Discrimination against Men

[The Plant]

Like many men I once believed that women were fundamentally disadvantaged in American society. I of course thought these injustices should be corrected as quickly as possible. I have recently come to think that men too face serious problems in western society. Most of these opinions were formed from my own personal experiences however I have since read a lot of articles/books on the subject. Anyway these are some things I think are unfair. (note I linked to some articles throughout the post)

Men are drafted, women are not

Men are expected to pay on dates

Men are expected to “protect” women often to their detriment (i.e. save the women and children first on a sinking ship)

Men are presented terribly in our popular culture (“Boys are stupid throw rocks at them” – Men appear stupid and loutish on television sitcoms) (http://open.salon.com/blog/jodi_kasten/2009/05/27/equal_rights_for_men)

Men are heavily discouraged from adopted feminine manners and dress wear as women are not discouraged from the converse. Men more or less cannot wear skirts/dresses/make-up and expect to live a normal life. Men are considered “pussies” if they are emotional. I think this is rather unfair and that men’s lack of clothing choices reflects a lack of expression in other areas.
(http://www.nationalcenterformen.org/page20.shtml)

Men really have few reproductive rights. This one hits home for me. Me and my girlfriend are having sex. I do not want children. However if she got pregnant I would have no recourse to pay child support if she went to term with the child. She has more choices. She alone decides whether to put the child up for adoption or to abort and I have no say. Since we are not married I would have rather unequal rights to see my son/daughter.

I disagree about many women’s inequalities in the workplace. I have never personally heard anyone, in my entire life, openly discuss discrimination against women. In no organization I have been a part of have women had any trouble being elected to office. I agree the “wage gap” statistic is compilled unfairly. It merely compares the AVG wage of full time working men to full time working women. It makes no allowances for education or extra hours at the job nor seniority. I think, for better or worse, women make different lifestyle choices then men and this affects their salary. Article going in more depth:
http://www.swifteconomics.com/2009/09/21/lies-damned-lies-and-statistics-the-wage-gap/ )

Divorce courts are extremely unfair to men. I do not see why if both parents are competent and willing that custody is not presumed to be a straight 50/50 split between each parent. However the current going rate is the father gets every other holiday and every other weekend. I think this is horrible and the risk of losing my kids like that is too great for me to currently entertain the idea of having children. Also child support and alimony can get out of hand. Men have been put in jail for being unable to pay. Support is based on “inputted income” which is what the court thinks you could make. Many cases show women getting very large divorce settlements after short, child-less marriages.
(http://www.ukmm.org.uk/issues/dar-by-sb.htm)

(http://www.glennsacks.com/fathers_bear_the.htm)

((http://www.ukmm.org.uk/issues/lawtest.htm)

We’ve all heard that women should be believed if they claim to have been raped or sexually harassed. I think this goes against the central notion of our legal system. Everyone, no matter what they are accused of, should be presumed innocent. In addition women almost certainly do make false accusation since it can easily work in there favor during a dispute or divorce preceding. The penalties for falsely accusing someone are low so it would seem like it would be abused. This video explains why many rape accusations must be unfounded. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RliMu2JxVr0&feature=player_embedded )

Finally I don’t like a lot of feminist scholarship. I have bought and read many well regarded texts (Women: A Feminist Perspective, Paradoxes of gender, etc) and found they appeal very strongly to emotion not reason. Obviously women have experiences they need to let out but I don’t think laws should be based on feelings. This is a great article by Christina Hoff summers on her experiences with Feminist scholarship. (http://chronicle.com/article/Persistent-Myths-in-Feminis/46965/)

In conclusion women have the right to be treated the same as men but men also have the right o be treated the same as women. In mathematics the only too things that are equal are things that are exactly the same. Obviously men and women aren’t the same (though I think in all important ways they are) but legally no distinctions should be made. Feminism has been a great force for good in our world and in many countries much still needs to be done but I think in some ways its gone too far.

Generally good page - http://www.ukmm.org.uk/
Decent page - http://www.themenscenter.com/National/national10.htm
Great site in general ( http://www.nationalcenterformen.org/index.shtml )

edit:
When I said being sent to jail for rape is just as bad as being raped I meant being sent to jail for aa rape you didn't commit. It was a mistake to not make that very clear.

 

[tape]

I do agree on most/a bit of those, especially stuff like "protecting" women. Same for paying stuff for them. I only do that to women I REALLY care for, i.e. actual "GOOD"(?) friends, and even then I'm looked down upon all the other fucking women.

This is the ol' siding-with-the-weak technique.

Reserving post for akuchi.

edit: I've also noticed that all women want "equal rights"; read: not having to be left alone taking care of people, being able to go out equally, having equal voice (I'm 100% fine with this), but they want their old treaties there, too, like paying for their stuff, etc. (0% agreed with)

For clearing up, no I'm not a machist(does that work even exist), and I defend women's right, but I want EQUAL rights, not I-want-this-but-not-that rights.

 

[Hipmonlee]

You can take any characteristic any person has and find people will be discriminated against for that.

Too ugly? People wont like you. Too pretty? People will assume you are shallow/stupid.

The only thing you have mentioned that is even worth discussing is the divorce courts issue (and maybe the drafting issue but I have never even heard of that before).

Have a nice day.

 

[cim]

This is going to be fun.

First I'd like to say that it's not a "one or the other" spectrum or slider of discrimination. Men cna be discriminated against at the same time as women, and it's ass backwards to go "but only men are drafted so women aren't discriminated against and I shouldn't bother with their injustices".

Men are drafted, women are not

This is kind of bullshit, but the reason this isn't corrected isn't because of male discrimination, but rather touching draft laws equals losing re-election.

Men are expected to pay on dates

Go on dates with better women. Every feminist I've ever dated more than once we've gone both ways on paying. Seriously, how old fashioned is that?

Men are expected to “protect” women often to their detriment (i.e. save the women and children first on a sinking ship)

The idea is to save less able bodied people before yourself because they can't save themselves. I agree that the phrase is out of date and should be replaced with "able bodied help the weak", but if you really think this is a form of discrimination you're kind of delusional.

Men are presented terribly in our popular culture (“Boys are stupid throw rocks at them” – Men appear stupid and loutish on television sitcoms)

"Who isn't?" is the first thing I've thought of in response. Honestly, there's about as much stereotyping for everyone, and it's all pretty bad. But there are plenty of instances in pop culture of men being portrayed in positive lights, and it's not like people go "hey that character is a man so let's make him dumb" except in the most infantile of programming.

Men are heavily discouraged from adopted feminine manners and dress wear

...by other men

Men are considered “pussies” if they are emotional.

...by (asshole) men.

I think this is rather unfair and that men’s lack of clothing choices reflects a lack of expression in other areas.

HOW? What? That's a stretch.

Men really have few reproductive rights. This one hits home for me. Me and my girlfriend are having sex. I do not want children. However if she got pregnant I would have no recourse to pay child support if she went to term with the child.

You have plenty of choices.
1. Use birth control (as in a condom)
2. Don't have sex with someone who wants children. You don't have to fuck them.

It's not like her getting pregnant is something you have no say in. You can wear a condom and / or refuse to fuck someone without birth control. And as parents (not as men) you should both be responsible for the kid.

She has more choices.

She has the same number of choices (pre conception).
1. Use birth control (as in the pill)
2. Don't have sex with someone who wants / doesn't want children. You don't have to fuck them.

She alone decides whether to put the child up for adoption or to abort and I have no say.

Why should you dictate what she does to her body again? Does she have a right to order you to castrate yourself?

Since we are not married I would have rather unequal rights to see my son/daughter.

Uh, no? Joint custody?

I have never personally heard anyone, in my entire life, openly discuss discrimination against women. In no organization I have been a part of have women had any trouble being elected to office.

Must not be an engineer then.


Let's take a puse here. You've let the rage of some things that are unfair to men, in your mind, drive you to attack things that make life unfair to women with the same passion. Why are you connecting them now ?

Divorce courts are extremely unfair to men. I do not see why if both parents are competent and willing that custody is not presumed to be a straight 50/50 split between each parent. However the current going rate is the father gets every other holiday and every other weekend.

Probably your only really valid point here.

Men have been put in jail for being unable to pay. Support is based on “inputted income” which is what the court thinks you could make.

Why do you want the right to not support your child again? It's not like you had it against your will.

Many cases show women getting very large divorce settlements after short, child-less marriages.

Huh what? This is a random point here.

We’ve all heard that women should be believed if they claim to have been raped or sexually harassed.

No one is saying we should believe EVERY claim of rape. It's just much better than the old way of saying "fuck you, you weren't raped, how dare you say that." I can see that there are sick people that claim rape who weren't. But there is a happy medium here, and it's dangerous to backpedal too far on this issue, considering how traumatic and terrifying it is to claim rape.

In addition women almost certainly do make false accusation since it can easily work in there favor during a dispute or divorce preceding. The penalties for falsely accusing someone are low so it would seem like it would be abused.

Yes, there are sick women who do this. But it's not enough to backpedal our whole mentality of rape. If someone witnessed a murder and claimed they were attacked by the murderer and got away... we are supposed to automatically assume they're innocent? (Unless you're on a jury, in which case you reserve judgement for the duration of a trial)

Finally I don’t like a lot of feminist scholarship.

I hate ultra-feminism. I like feminism. Don't mix them up.

Obviously women have experiences they need to let out but I don’t think laws should be based on feelings.

That's possibly the most sexist thing I've read in months. Women think with feelings, huh.

In conclusion women have the right to be treated the same as men but men also have the right o be treated the same as women. In mathematics the only too things that are equal are things that are exactly the same. Obviously men and women aren’t the same (though I think in all important ways they are) but legally no distinctions should be made.

And you were doing so well with that "men and women aren't exactly the same" thing. Women and men should both be treated fairly, but this doesn't necessarily mean you can use the same rules for both. Equality is ideal, though.

 

[Objection]

About the rape thing, what usually happens if the man gets raped?

About the false accusation thing, surely if an accusation is made, it has to be backed up doesn't it? If not, how does anyone know that the accuser is not just making shit up?

Actually, one point I want to make about the OP is that there is very little in the way of actual comparison. It's just a series of seemingly random points with no connection whatsoever.

 

[cookie]

You have plenty of choices.
1. Use birth control (as in a condom)
2. Don't have sex with someone who wants children. You don't have to fuck them.

It's not like her getting pregnant is something you have no say in. You can wear a condom and / or refuse to fuck someone without birth control. And as parents (not as men) you should both be responsible for the kid.

accidents happen. condoms break. the point is that potentially the man gets coerced into supporting a baby that not only had no say in keeping but also in spite of taking reasonable measures to avoid this in the first place.

 

[Altmer]

should a condom break theres always morning after pill :(

 

[cookie]

should a condom break theres always morning after pill :(

which is the choice of the woman to take, and ultimately the man can't do anything about it if she doesn't take it.

 

[Force Majeure]

I'm mostly annoyed that women get preferential treatment for college admissions even though women outnumber men in colleges by quite a bit. That's pretty much it, though.

 

[cantab]

We’ve all heard that women should be believed if they claim to have been raped or sexually harassed. I think this goes against the central notion of our legal system. Everyone, no matter what they are accused of, should be presumed innocent.

Rape is a difficult crime to prosecute, because there are almost never any witnesses. Unless the victim reports the crime quickly enough for forensic evidence to be obtained, the case ends up being one person's word against another. This problem also applies in cases where there is no doubt sex took place, but the dispute is whether or not it was consensual. And one person's word can never be reason to lock a person up for years.

This also hits a related matter that has concerned me for some time. I believe people accused of sexual offences should not have their identities made public. The reason is that with the media circus that nowadays surrounds paedophilia cases in particular, even if the courts find the accused innocent, their lives have already been ruined and the public view will forever remain that they are guilty. Reconciling the idea of concealing the identity of the accused with the principle that the judicial system should be open is of course difficult, but not unsurmountable.

I'm mostly annoyed that women get preferential treatment for college admissions even though women outnumber men in colleges by quite a bit. That's pretty much it, though.

I think in the UK it's generally the case that men are more numerous. The University of Cambridge has a slight male majority overall, despite the existence of three colleges that only admit women. (These colleges are rarely complained about, whereas you can bet there would be an outcry if an all-male college were to open.) Given that there is also a slight majority of male APPLICATIONS, the acceptance rates are within 1% of each other. (Of course, the University of Cambridge is hardly representative of UK universities)

 

[Hipmonlee]

Actually I'd kinda like to talk about name suppression because with the internet it just doesnt really work, but that's probably better for another thread..

Have a nice day.

 

[16.5th Dimension]

Chrisisme raised just about every point I had to raise and then some.

And about girls getting pregnant: Honestly, if you're willing to have sex with them, no matter what precautions you take, you ought to be, to a certain extent, prepared for the consequences.

Yes condoms are reasonable precautions, but no sex at all is also precaution, a more ensured one. Now, I also get that this argument can lead to a no sex until marriage/ready for kids argument, which I also disagree with. You shouldn't be having sex willy nilly, but I'm also against complete abstinence. There are some people who exercise caution and MODERATION with sex, and if they get someone pregnant, it can be unfortunate. In that respect life isn't always going to be fair. But life isn't always fair. And throwing it all on the woman wouldn't necessarily be fair either.

It's obviously the female's decision on whether or not she should keep the baby, and that decision should by and large be a moral one, not a financial one, hence child support to divide the expenses.

 

[Force Majeure]

I think in the UK it's generally the case that men are more numerous. The University of Cambridge has a slight male majority overall, despite the existence of three colleges that only admit women. (These colleges are rarely complained about, whereas you can bet there would be an outcry if an all-male college were to open.) Given that there is also a slight majority of male APPLICATIONS, the acceptance rates are within 1% of each other. (Of course, the University of Cambridge is hardly representative of UK universities)

Stateside, universities are an estrogen party.

 

[cantab]

It's obviously the female's decision on whether or not she should keep the baby, and that decision should by and large be a moral one, not a financial one, hence child support to divide the expenses.

Child support is not necessary if the couple raise the child together. If the father is willing to continue the relationship, but the mother is not, and there is no domestic violence or other danger the father poses to the mother, does the mother have the right to demand child support from the father? (This is an actual question not a rhetorical one; I am not sure what my answer is.)

 

[ivar]

I actually read one of the articles concerning a "paradigm" feminist text where a popular statistic is falsely propagated. Apparently 20%-25% of emergency room injuries pertaining to women concern domestic abuse, when the actual statistic is closer to 0.01% (after the author asked the hospital statistics board or something of that nature).

I agree with the point that it is the goal of 21st century feminism to provide basic rights to women in developing nations, rather than concentrating on cynical and often false views of the unfair treatment of women in developed nations (US and UK). The sad thing is that if you try and point out the gross error in much of feminist "theory" (took a woman's studies course and there isn't much theory tbh--just every stereotype you can think of about how women are always oppressed and men have it all) you get called an intolerant bigot, despite however reasonable your argument may be.

Now I'm not saying that things are all peachy and perfect for women, even in developed nations, but it's not all peachy for men either--double standards are cross-cutting and I like to think of the respective genders each having their own advatanges and disadvantages. It's when we those disadvantages are in the form of socially acceptable domestic abuse and rape that we have a serious issue.

Anything that gives unfair rights and privileges to a particular group can also be discredited, such as unequal pay (though I am skeptical of that statistic too, as well). Which is why things like affirmative action are so ass backwards, and is especially lol-worthy when it pertains to something objective like the sciences. You can't "take revenge" for a history of being at a disadvantage, otherwise we will continually be stuck in a power-play and make zero progress.

The really scary part is... what can I trust? I can't trust academics and statisticians, apparently. Can I even trust the article I read? I mean, it was written by a women, so I doubt she has any agenda beyond the truth. Am I ever really being educated, or am I just being indoctrinated by myths? It could be that my entire worldview is based on lies and that to me is a shitty thought. That's why I never watch/read the news because you never know what's bullshit. Life sucks.

 

[16.5th Dimension]

Child support is not necessary if the couple raise the child together. If the father is willing to continue the relationship, but the mother is not, and there is no domestic violence or other danger the father poses to the mother, does the mother have the right to demand child support from the father? (This is an actual question not a rhetorical one; I am not sure what my answer is.)

It could be something I'm missing, but if they were together, wouldn't the father be paying for child expenses anyway?

Yes, I think he should pay, under most circumstances. It might not be entirely fair, but I would guess that it's also not fair for a woman to be forced to stay with someone they don't love just so they don't receive the entire financial burden of the child.

Now, I'm going to be honest and say I don't know how potentially unreasonably large child support might be, but I believe 50-50 of actual child expenses would be very much fair.

The purpose of these child support laws seems to be to allow women to make these decisions based on their moral beliefs instead of off their financial needs. Now, I know law doesn't often grace us with this sort of thing, but it wouldn't be right for someone to go against their beliefs just because they can't quite pay for it alone.

That can lead to "Why doesn't the govt pay?" The government shouldn't spew money at every problem to fix it, and I guess they think making the father pay is a reasonable source of child support. I might say that child support might be a better of some of govt money as opposed to some other things, but that's kind of a different subject.

 

[Altmer]

which is the choice of the woman to take, and ultimately the man can't do anything about it if she doesn't take it.

i'm assuming the girl is sane and if the girl isn't sane enough to realise this then i won't be dating her

 

[mingot]

Now, I'm going to be honest and say I don't know how potentially unreasonably large child support might be, but I believe 50-50 of actual child expenses would be very much fair.

Where I live it can be up to 21% of gross (that means before taxes) of income. And this does not absolve you from paying the taxes on the money yourself. It really has nothing to do with the actual expenses of raising a child and everything to do with the income disparity between the mother and father.

 

[16.5th Dimension]

Where I live it can be up to 21% of gross (that means before taxes) of income. And this does not absolve you from paying the taxes on the money yourself. It really has nothing to do with the actual expenses of raising a child and everything to do with the income disparity between the mother and father.

Now I'm going to go out on a limb and say that that's rather dumb. It's not like mother and father would be working the same job.

I still stand behind the existence of child support, but it's implementation is quite potentially unfair.

My opinion on the overall matter still stands, that men aren't being particularly discriminated against.

 

[Deck Knight]

Perhaps you've heard this phrase before:

"Chivalry is dead, and women killed it."

My workplace is the complete reverse of the engineering standard. It's a small office and relatively young business, but I believe I am the only male employee who has ever worked there as an actual medical biller. I hear enough comments about "men" regularly to irritate me, but its supposedly tongue-in-cheek.

I believe it comes mostly from a society polarized by an extreme feminism that pits men against women with the following axiom: Men and women are equal, but women are better people.

Sure, maybe the feminist will buy you dinner, but at the cost of giving you a lecture and talking down to you like you're a neanderthal. Me, I'm old fashioned. If I am taking a woman out I will pay, because it is the right and proper thing for a gentleman to do. Period. Fuck you women's lib.

I will also hold open doors for you if your arms are full, no matter how busy your tongue becomes in the process. And for the elderly. And everything else the impolite, ill-mannered reprobates somehow have not managed to learn from their parents.

I don't believe there is institutional discrimination against men with the sole exception of family court. If you have a penis, you will lose custody, have 50% of your pay garnished, and be told not to defend yourself lest the court officer file a restraining order on you for contempt of court, intimidation, or some other trumped up charge.

Also you have all missed an important date on your Calendar folks: Equal Death Day (the day female work-related deaths catch up to male work-related deaths of the previous year) was November 25th. [Males constitute 90% of all work-related deaths].

 

[MrIndigo]

Statistical studies are misrepresented by the media and lobby groups frequently. The hard statistics show that it is actually quite uncommon for a woman to be paid less for the same position; what is common is that there are less women in high-paying roles.

The divorce courts are a problem, but in regards to alimony, misrepresentations in popular media like Two and a Half Men make this problem seem worse than it is (at least in this country). The capacity for child support is assessed against current employment, and is updated, and also takes into account asset and secondary income of both parties.

There is a bit of a problem when parties take proper measures to prevent pregnancy, but one comes accidentally; I feel that in cases like this, the woman should have the choice to keep or lose the child, but the other party is not responsible for the upbringing, financially or otherwise. Of course, you can't have visitation/custody rights if you don't want to pay the child support.


False allegations of rape are actually less common than other false criminal allegations. The actual allegation rate that turns out to be false is around 5%. However, rape is statistically the most underreported crime, meaning that the ratio of false to real cases is actually smaller than that. The problem with rape prosecution is not usually proving the intercourse, but proving the lack of consent, and ingrained social discriminations against women make this even harder, but it's a lengthy issue and I don't want to post the 5-page explanation of it.


The drafting (or in fact, military service in general) isn't really discrimination against men specifically; I know women who would like to serve in the armed forces, but are prevented from frontline roles due to the traditions (and the excuse that it distracts the men).


In general, I don't agree with reverse-discrimination measures or suchlike, because it causes more problems than it solves; for instance, the union at my university implemented a policy that demanded that one member of the union board MUST be female. Only three females ran (and they were on subset tickets, so basically the two major parties got two bites at the board), and two of them were disqualified for administrative purposes, meaning that the remaining member got automatically elected without any voting.

Similarly, positive discrimination practices in workplaces sow discontent among other members, they are just a terrible idea in general. Creating incentives for women to be promoted is one thing, but forcing them is another.

 

[Polis4rule]

I personally fail to see how women easily obtain scholarships when going into engineering, but males do not receive the same financial offering when going into nursing

 

[MrIndigo]

I personally fail to see how women easily obtain scholarships when going into engineering, but males do not receive the same financial offering when going into nursing

In my country, they do. Or did. Also for early childhood education. Now nursing is on the priority list, so everyone gets them.

 

[cantab]

the union at my university implemented a policy that demanded that one member of the union board MUST be female.

CUSU (Cambridge University Students Union), along with most of the college JCR committees (Cambridge has a federal structure, with 31 independent colleges making up the University), have something that is de facto the same, in that there are positions of Women's Officer, which only women (defined by 'self-identification') can vote for. I don't know if there is any de jure prohibition on a Women's Officer being a man, but it's very unlikely to happen anyway. There is no equivalent Men's Officer position; maybe there should be.

Similarly, positive discrimination practices in workplaces sow discontent among other members, they are just a terrible idea in general. Creating incentives for women to be promoted is one thing, but forcing them is another.

I hold by the old adage - there's nothing positive about discrimination. Demographic disparities in acceptance/promotion/whatever rates certainly need investigating and resolving, but quotas and favouritism are not the answer. And numbers of people in positions means nothing without also knowing numbers who apply.

 

[CaptKirby]

The OP acts as if it is not mostly males' fault that these policies/ideas became so excessively rampant and unshakable. The fault lies with men, the ones who used their strength to subjugate women and allow ideas like "the man runs the house, the woman repays him with sex." The man paying for a meal and the woman repaying him with sex is no different and stems from the same absurd subjugation and degradation of women.