I need feminism/the men's coalition because I am a fucking coward.

[odeon]

According to Wikipedia, Australia has one of the highest rates when it comes to rape:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#UN_Sexual_Violence_against_Children_.26_Rape_Statistics

Compare to countries like Greece, Armenia, hell, even Senegal, and notice the big difference. And these are patriarchical countries we're talking about.

Japan is another patriarchical country and it has an extremely low rate.

You might want to reconsider that:

http://www.japantoday.com/category/lifestyle/view/victims-are-finally-learning-to-speak-out-against-japan%E2%80%99s-outdated-rape-laws

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-612656/Greece-dangerous-place-world-Brit-women.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8318133.stm

Etc.

Do you realise that in Armenia, a woman must still be able to show bloody sheets to prove her virginity in marriage?

Do you suppose there might be other reasons than what you are suggesting for those seemingly low numbers you refer to? For example, could it be that the *mindset* in some countries is still so far back in the fucking middle ages that the crimes are not even being reported even though there are laws in place?

The main problem with taking Wikipedia statistics like that at face value is that while the numbers are as reported, the question is *who* reported them.

[Al Swearegen]

Yet women ( on average), in the same job with the same education do not make the same as men.

Any evidence?

impatient and dense.
 I already provided a link.  You can do your own research.

I have to go to work.  See, instead of crying that life isn't fair, that the women's rights coalition is beating us poor men down, I choose to do something for myself.  Right now I'm going to earn a living.
Also, instead of living in fear that everybody is against the straight white male I embrace others plight for equity. I choose to not live in fear.
It is quite freeing, others should try it.

In the meantime, I am happy to see women earn at the same rate as men.  Have health protections such as abortion rights. Happy to see them free from being the property of men.  These are good things.  I wish them more of it.

I owe you a  for that one. Not wanting to live in fear is 

I think it sounds admirable what he is saying, superficially (he is choosing not to live in fear sounds good, he is going to work, sounds productive) but who are these people he is imagining him contrasting himself against. I don't think anyone in this thread and I this it would be slim pickings in real life in finding people who aren't working and living in fear of women being empowered? Really slim.
Dunno if he could explain and thought you might be able to.

['andersom']

Living in fear is what I see happening more and more. Fear is used by politicians, to find reasons to frisk people without a proper reason, to have security cameras everywhere, to make us tattle tale on neighbours.
Fear is used to make people be overly PC,  not because of what they think is just, but because of fear to be reprimanded.

Refusing to be living in fear is a good thing. I hate the fear culture that seems to be forced on us lately. The cold war ended, a reason to be afraid of enemies we had never seen stopped to exist. Politicians found plenty of new reasons, and are using them in abundance.

[Al Swearegen]

Living in fear is what I see happening more and more. Fear is used by politicians, to find reasons to frisk people without a proper reason, to have security cameras everywhere, to make us tattle tale on neighbours.
Fear is used to make people be overly PC,  not because of what they think is just, but because of fear to be reprimanded.

Refusing to be living in fear is a good thing. I hate the fear culture that seems to be forced on us lately. The cold war ended, a reason to be afraid of enemies we had never seen stopped to exist. Politicians found plenty of new reasons, and are using them in abundance.

In that case, I agree. I think I have written similar viewpoints here about controlling by fear and so on.
But I red McJagger as trying to make some larger point about an undeignated people living in fear of people against the straight white male. I was wonder ebo they were or who he imagined them to be

[Calavera]

Women are not my enemy, though. And I'm certainly not afraid of them nor afraid of them having equal rights.

I never did comprehend what McJagger was saying.

['andersom']

Some of the fears are reasonable fears though.

What if you work in a sector with a huge gap in payment. And it has to be addressed. How will that be done? Will men get paid less, to close the gap? That is a frightening thought. Can you pay your mortgage, if that happens, can you pay for the school costs of your daughter? Reasonable fear, for a man working in that sector. Or will women get paid more? How will the company make up for that? Do they have resources for that, or will there be people who get sacked? Is my job still safe? Reasonable fear, both for men and women.

It was a reasonable fear of having too many families without an income out of work that made the Dutch government decide that women in service of the government were to be sacked the moment they got married. Unemployment was a big issue in the thirties of last century. It was a reasonable fear of unemployment skyrocketing in the seventies that made controlling doctors file away a higher percentage of married women than men as disabled. Very reasonable, very understandable, not just though.

[McGiver]

Living in fear is what I see happening more and more. Fear is used by politicians, to find reasons to frisk people without a proper reason, to have security cameras everywhere, to make us tattle tale on neighbours.
Fear is used to make people be overly PC,  not because of what they think is just, but because of fear to be reprimanded.

Refusing to be living in fear is a good thing. I hate the fear culture that seems to be forced on us lately. The cold war ended, a reason to be afraid of enemies we had never seen stopped to exist. Politicians found plenty of new reasons, and are using them in abundance.

In that case, I agree. I think I have written similar viewpoints here about controlling by fear and so on.
But I red McJagger as trying to make some larger point about an undeignated people living in fear of people against the straight white male. I was wonder ebo they were or who he imagined them to be

that is true.  It all ties together. I believe that males are born with advantages over females....regardless of law.  It is society, religion, strength, etc.
Men are afraid that they are losing that birthright.  In this case to the feminist movement.  In other cases because rights of gays are being addressed.  Civil rights for people of color are moving  in the right direction.
We all know that for every action there is an equal or opposite reaction.  When others move forward what happens to male (straight and white in the western world) privilege?

[McGiver]

Women are not my enemy, though. And I'm certainly not afraid of them nor afraid of them having equal rights.

I never did comprehend what McJagger was saying.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.  Each time you made a statement that proved you didn't even bother to read the statistic portion of the links I provided I simply had to shake my head.
I wondered, what's the point?  This bloke has already made up his mind.

That's where I am confused.  I'm not interested in winning a debate ( we aren't in the courtroom). I'm interested in all perspectives.  Perhaps learning something new.

[McGiver]

So help me learn

Seems like some of the younger males, from America, are expressing rage at the continued
feminist movement

Calavera and al are both from Australia? Right?

I wonder, does religion play a large role in how your country governs itself?

['andersom']

Australia does have alimony rules that, combined with the default mother custody after a divorce till 2006 made/makes it very easy for ex-wives to troll their exes till the youngsters have become adults. Have never heard of another country having a system like Australia has. It started to protect the vulnerable children from disappearing dads not paying. Protecting the state from having to take over that care. It seems to be a great system to aggravate your ex though, if your ex is the one who has to pay.

It is the state that collects alimony, and, apparently if you pay too much, it will not be seen as a payment in advance, the state will enjoy what you paid too much.

When it is about exes, things should be as clean as possible, lots of divorces end in mutual aggravation and bullying as much as possible. In Australia the alimony law has enough mazes to make ex-aggravation towards the paying ex a ball.

[Al Swearegen]

Calvera, I certainly had not read that in what you were saying.
One of my biggest issues in such discussions is things sliding into the discussion that are attaching themselves unneedlessly and without merit., I also dislike good intended ignorance allowing others with a fixed agenda to have fun. I am not speaking in respect to this debate here but larger reaching discussions in the world.
Not making much sense?

Here is one example - Autism Speaks. Was inseparable really from the Generation Rescue crowd. "Autism is caused from vaccines". They promoted it for an agenda and through fear and attached a lot of repulsive thoughts on Autism. A lot of people were suckered into their bullshit and high paying government agencies and philanthropic organisations and celebrities. The people not suckered into this bullshit that spoke out were derailed into a "you are so uncaring". (Funny how they drop this postion and look for new versions of Autism debate to promote now, and count still on people's ignorance and generosity. When questioned - "you are so uncaring")

Think on how the debates around gender equality and equal rights for women can get similarly confused. People wanting to push one agenda and happy to interject clever use of words and meanings or throwing out unsupported or poorly supported claims as fact or even use skewed statistics...then suddenly for all best intentions have bad agendas for bad ends riding on their merit.

Whether the gender equality debate here is an example of this, I don't know.
BUT I am highly suspicious when such things as rape are thrown into arguments about gender equality and women's rights. Great point if you are talking about things on a world scale but not if you are talking about women's rights in Western Countries where women are protected by enforced law. It means that if we are talking about protecting women and establishing equivalent rights in parts of the world they do not exist, great. If it is used to try to promote that because it still happens in Western countries with established and enforced laws that it is a mark of a need for further efforts in women's rights then it is a poor claim and is riding on the back of a lamentable historic position no longer pertinent, and of countries where women are undervalued.
I do have a problem when such arguments are questioned and the response is "you just fear women", "you are just being patriarchal" or worse.

I am sure. Positively that there are many aspects of difference between men and women that need attention and can be better examined or  readjusted. Hell, culturally I think that supermodel skinny is possibly one of the bigger problems and the slut/stud ideological difference and a lot more that are very damaging and clearly favouring the men in society and are certainly control devices.

It is a harder thing to tackle than rape because rape is so objectionable. Rape is something that disgusts most people and is primarily directed at women, is a method of dominance and power, and is present now in Western societies and was before the women's rights movement.

In my theory, things like rape and pay differences according to gender are both NOT real issues in the talk of gender equality in the Western world. That is not me saying that they are not important issues in their own right but they are protected and so long as they are strictly enforced and enforceable then we can not stop people breaking laws just arrested them when we find them doing wrong and punishing them as a deterrent for them and society. They are not part of a women's right in such societies and ought not be a part of it. I think that some feminists go much further than using non-issues like this but will also do the anti-male thing to ridiculous PC level that are meritless. My theory simply is, they do not want to fight the battles against cultural adherence to such things as the supermodel/fashion industry/dieting industries and such....too hard. They do not care so much about the women in poorer countries as that fight is insurmountable. Their rights in respect to the levels they as women enjoy now are akin to men's. What do they have that they can rally against? The fights they ought to be fighting they are not and the ones they are rallying against have been won. So they muddy the discourse.

Just like Autism Speaks does and did and will continue to do. Re-establishing various positions that are worthless but such a good stream of revenue. Keeping the loudmouth in comfortable existence.

[Al Swearegen]

So help me learn

Seems like some of the younger males, from America, are expressing rage at the continued
feminist movement

Calavera and al are both from Australia? Right?

I wonder, does religion play a large role in how your country governs itself?

Religion is not a big thing here. Our prime Minister is an Atheist. No one really gives a shit she is (in fact everyone gave her big ups for admitting it).

As stated above, I think what both me and Calavera are saying is that Feminism is good and women's rights are important. Women are and should be considered equal to men. There are countries not so enlightened in gender equality and women's rights and pointing out this lacking is fair. Trying to make a case for that in Western countries like Australia is probably not that relevant, this goes double for introducing the fact that rape still exists in Australia or that gender differences exist in pay (though with this I think that stats would be dodgy). If the law protects both, it is enforceable, it is enforced and there is no cultural bias against it....what further improvements to be made. (No the "well they are heading in the right direction but they still have a way to go". If there is no more to be done they have no way left to go. Game over. Next issue) It is the same as chauvinism or misogyny. If or when it exists then yes it is not a culturally supported position but a personal position. 

There are definitely some ongoing battles Feminists are fighting and the more enlightened in society that are worthy and worth discussing. There are some social aspects like the ones I mentioned which should be tackled hard. Rape and Gender discrimination in matters like pay that are protected by law....not so much.

[Dexter Morgan]

If I were a business owner, I'd have an all female staff and pay them 80 percent of the male wage.  I'll be able to crush the competition by utilizing my vastly superior profit margins.

[McGiver]

So help me learn

Seems like some of the younger males, from America, are expressing rage at the continued
feminist movement

Calavera and al are both from Australia? Right?

I wonder, does religion play a large role in how your country governs itself?

Religion is not a big thing here. Our prime Minister is an Atheist. No one really gives a shit she is (in fact everyone gave her big ups for admitting it).

As stated above, I think what both me and Calavera are saying is that Feminism is good and women's rights are important. Women are and should be considered equal to men. There are countries not so enlightened in gender equality and women's rights and pointing out this lacking is fair. Trying to make a case for that in Western countries like Australia is probably not that relevant, this goes double for introducing the fact that rape still exists in Australia or that gender differences exist in pay (though with this I think that stats would be dodgy). If the law protects both, it is enforceable, it is enforced and there is no cultural bias against it....what further improvements to be made. (No the "well they are heading in the right direction but they still have a way to go". If there is no more to be done they have no way left to go. Game over. Next issue) It is the same as chauvinism or misogyny. If or when it exists then yes it is not a culturally supported position but a personal position. 

There are definitely some ongoing battles Feminists are fighting and the more enlightened in society that are worthy and worth discussing. There are some social aspects like the ones I mentioned which should be tackled hard. Rape and Gender discrimination in matters like pay that are protected by law....not so much.

That would be a dream come true.  I think in America a paedophile has a much better chance at being elected to a government position than an atheist....it's that bad.

I do believe that the root of all discrimination, especially of women, has to do with religious influence in society. 
I am now better able to understand the Aussie view of equality by law.  In a religious influenced society, laws are written but not properly enforced. 

[Calavera]

So help me learn

Seems like some of the younger males, from America, are expressing rage at the continued
feminist movement

Calavera and al are both from Australia? Right?

I wonder, does religion play a large role in how your country governs itself?

Religion is not a big thing here. Our prime Minister is an Atheist. No one really gives a shit she is (in fact everyone gave her big ups for admitting it).

As stated above, I think what both me and Calavera are saying is that Feminism is good and women's rights are important. Women are and should be considered equal to men. There are countries not so enlightened in gender equality and women's rights and pointing out this lacking is fair. Trying to make a case for that in Western countries like Australia is probably not that relevant, this goes double for introducing the fact that rape still exists in Australia or that gender differences exist in pay (though with this I think that stats would be dodgy). If the law protects both, it is enforceable, it is enforced and there is no cultural bias against it....what further improvements to be made. (No the "well they are heading in the right direction but they still have a way to go". If there is no more to be done they have no way left to go. Game over. Next issue) It is the same as chauvinism or misogyny. If or when it exists then yes it is not a culturally supported position but a personal position. 

There are definitely some ongoing battles Feminists are fighting and the more enlightened in society that are worthy and worth discussing. There are some social aspects like the ones I mentioned which should be tackled hard. Rape and Gender discrimination in matters like pay that are protected by law....not so much.

I agree with your overall view here. Now if there are battles that feminists still have to fight because the state is still not recognizing their rights in some aspects that are granted to men by default, that is fine. I don't have a problem in such a regard especially since we're no longer living in a world where traditional gender roles are embraced (at least not as much as before) and independence is the expected norm for men AND women. You have a daughter, and I have a sister (and if things go well in the future, possibly a future wife), and if any of them are to live happy independent lives, they would not just require protection but also all the privileges they need. My sister's rights would certainly benefit me (and she could help me and my brothers with certain financial issues currently going on in the family), so I have nothing to fear from women being equal and a lot to gain from them.

My personal beef with modern feminism as is commonly expressed in the Western world is not the goals they're after (regardless of whether or not they've already been achieved) but the approach they take in reaching those goals. There is what I consider a poisonous attitude among many feminists in which they consider men to be part of the problem and need to compensate for the problems that men themselves have caused women, even though many men go out of their way to support them and many systems provide services and opportunities and bonuses and scholarships for women only to boost their economic/financial statuses and further their education and such.

Also, there is some lack of critical thinking in some of the reasoning they embrace, along with assumptions that don't match up with reality well. I assume the statistics are accurate enough (concerning gender pay), but many feminists tend to assert that the unknown factors behind, say, 40% of the difference is definitely gender discrimination and such when they are just assumptions and the unknown is considered unknown for a reason. Not to mention the rape issues and abortion laws and so on (neither rape nor issues with abortion is something that is solved by blaming the patriarchical system and doing away with it).

And no, I couldn't care less if the patriarchy system eventually goes away, but I just hope that I would never be disadvantaged later on because of whatever system would replace it nor have freedom of speech taken away from me just so I may respect the wishes of radical feminists who despise any criticism of feminism. I already have experienced enough condemnation from feminists just for disagreeing with some of their points (arguing I'm a misogynist or bigot or whatever). If the system is going to be like that in the future (if it ever happens), I will not embrace it and I'm sure many other men wouldn't either.