AIBU to think that if MN are willing to boycott certain groups on ethical grounds

[APartridgeAmongThePigeons]

they really should take a look at banning posters proclaiming themselves MRAs?

Sexist,

often racist,

frequently rape/ domestic violence deniers

I know that mumsnet want to keep a lively discussion going and not ban free speech but when they join a forum mainly used by women it's hard to believe it's not about being goady and spewing propaganda.

The result is that normal posters get angry..
engage...

And then get deleted or banned for "personal attack".

Using a nasty word for someone who has by just stating that they are an MRA has basically said you don't matter as a human seems the normal response.

Sabrina, you can't say those are MRAs doing the online attacking. You don't know if they are part of a movement. You don't know if they are educated in the debate or have an agenda.

There is similar abuse between Brits and Americans on a boxing forum I like.
It's wrong and needs stopping

Yes, sue - the last invasion that I know of came from reddit. It brought a few mra types over here - most of whom were then banned. Pistonheads were trolling - but not what I'd call mra trolls. MN sorted them out too

Treen, there are MRA's talking about attcaking particular feminists and particular threads on MN.

Is it on an MRA forum or something? Unless they state they are MRA I don't know how you know, greenie

Right.

'I've asked you here and elsewhere what changes you want to see for men and what issues face men.

Can you answer that question?'

I would like to see a change in the feminist run family courts that puts womens needs ahead of children and fathers. I would like to see a huge shake up of the court system to put children's needs first. This will benefit fathers. If you don't think that men are treated despicably by the courts, then ask yourself how many 'mothers4Justice' groups are there.

I would like to see more 'samaritan type' services for men. Currently men are expected to cope, and a lot of times they don't, given the high suicide rates.

I have a privilege. I can sit next to a child and nobody thinks I'm going to abuse that child. I would like to see the same for men, maybe then they might feel more able to work as teachers and childcare workers. And maybe the bloke who saw my 4 year old DS about to fall from the top of a slide would have actually plucked him to safety rather than looking around frantically until he caught my eye and pointed at DS.

I would like to see more DV shelters for men, as currently there are about 2, and zero funding....to quote (again)...

"If we put across this idea that the abuse of men is as great as the abuse of women, then it could seriously affect our funding.

Sandra Horley, CEO of Refuge (Wolff, 1992)"

I would like to see an end to the assault on male sexuality. I would like to see an end to the assault on mine, actually. I LIKE to be looked at appreciatively. Get over it, you can't ban biology, though you're having a damn good try eh?

I would like to see and end to the men=bad/women=good trope. It benefits absolutely no-one, except feminists.

As someone else has mentioned, homelessness disproportionately affects men. So does unemployment. So do workplace deaths.

Equal medical funding.

I would like to see the myth of 'patriarchy' debunked once and for all. It's bollocks, clearly.

That'll do for now.

I get quite incensed about how feminism affects me personally too, as a woman, but that's for another day.

Suelford, thank you for coming back with examples of some of the issues facing men. Here's my take on the issues you identify:

Homelessness - yes, there are more homeless men than women. However (and from the perspective of someone currently working in Housing), services for homeless people such as hostels are presently tailored almost exclusively towards men to the detriment of homeless women.

Suicide - APartridgeAmongThePigeons addresses this in her post of 16:18:02 above

Violence and rape - the former is predominately perpetrated by men, the latter can only be perpetrated by men as defined by law. As kim147 posted at 18:49:39 above, "Attacking feminism will not stop men committing crimes [or] attacking each other"

Dangerous working conditions - the ruling capitalist class (in which positions of power are held almost overwhelmingly by men) don't give a shit about the safety of working men or working women. Men who care about this issue should join a union - I can personally recommend my union the GMB for its campaigning work in this area, along with UCATT and Unite

Lower educational achievement - I will hold my hands up and say that a) I know boys currently perform less well than girls in education, and b) I don't know why (and yes, I will go away and do some reading about this). But across the board, grown-up men still earn more than women once they've left school/university

Higher criminal punishment - my understanding is that women are convicted of proportionally fewer crimes than men because they commit proportionally fewer crimes

Institutional sexism in DV cases - I'm not sure what you mean by this

Social expectation to be providers/brutes/disposable - this is a good example of how patriarchy harms both women and men

Draft (American) - 61% of American women think the draft should be opened up to include females

I would suggest that all of the above problems which men experience are not generated by women working to exploit a structurally oppressive system.

Earth, it's not a competition

Treen44444 - I'm still waiting for you to provide some links to reasonable, middle-of-the-road MRA websites. I've had another Google and I still haven't been able to find any.

I did find this though

Treen44444 - what do you mean, "it's not a competition"?

Sheesh, and there I was thinking we were engaging in debate and polite and reasonable discourse. Why can't we all just get along?

Patriarchy is not bollocks, sigmunde. Otherwise, you wouldn't have been traditionally given away by your father on your wedding day, and changed your father's name to your new husband's name. Plus the vast majority of the world's wealth and political power would not be held by men. Plus the majority of housework/childcare would not be left to the women.

The family courts being biased towards women is a myth propogated by mra father's rights organisations. The clue is in the name: father's rights. Not children's rights. The way that the family courts currently work is set up for the best outcome for the children. Currently, 'shared parenting' and a "continuity of care." Ie if the children are currently cared for by a sahp, that will continue, with access for the other parent. The children having a right to see both parents is fundamental to the current system. Believe me, I know - since a convicted paedophile husband of a friend of mine is now dangerously close to getting access to his children.

'MRA's are naming particular feminists on MN and talking about going after them on MN.'

Right, well I don't know anything about that, but this is an open forum isn't it? I'm certainly not condoning any kind of attacks on MN from other forums.

'Paul Elam has said some stuff in his time - I can't believe even sigmunde defends him. The man who said "if I was on a jury in a rape case, I would vote not guilty no matter what the evidence"'

Paul Elam is deliberately inflammatory. He has said this over and over again, you are choosing to take what he says literally. As someone who regularly reads AVFM, indeed, has read almost ALL the articles, I understand that it is not to be taken literally, as he has stated this many times. Put it this way, as a woman, I would not affiliate myself with a movement that hated and wanted to harm women, think about it.
................................................................................................
"Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." -- Andrea Dworkin

"Romance is rape embellished with meaningful looks." Andrea Dworkin in the Philadelphia Inquirer, May 21, 1995..

"Under patriarchy, no woman is safe to live her life, or to love, or to mother children. Under patriarchy, every woman is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's daughter is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman," Andrea Dworkin, Liberty, p.58..

"One can know everything and still be unable to accept the fact that sex and murder are fused in the male consciousness, so that the one without the imminent possibly of the other is unthinkable and impossible." Andrea Dworkin, Letters from a War Zone, p. 21..

..................................................................................

Do I take the above literally? Do you?

I mean some problems will be linked, some will be two sides of a coin, some will stand alone. People will choose their own issues to address and look in to

Paul Elam is deliberately inflammatory. He has said this over and over again, you are choosing to take what he says literally.

Oh, I see. Feminists just not getting the joke again?

Suicide services are aimed at both men and women. And the UK Government has run anti suicide campaigns aimed at men. It is not true to say there is no support for men.

'The family courts being biased towards women is a myth propogated by mra father's rights organisations.'

That is such a huge, massive, voluminous untruth. Utterly, utterly, utterly wrong. Wrong. Stunningly erroneous.

Provide us of evidence of that from somewhere that isn't an MRA site?

No, it really isn't sigmunde. Children of divorced parents have the right to see both parents, and this is enshrined in family law - and as I've found our recently, even a very good reason for them not to see their father (convicted of paedephilia offences) is often not even seen as a good enough reason for the father not to have access.

Treen, what do you mean by "some problems will be linked, some will be two sides of a coin, some will stand alone. People will choose their own issues to address and look in to"?

And please can you provide some links to reasonable MRA sites as requested?

Or perhaps you can assist, SigmundFraude?

Oh, I see. Feminists just not getting the joke again?'

It isn't meant to be funny ha ha. It's meant to make a point.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-464132/Jailed-waving-daughter.html

A parliamentary report about custody arrangements:

"Accusations of institutionalised gender bias were not uncommon. What was notable, however was this
position was held by both mothers and fathers, each alleging that the system was biased against them. Thus:

Fathers:

Rejected the dominant operating concept of a resident and contact parent;
Argued for a principle of shared care, giving equality of status to both parents, shared decision-making and
a roughly equal division of time;
Disputed the assumption made by courts and FCWO’s that shared parenting can only work if there is a low
level of parental conflict;
Believed that the small number of residence orders made in favour of fathers and the ineffective
enforcement of contact orders demonstrated a systematic prejudice against fathers;
Saw the family court welfare officer, as agent of the court and anti-father;
Believed that FCWO’s took the expressed wishes of the child at face value, ignoring the possibility that
they had been heavily influenced by the mother.

Mothers:

Felt that the family justice system was male-dominated and promoted the interests of fathers against those
of mothers and children;
Saw the family court welfare officer as pro-father;
Believed that the individual needs of their own child were sacrificed to the general principle that contact is
in the interests of most children, a principle most did not dispute in itself, only in application to their own
circumstances;
Believed that no account was taken of fathers’ past failures to support and nurture the child;
Believed that fathers used the courts to continue an oppressive relationship;
Argued that their own needs as carer were ignored. "

www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/FamilyJusticeMemoPart1.pdf

Well, what are you saying about Elam then, sigmunde? He's not meant to be taken seriously? Fine. I don't take him seriously. But more than once, he has passed off his misogynistic rhetoric as a joke, that we're not meant to take literally (as you said).

This article dispels the myth of gender bias in the US family justice system.

www.huffingtonpost.com/cathy-meyer/dispelling-the-myth-of-ge_b_1617115.html