Should universities allow Men's rights?

[Sausageeggbacon]

First want to thank whoever it was that posted the link to the article from the good men project about educating boys about sex and to lessen any impact from porn. Been reading different aspects of the website as a mother and a woman and while some of the articles I have struggled with but this is the one that has been discussed most here

Synopsis is about the lack of Men's groups at university and the fact that some universities have blocked them. We probably have all read about Toronto and the running battle between feminists and mens rights. So with male studies looking like it will appear in 2014 somewhere in the world do we fight against groups starting? I am interested as hopefully both my boys will go into higher education.

My opinion if we stop men having groups at uni then feminism is not about equality but about supremacy.

Ok sad TV with the kids so may not get back to this till tomorrow but wanted to post it as I have been talking about this with the boys for a large chunk of the afternoon.

I believe partners are still asked to say they agree when either gender has a sterilization, FWIW. Not quite the same, I know.

I think that's exactly where I am with it, prom.

I think the parallel between MRA groups and white supremacists not far off, sadly. And of course there did used to be white supremacists in academia. A shitload of anthropology was built on dubious ideas about race relations, so was a lot of history, back in the day. I went to university during this millenium and still had a very elderly emeritus professor who seriously believed that black people had smaller brains and less intelligence than white people, and that women were intellectually stunted compared to men. Quite seriously.

I think the hate speech issue is really important. I think it's not acceptable to allow a group that is coming up with hate speech, to have any kind of university sanction. There is nothing the university could do, I think, if a group of people decided to get together in a cafe and talk up a storm about whatever bigotry they chose, but I think the university itself has a responsibility not to let groups that are involved in hate speech be affiliated with it.

No way! Really?

Bollocks. What a load of bollocks. 'widely regarded' my arse. Both my supervisors do feminist lit crit and they are widely regarded as fucking brilliant.

Ooh, good luck!

My deadline for submitting the thesis in its entirety to my supervisors prior to final submission is ... ... yesterday.

Yeah. That didn't happen.

But your prof sounds so like some of the ones I've seen. And what annoys me is, I used to think so too when I was doing my undergrad. The reason being, the only feminist scholarship we were ever given on a reading list was awful. And in retrospect, most of it was either 20 years out of date or so watered-down as to be utterly trite - those were the only things that the people who made the reading lists could accept.

I am very, very lucky that the place I'm at right now is much better than that.

Did the deadline make a nice "whooshing noise as it went past", LRD ?

Ahhh, adipose cells you say? I'm nodding wisely here, but I'm not sure what it means really. I know you're meant to brush your thighs with a soft-bristle brush to get rid of it, which is something that makes me think someone mistook us all for horses.

The deadline did indeed whoosh most pleasantly past. It made a sound remarkably like the Game of Thrones theme tune being listened to by someone watching TV instead of scrambling to finish her footnotes.

Right, before allowing them to gather and speak, better secure they conform to an approved agenda, wise words...

Who wants to do that?

I-O I-O, it's off to work we go.

Can you give a link to the difference in sentencing, please?

I've seen plenty of discussions on here about male circumcision being wrong, supporting mothers and fathers who want to take a stand against their families on it etc.

I've seen male victims of rape, sexual abuse and domestic abuse supported on here.

I've seen people speak out against any poster saying a male in their life is too emotional, or, more often, support a parent who has friends or family saying those things about their DS.

Masterchef, I don't know if you are still here, but do you really think that these issues are best served by being as divisive as those people you are arguing against?

Hang on a minute...

Masterchef presented a fair summary in response to the discussion of what would constitute Mens rights, and was then deleted.

I'd be interested to know the reason for the post deletion.

Umm, what exactly are "Men's rights"? feminism is not about female supremacy at all, but what the hell is "men's rights" all about?

In case they haven't noticed, they have rights.

This is like me starting a heterosexual rights or a white people's rights group. Quite pointless, really.

Blackswan:

"but what the hell is "men's rights" all about?

In case they haven't noticed, they have rights.
"

As have Women, but they still have every right to speak out and act against injustice, as should Men.

For whats it's worth these would probley qualify.

Lack of Cancer spending and promotion despite a much higher level of Cancer in the population when compared to Women.

Inequalities of life duration.

No one could argue that a lot of Women have a shitty time under the patriachy , but wouldn't you stand up if you were facing the nasties listed above? Of course you would or you wouldn't have taken on the cause :)

MilgramsLittleHelper wrote - "As have Women, but they still have every right to speak out and act against injustice, as should Men. For whats it's worth these would probley qualify. Lack of Cancer spending and promotion despite a much higher level of Cancer in the population when compared to Women.Inequalities of life duration. No one could argue that a lot of Women have a shitty time under the patriachy , but wouldn't you stand up if you were facing the nasties listed above?"

More money should be spent on fighting cancers of all types.

Life expectancy should improve from everyone.

Why is more money spent in the UK on breast cancer (which affects men and women) than on prostate cancer (which affects men only)?

Could the difference in government spending be influenced by the following statistics from the United Nations World Health Organisation?

3.07% of deaths in UK in 2010 were caused by breast cancer (20th worst rate in the world).
2.46% of deaths in UK in 2010 were caused by prostate cancer (58th worst rate in the world).

Should the government spend more money on improving the bigger killer (breast cancer) or not?

Life expectancy in 2010 for British women at birth was 82.1 years (24th best in the world for females).
Life expectancy in 2010 for British men at birth was 77.8 years (14th best in the world for males).

In 1990, British women and men both had the 17th longest life expectancies in the world. In 2010, British women's life expectancy was 24th longest (compared to women in other countries) and British men's life expectancy was 14th longest (compared to men in other countries).

Compared to other countries, it seems that life expectancy for British women is getting worse, but for British men it is getting better.

More money should be spent on fighting cancers of all types.

Life expectancy should improve from everyone.

Thank you Vesuvia. You're absolutly right, it's a disgrace all round. I was just making the point that everybody has rights and gender specific issues. I just wish we could think of a way to raise the bar for everyone.

I think everyone faces some discrimination on some level at some stage in their lives.

However, on a comparative level, it is laughable to compare the injustices on men with those that women have faced over the years and still continue to face.

I would be wary of comparing a lack of spending on prostate cancer with rapes, domestic violence, the maternity crisis, childbirth deaths, wage gap and the numerous other issues that women face today.

Spending on breast cancer is hardly a comprehensive approach to women's healthcare. What about the fact that so many women in different parts of the world still die from childbirth? The maternal mortality rates in the UK and USA aren't exactly ideal either. What about the fact that so many women suffer PTSD after childbirth? What about the fact that so many pregnant women are given sub-standard care? What about the fact that so many women in the UK suffer from prolapse,incontinence and other related issues? What about the fact that obstetric fistula still exists in developed nations and is rampant in developing countries? What about the fact that women don't have full reproductive rights? What about the fact that women in Ireland are still dying due to denied abortions?

Breast cancer awareness and spending is a mere drop in the ocean when it comes to women's healthcare.

I don't really care if I am called a man-hating feminist. I want to see more spending on women's healthcare and I am not really interested in "men's rights" anymore than I am interested in the "rights" of rich people. Once we're done dealing with the hungry and destitute we'll get to Mitt Romney, Bill Gates and their rights.

The whole issue about custody rights mostly going to mothers doesn't get much sympathy from me.

Even today, women are responsible for majority of the childrearing. More women are SAHP than men are. Women are much more likely to make sacrifices for their children in terms of their careers etc. than men are.

So then why does it surprise people when custody rights go to women? If men want more rights to their children after a divorce maybe they need to work on making a bigger contribution during the marriage.

In any case, a lot of this is media hype. I read an article the other day about how most men in the USA don't actually fight for custody at all. Out of those who do, 70% are awarded custody unless they have criminal records etc. Doesn't really sound like men are the victims there.