Since you like a bit of fisking, Avi, I’ll indulge you by doing a bit of fisking of my own.
One by one, shall we?
I was supposed to attend the Bangalore Slut Walk, it was cancelled when the right to assemble for women was revoked because of men. Men and conservatives who threatened women who were marching for the right to walk in India without harassment or risk and to not be shamed because of their clothes. It was cancelled roughly a year before Nirbhaya.
Now no one will stop them.
And that is why the SlutWalk exists. Because a lot of people’s defence against the rape of women is that they were dressed like sluts. They were asking for it. Well that argument was used by people in India who suggested the same thing for Nirbhaya.
Not only are you evading the argument, but you are moving the goalposts. If feminists contend no one should be called a slut, then the point of Slutwalks are contradictory. Namely because the point of Slutwalks is not just to make the case that dressing skimpily is not deserving of rape, but also to rebrand the word ‘slut’ and take it back, making it a positive, not a negative, word. In fact, the argument doesn’t even mention the purpose of Slutwalks, just the contrary view of feminists saying this is good (Slutwalks) and this is bad (being called a slut).
Oh, and if we’re going to be fair: Canada also launched the “Don’t be that guy” campaign, which meant to paint all men as potential rapists. It didn’t work out that well, according to this report:http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/sexual-assaults-increased-in-2011-1.1287611
No. You ignored what I wrote.
And the most important line of what I wrote was….
“The name picked in Canada. The advice given was “Avoid rape by not dressing sluttily”. Let me rephrase that in a way you would find repulsive. She wasn’t wearing a burka so she was raped. Slutty is relative after all. One culture’s slutty is another’s normal.”
In reference to Constable Michael Sanguinetti’s remarks that to “avoid rape, don’t dress like sluts”. So women marched around dressed like sluts and called them that and carried signs about how it doesn’t matter what women wear, people who rape are still going to do it.
Are you aware perchance of the colloquial utilisation of the word “nigger” by the African American community as a way of robbing it of it’s power?
Well consider this similar.
“The other thing is that more and more people are coming forward to say, ‘Hey, this happened to me and wasn’t right.” which is a major component. I would say rapes may be increasing but at a slow pace, what is changing is the report rate of rapes. This is the same issue in India. Delhi once had just 500 rapes a year(and only 1 went to trial BTW), now? By September the Delhi police stated they had more than 1200 cases. It’s not that more women were being raped post Nirbhaya but more women were willing to press charges and the press was more willing to push for justice and the police under scrutiny were better at dealing with these.
People in Canada from the Battered Women’s Support Service ran the “Don’t Be That Guy” Campaign. And you know what? Perhaps we should speak to guys about what exactly is and isn’t rape.
“Why would anyone do that” you ask. The fact of the matter is a lot of rape occurs due to poor communication, expectation and not being told that their actions are harmful. The rapist isn’t some slavering monster but a normal human being who often does this horrible act because no one has told them that what they are doing is wrong.
This is a clear case of you simply misinterpreting the mission of SlutWalk, which is not a protest for the right to be called ‘slut’ but a protest for the right to dress however you want free of the presumption you are “asking for it”. This was ALWAYS it’s primary mission.
If we combine the main criticism from people such as Thunderfoot (who I repeat, picked INDIAN women to blame for this) which boils down to “risk aversion”, I must point out that I am arguing from a country where aversion to risk means an impossible life. A woman cannot leave the house here. Or even stay. I have put up stories of women who were raped by family members, hotel workers, auto/cab drivers. I put up stories of women who were raped for going to school or raped for standing up to their rights. I even put up a story about a young lady who was raped for escaping rape. Now you want to tell me what clothes these women wore? They wore the same clothes they have worn for thousands of years.
She wore a jeans and a blouse? RAPE HER!
She was out late? 6PM is late now? She was with a boy? So people raped her because she had a boyfriend? Mobile phone? Clearly got her raped. Chow mein? That too.
That was the dialogue in India. Now you tell me, what fucking risk aversion do you wish to tell the women of India?
Oh I got it.
1. Endeavour to not be female
2. Endeavour to not be in India
And through this all? The marches that took place were designed for women to stand up and tell their stories. To tell of police harassment and excuses given because of the clothes they wore or their hair or their attractiveness being used to deny them justice and protection and to protect rape.
Post Nirbhaya India saw rape rates spiral out of control. Often they went up by 100 to 200% in some areas. It is not because more rapes are occurring. Probably with greater awareness, more boys are learning not to. But what is happening is more women are standing up and being heard. I am going to go out on a limb here and say “it’s a good thing”.
And with this we come to the second part of the problem. The article you put speaks of increased rapes post raves due to drugs and alcohol. Guess what?
Don’t be that guy. Don’t be that guy who takes advantage of girls who are drunk or out of it. Don’t be that guy who lets other guys do that.
Not “don’t go to raves”. I mean seriously?
I like dancing with women. In fact one of the major things I miss is clubbing. Do you think women hate dancing with men? Do you think feminists don’t like men and the things we do? No they do like us. They fall in love with us and we with them. And sometimes we do it while we cut a rug and drink. Perhaps we should make these places safer for everyone?
Rather than say “Here be Rapists”.
And it doesn’t paint all men as potential rapists. Don’t be “THAT” guy. Have you actually seen or read any of those posters?
“Just because you helped her home, doesn’t mean you get to help yourself”.
“Just because she is drinking doesn’t mean she wants to fuck”
“Just because she isn’t saying no, doesn’t mean she is saying yes”
“It’s not sex if he changes his mind” (To explain? Consent is a continuous process. If something comes up, you can stop having sex. Sex isn’t a binary event and you can stop having sex midway due to an issue one of the people involved in it has). Anyone who says that a particular crime happened because the victim’s clothes or shoes or presence caused it has effectively stated something rather important.
That nothing can be done about this issue because the issue is much more complicated and difficult so it is easier to blame the victim.
The rape equivalent crime is being mugged in a tuxedo while the police say that “if you are dressed like a philanthropist, the underprivileged will take money from you. That person clearly thought you were a philanthropist. If you aren’t one why did you dress like one?”. No one says this, but people do say “why were you dressed like that at location x”. Which means they cannot solve the issue with the methods they have and think you should not create more of that issue because frankly it is irritating paperwork.
So people try and clean up that area. People try and reduce crime and educate kids and get them to schools and give them a future so that you can wear your tuxedo round that street and not get mugged. And we call these people pillars of the community.
If we do the same for rape we see people like yourself moaning about tricksy women. Cause lets face it. Your argument boils down to “what about all the men who are tricked into having sex with women and are surprised by rape accusations, this would encourage it!”
These are not stupid ideas. Your suggestion is that you are personally insulted because you don’t need to be told to do those things. Well then they aren’t posters aimed at you. Print the following out on a card. I suggest that everytime you are insulted by such a poster then you whip out the card and read the following.
“Except you Pitchguest, We know that you will do the correct thing at all times”
Porn is changing a lot.
Understatement of the century. Yes. If you care to look for it, there’s a market for all manner of porn. Not just “men objectifying women.” There are so many different kinds, it’s like an explicit hardware store. However if you have a one-track mind, like for instance Andrea Dworkin, then it doesn’t matter what the climate is. Women are objectified in porn. Women are taken advantage of in porn. Porn is bad for you. Period.
Sure… but Andrea Dworkin is not writing at A Million Gods. I have always been sex positive and my work has always provided care and assistance to sex workers.
I don’t see what this has to do with anything. Porn is just porn. A fair few readers are involved in it and don’t consider the sex industry to be bad unless it is forced and there is a clear delineation between voluntary and involuntary sex workers and porn.
In fact? With the Belle Knox issue, Porn’s again demonstrated a better system of care than bog standard blokes.
Feminism is not a monolith …
Oh man. That is funny. That is hilarious. Tell you what. I’m taking that and putting it in a folder. For later.
On this blog conglomeration there exists both me and Taslima Nasrin who are both considered feminists and who both have different ideas. I repeat….
Not a monolith. Hell, I even consider the MRA to not be a monolith. People like Paul Elam are many shades better than people like Roosh.
And just because you own 50 Shades of Grey and enjoy a BDSM doesn’t mean you like being beaten up.
What? How is this relevant to the argument? What the fuck are you talking about?
If you are unaware, the BDSM community has had issues with abuse that boils down to “this lady likes being hit, so I hit her” without going into safety and consent.
Except men are more in control of their lives than women are and the fact that the police can stand up and blame women for being raped in Canada. We are still discussing Birth Control access over decisions made by men. We are still discussing Abortion.
As far as I know, the issue of abortion (I don’t know about birth control) is a matter of mandate. By the masses. In other words, the majority decides. Are you saying that no woman ever have voted against abortion? Are you saying that women have never been the deciding factor on which to outlaw abortion, say in a state in the United States, by orders of magnitude? It’s always been men having their grubby little hands everywhere, always wanting to oppress and subjugate?
Considering how few women are on any abortion debate in the government? Considering how often it’s been men or indeed religious pushes by women who are trying to fit into a patriarchal society. This is something well noticed. That decisions on women’s healthcare are often made by men who have no idea what they are talking about.
And feminists don’t just blame the patriarchy but also other things that cause harm. Many feminists mock “Fashion Magazines” which are primarily run by women. Many feminists fight for pro-Choice against Pro-Life who have a lot of women in the movement. Not everything women do is helpful for women.
No. Shit. Sherlock. But, really? You don’t think it’s a conspiracy by the patriarchy to make women fight amongst themselves? No? You mean they actually have agency of their own, able to make their own decisions and choose of their own volition to disagree with other women without some invisible shadow daddy government watching and influencing their every move? Shut up!
The majority of cutters in Female Genital Mutilation are other women. The Burkha is enforced by other women. Many a time the dowry death of a young Indian lady is due to the mother-in-law.
But understand the thing that helps enforce it are expectations that are included in this. The patriarchy isn’t an organisation that meets on every third weekend to decide how to trample women in our man shoes but includes things like this. These things are not happening a bubble or a vacuum and are in general for the benefit of men.
FGM is done due to an aesthetic issue and to guarantee fidelity. Cosmo’s entire photoshop aesthete is to promote the ideal that men have of women and a huge amount of it is to “drive men wild” and a lot of it is poorly researched and outright bad advice.
You seem to think that women reached equality the day they got the vote and that’s when feminism stopped being relevant. I am afraid you don’t realise that a lot of feminism is dedicated to breaking women out of roles and societal norms that are simply widely accepted so that women have a better chance at opportunity.
And that means condemning women like Sarah Palin whose actions harm women or TERFs such as Kathy Brennan.
And as I said, the Patriarchy isn’t an organisation but a cultural and social pressure for people to conform and behave to certain roles. This can be as radical as Afghanistan or as egalitarian as Finland. And this can change. The idea is to try and reach a more egalitarian society.
However the thing is that in general, women have faced the brunt of the issues and while men face issues, they have the greatest overall rewards and so it is associated with us. The patriarchy exists but not in the straw man way you seem to think.
This is a non-sequitur. Feminism does care about some men’s problems with regards to equality.
That so? I honestly couldn’t tell. So if I were to go places like Jezebel and say I was falsely accused of rape, they would be sympathetic to my cause? Do you think? Maybe not Jezebel. Bad example. They’re a bit too radical. How about Skepchick?
See the funny thing is “I was falsely accused” of rape. TAM 2013 was a strange event for me because I apparently attended it and raped someone while being physically on the other side of the planet. Funny thing? When the accusation was made it was probably done so to poison the well on whatever well poisoning that needed to be done.
And I have had nothing by nice conversations with Rebecca Watson and Heina Dadabhoy. Because here is the thing.
No one profited. The idiot who made that accusation hurt women by making it seem like there are women who make that stupid an accusation. The men didn’t benefit since real faux rape accusations will not be taken as seriously and neither will real rapes.
Yes, if you were genuinely falsely accused of rape they would be sympathetic to your cause. More so than the anti-FTB brigade who have been “rather distasteful”.
Now the MRA demand that we make it harder to bring up rape despite the fact that even today just 30% of rape victims ever seek justice because the rest are simply told that they cannot form a case or are so ashamed that by the time they come forward no case can be made. It’s like suggesting we make it harder to form cases of murder because people fake their deaths.
The MRA does? Interesting
Are you suggesting the Men’s Rights Movement on Reddit and indeed “various websites” didn’t get together to make it harder to report a rape at Occidental College?
The first and fourth point were “Rape Apologetics”. Just saying….
What a fucking stupid thing to say. Good grief.
Perhaps. However slut shaming of rape victims IS a thing even in the USA where we saw the Steubenville rape where “correct me if I am wrong” the lovely MRA got together and decided that the victim was a “helmet bunny” and so deserved to be raped. Where such lovely individuals as Judgy Bitch excused the behaviour of not just the rapists but a town for whom a sport was more important than the victim of crime.
False rape allegations are insanely rare.
False rape allegations are relatively rare. In the UK the Crown Prosecution Service between 2011 to 2012 prosecuted around 5400 rapes and 35 false accusations.
Real rapes getting prosecuted would drop the percentage of false rape accusations even more since people who are going to make false rape allegations are a fixed minority. If the report rate is 33% (for ease of calculations) and 35 rape cases are faked a year in all of the UK out of 5400 then the rate of false allegation is 0.65%. If we double the prosecution rate then the false allegation rate drops to 0.325%. The issue isn’t that false rapes are being reported but that real rapes are not.
If every single case of rape gets to a prosecution in the UK where currently only 30% reach that state then there would be roughly 16000 cases of rape prosecution a year and just 40 (let’s round up) fake cases. 40/16,000 = 0.25%
I repeat, the MRA would like 0.25% of cases that are faked to represent the majority of cases
Or perhaps, if we have a proper report system the number of false allegations will go down because rapes are now properly investigated and so false accusations are more likely to come into the light.
And sure there are knee jerk responses but you know what? Taslima’s attitude to sex workers is harmful to them but that doesn’t mean Taslima is a gender traitor.
Indeed. Walking away from feminism makes you a gender traitor.
Sure maybe in your strange world but in Taslima and indeed the generation of feminists who didn’t get “sex workers” this was the norm. And if your actions promote equality in women you are a feminist in the same way that you are a vegan when you don’t eat animal products.
No, hurting women as a woman gives you that label and frankly not every feminist uses that label.
However me championing women’s rights makes me a beta male mangina.
Some asshole saying you’re a beta male is an indictment of the MRA? And you added the “mangina” because I guess you weren’t victimised enough? Poor dear.
ARGH YOUR SYMPATHY! IT BURNS! IT BURNS!
No. Some MRA think that male feminists are in it for the sex. Again see my above “beta male mangina” link.
Some decor! A qualifier! Let’s see if you can keep that up. Oh, and a double deliberate misquote? You must really be in need of some virtual hugs.
Really? I put up a rather tasteless piece of hate mail to explain why the first person I banned from the blog got banned. I have kept every single ban on here completely transparent and in fact the next person on the list to be banned is Larry Silverman who is the king of cut and paste spam.
In memoriam to that person, I put up his hate mail online for all to see. To run afoul of my lax comment policy is frankly an effort.
I have run into female MRA. There was Renee Hendricks who insisted that the MRA were not bad. That all changed after her site “A Voice for Men” ran articles arguing for men’s rights in India and blaming women for their rapes and hiding a culture of sexual harassment and rape.
Two things: One. Renee Hendricks is not an MRA. That’s your first error. And two, “A Voice for Men” is definitely not her site. Back to subterfuge are we, Avi?
She was doing something for AVfM at the time or whatever. However I was not a fan of her defence of them.
I don’t pretend to understand what’s going on in the minds of MRA who think this way irrespective of their gender. But considering Renee specifically supported a body that was willing to ignore the rapes in India to prop up their idiotic dialogue?
What? You are talking out of your arse.
You mean AVfM didn’t post articles where a man insisted that women in India have it easier despite the horrific stories coming out of India because they had “separate seats on the bus”. Or where GWW wrote a piece claiming women in Afghanistan don’t have it so “bad”.
It must be that weird “I have selective blindness” problem.
I have run into female MRA. There was Renee Hendricks who insisted that the MRA were not bad. That all changed after her site “A Voice for Men” ran articles arguing for men’s rights in India and blaming women for their rapes and hiding a culture of sexual harassment and rape. Then there was Karen from A Voice for Men claiming that women in Afghanistan don’t have it so bad and implied that the Taliban were some sort of Monkey’s Paw or malicious genie that granted Afghan women the wish that they could all stay home and have men do all the work outside. Then there was Judgy Bitch and her lovely slut shaming of a minor.
Oh Right! Links to stuff showing their daft beliefs.
You believe men only think men become feminists because they want to get laid, but also the only reason we tolerate female MRA is because we want to have sex with them.
Doesn’t say anything about ideals and paragons, does it, dickhead?
And you said nothing about the fact I demonstrated repeated and frankly stupid actions by anti-feminists and MRA that include
1. Support of the Indian Rapists (the ones who killed Nirbhaya)
2. Support for the Taliban
3. Support for the harassers and abusers of the Steubenville Rape Victim
And the makers of such arguments are held in high esteem among the MRA. Do you grasp that? Or must I break out the sock puppets?
Judging by the behaviour of MRA? I think women have every right to hate Men’s Rights Activists.
Nope. Couldn’t do it, apparently. Here’s what so absolutely wrong about this statement, Avi. If you remember I said I would tag a comment and use it later and here it is. You said “feminism is not a monolith.” What’s funny about that is, I agree. Feminism is most definitely NOT a monolith. And then you pull this bullshit. If feminism is not a monolith and feminism cannot be criticised in that context, then why should the MRM be smeared in that way? Are you incapable of noticing your own hypocrisy?
Do you even care? I’ve seen many feminists say things like this all the time: The MRA’s are descipable people. The MRA’s believe this and that. (All bad.)
I am sure MRA aren’t a monolith, however their most vocal speakers are in effect not interested in men’s rights but in damaging women’s. In fact in general the face of Men’s Rights is unfortunately the fucking dickheads. Now here is the thing. There are male related “masculine” movements dealing with different issues but you know what?
Most of them are harmed by the MRA hogging the spotlight and pretending to help men when what they think will help is thwarting women. Real issues are ignored and tossed aside.
Let’s look at Reddit’s MRA base.
1. Women Cried Rape 11 times to avoid taking the Bar Exam
2. An argument about the gender wage gap
3. Why must men buy expensive engagement rings
4. Family of teen boy killed after being caught sneaking into girl’s room wants girl charged
5. Male Dominated Societies are not more Violent. Because China!
7. A photo complaining about how the “biological urge to stare at women’s legs” is being curtailed by not stopping girls from wearing shorts but asking boys to not stare
8. About a court case where an abusive father was held but the mother was released. Portrayed as a shocking travesty of justice where the only reason the woman was released on bail was because of her gender. Not because the bloke was already out on bail and so cannot be issued bail a second time for a second offence committed.
9. Male Circumcision (FIN-FUCKING-ALLY)
10. What Feminism hasn’t done for men
So that’s what? 8 to 9 things higher than a genuine male issue. The rest consist of fucking over women or the self congratulatory circle jerk.
Now here is the funny thing. The ABSOLUTE FUNNIEST THING and I know this won’t last because it’s Reddit and it’s a shifting front page.
This is from r/feminism
Point no. 2 is a gender issue aimed at men and women. Where a man isn’t allowed to take time off to see his kid and the woman is being forced to undergo surgery to enable the man’s career even though the man is legally entitled to time off for his family.
The feminists have taken an issue that affects men more seriously than the MRA.
Generalisations based on the actions of a few. If I’m to judge feminism, then should I look to people like Rebecca Watson? Maybe Anita Sarkeesian? How about Suey Park? These people have said and done immensely stupid things. Which means I can say feminists say stupid things and not be wrong, can’t I? I don’t need a qualifier, do I? People should just realise I’m talking about these seperate people and not ALL feminists. Right?
I did ramble on but I did have a point to make.
Rebecca Watson isn’t really bad. Okay you may have realised that I am a more robust breed of activist than the usual but that is because I have to be robust. I am friends with one of Ed Brayton’s friends on the Pathfinder project. He is pretty robust too, but we have to be because of what we do.
Rebecca Watson’s stupidity can be also be seen as courage. She just said what she thought. She didn’t like a strange man hitting on her in an enclosed box. If your entire dating strategy involves approaching women in elevators and asking them for dates then your problem is not Rebecca Watson but your approach. I mean this all boils down to her suggesting that an anonymous man shouldn’t hit on people in elevators and it made her uncomfortable.
Anita Sarkeesian’s big fuck up seems to be the use of copyrighted material and not understanding fair use. (If Anita Reads this? It’s simple. Fair Use is for the purpose of criticism or education purposes and only then some bits unless under the proper CC license. Not for branding). Her videos however are criticisms of plot devices in games and how a mainly male audience has allowed for some pretty shabby treatment of women. If you paid attention to ANYTHING else I do you would know that I play games and that I argue for the thing that affects me which is RACISM in games. And let’s face it. Sexism and Racism and Homophobia are the three pillars on which Internet Abuse and by extension abuse in games is based on. She got a stupid amount of cash due to Internet Harassment but honestly? You want her to debate her critics who really have poor arguments?
Suey Park? Less involved with her. I actually like her ideas but I think she screwed up due to ignoring South Asians. Oh are we discussing the Colbert thing? With an Asian? Oh my no. I know enough to know that Colbert made a joke on Camera with context. The idiot in charge of twitter tweeted the punchline and people read it and went “What the Actual Fuck”. The tweet was racist since it was a racist joke without the context of the point it was trying to make. Secondly? Asians were picked because they would be the group of people LEAST likely to take offence to their racist stereotype. That asians generally don’t fight back against their racism and this has lead to people taking advantage and doing “racist” things. And that we don’t like it. For Fuck Sake, I regularly speak about Pat Condell and his support for UKIP and his statements defending the EDL. One of them is racist the other one is a party of Right Wing Neo-Nazis and mainly hates Asians. And you think we don’t face any “serious” racism? You do realise there were terror attacks targetting mainly Asians last year in the UK resulting in injuries and one death? Suey Park just is the tip of the iceberg of resentment being faced by Asians. Oh and I saw her hate messages. Asian lass speaks up about racism against asians, best threaten to rape her!
Had Colbert used black people and the racist insults aimed at them? I am sure Colbert would be hard pressed to find people to back him up, darling of the American Left or not.
And want to know something? Most feminists are “straight” and “like” men. They think we are cute and sexy. They just wish we stopped harming them. That’s really all there is to it.
Real comedian you are. By the way, have you read the latest statistics on domestic abuse by women?
That the numbers are equal but more women are hurt in more serious ways.
Have you considered telling your MRA friends to stop fucking about complaining about expensive engagement rings and perhaps work towards a more unified response towards domestic violence?
Because your argument yourself boils down to “See how shitty things are for men! That’s why we don’t want women’s lives to get better!” rather than “This is shitty for men, we need some help on this”.
The lists of female privilege is just laughable straw men. For god sake they still complain about the draft. This is a Vietnam War era argument and the MRA are still making it.
And the list of male privilege is a laughable strawman, as it as well derives from a different era. How many times haven’t you heard “How many women have been presidents?” Well, not many, but if I recall there was that one time that was very close. When was that? Oh yeah. In 2008. That is if you don’t include other countries than the US, in which case wowee. I mean, I mustn’t have got the memo where it said that women nowadays are prohibited from becoming presidents. But, of course, it always comes back to what once were, and not what is. Which brings me to the argument about the draft. Feminists (see, I’m doing it again!) contend that we live in a patriarchal society that oppresses and subjugates women, and have lived in such a society for a long time – centuries, milennia, epochs, whatever – but then what about the draft? Men were sent away to die as cannon fodder. Why? To put women in their place? Please. And the draft isn’t gone forever. It’s just suspended. But at least if there’s a war on now, they won’t just exclusively enlist men.
Is that why all your presidents bar one have been White and Male? I mean seriously? 50% should be female and the demographies should be balanced. Instead we can see a distinct gender bias in politics. Now if we paid attention to major gaffes we would see why this is. Do you think highly influential politicians saying things such as “Legitimate Rape doesn’t cause pregnancy” or the “Binders full of Women” statement has ANYTHING to do with an abject lack of women in power to change and tell people that these ideas are stupid? The Democrats are trying but the Republicans just want female mouth pieces.
Indira Gandhi was voted to power in India and was a strong Prime Minister, but she is still one woman among men. Thatcher? I think Bangladesh is the only country which has had two female prime ministers but I may be wrong on that.
The USA has been independent for nearly 200 years more than India and still hasn’t had a single woman hold the highest office in the land. Close doesn’t count mate. The public wanted Obama. Maybe next time. But honestly? The fact Obama and her are “firsts” is a good thing. Maybe from now more young women will go into politics and reach that magic 50:50 ratio. But as of now? She’s heavily outnumbered.
Men were sent to die as cannon fodder because to quote Sun Tzu “Land is the basis of the State”. Because the net state could benefit from more land. Women were not kept away from warfare because men were magnanimous. They were kept away because they were seen as incompetent and fragile and incapable of killing.
Seriously? Listen to me very very carefully.
We had a big huge big war called World War II. The Allies which included the USA, UK and it’s Commonwealth, China, France and Free colonies and the Soviet Union got together to kill Facists from Italy, Germany and Japan among other countries.
In that we had both professional soldiers and draftees. In many cases the reputations of elite units became cemented here solely because they were filled with professional career soldiers and were lead by career soldiers themselves and so performed head and shoulders above conscriptions. This was seen in EVERY theatre. Conventional combat tactics were evolving and while there were incredible acts of heroism. Professional soldiers were more likely to perform “bravely” as a unit.
So we began to change our armies. A modern day Marian Reform! They got smaller, better equipped and trained. We found out that with proper communications, combined arms, training and technology a professional soldier was the equal of dozen conscripts. The key changes were mobility, manoeuvrability and the ability to call on the right tool for the right job.
I am rather sure most nations would fight with that idea in mind rather than bloated armies of poorly coordinated human waves. Quantity is a quality of it’s own, but with the advent of mass area of effect weaponry and strategies such as curtained fire, even traditional human wave armies of places like India, China and Russia are changing their attitude to war and moving to smaller armies of professional soldiers with good technology.
And this is without including the economic cost of taking away your workforce and killing them off in a war and the future effect of a damaged workforce.
What this boils down to?
The Draft is economically disasterous, strategically unsound and not utilised in a modern warfare environment unless the need is pressing such as Israel or there is little to no need and it’s just a formality such as in Singapore.
Also? We had 2 wars and had no Draft.
A lot of feminists are anti-circumcision. Both Female and Male. Now Female genital mutilation is on many scales worse than the male equivalent, but we often see MRA derail conversations about FGM with conversations about men.
Humour punches up. Male circumcision and getting kicked in the crotch is funny for the same reason falling down the stairs is funny. It is because it is someone in power getting hurt by an attack on one of the things that gives him power. While hitting a woman is not funny since women are routinely hit by men and it’s a major problem.
And once again, this is the stupidest, if not the most disgusting, statement you’ve ever written. Fucking hell.
I put up examples of your MRA friends stating that a 16 year old girl deserved to get raped because she fancied football players and you think pointing out that we find crotch attacks on TV funny for the same reason we find the 3 stooges funny is worse?
I put up examples of a rich woman in the USA pandering to MRA expectations by throwing the women of Afghanistan under a bus and you think pointing out that getting crotched is amusing to others for the same reason that someone tripping and falling on dog shit is funny. Because people find physical distress amusing. I mean you laugh at Home Alone but do you ever consider it’s a movie about reckless child endangerment and a near fatal amount of insult heaped upon the two antagonists? Or that it’s possibly a representation of American Imperialism in Vietcong and an allegory of the asymmetric warfare that took place?
I put up an example of MRA blaming the victim of the Delhi Rape for her death. Vile doesn’t hack it mate. The MRA are scum for doing things like that in such an uncritical fashion and have pretty much resigned themselves to be anti-female rather than actively help men.
Have you ever considered that you are over analysing it? We kick men in the crotch on TV because it’s funny. We don’t do that to women because women are beaten every day. I should know, my aunt died due to severe complications of caused by her beatings. Renal failure, it took more than 20 years to kill her but you know what? Getting kicked about like that will do that to you. One hits a bit too close to home.
And here is the thing? Have you seen crotch humour recently? It’s rarer. Slapstick as a comedy form is dying because we fear children will imitate what they see.
Oh and for the record? I encourage people to not get circumcised except in the rarest of conditions where it is necessary. But I know two things.
1. Circumcision has some benefits and whether the benefits justify the risks for surgery we need to find out.
2. Recovery is better in children than adults and conservative surgeries are more likely in kids so it is better to do it young
Now here is the thing. Every time I discuss Female Genital Mutilation, someone comes up and goes “WHAT ABOUT BOYS”. Do you see feminists crashing intactivist forums to demand action for FGM? Nope.
Misandry exists among the more radical feminists but you know what? They are a minority, they are a vocal minority but they rarely are the ones speaking about things. However if we compare the net social effect of misandry versus misogyny then the voice of radfems is not a major voice while many MRA simply parrot things we take for granted.
Oh. Well, I’m glad you’re here, Avi, to assert what constitutes as radical feminism and what doesn’t.
What constitutes as a radical men’s rights activist? Oh, right.
Seems to me that while Radfems have been sidelined, Radical MRA are given front and centre.
No, no one says that. We say that women can be strong, capable and independent. However women don’t grow up in that environment and from a young age are told that they cannot do things.
Yes. Yes, they do. Almost every feminist on the planet has one time or another said or otherwise implied that. In fact, what you just said right there “women don’t grow up in that environment” just proves their point. Only men – I’m sorry, boys – grow up in an environment where they can be strong, capable and independent? Girls never get that? Do you have any evidence to support this conclusion, or are you just pulling information out of your arse again?
A simple example.
Indian girls are not told that maths is not for them. End result? 50% of Engineers are Women. A huge difference compared to the USA and UK.
Want more? Indian women are more likely to stay at home and be housewives. Why? Cultural Expectations. Your culture makes you expect certain things.
Are you seriously arguing something that we know harms men because of one SIMPLE statement?
Real Men Do Not Cry. Do you know how much depression gets hidden by ignoring this stupid fact? How many men suffer under the weight of their expectations? But here is the thing? While our expectations suck we are given a lot more freedom and treated with greater seriousness and capacity than women are.
If you think otherwise then congratufuckinglations, you suck as an MRA since you actually are supporting a world view that harms men SOLELY to fuck over women.
Weird, I thought it was gender traitor and rape apologist. Women who stay at home aren’t rejecting feminism. However we do realise that women are expected to give up careers with greater frequency than men are.
What do you mean ‘expected to’? By whom? The invisible shadow daddy government?
Shadow? I thought I told you! We meet at the Unicorn on every 2nd Satuday. We are planning a pub team soon!
Yes because you grew up thinking “House Husband” is a valid career opportunity for a bloke.
In addition due to the wage gap and difficulty of women to progress men are simply “better” off staying in a job. In addition men are derided for being “househusbands” making them less likely to be at home.
Sounds like it’s a matter of culture. In my country, men (or husbands) staying at home is normal. They’re even encouraged to by the government.
.Which is puzzling since you seem to think everyone else’s culture is like yours. In Saudi Arabia they don’t let women out unless they have a male guardian. Did you know that?
Have you ever considered that feminism rails against culture? And that (I repeat) The patriarchy is just a term used to describe a culture that is anti-female with most of the power and agency is in the hands of men? While there exist a few negative tropes for men, the majority hit women the hardest?
Now here is the thing, if the genders were balanced in how they were treated, there would be no issue with this. But as it stands, women staying at home is a thing mainly because women are expected to do so.
In what era would that be?
This one. Women are still expected to trade careers for childcare more than men are and women still are treated in many parts of the world like second class citizens. To say otherwise is to basically ignore reality in order to push your anti-feminist ethos. Your ideas rely on denying that women have problems and issues caused by culture.
It’s just laughable, if the MRA really wanted to fight for men’s rights they would be pushing for the acceptance of house husbands rather than the denigration of feminists. And that’s basically the MRA in a nutshell.
Irony. I do love me some irony.
I have been exceedingly patient. I have been exceedingly polite considering you levelled personal insults at me.
You don’t really have an argument. You basically just think women have it equal and anyone pointing out inequalities just want to rule over men.