I would like to suggest adding MRA to the acronym list

[NormaStanleyFletcher]

a) do you think this is a good idea. I had never heard the term before here (sheltered life) and when I saw it on a discussion I checked the acronym list, then googled, before finally asking. I have seen other posters have the same problem/question

b) Would it just say Men's Rights Activist or would you add more (without using the word fucknuggets)

tbh - looking at the [http://www.mumsnet.com/info/acronyms current list] it probably would just be Men's Rights Activist.

Slavery past and present
Emancipation in this country was not extended to all men till after the first world war.
The automatic right to paternity leave.

Again am not saying that these are different or worse or indeed any better than women being denied rights. But the view that only women are denied rights by virtue of their sex is not sustainable. I am not trading who gets a worse deal, undoubtedly we sitting hammering away at our keyboards don't, the homeless, the refugees from war and famine, they are the ones that have the least.

No, slavery was not about sex. That's the point I am making.

Men were not being oppressed because they were men. They were being oppressed because they and their women were part of a racial (or, depending where in the world you mean, social) group that was oppressed.

I don't know any system of slavery where men are enslaved because they are men.

Not sure about paternity leave ... you'll have to let me think about that one ... but possibly.

I may have picked you up wrong Lrd my mistake I am sorry. I thought you were trying to think of examples where men had been refused their rights or discriminated against because they are men. I think slavery may well fall in to that category as their sex was a factor that was used against them. The colonial powers needed workers to do long back breaking shifts in fields. The africans were targeted and sold by their own countrymen for a few reasons, but what surely is not in dispute is that the perceived need was for strong young men.

Modern slavery is much more of an equal opportunity oppresion with people actually having to pay for the privilege of being transported in to slavery, but it is still about women being transported for sex, domestic work, and child related work. And men being seen as labourers, unskilled workers who work long hours for no pay in some instances Not much improvement, what a sad world.

Ha ha ha ha haha

leith - that's not discrimination by sex. It's just not. Slavery - and I think you're referring to slavery in the US, primarily - resulted in the oppression of men and women. I don't want to get into hierarchies of misery because it's a rotten thing to think about, but I doubt it is any better to be a woman doing back breaking work and being bred for more strong slave babies, than it is to be a man doing back breaking work and being used to provide more strong slave babies.

It is horrific. It is oppression of a people, a race, and not a single sex.

Yes, we all think that slavery was abolished such a long time ago, but it is still with us under a different guise. Now we call it sex trafficking when it involves women and economic migration when it involves men trying to pay off family debts and getting ensnared in gangs working as cockle pickers or on farms etc. the modern day gang masters are still slave masters.

Good point green.

And slavery still exists in many forms all over the world.

Greenhill and LRD that was the exact point I made in my 2nd paragraph.

Food I have reporters you!

So if your were saying that both men and women were and are transported in to bonded slavery and it has nothing to do with sex?

"Food I have reporters you!"

Erm - riiiight

The Southern Poverty Law Centre who are one of the leading civil rights organisations in the USA define MRAs as 'Hate Groups'.

This is quite a good introduction to the problem of trying to apply 'mens's rights' to the reality of womens lives

"Yes, we all think that slavery was abolished such a long time ago, but it is still with us under a different guise. Now we call it sex trafficking when it involves women and economic migration when it involves men trying to pay off family debts and getting ensnared in gangs working as cockle pickers or on farms etc. the modern day gang masters are still slave masters."

This is actually wrong. We call it 'human trafficking' as an umbrella for all slavery involving migration (national or international) including women or men getting ensnared in gangs working as cockle-pickers or into domestic servitude, and up to specifically 'sex-trafficking' for sexual slavery (which is overwhelmingly the lot of women and children) which makes up the vast majority of the slavery in the western world.

Oh, yes, we are agreeing with you that slavery hasn't disappeared, it's just changed form.

But yes, slavery affected both men and women. Absolutely.

There are masses of books on this, obviously, but one of the ones I read as a child that got to me the most was a collection of witness statements by ex-slaves. It was utterly horrifying to read what was done to men and women. If you think it was only, or primarily, about men, please look out this stuff. It makes harrowing reading, but it is convincing. Women slaves were raped, repeatedly. Women and men were bred like animals. There was a horrific description of women slaves told to put their babies down in a long trough and to leave them there and go away. The babies were left to die and when it rained, the trough filled up and they drowned.

This was oppression of a whole people over generations - men and women and children.

This is an interesting website useful resource and map on slavery.

Thanks for the link, FoodUnit.

LRD: "I am trying to think of a right that has been denied to men because they are men."

I think this is the crux of the matter. I can't think of any rights that have been denied to men because they are men.

It's worth also thinking about general patients' rights campaigns. Within them, there are some issues which it may be helpful to consider also in a women's rights context. For example, a reluctance to query doctors or ask for more information, where the problem might in part be a lack of confidence on the part of a female patient with a male doctor. Obviously, men are also reluctant to query doctors or ask for more information - but is it useful in such cases to apply a men's rights perspective?

FoodUnit Mon 24-Sep-12 10:28:39
OMC Your post really made me chuckle!

Oddly enough, yours tend to make me sigh.

What a load of whiny 'what about men' doused in slippery 'just trying to make an inoffensive appeal' swallow-it grease.

In response to offensive, inaccurate and bigoted drivel spouted by...

Heh heh heh

foodunit I was splitting it by gender, rather than rehashing the examples already given by leith and lrd I wasn't using the correct definition, I appreciate, I was thinking more of how a news story is reported by media sources, eg the BBC, rather than how it ought to be defined. The comment was not as formulated as I'd hoped.

No worries greenhill I felt I had to correct the inacuracies because they implied things (I don't now think you meant) that would obscure the truth of the matter.

slug love that video

Please, no more acronyms.

Why not?