7 ms·

There are a lot of ways that society is biased in favor of women[1][2], including the education and justice systems. But feminism has taken over all the mainstr

There are a lot of ways that society is biased in favor of women[1][2], including the education and justice systems. But feminism has taken over all the mainstream institutions and right-thinking minds, so it's un-PC to mention it. [1] http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/05/13/male-suicide-wheres-the-outcry/ http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/05/13/male-s... [2] http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/03/20/men-in-decline-means-more-single-moms/ http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/03/20/men-in...

mistercow 13y ago
Won't somebody please think of teh menz? Of course there are individual examples of advantages that women have over men in various areas. That does not equate to women being advantaged overall. In the world of acting, dwarfs have some advantages over non-dwarfs. For example, a dwarf is far more likely than a non-dwarf to land a role as a dwarf, a christmas elf, a leprechaun, or a villain's creepy little minion. This advantage does not outweigh the disadvantage a dwarf has when trying to find work in any other type of role.
- dyno12345 13y ago
  > Won't somebody please think of teh menz? Do some people not realize how bigoted this sounds?
  - steveklabnik 13y ago
    That is the entire point of the phrase.
    - papsosouid 13y ago
      That makes no sense. People say that so that everyone will see they are bigots and ignore the rest of what they have to say? If people want to be ignored wouldn't they just not bother posting to begin with? The point of the phrase is to belittle people who dare to suggest that men are not some special privileged class of people who spend their time oppressing women.
      - steveklabnik 13y ago
        > People say that so that everyone will see they are bigots and ignore the rest of what they have to say? You have it backwards. It's pointing out that the person you're talking to has said something that's quite silly. Fighting for women's rights doesn't mean you don't care about men, and it doesn't mean that men are universally better off.
        mistercow 13y ago
        I don't think I've ever seen it put so succinctly, but that is exactly the sentiment.
        dyno12345 13y ago
        If that's what you intended perhaps you should find a more respectful way of putting it
        dyno12345 13y ago
        > Fighting for women's rights doesn't mean you don't care about men How is ridiculing concern for men supposed to express that?
        steveklabnik 13y ago
        You're missing context. The phrase is used in instances like this: Person A: "Women have it rough. Patriarchy." Person B: "No, see, [bad thing happened to this guy one time], so there's no possible way there's systemic bias against women." Person A: "Yeah, _what about teh menz?_" Feminists deeply care about men's issues. But they won't tolerate using specific instances of things being bad for men as a means to deny that there is systemic bias against women.
        dyno12345 13y ago
        I think you're way off. The phrase could be used in such a way, but even in this thread the person to whom this insult was leveled against did not say "there's no possible way there's systemic bias against women" or deny anything about women or anything like it. The way you're using "context" is a hand-waving, straw person, red herring. You should check the context.
    - dyno12345 13y ago
      I'm not sure what you mean
  - newnewnew 13y ago
    Feminism is a Marxist ideology, and it is fundamentally about political power. It is not about truth or fairness or anything that it claims to be about. Rather, it is about furthering the political interests of people that believe in feminism and punishing those who do not. It sees the world in terms of class conflict and it is dedicated to seeing the under-class triumph over the "oppressive" uber-class. Consider a closely related group, Marxist anti-racists. They claim to be against racism, yet they reject color-blind policies on the part of government agencies or universities. Why would they do this, if they are truly against racism? It is because they seek power.
    - steveklabnik 13y ago
      Feminism _can_ be Marxist, but it's often not. See for example http://moufawad-paul.blogspot.com/2013/04/10-theses-on-identity-politics.html http://moufawad-paul.blogspot.com/2013/04/10-theses-on-ident...
      - newnewnew 13y ago
        Thanks for the laughs. It is fun to watch different kinds of Marxist argue over who is most oppressed :)
- hacker789 13y ago
  > Won't somebody please think of teh menz? Stop it. Feminist bigots like you need everyone to view women as the "true victims" in society, so any discussion of men's issues is inevitably and swiftly met with that bullying phrase. Women in the western world have always been among the safest, most privileged people on Earth. Being a man has sucked throughout history, but modern western feminists furiously point to the men at the top of society as evidence that things were worse for women, completely and conveniently ignoring the men at the middle and bottom of society. Predictably, modern western feminists fight tooth and nail to preserve female privilege. Despite their rhetoric, western feminists give hyperagency to men—they try to hold men responsible for the behavior of women. At the extreme, you get posts like this (hopefully satire, but apparently it isn't): http://i.imgur.com/FkVKqJH.png http://i.imgur.com/FkVKqJH.png It's sickening to witness the absurd mental gymnastics western feminists perform to absolve women of all responsibility for their actions and failures, with the blame almost inevitably falling on a man or on men in general. On the flip side, to justify their own existence, western feminists do everything they can to make women feel helpless, scared, and powerless. The western world is a warzone for women, if you listened to their rhetoric. And any potentially empowering advice you give women for avoiding dangerous situations is considered "victim blaming". These attitudes are not only ingrained in our legal system; they're completely ingrained in society at large. If a woman is struggling, men and women (and feminists) eagerly rush to save her and scold the mean men put her in that situation. If a man is struggling, th—WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ?! Why are we even talking about him?!
  - mistercow 13y ago
    >Stop it. Feminist bigots like you need everyone to view women as the "true victims" in society, so any discussion of men's issues is inevitably and swiftly met with that bullying phrase. Do you need to go to the powder room and have a good cry about it? But in all seriousness, no I don't need everyone to view women as victims. That's absurd. I also don't think that there's anything wrong with discussing situations where gender inequality harms men. In fact, I think that it is essential to the larger discussion, because there is often an intrinsic connection between harms to women and men caused by gender prejudice. Would I would like however, is for obscenely privileged morons to stop acting like female privilege is anywhere close to (much less greater than) male privilege. Yes, there are some feminists who disempower women and men alike by treating women as the frail victims of sex-crazed men who are biologically incapable of showing empathy or controlling their emotions. There are feminists who don't consider valid the intersection of sexism and other forms of oppression. There are feminists who accuse trans women of "objectifying" the female body. Fuck all of those people. They're idiots. But reversed stupidity is not intelligence. If someone thinks that all sex is rape, and that same dipwad thinks that male privilege is a problem, that is not evidence that male privilege isn't a problem.
- wisty 13y ago
  Most people who claim to be feminists say that being a feminist means treating both genders equally. Most people who claim to be feminists say that men also have a lot of problems, which are caused by gender biases. It's a load of shit to say that feminism is all about fighting male privilege. But since these radical "feminists" are the most outspoken people who describe themselves as feminists, they effectively define what feminism means to the public. You can say, if you want, that you think the problems men face aren't as severe, so you think they deserve less attention. That's a value judgement which no-one can argue with. But behaving like only women have problems is simply not honest. This is really fucking dangerous, if you think that feminism (whether that means gender equality, or women's rights) is a good thing. Men (at least, the men at the top) are really more powerful than women, and this isn't changing in the foreseeable future. Men put in the hard yards in the high-risk careers, and end up dominating politics, law, and the corporate world. As long as feminism has the moral high ground, that won't be an issue for women, because the small number of men in really high positions still have to do what is seen as the right thing. But there's no reason why gross gender inequality can't exist in a modern society. Look at most countries outside the US, UK, and some parts of the EU. Feminism probably happened because women were needed for the war effort. The men were fighting the war, so the women were able to show they could do the work men generally did. There's no real reason that feminism needs to exist in a modern society, it's just path dependence (you can't take a bone out of dog's mouth - people tend to hang onto the rights they have), and the fact that most people (including most men) think that feminism is a "good" thing. If feminism allows itself to be defined by the radicals (who use some weird Marxist analysis about the class struggle between men and women), that's exactly what they'll get - a class struggle. And if it does stop being about right and wrong (as it has been, up to this point) and simply about men versus women, I have no doubt that the men will gradually try to chip away at the progress feminists have made. Equality is a great thing. Equality is a thing which most people see as right, and that most people will support. A class struggle is not something everyone agrees with, and it's a war I don't think we really want to have. If things continue the way they are going, it's not going to be long before a conservative politician can repeat the more reasonable points that men's rights groups are making (not the angry crap about their evil ex, or stuff about sexual assault, but the bits about women having too many advantages in things like the justice system). What will the feminists say? Will they say that they are fighting biases of all kinds, or that feminism is simply about fighting teh menz? If feminists start fighting against equality, there will no longer be a bright line (equality) which everyone can strive for. It will simply about the two sides trying to push each other around. If you really want to put your money where your mouth is, and bet that women will push harder, that's a matter for you. I'm not really well read on the history of sexism, but I'd bet there's a lot more historical examples of men eroding the rights of women than women eroding the rights of men.
- LockeWatts 13y ago
  "Won't somebody please think of teh menz?" Wasn't the whole point of Hacker News to not have inane gibberish like this on it? If you have a problem with argument, refute it. But acting like a child and mocking it does nothing but raise the blood pressure of everyone else reading the post.
kenbellows 13y ago
When you say "right-thinking minds", do you mean right-wing? As in conservative? Because to my knowledge and from my experience feminism has traditionally been and continues to be a very left-leaning philosophy and is actually rather heavily scorned and derided by many conservatives I know. Also, which "mainstream institutions" do you mean? News media? Educational institutions? These are also generally thought to be rather left-thinking, in my experience.
- newnewnew 13y ago
  By "right-thinking minds", I mean "correct-thinking minds". It is a fireable offense to say non-feminist or anti-feminist things, even in a dry academic way (look at Larry Summers) - it is politically incorrect. Non-feminist and anti-feminist thought is no longer an acceptable part of the mainstream conversation. The range of permissible mainstream thought is determined by the left. Essentially, the mainstream follows Harvard with a ~30 year lag. The infrastructure which propagates what Harvard believes to everybody else and determines the constraints of acceptable thought is what Moldbug calls "the Modern Structure"[1] or "the Cathedral"[2]. [1] http://anomalyuk.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-modern-structure.html http://anomalyuk.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-modern-structure.h... [2] http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/01/gentle-introduction-to-unqualified.html http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/01/gentle-...
  - theorique 13y ago
    With Summers, he violated protocol by even asking the question.
    - kanja 13y ago
      Some questions are simply un-askable in a postmodern intellectual framework. Here's a great primer if you're unfamiliar with it: http://arts.uwaterloo.ca/~kwesthue/regiftedxmas12.html http://arts.uwaterloo.ca/~kwesthue/regiftedxmas12.html

mistercow 13y ago

Won't somebody please think of teh menz? Of course there are individual examples of advantages that women have over men in various areas. That does not equate to women being advantaged overall. In the world of acting, dwarfs have some advantages over non-dwarfs. For example, a dwarf is far more likely than a non-dwarf to land a role as a dwarf, a christmas elf, a leprechaun, or a villain's creepy little minion. This advantage does not outweigh the disadvantage a dwarf has when trying to find work in any other type of role.

dyno12345 13y ago
> Won't somebody please think of teh menz? Do some people not realize how bigoted this sounds?
- steveklabnik 13y ago
  That is the entire point of the phrase.
  - papsosouid 13y ago
    That makes no sense. People say that so that everyone will see they are bigots and ignore the rest of what they have to say? If people want to be ignored wouldn't they just not bother posting to begin with? The point of the phrase is to belittle people who dare to suggest that men are not some special privileged class of people who spend their time oppressing women.
    - steveklabnik 13y ago
      > People say that so that everyone will see they are bigots and ignore the rest of what they have to say? You have it backwards. It's pointing out that the person you're talking to has said something that's quite silly. Fighting for women's rights doesn't mean you don't care about men, and it doesn't mean that men are universally better off.
      - mistercow 13y ago
        I don't think I've ever seen it put so succinctly, but that is exactly the sentiment.
        dyno12345 13y ago
        If that's what you intended perhaps you should find a more respectful way of putting it
      - dyno12345 13y ago
        > Fighting for women's rights doesn't mean you don't care about men How is ridiculing concern for men supposed to express that?
        steveklabnik 13y ago
        You're missing context. The phrase is used in instances like this: Person A: "Women have it rough. Patriarchy." Person B: "No, see, [bad thing happened to this guy one time], so there's no possible way there's systemic bias against women." Person A: "Yeah, _what about teh menz?_" Feminists deeply care about men's issues. But they won't tolerate using specific instances of things being bad for men as a means to deny that there is systemic bias against women.
        dyno12345 13y ago
        I think you're way off. The phrase could be used in such a way, but even in this thread the person to whom this insult was leveled against did not say "there's no possible way there's systemic bias against women" or deny anything about women or anything like it. The way you're using "context" is a hand-waving, straw person, red herring. You should check the context.
  - dyno12345 13y ago
    I'm not sure what you mean
- newnewnew 13y ago
  Feminism is a Marxist ideology, and it is fundamentally about political power. It is not about truth or fairness or anything that it claims to be about. Rather, it is about furthering the political interests of people that believe in feminism and punishing those who do not. It sees the world in terms of class conflict and it is dedicated to seeing the under-class triumph over the "oppressive" uber-class. Consider a closely related group, Marxist anti-racists. They claim to be against racism, yet they reject color-blind policies on the part of government agencies or universities. Why would they do this, if they are truly against racism? It is because they seek power.
  - steveklabnik 13y ago
    Feminism _can_ be Marxist, but it's often not. See for example http://moufawad-paul.blogspot.com/2013/04/10-theses-on-identity-politics.html http://moufawad-paul.blogspot.com/2013/04/10-theses-on-ident...
    - newnewnew 13y ago
      Thanks for the laughs. It is fun to watch different kinds of Marxist argue over who is most oppressed :)
hacker789 13y ago
> Won't somebody please think of teh menz? Stop it. Feminist bigots like you need everyone to view women as the "true victims" in society, so any discussion of men's issues is inevitably and swiftly met with that bullying phrase. Women in the western world have always been among the safest, most privileged people on Earth. Being a man has sucked throughout history, but modern western feminists furiously point to the men at the top of society as evidence that things were worse for women, completely and conveniently ignoring the men at the middle and bottom of society. Predictably, modern western feminists fight tooth and nail to preserve female privilege. Despite their rhetoric, western feminists give hyperagency to men—they try to hold men responsible for the behavior of women. At the extreme, you get posts like this (hopefully satire, but apparently it isn't): http://i.imgur.com/FkVKqJH.png http://i.imgur.com/FkVKqJH.png It's sickening to witness the absurd mental gymnastics western feminists perform to absolve women of all responsibility for their actions and failures, with the blame almost inevitably falling on a man or on men in general. On the flip side, to justify their own existence, western feminists do everything they can to make women feel helpless, scared, and powerless. The western world is a warzone for women, if you listened to their rhetoric. And any potentially empowering advice you give women for avoiding dangerous situations is considered "victim blaming". These attitudes are not only ingrained in our legal system; they're completely ingrained in society at large. If a woman is struggling, men and women (and feminists) eagerly rush to save her and scold the mean men put her in that situation. If a man is struggling, th—WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ?! Why are we even talking about him?!
- mistercow 13y ago
  >Stop it. Feminist bigots like you need everyone to view women as the "true victims" in society, so any discussion of men's issues is inevitably and swiftly met with that bullying phrase. Do you need to go to the powder room and have a good cry about it? But in all seriousness, no I don't need everyone to view women as victims. That's absurd. I also don't think that there's anything wrong with discussing situations where gender inequality harms men. In fact, I think that it is essential to the larger discussion, because there is often an intrinsic connection between harms to women and men caused by gender prejudice. Would I would like however, is for obscenely privileged morons to stop acting like female privilege is anywhere close to (much less greater than) male privilege. Yes, there are some feminists who disempower women and men alike by treating women as the frail victims of sex-crazed men who are biologically incapable of showing empathy or controlling their emotions. There are feminists who don't consider valid the intersection of sexism and other forms of oppression. There are feminists who accuse trans women of "objectifying" the female body. Fuck all of those people. They're idiots. But reversed stupidity is not intelligence. If someone thinks that all sex is rape, and that same dipwad thinks that male privilege is a problem, that is not evidence that male privilege isn't a problem.
wisty 13y ago
Most people who claim to be feminists say that being a feminist means treating both genders equally. Most people who claim to be feminists say that men also have a lot of problems, which are caused by gender biases. It's a load of shit to say that feminism is all about fighting male privilege. But since these radical "feminists" are the most outspoken people who describe themselves as feminists, they effectively define what feminism means to the public. You can say, if you want, that you think the problems men face aren't as severe, so you think they deserve less attention. That's a value judgement which no-one can argue with. But behaving like only women have problems is simply not honest. This is really fucking dangerous, if you think that feminism (whether that means gender equality, or women's rights) is a good thing. Men (at least, the men at the top) are really more powerful than women, and this isn't changing in the foreseeable future. Men put in the hard yards in the high-risk careers, and end up dominating politics, law, and the corporate world. As long as feminism has the moral high ground, that won't be an issue for women, because the small number of men in really high positions still have to do what is seen as the right thing. But there's no reason why gross gender inequality can't exist in a modern society. Look at most countries outside the US, UK, and some parts of the EU. Feminism probably happened because women were needed for the war effort. The men were fighting the war, so the women were able to show they could do the work men generally did. There's no real reason that feminism needs to exist in a modern society, it's just path dependence (you can't take a bone out of dog's mouth - people tend to hang onto the rights they have), and the fact that most people (including most men) think that feminism is a "good" thing. If feminism allows itself to be defined by the radicals (who use some weird Marxist analysis about the class struggle between men and women), that's exactly what they'll get - a class struggle. And if it does stop being about right and wrong (as it has been, up to this point) and simply about men versus women, I have no doubt that the men will gradually try to chip away at the progress feminists have made. Equality is a great thing. Equality is a thing which most people see as right, and that most people will support. A class struggle is not something everyone agrees with, and it's a war I don't think we really want to have. If things continue the way they are going, it's not going to be long before a conservative politician can repeat the more reasonable points that men's rights groups are making (not the angry crap about their evil ex, or stuff about sexual assault, but the bits about women having too many advantages in things like the justice system). What will the feminists say? Will they say that they are fighting biases of all kinds, or that feminism is simply about fighting teh menz? If feminists start fighting against equality, there will no longer be a bright line (equality) which everyone can strive for. It will simply about the two sides trying to push each other around. If you really want to put your money where your mouth is, and bet that women will push harder, that's a matter for you. I'm not really well read on the history of sexism, but I'd bet there's a lot more historical examples of men eroding the rights of women than women eroding the rights of men.
LockeWatts 13y ago
"Won't somebody please think of teh menz?" Wasn't the whole point of Hacker News to not have inane gibberish like this on it? If you have a problem with argument, refute it. But acting like a child and mocking it does nothing but raise the blood pressure of everyone else reading the post.

kenbellows 13y ago

When you say "right-thinking minds", do you mean right-wing? As in conservative? Because to my knowledge and from my experience feminism has traditionally been and continues to be a very left-leaning philosophy and is actually rather heavily scorned and derided by many conservatives I know. Also, which "mainstream institutions" do you mean? News media? Educational institutions? These are also generally thought to be rather left-thinking, in my experience.

newnewnew 13y ago
By "right-thinking minds", I mean "correct-thinking minds". It is a fireable offense to say non-feminist or anti-feminist things, even in a dry academic way (look at Larry Summers) - it is politically incorrect. Non-feminist and anti-feminist thought is no longer an acceptable part of the mainstream conversation. The range of permissible mainstream thought is determined by the left. Essentially, the mainstream follows Harvard with a ~30 year lag. The infrastructure which propagates what Harvard believes to everybody else and determines the constraints of acceptable thought is what Moldbug calls "the Modern Structure"[1] or "the Cathedral"[2]. [1] http://anomalyuk.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-modern-structure.html http://anomalyuk.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-modern-structure.h... [2] http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/01/gentle-introduction-to-unqualified.html http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/01/gentle-...
- theorique 13y ago
  With Summers, he violated protocol by even asking the question.
  - kanja 13y ago
    Some questions are simply un-askable in a postmodern intellectual framework. Here's a great primer if you're unfamiliar with it: http://arts.uwaterloo.ca/~kwesthue/regiftedxmas12.html http://arts.uwaterloo.ca/~kwesthue/regiftedxmas12.html