I was looking up something quite different but stumbled upon a site called 'mumsnet'. Now, remember, this site is purporting to be a website for mothers, NOT feminists.

Yet, this thread I encountered seemed full of feminist propaganda and man-blaming. So I registered a fake account and went on to respond to the below post on their site:

Writing in an article on Politics Home, Dominic Raab MP for Esher and Walton has written:

"It is almost taboo for a man to question the assertion that the rapidly dwindling pay gap is the result of discrimination, rather than genuine choice. The debate has been consumed by the prejudice it seeks to purge."

"While we have some of the toughest anti-discrimination laws in the world, we are blind to some of the most flagrant discrimination – against men. From the cradle to the grave, men are getting a raw deal. Men work longer hours, die earlier, but retire later than women. "

Then there is the more subtle sexism. Men caused the banking crisis. Men earn more because they are more assertive in pay negotiations. One FT commentator recently complained that: ‘High-flying women are programmed to go for high-flying men. Most men aren’t attracted to women who are more successful than they are.’ Can you imagine the outrage if such trite generalisations were made about women, or other minorities? Feminists are now amongst the most obnoxious bigots."

"You can’t have it both ways. Either you believe in equality or you don’t. If you buy into the whole Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus theory of gender difference – with all its pseudo science - you can’t then complain about inequalities of outcome that flow both ways from those essentially sexist distinctions."

What do you think MNetters?

Mumsnet Discussions - Men discriminated against from cradle to grave according to Dominic Raab MP Discussions - Feminism/women's rights

I'll let you make your own minds up... on the conversation piece.

Quote from me

I note that some of you seem concerned that a man (gasp) speaks up against feminist values (of blaming men for everything) and some have even denied that many feminists have blamed men for the banking crisis and such like.

So let me ask you, when Harriet Harman continually bashed on men during her reign as 'equality' (LMFAO) minister, did any single one of you take issue with her for her constant assaults at men?

Even in her book she claimed fathers are of no value at all - Did any one of you take issue with that?

No?

Oh... so it's only bad when a man speaks against an ideology (i.e. not 'women') of blaming and hating on men... but when that ideology of hating & blaming men (i.e. half the planet's population) is running rampant, you're all blind to it - Amazing!

Quote from sethstarkaddersmackerel

oh another ignorant MRA come to talk shit about feminism. Yawn. Go and read a few basic books about what feminism actually is and come back when you've got something intelligent to say.

Quote from vesuvia

JohnathonRocks - "Even in her book she claimed fathers are of no value at all"

Can you provide a quote and page number where Harriet Harman wrote what you claim?

Quote from HerBex

JonathanRocks you very obviously have no idea what feminist values are. Go and do a bit of basic reading as Seth advises, this is the mumsnet feminist section, we expect a bit more intellectual rigour please, we don't want to engage with stupidity as we do enough of that in RL. We come here as an oasis of interesting, intelligent debate, if we wanted to have the kind of basic stupid debate you're after, we'd be on CiF or Daily Mail.
HTH

Oh and you patently don't rock

Quote from Rhadegunde

I do love how they only ever do this on old threads: too afraid of active engagement?

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

[The above post was reported by me for it's blatant hate speech and use of excessive profanity. I don't recall exactly word for word, but it was unnecessarily insulting and derogatory]

Quote from Rhadegunde

That works too.

Quote from ElephantsAndMiasmas

Oh my god, like, some women, somewhere are being mean! And all the other women aren't running round to beat up the naughty mean women! Some are even agreeing! That is like, SO not ok.

Quote from me

So the only retorts are to insult, mock, name-call and divert attention away.

For the record, I judge feminism by it's ACTIONS not it's claims.

Actions always speak louder than words.

Quote from vesuvia

JohnathonRocks wrote - "So the only retorts are to insult, mock, name-call and divert attention away."

That is not true. You seem to just be seeing and reacting to what you want to see, to fit your own agenda, which is hostile to feminism.

Try answering the question I asked you.

Quote from me

"It cannot therefore be assumed that men are bound to be an asset to family life, or that the presence of fathers in families is necessarily a means to social harmony and cohesion."The Family Way: Harman, H., Institute of Public Policy Research, 1990.



Vesuvia, Feminism is hostile to men. It defends women who abuse men & children, it promotes superior rights for women at the cost of men & children, it has gone out of it's way to marginalize and mock male abuse victims, etc. etc.

Why should anyone support such a hateful & bigoted movement?



I stand corrected, ONE out of the EIGHT replies actually bothered to address the point I was making while SEVEN of the either relied on bigotry.

And they have the audacity to call me ignorant? LOL



Hence my earlier point... I judge feminism by it's actions, not it's claims.

The KKK can claim to be supporting racial equality... while promoting white-only clubs and petitioning against black-only clubs, or demanding laws that give whites a step-up and propaganda to label all blacks as rapists...

Claims of feminism and the actions are worlds apart.

Quote from vesuvia

JohnathonRocks, based on the evidence of your actions, i.e. your posts on this feminism thread, you do not appear to be here to seriously debate issues relevant to feminism.

Quote from Rhadegunde

Jonathon, I think you might want to read the rest of Harman's report because that isn't what she's saying.

You also seem to have very little understanding of either feminist theory or practise. Please provide concrete examples of your claims; and not ones quoted out of context.

Quote from me

Vesuvia, so pointing out the 'bad' areas of feminism is 'not serious'? OK...
Rhadegund, my point from word go has been that feminists rely on 'selective equality' (they want equality ONLY when it benefits women)... the typical reply I get to that point is that it's called feminism as a reflection that it's female based so of course it will focus on females... thus confirming that it is NOT about true equality.

How is the quote out of context?

Quote from prolsworth

Your logic is terrible.

Were the civil rights activists wrong because they didn't campaign for white people too?

If you don't accept that women are an oppressed group then of course you're not going to agree with feminism. Clearly you don't think that feminists have a valid cause to fight. I think you'd struggle to find hard evidence to back up that view though.

Quote from HandDivedScallopsrgreat

"they want equality ONLY when it benefits women" And your point is? If we want equality it is because we don't have it at the moment i.e. men are superior in some way in that area (difficult to argue without specific examples). Why is that fair?

Of course it focuses on women. The balance of power is in the favour of men. In order for that to change you have to focus on the gender that being oppressed. Just as you do with racial issues you look at the rights of and attitudes towards those being oppressed.

And you haven't pointed out the "bad" side of feminism. You've pointed out some "bad" things, perhaps (examples again would be good!) but they don't seem to apply to feminism.

And comparing feminism to the KKK - nice, classy!

Quote from vesuvia

JohnathonRocks wrote - "so pointing out the 'bad' areas of feminism is 'not serious'? OK...
and
"Why should anyone support such a hateful & bigoted movement?"

What do you expect us to say?

Something along the lines of
"People should support such a hateful and bigoted movement because x, y, z ..." perhaps?

No thanks.

I suggest you read a book about feminism, for example, "The Equality Illusion" by Kat Banyard.

Quote from omg20

I think what johnathon is trying to say is that some of the laws etc that have been brought in due to feminist protest that clearly put women on top of men instead of equal. So called "positive discrimination". I think he just went about it in the wrong way. Some of the points that dominic raab put foward are valid concerns. Like the obvious inequality in the nhs and life span.

The best example of this I can think of is the hpv vaccine which I was quite angry about myself as I cannot get it on the nhs if I want it I have to pay a private doctor £000s.(which i can simply not afford.) Even though it is offered to girls free on the nhs. So then my health and well being depends on a decision that a girl made to have or not to have the jab. I could get various cancers etc from this.

HPV Vaccination - NHS Choices

Also the whole article wasn't posted in the op so here it is:

"Last week Nick Clegg made a valiant effort to address the pervasive challenge for modern working parents, striving to find the right career-family balance - including announcing a more flexible system of maternity-paternity leave. It is one of the most relevant issues for young families in Britain. The coalition would do well to grasp it in place of Labour’s outdated and obsolete ‘equality and diversity’ agenda.

Take the gender pay gap. The fascinating thing is just how sexist its champions have become. The government’s decision to abandon mandatory gender pay audits, under Labour’s Equality Act, sparked a wave of soul-searching – almost exclusively by women. It is almost taboo for a man to question the assertion that the rapidly dwindling pay gap is the result of discrimination, rather than genuine choice. The debate has been consumed by the prejudice it seeks to purge.

Yet, research shows the pay gap has halved since the 1970s. Office of National Statistics data in December showed that, since 1997, the difference between full-time median earnings has fallen from 17% to 10% - and the shrinkage is accelerating. So much for the Equality and Human Right’s Commission’s claim last October that progress is ‘grinding to a halt’.

Look further at the data available. According to research for the Institute for Economic Affairs, women in their twenties earn 1% less than men, single women a shade more. Gay men earn more than straight men, lesbian women more than heterosexual women. Does that sound like a society riddled with discrimination? In fact, the gender pay gap also reflects the higher numbers of women in work in Britain compared to other European countries. Keeping women out of work is one of the easiest ways to bridge the gap: Swaziland and Sir Lanka have the lowest pay gaps. Meanwhile, pay is just one of the terms of employment. Men work longer hours, enjoy their jobs less, commute further and are more likely to get the sack.

While we have some of the toughest anti-discrimination laws in the world, we are blind to some of the most flagrant discrimination – against men. From the cradle to the grave, men are getting a raw deal. Men work longer hours, die earlier, but retire later than women. That won’t be fixed for another seven years. One reason women are left ‘holding the baby’ is anti-male discrimination in rights of maternity/paternity leave – which Clegg wants to tackle. Then there are ‘pre-nups’, recording the wishes of partners before they get married. Those wishes were serially ignored in this country, until last year – when one was enforced in favour of a woman, loaded German heiress Katrin Radmacher. Meanwhile, young boys are educationally disadvantaged compared to girls, and divorced or separated fathers are systematically ignored by the courts. A father turned up to one of my constituency surgeries, complaining that dozens of court orders requiring access rights had been flouted by his ex-wife. He asked me to write to Ministers, not because he harboured any hope of changing the situation, but so he could show his children he had tried everything when they reach adulthood.

Then there is the more subtle sexism. Men caused the banking crisis. Men earn more because they are more assertive in pay negotiations. One FT commentator recently complained that: ‘High-flying women are programmed to go for high-flying men. Most men aren’t attracted to women who are more successful than they are.’ Can you imagine the outrage if such trite generalisations were made about women, or other minorities? Feminists are now amongst the most obnoxious bigots.

You can’t have it both ways. Either you believe in equality or you don’t. If you buy into the whole Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus theory of gender difference – with all its pseudo science - you can’t then complain about inequalities of outcome that flow both ways from those essentially sexist distinctions.

Britain’s not perfect, and we will never eradicate all human prejudice. But, we have reached a stage where the differences between men and women in our society are less reflective of overt discrimination, and more their common challenge of trying to find the right way to earn a decent quality of life for their family, whilst sparing some time to enjoy it. That means taking a consistent approach to equality, ditching outdated gender warfare and finding practical solutions to the challenges couples go through together.

In some cases, it will beg more questions than it answers: the surge in career-minded women landing top jobs has reduced social mobility, because so many are middle-class. In other areas, we might be pleasantly surprised. Making maternity leave transferable (without increasing it, to avoid extra burdens on business) would give men greater equality, and free up women to share their career-family compromises with their other halves – if they choose. The phenomenon of young couples on middle incomes both doing a four day week, to save on childcare, looks set to rise. It makes economic, as well as egalitarian, sense.

Likewise, family-friendly policies could help exhausted families struggling to strike a sensible work-life balance. Critics mocked the idea of transferable tax allowances for couples as socially regressive and financially insignificant. Yet, transferable tax allowances for parents with children under five would support women who choose to stay home, when their children are young, while helping them save for childcare, if and when they choose return to work. A little tax relief would go a long way.

Young British couples are tired of the equality bandwagon, dreamt up in the 1960s, pitting men and women against each other. We need consistent equality for men and women, an end to ‘soft’ feminist bigotry and support for hard-working families trying to juggle competing priorities in their hectic daily lives. Maybe it’s time men started burning their briefs, to put an end once and for all to what Emmeline Pankhurst used to call ‘the double standard of sex morals.’"

Dominic Raab: We must end feminist bigotry | Research | PoliticsHome

Quote from HerBex

"Feminism is hostile to men. It defends women who abuse men & children, it promotes superior rights for women at the cost of men & children, it has gone out of it's way to marginalize and mock male abuse victims, etc. etc."

None of that is true, it is just unevidenced assertion based on a hatred of what some mysogynists think feminism is.

Why should we address your points, when they are just not worth addressing?

It is like a white person going on to a website which promotes the rights of Muslims in the UK and saying: "Islam is all about hatred, you promote the rights of mumslims above anyone else, you don't believe in equality for other religions and you want to bomb us all".

Why would you expect anyone to take you seriously or want to engage with you?

Seriously? Why?


omg there is no such thing as positive discrimination laws in the uk, positive discrimination is illegal.


And Jonathon isn't trying to say whatever it was you claim he's trying to say. He's just trying to say that feminism is a Bad Thing and of course we're not going to accept that.

Quote from me

OK, recently - an English law went under review. It was to reword the crime of rape to include women. Currently, women cannot be found guilty of rape as rape requires penetration. IF it had gone ahead, women would have equality with men and be able to take equal responsibility for their crimes (instead of the current method of giving women a slap on the wrist and referring to it as 'sexual assault' or 'an affair').

Guess which groups got their knickers in a twist and decided that having equality with men was a bad idea all of a sudden? Guess which group claimed that men (but of course) would abuse this change in law with false allegations (as if no woman in history has done so against men)?

Can you guess?

Of course you can - proof that feminists do NOT want equality - they want preferential treatment and equality only on the condition it benefits women.

Quote from HandDivedScallopsrgreat

"the current method of giving women a slap on the wrist and referring to it as 'sexual assault' or 'an affair'" Sexual assult carries the same sentence as rape so referring to it as a "slap on the wrist" is inaccurate. And since when has anyone referred to any crime as "an affair". What crimes are these that women aren't taking responsiblity for?

Quote from omg20

I can give you an example of positive discrimination and that is womens only lists for mp seats. There are many other examples of positive discrimination in the workplace for instance. Employers choose people for roles based on gender, race, religion etc instead of you suitability to the role or qualifications and experience.



Recently I applied for a job and did not get it after attending interview. I was told at a later date that they were looking for a women.

I've encountered this very same issue. One time, the woman at the job center told the interviewer that they could not discriminate and if they did they would have to remove the advertise job - so they did... no one got sued of course...

Quote from chibi

that is sooooo true

going by current trends, we could have a female majority in parliament in another few hundred years

go on, guess how many women are in parliament now

quick, someone do something!!!



or maybe you just weren't good enough

terrifying, and yet strangely plausible...

Quote from omg20

It doesn't matter when we will have a majority women parliament. It is the fact that positive discrimination is used. Instead of qualification/experience/suitability etc.

Quote from HerBex

"It is almost taboo for a man to question the assertion that the rapidly dwindling pay gap is the result of discrimination, rather than genuine choice.

No it fucking isn't. We are constantly being told that the reason for the pay gap, is women's personal choices to go part time, to downshift, not to go for promotion, because they can't negotiate etc. What a load of bollocks that it's taboo to question discrimination, on the contrary, it's almost become taboo to assert that the pay gaps is due to good old fashioned sexism, not because women want to be paid less than men.

"Yet, research shows the pay gap has halved since the 1970s. Office of National Statistics data in December showed that, since 1997, the difference between full-time median earnings has fallen from 17% to 10% - and the shrinkage is accelerating. So much for the Equality and Human Right’s Commission’s claim last October that progress is ‘grinding to a halt’." a) there is still a 10% pay gap b) he has deliberately ommitted part time work data from the figures, which shows a different story.

"Look further at the data available. According to research for the Institute for Economic Affairs, women in their twenties earn 1% less than men, single women a shade more." Yes and then they have babies and watch their market value plummet.

"Men work longer hours, enjoy their jobs less, commute further and are more likely to get the sack."

They only work longer paid hours - they don't do more hours work in the home. Women work fewer hours because they are going home to do the second shift at home. They're more likely to commute further, because the nursery or school doesn't phone them up to collect the kid when he or she is sick. This means they can concentrate more on their career and earn more. They're more likely to get the sack because they are less likely to follow rules than women are. We're supposed to apologise for that?

"Men work longer hours, die earlier, but retire later than women." They don't work longer hours, women do - at home and at wrok. Women also do more exercise, eat better and keep themselves fitter and are less likely to smoke and drink too much than men. And again, we're supposed to apologise for the fact that we look after ourselves better?

"anti-male discrimination in rights of maternity/paternity leave" - when did Dominic Raab last go on a demo demandign paternity rights?

"dozens of court orders requiring access rights had been flouted by his ex-wife." What are the courts doing about the much greater numbers of men who regularly fail to turn up for contact visits or the 3/5 of non-resident parents, 90% of whom are men, who don't pay a penny in maintenance?

"Then there is the more subtle sexism. Men caused the banking crisis" - Well who the fuck was running the fucking banks? A bunch of women? How many women ran the banks or were in senior decision making positions? And that staemetn has been made in regard to the fact that although the financial crisis was caused by bankers, most of whom are men, the effects will mainly be borne by women - 72% of the budget cuts affect women disproportionately.

"Men earn more because they are more assertive in pay negotiations." When women are assertive, in pay negotioations or anything else, they are seen as aggressive bitches and don't get the pay rise.

One FT commentator recently complained that: ‘High-flying women are programmed to go for high-flying men. Most men aren’t attracted to women who are more successful than they are.’ Can you imagine the outrage if such trite generalisations were made about women, or other minorities? What? That first statemetn is about women.

"Feminists are now amongst the most obnoxious bigots." Because he knows loads of them, obviously.

"You can’t have it both ways. Either you believe in equality or you don’t. If you buy into the whole Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus theory of gender difference – with all its pseudo science - you can’t then complain about inequalities of outcome that flow both ways from those essentially sexist distinctions." This is a load of incoherent nonsense because that rubbish book isn't even feminist, it's like me quoting Adam Smith to back up a point I'm making about Marxism. It's irrelevant and ignorant.

"We have reached a stage where the differences between men and women in our society are less reflective of overt discrimination" The joy of being privileged, is that you don't notice the discrimination suffered by the group of which you're not a member

"the surge in career-minded women landing top jobs has reduced social mobility, because so many are middle-class" So they should apologise to working class men for taking their jobs

"Yet, transferable tax allowances for parents with children under five would support women who choose to stay home, when their children are young, while helping them save for childcare, if and when they choose return to work" What about men who want to stay home with their children? Whose discriminating against men now?

"Young British couples are tired of the equality bandwagon, dreamt up in the 1960s, pitting men and women against each other." What he means is, mysogynists are tired of women demanding equality and it's not equality that pits men and women against each other, it's male privilge and female under-privilege.

Quote from omg20

chibi the employer told my wife that, himself. He said that he would be willing to take me on in a new job opportunity that he had posted and that I should reapply a few months later because they were looking for a women to fill the previous role.

Quote from chibi

why are you assuming that the women are not qualified or suitable?

do you think they compose these shortlists by just asking, quick, who do we know with a vulva, and then take it from there?

in any case people still have to vote that candidate in, no?

and nothing prevents any man as running as an independent

so what is the problem?

at any rate, it makes a change from the traditional all-white-male-shortlists in operation until v recently

Quote from HerBex

OMG positive discrimination is used all the time for men.

Tehy are chosen as candidates purely and simply because they are men. Not because they are better qualified.

And as for rape being penetration - of course it is. Having your body penetrated, is a different experience from any other sexual assault. Men can be raped, but only if it involves penetration. I think if we are going to keep the offence of rape at all, then it does need to acknowledge the difference between penetration of an orifice and any other type of assault.

Try being penetrated against your will JR and then say it was the same as any other assault.

Man that one made me laugh... men get positive discrimination? LMFAO - what planet is that prat on?

Quote from chibi

sweetie, if he really wanted to hire you, he would have

that is mostly how employment works

in this country there are no laws which state, 'this job must be filled by a woman/man/bug-eyed alien'

you do know that, right?

Quote from omg20

Come on herbex instead of looking at the things you think are wrong how about the issue I highlighted that is true and is worrying.
As I said i don't agree with everything that he puts across but some are valid concerns.

Quote from HerBex

Then omg, they were breaking the law.

Except for very specific occasions - MP, actors, carers etc., there is no such thing as positive discrimination. It's just sex discrimination and it's still illegal.

Quote from sethstarkaddersmackerel

then let me give you the advice that men often give women when they complain of discrimination: sue.

there is a huge amount of unofficial discrimination against women. there may well be plenty against men as well. The result is men earning more money than women and holding most of the positions of power.

Quote from omg20

chibi Which part of he said that he wanted a women to fill that role didn't you understand.

If that wasn't what he wanted he would have said that I didn't have enough experience/qualifications etc... but he didn't.

Quote from HerBex

Of course he's got some valid concerns, his scattergunned whingeing ensures that, but FFS to dress up a sustained whinge as a list of "valid concerns" when most of them are just pathetic whiney arsed whingeing about how awful it is now that women are sometimes allowed out, is jsut a big load of wank IMO.

Ooh, look, he said 2 things that were valid.

Big deal.


So why didn't you sue OMG?

Quote from chibi

then sue

you have a case under the equality act

unless the job you were going for was a place on an all-woman shortlist, or a very very select few others where being female is integral to the job, this is discrimination and illegal

Quote from omg20

I didn't say anywhere that there wasn't discrimination against women. What said was that dominic raab highlighted a few valid concerns. Like education the basis of our society being discriminate towards boys or the inequality in the nhs.

Quote from HerBex

In what way is education discriminatory against boys?

And if it is, given that the Dept of Education has been run by men for the last 30 years, whose fault is it?

Quote from omg20

Inequality isn't a big deal to you herbex?

Quote from chibi

do you have any sources for your claims that our education system and the nhs discriminate against men and boys?

Quote from HerBex

Who is the health secretary?

Whow were the health secretaries under Labour?

Who were the health secretaries under John Major's govnerments?

Once again, we are talking about organisations which are run at a senior decision making level by men. Like practically everyhting else in society.


Dominic Raab and his whiney arsed rants aren't a big deal to me omg.

And you knwo what, when women are 50% of government, 50% of bankers, 50% of FTSE 100 directors, do 50% of work, 50% of rape and sexual assault victims, have 50% of leisure and own 50% of property, then I'll read a whiney arsed whinge like that with a bit more patience.

Quote from chibi

ooh snap

i like the cut of your jib lad

Quote from vesuvia

Dominic Raab wrote - "Men work longer hours, die earlier, but retire later than women".

Men retire later and therefore have the advantage of larger pension in retirement. Most poor old people are female. Anyway, that retirement age difference is definitely going to be abolished in a few years.

Until about 1970, women were forced to "retire" from teaching and many other jobs when they got married and had children in their 20s, thereby being legally prevented from accruing pensions.

Male life expectancy is greatly influenced by biological factors, not just social factors. Male life expectancy was lower for those reasons before feminism.

Quote from omg20

I didn't blame anyone for the inequality in the education system nor the nhs I simply pointed out that they are valid concerns so I don't know why you seem to think I am blaming women for it.

Nice to hear that you don't care about inequality of anything else unless it effects you.

The methods used by schools to teach and reward qualifications are all methods which prefer and are more girl friendly. As a result boys get a worse education.

Quote from chibi

please can you provide any links which support your allegation that our education system discriminates

also any links re your allegation that the nhs discriminates against boys and men

it is really hard to argue against random assertions, i might say that the nhs discriminates against lefthanded people

Quote from HerBex

:"Nice to hear that you don't care about inequality of anything else unless it effects you"

Bullshit. I care more about inequality that is systematic, ongoing and affects half of humanity, not some imagined inequality that whiney arsed middle class privileged white men imagine is going on every time they see a woman or a black man in a position of authority. Or even in an equal position to them.


"The methods used by schools to teach and reward qualifications are all methods which prefer and are more girl friendly. As a result boys get a worse education."

Evidence please?

Because it doesn't seem to affect them once they're in their thirties does it, when they're earning more than women because they're not being held back by being expected to do all the childcare and domestic labour in the house as well as a paid job.

Quote from vesuvia

Omg20 - "As a result boys get a worse education."

How many girls have been allowed to attend Eton College?

Quote from omg20

Chibi
I already provided a link for the hpv vaccine which I talked about in my post which costs mens lives.

Here is some for education:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...cle-23796870-e ton-head-says-uk-education-fails-boys.do

A video:
YouTube - Feminised Education is Failing Boys - part 1 / 2

and many many other videos there aswell.

herbex
I am not middle class nor privileged but you still don't think these are valid concerns even when I point them out.

Quote from claig

'Male life expectancy is greatly influenced by biological factors, not just social factors. Male life expectancy was lower for those reasons before feminism.'

vesuvia is eaxctly right, and of course Raab knows that too. I don't think he really believes that equality revolves around life expectancy, and the fact that he uses that argument shows that he is not really concerned about equality. I suspect he is using an argument he doesn't believe in, just to attack feminism.

If he really does care so much about equality, why doesn't he have a look at the shocking life expectancy figures for men and women in Glasgow. There is a reason for those figures and it would be nice to see him campaign to change those figures.

Quote from chibi

omg, hpv virus disproportionately affects women

and as to your eton link, that is really no different to saying 'o yah well my mate agrees with me so ner'

i meant links to studies, stats analysis, something concrete

Quote from me

"The joy of being privileged, is that you don't notice the discrimination suffered by the group of which you're not a member"

That works both ways... but feminists keep pretending only men have privileges.

Again with half a truth in order to demonize men and victimize women.

Quote from AliceWorld

Privilege JR, not privileges. The way you've misused the term suggests you're not familiar with it. Have a little read of some basic feminist theory - it'll help.

[QUOTEomg20]It is concrete it is a head of a school and if you watch the video you will get the view of female teachers and parents.

Also you logic fails that is like saying breast cancer affects more women than men so men shouldn't be given treatment. what does it matter is only a small amount of people dying who cares eh?[/QUOTE]

Quote from me

"And you knwo what, when women are 50% of government, 50% of bankers, 50% of FTSE 100 directors, do 50% of work, 50% of rape and sexual assault victims, have 50% of leisure and own 50% of property, then I'll read a whiney arsed whinge like that with a bit more patience."

Nearly all of those can be done IF women would step up - blaming men is the easy cop-out for taking responsibility.

In my first post, I stated that feminists tend to blame men - and this was denied, yet since that post was made, it's all been about blaming men. The above quote being a prime example.

This also confirms my above recent post where I stated that it works both ways and some people refuse to see anything from any other angle. 'Any other angle', in this case meaning, "without blaming it on men" being an excellent example of my point.

When I see feminists pushing for equal accountability of women under the law, rather than just preferential treatment under the law, then perhaps I'll start to be convinced that feminism is about equality - but while they rant on & on for preferential treatment of women at the expense of men... I find it unfathomable that anyone could affiliate with such bigotry.

Quote from sethstarkaddersmackerel

'Nearly all of those can be done IF women would step up - blaming men is the easy cop-out for taking responsibility.'

LMAO!

Quote from AliceWorld

Seth I've got my bingo card out and nearly have a line .

(the above sounds like they've copied Eternal Bachelor's FemBotBingo game if anyone remembers that lol)

Quote from me

AW, #1 you don't have to join in with your misandric supporters in relying on mockery & insults to make a point.

#2 I keep stating, I prefer to judge on ACTIONS as oppose claims.

#3 the ACTIONS within this very thread have reaffirmed much of what I've already stated.

And in addition to my previous post, I forgot to add - women will never be 50% rape victims under English law because feminists want ONLY women to have the status of rape-victim and ONLY men to have status of 'rapist', hence they want INequality under English law - when it suites them.

Quote from AliceWorld

JR
1. Thanks ever so.
2. Super duper
3. Glad to be of service. Might be best if you find somewhere else to post your stuff. There are all sorts of places where people agree with you. Here aint one of them.

Quote from HandDivedScallopsrgreat

But Johnathon you haven't answered any direct questions we have asked and you haven't actually engaged with any of us. You have just told us what we are and then got angry when we laughed at you!

"women will never be 50% rape victims under English law because feminists want ONLY women to have the status of rape-victim and ONLY men to have status of 'rapist', hence they want INequality under English law - when it suites them."
Men have the status of rape victim - when they are raped. Being a man doesn't preclude you from being raped. Feminists don't want men to be equal in terms of rape-victims because that would mean 1 in 4 men being raped and why would that be good for society?

Quote from claig

Do you want 50% of domestic violence sufferers to be men? Is that the type of equality that would satisfy you?

Quote from sethstarkaddersmackerel

careful Claig, he'll tell us there already are more men than women who suffer DV.

I do think we need to step up to the plate and murder our partners more often. We women simply aren't trying. It's not fair that more women than men have so much domestic murder victim status.

I will put that on my list of stuff we should be campaigning for, along with telling women to live less healthy lives so we die later like men.

Quote from chibi

it sounds like MRA Alice in Wonderland logic.

At this point my account was banned or made unusable by a moderator or admin of the site... Note there is no cursing and such, just disagreements.

Quote from me

Lovely how feminist boards ALWAYS rely on censorship rather than allowing any kind of oppositional thought... Speaks volumes.

I operate a board which also discusses gender issues, but more from a male perspective (female perspective is already rammed down our throats quite enough through media & government interferences)... You know what? When we get a feminist - we let her speak, she isn't banned just because we don't like her words...

Some of them made valid points, some of them haven't. Some of them hang around a long time, others do a 'hit n run' job. Some of them try to engage, others don't.

You lot - just rely on silencing, either through childish name-calling tactics as seen several times here or through censorship/banning members who don't cow-tow to your party-line.

Cowards - that's the word.

You really show yourselves for what you are when instead of discussing like rational beings (as I allow on my site) you simply muzzle any opposition.

Claig, no - I don't want men (or women) to be 50% of DV victims... but the sad reality is men already ARE 50% victims (I have lived it myself directly, both from my mother AND an ex wife working with her own mother). The stats are out there and yet feminists refuse to give up the honour-badge of 'victim'. Feminist groups have complained against support groups set up for men, one man in NZ who helped build a home for abused men saw it set on fire by another feminist group because they couldn't dare to let any men gasp get funding that is earmarked for women-only.

Quote from chibi

who is censoring you? in what way are you unable to post or make your voice heard on this board?

unless you mean people are not agreeing with you, which is quite a different thing, indeed

Quote from sethstarkaddersmackerel

'honour-badge of 'victim''?

what a revolting term.

Quote from AliceWorld

He's got a 2 on his username. I'm guessing MNHQ banned him? Dunno.

Quote from me

Chibi - my original account has been banned. It would appear disagreeing with feminism is such a terrible crime it results in being banned...

Quote from chibi

well, i imagine you would have received an email telling you why - i don't suppose mnhq said you were banned for disagreeing with feminists, as i can think of plenty of posters on these boards who do

Quote from me

WHEN this account is banned (we see already that the old adage 'feminism cannot withstand an open debate' is true) I shall not bother returning... but this only serves to demonstrate - repeatedly - my points about feminism blaming men for all that is wrong, relying on silencing tactics, mockery & insults rather than addressing any issues raised.

Quote from claig

but you have had you say on here. It's just that you are making little sense, just like Domithic Drab.

There is no such thing as a perfect world, with perfect justice and perfect equality. Injustices happen to both men and women. But there is more discrimination against women.

It sounds like you have had bad experiences with some women and this has clouded your judgement.

Please don't join the Mad Hatter, Dominic Raab's, band of not so merry MRA men.

Quote from sethstarkaddersmackerel

oh the arrogance of the man, thinking he can come into our space and dictate what we talk about.

the OP described the article and then asked 'What do you think MNers?'

It didn't say 'What do you think MNers and any male rights activists who like seeking out feminist threads and telling them they are wrong?'

you are not a MNer. You joined purely for this one thread. So why do we have a duty to include you in our conversation all of a sudden?
Answer: we don't.

Quote from prolesworth

If you want a civilized debate JR, it might be an idea to behave in a civilized manner. Your first post on this thread was aggressive and full of claims that you were unable to substantiate.

Quote from me

"If you want a civilized debate JR, it might be an idea to behave in a civilized manner. Your first post on this thread was aggressive and full of claims that you were unable to substantiate."

Below is my first post:

--
I note that some of you seem concerned that a man (gasp) speaks up against feminist values (of blaming men for everything) and some have even denied that many feminists have blamed men for the banking crisis and such like.

So let me ask you, when Harriet Harman continually bashed on men during her reign as 'equality' (LMFAO) minister, did any single one of you take issue with her for her constant assaults at men?

Even in her book she claimed fathers are of no value at all - Did any one of you take issue with that?

No?

Oh... so it's only bad when a man speaks against an ideology (i.e. not 'women') of blaming and hating on men... but when that ideology of hating & blaming men (i.e. half the planet's population) is running rampant, you're all blind to it - Amazing!
--

How is the above 'aggressive'? Sounds like you're trying to use victim mentality to justify oppressing any voice that doesn't cow-tow with your own.

But I DO substantiate my claims, in fact, this forum has substantiated much of my claims with their persistent blaming men, absolving women of any accountability for their own decisions & actions, name-calling and so forth.

A second ban was implemented before I was able to post the below thread... Seems the admin of Mumsnet are as big-a-cowards as they come.

Quote from me

BTW, should I operate a similar policy to here whereby I ban all opposing voices on my website? Should I take this cowardly approach to 'discussion'?

See, I always thought discussion meant being able to point out flaws as well as giving pats on the back. I didn't realise this site used a different definition of discussion whereby only agreeing voices can speak. Mind you... feminists do have a habit of redefining words to their needs - like 'equality'.