[Dragon]

Domestic abuse isn't what we're talking about. Oh, and FIY, women do that, too. You just don't hear about this, because men don't talk about such things. I'm not sitting in those things, but I assure you, this does happen. This is double standard as well, I assure you that women can be just as aggressive, mistreating or abusive as men. It's just that men won't admit that, due to fundamental differences in how the two genders think. Domestic abuse is a much, much greater problem than things we're talking about, and one only partially related to feminism. The woman isn't always the victim in those cases.

If you honestly believe that the status quo as it exists now is good enough, you should do yourself a favour and talk to women you are not related to about their experiences in everyday life.

I did talk to many women and this doesn't seem to be a problem. My female classmates are very successful and certainly not discriminated against like you seem to think. But then, it might vary across countries, classes and regions. There might still be bigotry on the "lower levels", so to speak, but for people I interact with, things seem pretty equal. Then again, I might be biased. I'm upper-middle class and mostly deal with people involved with academics in some way. I've seen some double standard in politics, but then again, Polish politicians are lower class in expensive (not always good-looking) suits. And even then, it's most about pushing women to power because they're (pretty) women and can distract from actual issues with a pretty face. Though they're just as incompetent as men, this being Poland. Law does not discriminate against women, and even the Polish military seems not to have many problems with them. The wage gap might still be there (again, mostly in lower, low-middle classes), but it's small and shrinking. This is to be expected, change generally flows from top. Rural people, uneducated laborers and such are always the last to accept any sort of changes, including treatment of women.

I might be wrong about it applying to the Western world, one of the things the commies did right was to strongly promote female workers. Indeed, my grandmother was involved in building a foundry when she was in school. As in, carting sand around in wheelbarrows. Still, I think it would be pretty strange if Poland, or all countries, was better than, say, Germany about treatment of women. I didn't account for that, but if you're right, then I apologize for putting so much faith in civilized countries...

[zookeeper]

Gender inequality doesn't only mean verifiable individual cases a person is discriminated against or prevented from doing something solely because of their gender. Indeed those are relatively few in the western world now (and when they happen, generally condemned), internet trolling aside.

Gender inequality also means cases where no one involved thinks people should be treated differently based on gender, yet due to ingrained gender stereotypes and the like, they actually do. Or cases where you can statistically tell that discrimination has to be going on even though no individual instance is certain.

Obviously some people take discrimination to mean only the former, so when talking about discrimination one should clarify what they mean.

[Mr. Vega]

Domestic abuse isn't what we're talking about. Oh, and FIY, women do that, too. You just don't hear about this, because men don't talk about such things. I'm not sitting in those things, but I assure you, this does happen. This is double standard as well.

Talking about this is a double standard? Therefore, i should shut up about it happening to women? Yeah, lemme think about th-NO.

And you started the talk about equality, so i brought up my experiences witnessing domestic abuse as evidence of how it actually is. It's what we're talking about now. Are there any other discussion 'rules' you'd like to arbitrarily change for your own convenience?

[AdmiralRalwood]

There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/

[zookeeper]

There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/

I'm afraid it's very unclear what it is that you're saying with that url? It's a page berating MRAs posted as a response to someone saying what they should be for. Does not compute.

[Aardwolf]

Well I, for one, only got involved in this discussion because of the censorship aspect.

Edit: Oops, apparently there was another half page or so between the post I thought was most recent and the actual most recent post ... meh.

[AdmiralRalwood]

There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/

I'm afraid it's very unclear what it is that you're saying with that url? It's a page berating MRAs posted as a response to someone saying what they should be for. Does not compute.

The only "Men's Rights" "Activists" in this world are misogynists who have deluded themselves (or been brainwashed) into thinking that women are the source of all their problems. Perhaps you should try actually reading the linked page.

Anyone actually interested in gender equality is more accurately described as a "feminist".

[Lorric]

@ Joshua

I can actually get behind much of what you say in your post. Because you're not attacking or twisting, and you make some very good points. And with the fact you might have the greatest cause of any of us to be angry at this, I praise you for that.

@ Mr. Vega

I'm glad you're not lumping Bobboau in with those others.

There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/

I'm afraid it's very unclear what it is that you're saying with that url? It's a page berating MRAs posted as a response to someone saying what they should be for. Does not compute.

Because it's okay to post something that isn't rock solid 100% hard evidence as long as it's against the supposed enemies of feminism, but anything else gets dismissed. Or so it seems.

And it's okay to say things like this:

The only "Men's Rights" "Activists" in this world are misogynists who have deluded themselves (or been brainwashed) into thinking that women are the source of all their problems. Perhaps you should try actually reading the linked page.

[666maslo666]

There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/

Your quite one-sided article takes its concent from /r/redpill subreddit, which is the more extreme and anti-feminist wing of mens right movement on reddit. Its like someone linking to some feminazi site and trying to paint feminism as that. The movement for male rights is much broader than that, some of it even pro-feminist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_movement

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fathers%27_rights_movement

[Aardwolf]

Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.

[zookeeper]

The only "Men's Rights" "Activists" in this world are misogynists who have deluded themselves (or been brainwashed) into thinking that women are the source of all their problems.

Well, that's just silly, I'm sure there's a few good ones.

Anyway, I had to ask for clarification because I wasn't sure if you agreed or disagreed with 666maslo666, but it sounds like you at least don't disagree. Enough clarification for me.

[Mr. Vega]

Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.

**** people who make false accusations of rape-all five percent of them. They're condemning others who a were raped to have their cases ignored. There. You may now continue the attempt at distraction.

[Lorric]

Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.

It would be interesting what the reaction here would have been if Quinn had accused her ex-boyfriend of raping her. I'd be surprised if it was dismissed in the same way as her ex-boyfriend is being dismissed now.

[Mr. Vega]

Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.

It would be interesting what the reaction here would have been if Quinn had accused her ex-boyfriend of raping her. I'd be surprised if it was dismissed in the same way as her ex-boyfriend is being dismissed now.

Did she rape him, or is this another rediculous attempt at introducing a strawman?

[AdmiralRalwood]

There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/

Your quite one-sided article takes its concent from /r/redpill subreddit, which is the more extreme and anti-feminist wing of mens right movement on reddit. Its like someone linking to some feminazi site and trying to paint feminism as that. The movement for male rights is much broader than that, some of it even pro-feminist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_movement

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fathers%27_rights_movement

Ah yes, the "Fathers' Rights Movement", who seem to think that men are incapable of getting custody of their children, even though when men actually ask for custody, they get it in the vast majority of cases. Yeah, that's sure some anti-male bias, huh?

Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.

Pray tell, link to some facts that show that false rape accusations are somehow a bigger problem than actual ****ing rape.

[Dragon]

Men's rights are a bit of a silly idea. Yes, there are times when men are at a disadvantage, but one should not fight for "someone's rights" exclusively. They should all go towards gender equality. Extremists aside

Domestic abuse isn't what we're talking about. Oh, and FIY, women do that, too. You just don't hear about this, because men don't talk about such things. I'm not sitting in those things, but I assure you, this does happen. This is double standard as well.

Talking about this is a double standard? Therefore, i should shut up about it happening to women? Yeah, lemme think about th-NO.

Yes, talking about it like you do is double standard. Therefore, you should talk about it happening to men, too. That's my take on it. In this particular case, I mentioned it because it's not a good example of a place women are discriminated. It is an example, but there's another side to that coin you should have mentioned. It is related to feminism, but domestic abuse is not exclusively linked to discrimination of women and is a separate, if partially related problem. You also can't talk about domestic abuse without mentioning male examples, because it'd be a very incomplete picture. I wouldn't open that can of worms in here, TBH. If anything, it deserves a separate thread. I'm not saying it isn't a serious issue, or that it's completely irrelevant, or that it shouldn't be talked about. It should. But it doesn't contribute to this discussion that much, and runs the risk of hijacking it because it's so bloody complex and difficult.

Gender inequality doesn't only mean verifiable individual cases a person is discriminated against or prevented from doing something solely because of their gender. Indeed those are relatively few in the western world now (and when they happen, generally condemned), internet trolling aside.

Gender inequality also means cases where no one involved thinks people should be treated differently based on gender, yet due to ingrained gender stereotypes and the like, they actually do. Or cases where you can statistically tell that discrimination has to be going on even though no individual instance is certain.

Obviously some people take discrimination to mean only the former, so when talking about discrimination one should clarify what they mean.

The problem is, to put it bluntly, only the former can be "fought" in any meaningful way. That's what I meant. The latter is the result of literally millennia of conditioning. People tend to subconsciously "play their roles", those who don't become detached from "normal" people (and are incredibly valuable because of that). The second type of discrimination is something that could only be removed with time, and with help of exceptional, independent people. We need to have TV shows in which women and men are not only perfectly equal, but no attention is drawn to it. We need "casual" feminism that doesn't consist of white knights and trolls arguing about women, but of women going about their business like it was nothing. This isn't going to be a fast process, either. We're trying to dislodge something deeply entrenched in human culture, and culture isn't quick to change. The only chance to consciously influence that is through art, and it needs to be subtle, so that it's not a message or anything. It should just be.

[Flipside]

I believe the discussion about the difference between real feminism and what most people are told is feminism has already taken place in this Forum at some point.

Though, I will admit, I'm still a little confused how this got to be so feminism-centric, she's being attacked for being a feminist this is true, but that's not really why people are attacking her, it seems to be being used more as a method of attack than a reason for it.

The thing that is really confusing me is that, of all the times people choose to get up in arms about the possible lack of objectivity in the gaming press, it is over the coital habits of a single indie developer who produced a game that wasn't even reviewed by the person she slept with, whether she is a manipulative ***** or not, I would have thought the increasing reliance on advertising income from the companies whose games they are reviewing are far more likely to have a policy-wide impact on impartiality than sex is and would be a far more pressing concern in that area.

[Lorric]

Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.

It would be interesting what the reaction here would have been if Quinn had accused her ex-boyfriend of raping her. I'd be surprised if it was dismissed in the same way as her ex-boyfriend is being dismissed now.

Did she rape him, or is this another rediculous attempt at introducing a strawman?

I am saying I do not think people would have applied the same arguments to Quinn in a reverse situation. That I don't think they would say that she must be lying because there is no 100% concrete evidence, and because there is motive. Under those conditions we would dismiss anyone making accusations from a broken relationship without concrete proof, going so far as to dismiss evidence if that evidence could potentially be faked.

[AdmiralRalwood]

I am saying I do not think people would have applied the same arguments to Quinn in a reverse situation.

The "reverse situation" would be her accusing her boyfriend of cheating on her in order to gain favourable reviews of a game he had made, even though the person in question never actually wrote a review of that game.

If you don't think the vast majority of responses would have been "instant dismissal", you're living in a fantasy world (actually, based on your posting history, you're living in a fantasy world regardless).

[Lorric]

I am saying I do not think people would have applied the same arguments to Quinn in a reverse situation.

The "reverse situation" would be her accusing her boyfriend of cheating on her in order to gain favourable reviews of a game he had made, even though the person in question never actually wrote a review of that game.

If you don't think the vast majority of responses would have been "instant dismissal", you're living in a fantasy world (actually, based on your posting history, you're living in a fantasy world regardless).

Don't twist it, of course the conditions for that scenario would be absurd.

I mean a reverse situation that's believable. Where Quinn is the accuser.