Why are feminists so threatened by the MRA movement?

[LaVoixDeLaRaison]

When I was at university, the Gender Equality society (of which I was a member) chose to rename itself the Feminist society, arguing that the only way equality could be achieved was by focusing on women's issues. This led some other students to set up an MRA group, which was met with some resistance from the feminists. On this very board I see commenters angrily referring to MRAs as if they are all members of an evil homogeneous group.

Isn't it possible that men and women both suffer oppression from society in different ways? That the levels of this oppression are not necessarily equal, but are still important if we are to achieve equality? I often see feminists agreeing with certain 'male issues' (e.g. media stereotypes, elevated male suicide rate), but suggesting that feminism has other priorities, and if they want to do something about these issues then they should make their own groups. Why do they get criticized when they do exactly that? Better still, wouldn't feminism be better off if it didn't alienate so many men (and women, focused on a wider range of issues, and stopped pitting the sexes against one another?

What privileges do you want women to give up around the world?

PetulaGordino
SevenZarkSeven

I would never suggest you should do something that put you out of your comfort zone or put your personal safety at risk, so you are of course welcome to limit your discussions to feminist groups. However, given that the suggestion was about an online discussion, I think it's worth mentioning that online anonymity is very easy to preserve, and you'd have no reason to fear for your safety even if the posters are as barbaric as you suggest.

LineRunner

What about it exactly? I'm aware of the news story, but I'm afraid to say that I've not been following it too closely.

Tell me what you mean by women's privileges

What privileges do you think women have around the world?

Why do you imagine that I haven't ever posted elsewhere, or even on here, and haven't received threats?

Well it would be nice to limit my discussions to feminist groups but in my favourite one men people keep wandering in and telling me that I'm doing feminism wrong, to STFU and talk about something else.

Funny, that.

You haven't commented on where MRAs stand on the global situation re sexual violence. I would be interested to hear your views not really

Also waiting with baited breath to hear what privilege we have.

Do you imagine that you're the first to come here and goad feminists under the guise of "challenging" them and helping them out of their comfort zone?

As a man...sigh...hesitantly entering the discussion just to post about female "privilege" under the global patriarchy. What about military conscription? I can't think of a more discreet sexist construct that has killed more people?

OP, then you're woefully lacking in the knowledge (and frankly the skills) for this argument.

Peter - perhaps the prostitution of women?

SevenZarkSeven

A few examples off the top of my head.

-Female-on-male violence is typically seen as less serious than male-on-female violence
-Women are typically seen as better caregivers than men, which seems to be reflected in custody disputes
-Men may have to pay higher insurance than women

I'm not necessarily suggesting that all these examples are valid (i.e. even if statistics support them, there may be underlining reasons as to why that might be), but I think these are important topics for feminist debate, and shouldn't be dismissed just because they suggest that there are some areas where women hold the privilege.

Typically 'seen' by whom? Your mates?

Thereyouarepeter - so do you expect women to campaign for men to stop sending other men to kill even more men? Yes, conscription is fucking stupid. So how about you men stop doing it?

OMFG.

I can't believe anyone would look at the world and think that those were the main problems when it came to equality of any type.

Incidentally, all of those things have been discussed at length and multiple times on this board.

LineRunner

So because I'm not up-to-date with one particular section of current affairs, it automatically invalidates my entire argument? Come on, that's a childish argument. Instead of saying 'you're woefully lacking in the knowledge (and the skills) for this argument', you should attempt to deconstruct my argument. If I am what you say, then this should be very easy for you.

thereyouarepeter

A good example, one I missed. Petulia, the prostitution of women has little to do with the global conscription of men, so I fail to see how that's relevant? Surely both issues are important?

SevenZarkSeven

I daresay that MRAs aren't typically concerned about the global epidemic of sexual violence (though you'd have to ask them), just as feminists aren't typically concerned with men's issues. My position from the start has been that this division between men and women only hurts both groups, and is a step in the wrong direction.

It's true isn't it? Men fear women laughing at them. Women fear men killing them.

And somehow this gets twisted into into some bizarre comparable oppression.

Peter

What about femicide? Especially in Asia. 100s of millions missing / killed.

Ah but my dear OP, one can't deconstruct ignorance.

a blog about it there is plenty more on google

SevenZarkSeven

Why do they have to be the main issues? They (or at least the first two) can lead to physical abuse going unnoticed, children growing up without their fathers, and can cause estranged fathers to commit suicide. I'd say that's pretty serious, and I think it's offensive to trivialize it. That's not to say that the issues that feminists typically campaign for aren't equally important, or even more important. Why can't we be concerned with both?

Female-on-male violence is typically seen as less serious than male-on-female violence

Because women are universally seen to be weaker, and men, under the patriarchy, are supposed to be big and tough and able to take it. Feminism fights to dismantle artificial gender constructs, which would eliminate this problem. So, this is an issue we are already tackling. No need to thank us.

-Women are typically seen as better caregivers than men, which seems to be reflected in custody disputes
Custody is given to the primary caregiver, not the woman because she is assumed to be so. Men are getting better at caring for their own children and this is reflected in the fact that more and more parents share residency 50/50. But in cases where a man was quite happy to abdicate childrearing to his partner as "women's work" while he happily continued his career can't then start crying that he suddenly want to step up and be a full-time day when the marriage breaks down. If you want to make sure you get fair access to your children, make sure you as much your child's primary carer as the mother for the child's entire life.

-Men may have to pay higher insurance than women
If you're talking about car insurance, not any more. This law has been changed. And if men weren't so keen on injuring and killing themselves and each other, this would not be true. Male aggression (resulting in higher injury rates) is also a results of artificial gender constructs which don't allow men to express emotions in a positive and healthy way. See point A for how feminists are already fighting this battle. Again, no need to thank us.

the eu outlawed gender discrimination in insurance costs in 2012

LineRunner

Actually, it is very easy to deconstruct ignorance. One does so through the use of logic and evidence. A more cynical OP than me would suggest that you are not capable of deconstructing my argument (perhaps because you recognize the validity in what I have said), but don't want to back down now.

I do think conscription is an issue that requires attention from both genders. As war is a feminist issue with violence against women it creates.

Two good examples in prostitution and femicide but I'd still argue (pointlessly) that conscription and death in service outstrips other sexists constructs significantly.