:
If you go to the very first link on that page that SosiologR has, you'll find a list of sources that "proves" that women are more violent.

---

I have studied the links too and found out that women are not more violent than men. As posted her e before, the results of my studies are:

1. Women and men are equally violent and aggressive against each other in relationships, if mild forms of violence such as slapping, pushing and throwing objects are counted to the statistics. That varies according to culture (e.g. in black couples men are more aggressive and in latino couples women are more aggressive).

- This can be proved with more than 100 studies done with the Confltict Tactics Scale.

2. Women get more injuries from domestic violence. The ratio is 1.6 women for each injured man.

3. When talking about moderate to severe injuries, the ratio is 4 women to each man.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alix:
If you look at the actual journal article, it says that 19% of the men in the sample had been abused, and 38% of the women.

Important distinction here – the stats 21% and 15% do appear, they are the percentage of people who admitted to having been abusive.

---

Thank you, Alix. Now I see that the collection of statistics has been created in a selective manner. I guess I will need to dig in to the actual studies before being able to quote the results in any scientific context.

However, do you see that feminists do the same kind of selective reporting? For example, the worst lie that I have seen is the following:

"40% of women have suffered from interspousal violence from their male partner... 90% of the victims of interspousal violence are women"

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShyViolet:
i expect to be treated like a queen... but that's because i try to treat my boyfriend well. i expect him to respect me and be there for me and as long as he does that, he can definitely expect me to do it for him. i think both of us would agree that we have equal importance in our relationship

---

ShyViolet, I appreciate your sense of what equality in a relationship means.

For some reason, I happen to know a few examples of couples in which the picture goes roughly as follows (I told you I have weird friends):

- Man takes care of shopping for food, cooking, doing the dishes, vacuuming and almost all forms of domestic work

- Woman is proud that she is not doing domestic work and considers it a proof of "how emansipated she is".

Personally, I just hate that kind of "emansipation" as it creates root for discrimination against the husband of the emansipated woman. Also, I do not like the idea that the media tells men about 50 times per year to do more household work such as cooking and child care - but the media almost never tells women to do more maintenance work concerning the house, car or summer cottage.

quote:

---

quote: Last time I checked, women made up approximately 9% of the murderers in the U.S., but accounted for approximately 1-2% of the death row population.

Does it say what kind of murders?

---

In the Finnish equality law there is the idea that each instance of discrimination should be taken seriously. In labour market, the "burden of proof" is on the employer, so that the employer needs to prove that they are not discriminating agains a person who makes a complaint.

How about applying the same idea to all discrimination? When somebody gives a hint of discrimination - or shows a curious statistic hinting on discrimination, should it not be taken seriously? I object that kind of double standard that all suspected discrimination against women is considered a fact (until proven otherwise) but all suspected discrimination against men is "bullshit" until proven otherwise.

I am just asking for some kind of justice.
(An American feminist, in a web site, wrote that "every time somebody request for fairness for men, that is a sign of a hidden anti-feminist agenda". I hate that kind of attitude. Fair is fair and men should have equal rights. Period. If I present statistics that hint on the discrimination towards men, nobody has the right to label me as an "anti feminist" - unless feminism is defined as a pro-discrimination movement).

quote:

---

If a Black/Caucasian stat were that skewed, we'd demand answers.
- -
They are. And nobody in the US - certainly not Gov. Jeb - is going to give you any answers.

---

Did you see the (questionable) statistics telling that a drunk driver killing black man gets 3 years in prison, killing a white man means 4 years in prison and killing a woman means 6 years in prison? I am not sure that this statistic is correct - but on the other hand, I am not sure it is false either.

I wish we would get more research reports in which the discrimination against men is compared to the discrimination against the black.

quote:

---

Has anyone else noticed that the guy buys the gal a card which takes 15 seconds to choose, while the gal cooks the guy a special dinner, with heart-shaped cake, that takes 5 hours to prepare?

---

That is something I consider unfair, especially if the money in the family is shared. I consider it more valuable to get a birthday cake and no present at all than to get a 200 $ present which has been purchased with our shared money. When receiving presents, I do not think so much how expensive they are - but how much emotion and time was put in finding and choosing the present.

quote:

---

Or that the expensive birthday present for the wife is probably a washing machine, while the less expensive gift for the husband is golf-clubs?

---

Well, in many families that I know women get (and expect to get) jewelry while men receive trousers, socks, or something useful and not very classy.

quote:

---

Or that the father drives his kid to the hospital after the mother has been sitting up for three nights?

---

As you said, we are living in a transition period. In my family and in several others I have heard the same story: The infant does not sleep at night in any other conditions except when put to a car and being driven around. As crazy as it sounds, I know several fathers who have spent nights riding around with their baby while their wife is getting some sleep. (Let's not think in black and white - not all men are chauvinist assholes any longer).

quote:

---

And, yes, goddamit, my night's sleep is important - after i've had to tiptoe and whisper, so as not to interrupt his afternoon nap.
SosiologiR, you need a wider lens!

---

It is hard for me to believe that I am a rare exception. In my family the "woman's sleep" is more important Especially after parties, when we have stayed up until 2 o'clock, it is my task (always) to wake up with the kids at 7.30 while my wife continues to sleep until 9.30. I do not consider this unfair as my wife does so many other wonderful things to me (treating me as a king). However, more and more women seem to be willing to pick the best bits of chivalry, while refusing to give a "king treatment" in return.

quote:

---

He considers it fair exchange for the right to ask, every day: "What are we eating and when?" and for all the times i find his keys and finish the detail-work and rub his back and clean the toilet and change the sheets.

---

Your relationship sounds very equal. Mine is also equal in a different manner: I do more cooking and laundry work than my wife, I help her every morning to find her mobile phone, I do the majority of shopping for food, I take my daughter to kindergarten every morning and fetch her after work, etc. etc.

Yet, I am not complaining as I get a lot in return.

[ 19 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by SosiologiR:

ShyViolet, I appreciate your sense of what equality in a relationship means.

For some reason, I happen to know a few examples of couples in which the picture goes roughly as follows (I told you I have weird friends):

- Man takes care of shopping for food, cooking, doing the dishes, vacuuming and almost all forms of domestic work

- Woman is proud that she is not doing domestic work and considers it a proof of "how emansipated she is".

Personally, I just hate that kind of "emansipation" as it creates root for discrimination against the husband of the emansipated woman. Also, I do not like the idea that the media tells men about 50 times per year to do more household work such as cooking and child care - but the media almost never tells women to do more maintenance work concerning the house, car or summer cottage.

I hate double standards. I also hate the idea that any discrimination against men should be considered as "positive discrimination".

---

i do not consider that reasonable. imo, in a household, the work should be shared. it should be both's responsibility to keep things running smoothly. in the situation you have described above, it is the traditional patriachical roles, only with the genders reversed (hope that made sense)
what you say about the media is pretty true, though i have seen some stuff that promotes women and car maintainence. now, home maintainence...what do you mean by that? are we talking yard work? painting? replacing windows? all of the above? b/c again, i think i've seen stuff promoting women in that arena as well.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShyViolet:
now, home maintainence...what do you mean by that? are we talking yard work? painting? replacing windows? all of the above? b/c again, i think i've seen stuff promoting women in that arena as well.

---

I mean all of that and some other things as well. I believe you have seen articles encouraging women to do more "men's work". However, that is really rare compared to the pressure that is put towards men for doing more cleaning, cooking and childcare work.

quote:

---

i don't endorse discrimination, however, i do think it's time that men took a more active role in housework. i still see too many instances where the woman has a full time job and is also expected to do all the cooking and cleaning b/c it's "women's work."

---

I agree. However, please, be sensitive to the differences between countries and also, differences between social groups. For example, in Scandinavian countries men do a lot of household work - and generally speaking, the more educated men are more willing to do childcare. According to a recent study, a large number of academic men are using their right to a long paternity leave in order to take care of their children (in Finland).

Please, analyse also statistics. How do you explain that fathers in countries like Great Britain and Belgium have 90 minutes per day less free time than their wives? In such a case, do you seriously recommend that these men would do more cooking, cleaning, laundry, shopping etc? Would it not be a discriminative way of handling things?

From my point the problem is not that husbend in GB are lazy - the problem is that women need to stay home or work shortened days as there are no public kindergartens available for everybody.

[ 20 May 2005: Message edited by: SosiologiR ]