I think you do an excellent job Douglas on your comments. I think you write well also.

I want to add that men's rights is only one part of unfair treatment through the family court in the UK.
Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: 10,000 children ripped from their families

And that New Zealand suffragettes were inspired both by the equal-rights arguments of philosopher John Stuart Mill and British feminists.

Of Mill's shorter works, two others deserve mention. The Subjection of Women 1869 was thought to be excessively radical in Mill's time but is now seen as a classic statement of liberal feminism. Its essential case is that if freedom is a good for men, it is for women, and that every argument against this view drawn from the supposedly different "nature" of men and women has been superstitious special pleading. If women have different natures, the only way to discover what they are is by experiment, and that requires that women should have access to everything to which men have access. Only after as many centuries of freedom as there have been centuries of oppression will we really know what our natures are.

......and by the missionary efforts of the American-based Women's Christian Temperance Union (WCTU).

The most famous member and second president of the WCTU was Frances E. Willard who served from 1879 until her death in 1898. An advocate for women and for many causes beyond temperance, Ms. Willard was not only the most famous president of the WCTU, but the most famous 19^th century woman in America, and perhaps the world.

Other than that, I am learning much from you.

Quote from julie

And that New Zealand suffragettes were inspired both by the equal-rights arguments of philosopher John Stuart Mill and British feminists.

And they were also 'charged' by the chartist movement that came a century before. The Chartist movement - UK Parliament

The Chartist movement was the first mass movement driven by the working classes. It grew following the failure of the 1832 Reform Act to extend the vote beyond those owning property.

In June 1839, the Chartists' petition was presented to the House of Commons with over 1.25 million signatures. It was rejected by Parliament. This provoked unrest which was swiftly crushed by the authorities.

A second petition was presented in May 1842, signed by over three million people but again it was rejected and further unrest and arrests followed.

Suffragettes weren't unique, they merely borrowed from the failures of the chartists.

Quote from Celtic Druid

And they were also 'charged' by the chartist movement that came a century before. The Chartist movement - UK Parliament

Excellent, THANK-YOU for sharing this. I've just bookmarked this thread.

@Douglas:
Sorry I missed your post, I just need to ask one thing though. Since I'm talking about the more recent UK political system, I'm referring to those done after 2010 since that is when details of the men's rights movement was appealed to the government. If so, a lot of these issues were brought up in the news due to more awareness of the issue + a lot of things were not implemented still such as the prostrate screening - it is now regularly practised in the UK. As I said it is not perfect as it is new, but I feel we have made a lot of progress compared to other countries.

The UK now has domestic abuse charities for men, they've changed the pension age for women to match men (it was previously lowered), false rape accusations are highlighted in the news which I personally think is a good thing eg: BBC News - Girl, eight, says 10-year-old boys 'did not rape her', as for men's shelters, numbers are increasing but this is obviously take time: Domestic abuse against men - Shelter England, and as for that horrid sperm incident, I do believe that it was a terrible incident that the court should have dealt with, sure, she didn't rape him, but what she did was wrong. As for whever the children should get benefit from the father, a bit subjective, which is something that the court should have taken into better consideration. Because while it is not the children's fault, he himself had to pay for it, quite a hard issue to deal with.

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: 10,000 children ripped from their families
I know about this, this is something sparked by the Baby P case which was poorly handled imo. It was supposed to be taking kids away from possible child abusers, however they did it a bit too harshly so families who had potential to improve did not have much of a second chance.

------

Okay but, they were there even before feminists became rampant, all over the world. Even in other countries where feminism is unheard of, you see sexism towards males in the same way etc. Radical feminists only took a ride on these and agreed with them, and used to build their agenda. As I said, it's society's dumb brain that causes all the isms in the world. If the world was not ignorant, radical feminism could not even exist, and the oppression of men or women could not have happened in the first place.

Now, feminism's downfall was mainly caused by the fact it was only supporting one gender's rights, hence why many groups that are only supporting one set of rights should be careful. However, don't assume that all feminists are the same and support the same thing, everyone has a different idea of how feminism is:

Who Cares About Men’s Rights? | No, Seriously, What About Teh Menz?
101/FAQs | No, Seriously, What About Teh Menz?

This blog owner looks at roots of feminism that also affect feminism, and often criticizes some feminists for being extremists. She believes that feminism doesn't just have to support women but men as well, since in order to be equal, you'd need men's rights to be good as well. Only comment is that she's a bit blunt but she is on the case on both sides of the story.

Listen, ladies and gentlemen, we are not going to solve this whole sexism thing as long as we’re only looking at half the problem. You want women to be equal to men, then you damn well have to make men equal to women.

And, no, a bunch of talking about how men need to be more feminist does not count as work on men’s rights. I agree, men need to be more feminist. But we’re not going to get them more feminist unless we show them what feminism can do for them, and that involves working on their problems in addition to being all “men can fight rape too!” Well, you know what, women can fight gender-policing too.

I’m really, really glad to see a blog like this.
The feminist movement sadly has fallen short with regard to incorporating men into their movement toward gender equality. Yeah, they have accomplished many great things for women and continue to do so, as in some respects their work is not done. But while they’ve been focused on that, they have been largely ignoring or only weakly acknowledging the ways in which men get shafted in society.

Not saying the men's movement is wrong or anything, however thinking, if the MRAs would negotiate with the reasonable feminists, they could merge and make a good movement on their own and it's anti-sexism which would overpower radical feminism and fight anti-misogyny and anti-misandry. Because right now the feminist name is huge but tarred with a black brush, and the men's movement is small and is not doing well in the political movement in it's growth and image. I just thought it would be better to remove one of feminism's pillars and watch it fall instead of trying to destroy it with brute force because it is a bit too powerful at the moment, however if that solution were to happen, a lot of people would join you because they feel exactly how I and the author of the post feel now.

Any opinions?

Not saying the men's movement is wrong or anything, however thinking, if the MRAs would negotiate with the reasonable feminists,

There are reasonable feminists ?
Even if there were they would have no affect..
Feminism has already clearly demonstrated that it is a hate movement so it really comes down to our newly adopted MRM saying that states "you are either for us or against us, but get out of our way"..

Lucia, I don't want to re-paste your entire post since that would be wasteful.

You seem to be saying, "Let's all be reasonable about this feminism thing".

Well, too many men have suffered and too many men have died. Too many men have had their careers ended, their wealth and their children stolen, their reputation besmirched and their very existence questioned, for that to happen.

Appealing to some bright 'egalitarian' future will not heal the wounds. There is a huge undercurrent of resentment against women in general. It may be misguided but it's there. There's an even more powerful resentment against male sycophantic politicians and Family Court judges that welcomed the feminist zeitgeist to feather their own nests and betray their own brothers.

if the MRAs would negotiate with the reasonable feminists

So... the Allies should have negotiated with the "reasonable Nazis" in WWII?

the men's movement is small and is not doing well in the political movement in it's growth and image.

You just don't get it. The MRM doesn't need to be politically powerful or attractive to the sheep who vote. It just needs to keep men informed.

Women and feminists may look to Daddy State for their security but most men do not. They created 'The State' in the first place. All they need to do is quietly turn their backs on a system that is not to their liking.

Quote from christianj

There are reasonable feminists ?
Even if there were they would have no affect..
Feminism has already clearly demonstrated that it is a hate movement so it really comes down to our newly adopted MRM saying that states "you are either for us or against us, but get out of our way"..

If you say that, how would you stop MRM from becoming a hate movement?

That would be like saying the author of the blogs I posted would be a hateful feminist nazi even though she stated she is also masculist.

For clarity and in order to succeed at our mission, here at NSWATM we do not use the following problematic shorthand:

• “Men” for “the subset of men who are misogynist or abusive or otherwise bad”
• “MRAs” for “the subset of MRAs who are misogynist or otherwise bad”
• “Women” for “the subset of women who are manipulative or abusive or otherwise bad”
• “Feminists” for “the subset of feminists who are misandrist or otherwise bad”

Quote from Lucia

Not saying the men's movement is wrong or anything, however thinking, if the MRAs would negotiate with the reasonable feminists, they could merge and make a good movement on their own and it's anti-sexism which would overpower radical feminism and fight anti-misogyny and anti-misandry. Because right now the feminist name is huge but tarred with a black brush, and the men's movement is small and is not doing well in the political movement in it's growth and image. I just thought it would be better to remove one of feminism's pillars and watch it fall instead of trying to destroy it with brute force because it is a bit too powerful at the moment, however if that solution were to happen, a lot of people would join you because they feel exactly how I and the author of the post feel now.

Any opinions?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but I'd say that is utopian wishfull thinking.

The risk of the MRM getting hijacked by people who twist our message into something that befits the feminist movement too large. It can't be afforded to waste momentum on such thing. Do note that moderate feminists, still indirectly provide support for radical feminists for trying to do some good to the feminist label (e.g. 'not all feminists are like that'). This provides radical feminists (whom are actually calling the shots) with covers to hide behind.

Joining with feminists is essentially the same as joining with your archnemesis. It is like asking enemies to work together as YanYan has already pointed out; it just doesn't works, even if only for the resentment one group has caused to grow within the other group. I'm not going to elaborate on this one since it has already been done.

It is perhaps blunt, but women would actually remove a pillar from the feminist movement by denouncing the label and opting for something like 'egalitarian' or so. I sometimes wonder why many are so persistent on sticking to that feminist label...

Brute force as you put it is the best option at hand. We gradually strike harder untill a crack appears and cracks spread. Alongside that, time is also on our side. With the current state of affairs and the damage inflicted by feminism, the system is bound to collapse economically.

You appear to be of the opinion that I give a damn about feminists or their male hating movement which I don't.
You appear to be of the opinion that we will not win this war which we definitely will..
You also pander down the road and serve up feminists like they are just fluffy, warm and cuddly. You are barking up the wrong tree if you think for one minute that we will jump into bed with the enemy and pretend that all is well..

You have got to be joking..

They started it and we will finish it and there will be consequences as the MRM grows and expands daily and it's effectiveness increases. Feminists are no longer the supreme power they claim to be. They are on the way out and they are aware of it.
I have been promoting the MRM since the early 1990's and I do not intend to stop until that work has been completed.
The only way to ensure that, is to ensure that feminism no longer has any control over any part of our lives..

Now, now, that is putting words in my mouth. However I must state my points more clearly perhaps.

Here is a new thread:

How to really solve the gender inequality problem

BBC News - Girl, eight, says 10-year-old boys 'did not rape her'

And despite the girl admitting she lied the two ten year old boys were found guilty of “attempted rape” and given a three year supervision order, justice done eh?

In 2011 UK courts are still under instruction to give sentencing discounts to female criminals (despite this being an unofficial standard practice already) and prominent female politicians and women’s groups continue to demand for the closure of female prisons in favour of community service because women’s crimes …. Well just aren’t as bad as men’s.

The UK now has domestic abuse charities for men, they've changed the pension age for women to match men

And I’ve lost count of the women/feminists who think this little bit of equality is unfair to women

quite a hard issue to deal with.

Eh? What’s hard to deal with about it? She stole his sperm and he’s made to pay because of “what’s good for the kids” there was never a clearer cut case of a man being discriminated against in favour of an irresponsible woman, she should have been made to take full responsibility for her choice/crime, but no, he was made to pay for her choice/crime and that is seriously outfuckinrageous, what message does it send to other prospective spermnappers and otherwise deceitful self-centred scroungers.

However, don't assume that all feminists are the same and support the same thing, everyone has a different idea of how feminism is:

Now this is exactly my problem with feminism, how it is apparently so many different things to different feminists, if it’s so many different things then in my opinion it fails to be anything at all.

Many in the manosphere have said it before when confronted with claims of NAFALT, feminism, like anything else, will be judged by its actions and its actions have had devastating affects on the lives of ordinary people, especially men and boys. It’s most visible actions are those perpetrated by the more radical elements as they are the loudest and most visible, strident, demanding, effective and bigoted.

When the BBC has a nice moderate feminist on the panel of QT to tell Greer what an irrelevant bigoted old trout she is and when some nice moderate feminist politicians tell mad Hattie and her ilk to STFU with their lies and hatemongering then I may offer a begrudging slow handclap but I’m not going to hold my breath.

So we will continue to call out feminism for the evil it has done, but don’t worry, if you are not one of those feminists ……. We’re not talking about you

Any opinions?

You seem to have the red pill in your grasp all you need to do is take it.

Lucia is a trolling feminist.

Her posts prove it.

If you say that, how would you stop MRM from becoming a hate movement?

the movement openly expels or disassociates with the haters or else (if in the minority) those that don't hate move away and change their name, there is plenty of evidence of this occurring within the MRM over recent years, it's a simple concept that feminism has failed to grasp.

Quote from Lucia

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: 10,000 children ripped from their families
I know about this, this is something sparked by the Baby P case which was poorly handled imo. It was supposed to be taking kids away from possible child abusers, however they did it a bit too harshly so families who had potential to improve did not have much of a second chance.

It went much further with babies being taken for possible abuse and they went through backgrounds of mothers to see if there was any depression etc. They sent letters to them telling them they were taking the baby while they were pregnant. Some families fled the country while others lost out. They had social workers in hospitals taking babies if mothers were stressed like one mother whose son died while in the maternity ward.

.....if the MRAs would negotiate with the reasonable feminists, they could merge and make a good movement on their own.

The reasonable ones do work together from what I see, but mostly offline because it's practical work. Online is more for saying what you want and lobbying for political change.

The way I see it, there are innumerable radicals and all isms are out of control movements. Also, it's near impossible to change the middle age and up group and extremely challenging to change people's opinions and experiences. Men and women generally think the opposite sex is worse at sexism than their sex because they mostly experience it this way.

IMO, one option is to work around radicals and people who have unfortunately been pushed to bitterness from experiences because you can't control people. Besides, they provide much needed information when passionate about their cause - so why try to force another cause on them that they're not passionate about?