Discrimination Against Men in All Areas of Life

[Amorsite]

The facts
Men are discriminated against in all areas of life. We identify discriminations in :

1. Education
2. Employment
3. Taxation
4. Social Security
5. Social Protection
6. Health Care
7. Civil Law

8. Criminal Law
9. Matrimonial & Family Law
10. 'Women-only' syndrome
11. Media Representation
12. Representation in Women's and Men's Groups
13. Representation in Parliament & Government

Discrimination against men in the UK

[Susi]

Whilst I agree that discrimination against men exists, I don't really think that it's as bad as it is said on this website.

"Women only courses"-- what are those? None exist at my university, nor are there men only courses.

"Encourage women into certain professions programs" -- there are also programs to encourage both males and females into professions

"changes in types of industry, away from men-based manufacturing to women-based service industries, while no support to assist men at all" -- despite many factories employed exclusively women and both men and women are fully capable of working in service industries

"circumcision on men is still allowed by law, while being a criminal offence on women" -- Jewish people would become upset if it was illegal, and there are Jews in Britain. :\

"false allegations of rape used effectively by women against men they wish to attack" -- this is deplorable but there are real instances of rape

" ‘women only’ library and swimming pool sessions"- Really seems more like a Muslim thing than anything else

"meanwhile women want entry to men-only clubs etc, rather than establish their own clubs they appear simply to want to prevent men having their own" -- And men would try to go to women-only clubs. Simple.

"enormous support for women in women’s organisations"-- Kind of a given, they are women's organisations. -_-

"no such support for men’s groups"-- what type of groups? football teams, what?

"deliberately continued to accept privileges in social security etc, which were based on the previous financial dependency of women on men, while this no longer exists." -- women continue to make less money than men, there is an income gap

"We regard the assertion that women are disadvantaged as The Big Lie of our time."

And I regard the assertation that men are disadvantages as "The Big Lie" also.

Historically women have been not in such a position to speak like this. Men have always dominated.

[Marcus Marulus]

What about this?

[Delbáeth]

Mynydd! Susi is discriminating against us men .

[Susi]

There is no chivalry from men anymore. They'd rather see us flat on our faces then helping us over the ice. This "New Chivalry" article isn't about chivalry at all, it's bad for both men and women.

Feminism causes men to resent women and to give up caring for them. Men start to become chauvinists.

[Amorsite]

"Encourage women into certain professions programs" -- there are also programs to encourage both males and females into professions

even if so, so what? It is hard to think even of a single instance in which men are given the upper hand by law. It is always either neutral or pro women.

[Tryggr]

Originally Posted by Susi

There is no chivalry from men anymore. They'd rather see us flat on our faces then helping us over the ice.

Only modern behaving men.

This "New Chivalry" article isn't about chivalry at all, it's bad for both men and women.

Agreed completely.

Feminism causes men to resent women and to give up caring for them. Men start to become chauvinists.

Feminism causes me to resent feminists, I've met some wonderful women however who don't seem to need feminist lies to live a happy life.

Oh, and I can't stand chauvinists either.

[Amorsite]

Just three things off the top of my head they seem to have forgotten or not expressed clearly enough and apply not perhaps to the UK but to many other countries:

- Compulsory military or civil service for men and not women (ie young guys get stolen about a year of their lives defending a state that treates them as second class citizens)

- Quotas for women in college, parliament.

- Women history month, bombardment of feminist nonsense in careers such as Languages or Social Sciences.

[Sergius]

Originally Posted by Susi

There is no chivalry from men anymore.

Not true. I still willingly cast my cape upon a muddy road for ladies to remain dry-footed.

Originally Posted by Amorsite

- Compulsory military or civil service for men and not women (ie young guys get stolen about a year of their lives defending a state that treates them as second class citizens)

- Quotas for women in college, parliament.

- Women history month, bombardment of feminist nonsense in careers such as Languages or Social Sciences.

Only the latter is worth discussing. Striving for equal rights to the point where you feel that young men are deprived of a year of their lives by doing military service is bogus. The logical response: do you want all young women to serve in the army? Or them doing something equally worthless for a year just to make the genders even in forced time waste?
The genders are different. Society acting upon those differences does not equate discrimination.

[Susi]

Originally Posted by Tryggr

Only modern behaving men.

Which is like 99% of them. -_-

Feminism causes me to resent feminists, I've met some wonderful women however who don't seem to need feminist lies to live a happy life.

I understand but what I see here is a resentment against all females, and not just feminists.

Originally Posted by Amorsite

- Compulsory military or civil service for men and not women (ie young guys get stolen about a year of their lives defending a state that treates them as second class citizens)

Sorry I just had a seizure from laughter. Do you honestly think a woman makes a completely competent soldier? She is different physically and mentally and won't be a suitable soldier in the manner of which young men are trained. I've never really heard of compulsory civil service which is exclusively male. Sorry.

Second class citizens? Sorry I think you made me have another laughter-seizure. :p Males dominate politics and have dominated politics for what? Oh, several thousand years? I can't see them as being second-class citizens.

- Quotas for women in college, parliament.

Mmm, colleges, maybe understandable to be pissed off about. Parliament? It represents the people and if the people want to vote in women, why not?

And why are you resentful of women in college? What if they were there of their own merit? We're not stupid, sorry. I got into university like every other kid who applied, and I pay exactly the same as any other person who does my program. I pay the same incidental fees and the same course fees.

- Women history month, bombardment of feminist nonsense in careers such as Languages or Social Sciences.

Somewhat stupid, I agree. Most serious scholars disregard feminist theory anyways, even if they are female.

edit: I missed something:

even if so, so what? It is hard to think even of a single instance in which men are given the upper hand by law. It is always either neutral or pro women.

Kind of like the whole men getting off rape charges because they're rich and powerful thing? Or the male police officers are too goddamned lazy to do anything?

[Amorsite]

Sorry I just had a seizure from laughter. Do you honestly think a woman makes a completely competent soldier? She is different physically and mentally and won't be a suitable soldier in the manner of which young men are trained. I've never really heard of compulsory civil service which is exclusively male. Sorry.

I don't believe in obligatory military service, not for anyone. But if it is mandatory for men, there should also be some sort of request for women as well (even if not militar). Did you notice I wrote "military or civil service"? There are plenty of other social works women could do instead.

Second class citizens? Sorry I think you made me have another laughter-seizure. :p Males dominate politics and have dominated politics for what? Oh, several thousand years? I can't see them as being second-class citizens.

Read the tense of the verb: they are not were second class citizens. Nothing of what you said disproves it.

Mmm, colleges, maybe understandable to be pissed off about. Parliament? It represents the people and if the people want to vote in women, why not?

Are you saying that it is OK that only a given number of men are allowed? Most people vote for parties, not individuals anyway. Parties are forced to introduce females.

And why are you resentful of women in college? What if they were there of their own merit? We're not stupid, sorry. I got into university like every other kid who applied, and I pay exactly the same as any other person who does my program. I pay the same incidental fees and the same course fees.

Try reading my statement, it mentioned quotas specifically (ie women who are there because they are women while some guy merited it more).

Somewhat stupid, I agree. Most serious scholars disregard feminist theory anyways, even if they are female.

If so, it for sure doesn't show in "western" poliices.

edit: I missed something:
Kind of like the whole men getting off rape charges because they're rich and powerful thing? Or the male police officers are too goddamned lazy to do anything?

Did you even read my post? In what law is that written?

[Susi]

Anyways, I wrote this last night but the forum was being upgraded. So here we go.

Originally Posted by Amorsite

I don't believe in obligatory military service, not for anyone. But if it is mandatory for men, there should also be some sort of request for women as well (even if not militar). Did you notice I wrote "military or civil service"? There are plenty of other social works women could do instead.

Your phrasing indicates that military or civil service is solely a male pursuit. And yes, there are plenty of other social works that women can and indeed do do. Social work, for example, is a profession dominated primarily by women and is government employment for the most part... Unless you think we're all lazy people who do nothing but oppress the poor men.

Read the tense of the verb: they are not were second class citizens. Nothing of what you said disproves it.

But it somehow is still acceptable to men to be able to harrass and assault me in the street or on the metro. If they were second class citizens this would be highly punishable, and I doubt they'd even be on the street or on the metro.

If you'll notice, many things are male-centred. Men are often perceived as more powerful and if a woman is in this position (of course you'll say she was put in by quota and not by merit, but that's because you think all women are stupid cows, or so it seems from how you talk about us) the woman always makes less money and isn't given as much recognition or esteem. Another thing -- if someone is going to meet, say, a Dr. Smith, and they don't know the gender, almost every single time they'll assume he's male because of course women aren't capable of getting PhDs because they're too busy shopping for clothes.

I'm tired of men whinging on and on about their second class status when it clearly isn't the case. Wah wah those females want to use their intelligence instead of letting it waste away due to unfair gender stereotypes and chauvinism that pervades most male thought.

Haven't you ever heard of objectification? It happens more often to women then men, and it's always used to sell male-focused products. If one looks on the telly one always sees more male-centred advertisements than female (unless it's a female-network, then of course female centred. and before you go on a tangent, there are plenty of networks that cater to male interests).



What does this advertisement show? Male domination over this women... What do you think is about to happen to her? She's going to somehow become more powerful in the situation? No, it looks like, to be totally honest, that she's going to be raped.



Woman submitting to a man, again. It's rare to see the reverse, if at all.



Of course a woman is an object like a BMW, right? Because they're not using the woman's body to sell the car, they're using her personality or looks or what have you. Hmm, who is more the second class citizen? The one with the face and the clearly dominating position or the one underneath with a car magazine for a face?

Are you saying that it is OK that only a given number of men are allowed? Most people vote for parties, not individuals anyway. Parties are forced to introduce females.

And only a given number of females are allowed. You're just turning it around. So you want male-dominated politics or something? Remember that women can get into political positions with something called merit, or is merit the sole realm of the male?

Try reading my statement, it mentioned quotas specifically (ie women who are there because they are women while some guy merited it more).

I've never seen such a quota in place. Which academic institutions?

Maybe some guys don't deserve it but feel resentful so blame such supposed policies so they feel better about themselves? Who knows.

If so, it for sure doesn't show in "western" poliices.

Scholars hardly influence this, there's a feminist thought in nearly every social science, and not every social science or every division of every social science has great political influence.

Did you even read my post? In what law is that written?

It's not written in law but it's happened. Don't have a fairy-tale view of the world where all the laws are always applying and that everyone follows them or that they're enforced as they're written. I read your post, and then I applied something called "reality" to it.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Susi

There is no chivalry from men anymore. They'd rather see us flat on our faces then helping us over the ice.

Nah, maybe not all of them, maybe some would still act in a chivalrous manner, but are afraid of woman's reaction if they don't know her personally (she might be a rabid feminist, you never know).

Originally Posted by Susi

This "New Chivalry" article isn't about chivalry at all, it's bad for both men and women.

What the article says, is that a certain traits of what was previously known as chivalry has become ingrained in the societal code of "political correctness". It is not chivalry in the old sense of word, but only a distant echo thereof, totally disconnected from its original meaning.

And, yes, I agree it is bad for both men and women, because it is hypocritical and aimed at perpetuating a Big Lie.

Originally Posted by Susi

Feminism causes men to resent women and to give up caring for them. Men start to become chauvinists.

It appears that feminists helped the spreading of some attitudes they claimed to be trying to suppress.

[M.R.]

Originally Posted by Susi

Hahaha, I liked this one!

I don't really see a problem here, it's a good commercial, I guess you all here are a little to sensitive.