Suicide-a feminist issue?

[whenwomenruletheworld]

Tragically high male suicide rates have I think wrongly painted this as a men's issue. Aren't all the suicides men and women tragedies? And if the "man up/grow a pair" culture is in part responsible for men killing themselves in such numbers, when will society see feminism as the main opponent to the patriarchal bullshit which creates these gender stereotypes as the main hope for both men and women of dismantling them? It is disheartening to hear men talk disparagingly about feminism when my God the alternatives PUA nonsense MRA, UKIP, are so totally discredited. As someone posted on here when will there be a men's rights movement which embraces feminism as it's sister movement and which focuses on things which damage everyone?

Conscription of women has been ignored or minimised by many people because it doesn't fit the patriarchal men-only conscription myth.

Yes, and that number included my paternal grandmother who was in the WVS for most of the war. I am incredibly proud of what she achieved, and think she really believed she made a difference, and remained incredibly proud of it until her passing.

However, my initial post (in my defence) was being sent to war - apologies, I perhaps should have more clearly stated "posted to a frontline offensive position in an identifiable military action of the conflict".

Sadly, I think that all "rights" that women have been granted, are granted by men and enforced by men. Necessarily so. You routinely read on these forums of the "terror" that women experience around men. Note that it would be deemed unacceptable for a man to say "I was terrified when a strange man stood close to me on the tube".

On the other hand, there are no "rights" than men do not have because of their gender. Framing it as a "rights" movement is partially counter productive in my opinion since people can point at the statute book and say "well there you go, there are no rights you don't have that men do". If you boil it down to a movement which tackles male on male violence and the culture that tolerates that, then that's hardly a "rights" movement.

I work in what I believe to be a fairly standard professional services company.
They behave like that because they can, because 80% of the company is men.
Flip side of what you've been told about pay. You can probably legally challenge that after the recent shared parental leave legislation. That is discrimination.

Went down that right - the legislation has been purposefully crafter to allow companies to avoid it.

I agree with itall

"Mens rights" group doesn't sit well with me

What rights dont men have compared to women?

If you have legal cover on your house insurance you might be able to get your case looked at by an employment lawyer. I hope you do because legal challenge is the only way to ensure these companies act fairly.

I have been down every route possible. My employer has to allow me the same TIME off as a mother, but doesn't have to offer me the same access to Company Maternity Pay. It isn't sexist because if I adopt, then I CAN get access to CMP. See? No, me neither but I have had the company lawyers, a personal lawyer that I paid for (an expert in discrimination) and the trade union all look at it.

I agree with itall

"Mens rights" group doesn't sit well with me

What rights dont men have compared to women?

Funnily enough, I was just about to come back on line and post a similar thing. The problem is, what else do you call it?

Men's liberation? No
Men's issues? Feels like we aren't focussing on outcomes
Men's problems? Sounds like you might take it to the GP
Meninism? The term has been irrevocably sullied
Men's equality movement? My preference - AND before I am wilfully misunderstood or end up pointing out ANOTHER point of view that I don't hold - I am more than happy that means also fighting where men are on the benefitting end of inequality.

The solution as usual is contained within the problem. Little boys need decent male role models and father figures. Not only to teach how to compete in a competitive world, but how to be complete, well rounded, wise and compassionate human beings.

Most of the MRA and PUA communities seem to be born out of what fundamentally appears to be daddy issues at least to my eyes.

Like a lot of men I grew up without a father, however I was fortunate in that my maternal grandfather was very involved when I was growing up. That is not to downplay my mother and grandmother's influence, but for a little boy I had something to aspire to.

In short fathers need to be hands on.

"posted to a frontline offensive position in an identifiable military action of the conflict".

You are narrowing and narrowing the terms of your comparison, so that you can still say that men are harmed to a greater extent by male violence than women. If you are in this to, as you say, try and arrive in good faith at more of a balance, this doesn't seem like the way to go about it.

I think this is a side point and I don't want to derail what is a really useful thread- but I said sent to war, and OP talked of women being conscripted into the land army for example. I didn't feel I needed to be more specific about what I meant initially. I am not "narrowing the terms", simply being forced to re-submit the same point in different language.

I will always try to understand the point the author of a post is trying to make - rather than using a straw man attack.

The solution as usual is contained within the problem. Little boys need decent male role models and father figures. Not only to teach how to compete in a competitive world, but how to be complete, well rounded, wise and compassionate human beings.

I do get what you are saying, but I think the key bit is decent male role models rather than NECESSARILY father figures.

I say father figures quite deliberately, as my grandfather used to say you learn morals and ethics at the breakfast table, watching your family. That is to say every child and particularly boys in terms of modeling behavior benefit from having a daily, persistent loving male presence in their lives.

unexpsoc

You, as a man, are in no different a position to the female partner of a woman who has given birth. For every child born after 1st April last year, there is a period of maternity leave for the human being who bore the child, and had the physical and mental risks and disadvantages that went with that.

The mother (i.e. the person who bore etc. etc.) can choose to conclude her maternity leave early and switch the rest of the maternity leave into Shared Parental Leave, which has the flexibility to be taken by either parent, all in one go or as a mixture.

Companies are not obliged to have enhanced maternity pay at all. If they do have enhanced maternity pay, they are not obliged to mirror its provisions onto shared parental leave, just as having enhanced maternity pay doesn't preclude having statutory only sick pay, or vice versa.

You are correct that this may continue to disadvantage women in enhanced pay roles as it may be more affordable for the family to have the woman stay off longer. However, if the government had not introduced this distinction, it is clear that many companies would simply have pulled enhanced maternity pay packages as soon as possible.

You may also be on stronger grounds if, for example, your company offers a year full pay for maternity and your wife has taken six months (so you want the second six months to match your firm's second six months) than if your firm pays full pay for six months but your wife has already taken six months of leave. The goal of the policy was not to 'double up' enhancements.

HTH.

Throughout history, unexpsoc, how many women do you think died in childbirth vs men in war?

And as women are making inroads all the time, on their own campaigning, into military roles, other than supporting them in these campaign, what is the role for your movement there?

I have genuinely, genuinely tried to fight this issue about shared parental leave and can not find a single lawyer who is willing to take it.

Whilst I do appreciate the kind words, the reality of it is quite different. I have almost burned myself out fighting this and spent more than a few tears at the injustice of it.

So unless somebody on here is an employment specialist willing to take on my case, I have to accept what they are saying - no chance of winning.

Was that in response to my post, unexpsoc?

You won't win the case for the reasons I outlined.

Over time, good employers may well find that improving SPL benefits increases staff retention and improves recruitment. If men cite SPL as a reason for choosing one new job over another, I suspect that will accelerate this process.

You, as a man, are in no different a position to the female partner of a woman who has given birth. For every child born after 1st April last year, there is a period of maternity leave for the human being who bore the child, and had the physical and mental risks and disadvantages that went with that.

Basically, yes this argument was the one used. I think the problem is the way that the bill was touted publicly was that my wife and I could now choose who took leave, without it being a question of financial detriment. Basically, I can have the leave, but can't afford to take the leave.

I think the point you make about the mother "choosing" to give up her maternity leave rights is disagreed with in the link from the cloisters website below - but I am not a lawyer myself.

The trouble is (IMO at least) that since "men" (which feminists define to mean "men as a class" whatever exactly that might mean), are the ones who "grant" women equal rights. Which sex would a Mens right movement appeal to to address the perceived inequality ? In the feminist analysis you would be appealing to other men. This, in my eyes, would be equivalent to the ANC appealing to other black south africans to address racial discrimination against black people by white people. Framed as a campaign of the weak against the strong, the existence of a Mens rights movement is predicated on Men being oppressed or unequal. If you are talking about a specific issues that affect some men - then i fail to see how that can be couched in terms of unequal "rights".

" I think the problem is the way that the bill was touted publicly was that my wife and I could now choose who took leave, without it being a question of financial detriment. "

With respect to the statutory provisions (and I imagine the majority of people don't get any better than stat pay), there is no financial detriment, assuming your wife takes at least 6 weeks to get the 90% pay.

"To start SPL or ShPP the mother must end her maternity leave (for SPL) or her Maternity Allowance or maternity pay (for ShPP). If she doesn’t get maternity leave (but she ends her Maternity Allowance or pay early) her partner might still get SPL."

My bolding. From here:

www.gov.uk/shared-parental-leave-and-pay/overview

Slugs, over time I expect employers will also enhance their SPL, but they will need to do so on a costed basis and it may involve meeting somewhere in the middle on their current enhancements that potentially apply to well under 50% of the workforce (not all women being of CB age) to well over 50% (men being able to father children throughout their working lives).