Why isn't there a genuine 'Men's Movement'..?

[AWholeLottaNosy]

So instead of Pick Up Artists, MRAs, UKIP etc, why isn't there a genuine 'Men's Movement' to look at issues such as male suicide, depression, alcoholism, difficulties with expressing emotions and vulnerability, male violence ( against both men and women), homophobia, how to have a fulfilling relationship with a woman and be a good father etc? I would fully support anyone who attempted to do this as they are laudable and important aims.

INSTEAD OF SLAGGING US OFF FOR TRYING TO ADDRESS ISSUES THAT AFFECT US AS WOMEN?

Oh yes, I should say I think its quite right that all feminists blame patriarchy for their oppression. What seems to confuse this issue is how patriarchy is defined. Often it isn't defined. Is it a theory, a descriptive category of cultural institutions and practice, a social totality (although post structuralists might take issue) does this theory have any methodology etc,

The problem men have is this, if patriarchy is defined as a totality explaining all social relations, and men as a class are the exploiters of women, then to attack patriarchy attacks male privilege. Of course they see this as attacking men.

Luckily we don't have to attack men or their privilege because its being undone as we speak, if what they believe to be privilege is the very thing that capital is wrestling from them. I think men perceive that their loss of privilege is the undoing of their masculinity. They feel emasculated by their loss of economic status. They wrongly believe its a zero sum game with women gaining from this. This leads to a contradictory situation as patriarchal culture is undermined in one sphere, men seek to strengthen it in other spheres, be that DV or rape. Far from being safer, we are probably less so. Which is why we have MRAs and dating gurus telling men women deserve nothing less than "real men" The fact these new cultural products and groups exists suggests that men probably do feel very besieged.

The fact these new cultural products and groups exists suggests that men probably do feel very besieged.

While obviously my heart bleeds and all that, they may just have to learn to forge an identity not based on dominating women. The sooner they accept that, the better for them.

I don't think anyone would say that things like suicide rates among young men aren't a problem. They are. The differences come when they are thinking about who should deal with it. Feminists say that, because men are more likely to be in positions of power, men are best placed to change things for other men. MRAs tell feminists that it's our fault, and that we should be sorting it out.

They also talk about DV shelters. They say that there's too many for women and not enough for men, so women's ones should shut down in favour of men. This is totally irrational. Men are more than capable of organising spaces in their homes for male victims of DV. It would be utterly inappropriate for women to do this, firstly because of the risk it might pose those women, and secondly because of how triggering it might be for the male victim to have too many women around them when they are trying to heal and regroup.

If men wanted these things sorted, they have all the resources they need at their disposal already.

ApocalypseThen, really that is very naughty me too. I am just trying to articulate why I think men might actually feel inclined to attack feminism. Not sure how a feminist can really get these men on board and explain anything when they see us as the cause of their problem.

I don't think men have these resources at their disposal. DV isn't effecting a wealthy elite and therefore men must fight for these things, just as we have had to, and just as we keep up the fight when funding is withdrawn by the big bad men who represent that wealthy elite. It isn't the job of feminists to keep apologising because some big bad man is making some other man's life difficult.

On the more positive front, Movember. e.g.: uk.movember.com/programs/mental-health

Quite why the PUA movement even needs to exist is quite beyond me. They have it backwards if you are having trouble attracting romantic partners why even goto other men? Ask a women. Unless you want to date a man of course!

Having said that one or two male friends have come to me over the years and have done ok. If I formed a PUA movement it would be a simple website with four simple bullet points:

Be yourself.
Don't be an asshole.
Work on self esteem/confidence.
Widen your social circle (ie more friends of both male/female varieties).

I don't think it would sell very well!

The X factor is the self esteem/confidence and that applies to both genders, and is remarkably hard to acquire on your own, hence the wider social circle. PUA crap generates a false confidence not a true measure of faith in yourself which is something we could all do with more of at times.

Movember is a great example of a positive campaign run by men about men's health issues. I'm sure there's some dark corner of the internet where men complain about women not doing enough for Movember but I've never seen anyone involved in Movember connecting it to feminists' or women's failure to do enough for men's health nor complaining about women's health issues getting too much attention.

Dervel those are good points. I'd add "Don't assume a woman owes you sex in return for kindness / friendliness" I know this is a subset of "Don't be an asshole" but it seems to be such a key gripe among PUA types that it does, sadly, need to be specifically said.

I'd also possibly add "have reasonable expectations".

www.meninchildcare.co.uk/ is another group aimed at helping men in a certain area, and indirectly women as it's trying to get away from "Childcare = women".

Agreed flora maybe even no expectations. Socializing is its own reward, and easier all round when we're well within our comfort zones.

Personally, I get almost all of those things from this site. Why invent a new site when this one has so much content and activity.

I don't think dervel was being serious about launching a website

A friend of a friend founded www.thecalmzone.net which aims to tackle suicide among men

From what I have seen those men and women who are genuinely working to improve things that have more of a negative effect on men are just getting on with it and view feminists as allies (or as neutral fellow campaigners for a better lot for vulnerable groups). The big difference is between them and self-declared MRAs is that they don't generally view feminists as the cause of these problems

PUA crap generates a false confidence not a true measure of faith in yourself...

From the little I have seen of PUA sites of the likes of Julien Blan[d]c and his ilk, I would have to agree with this. PUA generate a performance of self confidence, a facade, not real self-esteem itself. Real self esteem is hard won, develops over time, penetrates a person to the deepest, most unconscious level, and eventually, affects patterns of thought, emotions and behaviour in a very positive way.

Actually if you want to be successful with women its best to ask someone who is successful with women.
Just as you don't ask a man's opinion on what to wear, you ask another woman who dresses well.

Advice of be confidence, be yourself and don't be an arsehole doesn't usually help.
If 'yourself' is to play and talk about video games 24/7 then chances of pulling a woman he is actually attracted instead of 'settling' are slim.
You only have to read the dating thread to understand that being hot and cold arsehole generally gets women hot and bothered.

I THINK this is how our society is structured according to how important they are:

A combination of Powerful and/or good looking men: Top 20%
Good looking women: 20%
The rest of the women: 80%
The the rest of the men: 80%

Whilst its changing, the only way a woman was able to move up the social ladder was/to some extent still is because of man she married.
I think feminism fights to help women move up the social ladder ie. get judged on their achievements instead of their looks.

On the other hand the freedom afforded to men is they can move up and down the ladder based on their achievements.
This means the ones that fail to do so can see themselves as failures and will get reluctant to seek help.

I think that's why some men see feminism as against men because they FEEL they haven't benefit from being a man.

"Successful with women" = they will have sex with you?

arse that's the same shit PUAs say. Please don't taint the board with this crap.

The notion that 80% of men are on the lowest rung of society is utter utter bullshit.

I must be butt ugly then since I married a bloke who lives, works, breathes computer games

Either he won the lottery Bertie or he settled, according to arse

I agree MEOD social mobility is practically non-existent now and it's getting worse in many ways. I'm mulling over whether I think well off women have more power than poor men. I think it's true in an economic sense but not sure about politically or socially. If a MC woman ran against a WC man for a party nomination as an MP, for example, I think the WC man would have the advantage but maybe not always and it probably depends on the political stance of the party.

I hate the notion of social mobility since it assumes a WC person should become MC or want to become MC when what a lot of people want is just a decent job and more money, not to "climb a ladder". However I'd be a hypocrite not to be in favour of measures that improve social mobility since I have benefited from them myself.

The thing is if you act fake, you attract someone looking for that fake persona, ie someone who's interested in playing the game. They're putting up a fake persona too for the "game" and so you bounce off each other like that. Everything is working fine, you progress to sex etc. But after the fake game playing facade wears off you might have absolutely nothing in common. And then people get upset because they reckon that the things they don't like about the other person are "wrong" and need to be "fixed".

If you just looked for someone who you actually get on with in the first place you avoid all of that

Bertie PUA types don't care about women's personalities. arsenal didn't even mention women's personalities in his post, it's all about getting the best looking woman possible. I saw this picture on twitter a few weeks ago, posted by a man as an illustration of women's privilege. Where do you even begin? Maybe if PUA types cared a little about women's personalities and less about playing a game, they wouldn't find themselves 10 years down the line sitting on the County Court roof dressed as Del Boy Superman.

Shocker, the man in that picture is fully clothed and the woman is naked.

And - it's completely within each person's control (acknowledge the influence of society) what it takes to make a relationship fit. If one person has one criteria and another several - so what?!?

It is indeed a very shallow way to look at the world. You see it when people say that someone is in/out of another person's "league". Because an attractive person could never find things attractive about others aside from their appearance, of course