Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team.
While British feminist campaigners explicitly try to address the gender iniquities faced by all, sho
Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12
I too used to consider myself a male feminist and still do in that I think women should have equal opportunity in all areas. For all of my adult life, my employers have always given women a leg-up over men and hired them disproportionately, even though women clearly cost more and are less productive over their working careers(always having babies). I have worked with many brilliant women and have great respect for them. I have also worked with many terrible, incomepetent women who are preserved by the system and not held accountable for their bad performance(as men are). We now live in a world where any woman, in a work or domestic environment, can accuse any man of anything (making her uncomfortable or frightened) and expect the authorities to take action, usually at the expense of the man's career/life. The problem of course is that in real life there are some women (2%?)who are crazy/evil/criminal and they use this power over all men to their personal advantage. Feminist's of course deny that there are any bad women at all and have no empathy whatsoever for the many men and families destroyed by false or exagerated claims made selfish all-about-me women. So, I've come to despise the modern feminist and think of them as rather stupid selfish women who have a very incomplete world view. The advice I give my normal friends is this:
Don't ever vote for a feminist or a feminist backed candidate; don't ever give money to a feminist organization; and call-out feminists when they start spouting irrational and false "facts" about the level of female oppression in the west. It's really gotten over the top and Mr. Martin is one of the brave few willing to take the issue on. Good for him!
I'd rather have a feminist echo chamber than a masculinist circle-jerk.
Do you have a point? What is it?
Tom Martin's points were absolutely spot on. So how can a court find against him?
The courts, the police and politicians -- those with power -- are looking more and more corrupt every year. Tom's points and his evidence were sterling.
I used to work for a large US corporation that had endless pro female policies. I lost my job due a female employee making bullying accusations against me. She'd been working for me for about 3 months, and around the same time I got a new female boss who didn't know me.
10 years of happy working relationships counted for nothing.
The HR attack dogs where set on me and there was only going to be one result. The bizarre thing was many of the complaints made against me concerned things that happened when there were other people around but no-one in HR or my boss was interested in anything other than what the complainer said, it felt like real life Catch 22.I was male, therefore must be bullying the poor defenseless female.
4 months after I got the push the bullying victim got sacked for unacceptable behavior and making malicious complaints against her new boss.
it wasn't all bad, I left with 2 years pay in my back pocket. The only way the company could run a policy where male guilt was assumed was to pay off the person being 'sacked'.
Very odd time though. Being fucked out of a career by an idiot who just happend to have landed in the right enviroment.
I learnt a valuable lesson. If I have a female employee with performance issues there's no freindly chat, advice or off the record coaching , it's straight into formal process with an HR rep in the room. Then I'm safe.
So there you have it. How feminist policies in one company turned me into a sexist boss.
"While British feminist campaigners explicitly try to address the gender iniquities faced by all, should men's rights ever be feminism's responsibility?"
I think the contradiction found in claiming "feminist campaigners explicitly try to address the gender iniquities faced by all"... I'll repeat "BY ALL" and then, in the same sentence asking "should men's rights ever be feminism's responsibility?" demonstrates the feminist ideal. If feminism actually was addressing inequalities of "all", that would include men and the question of whether feminism should include it would never need be asked.
McMac -- as a culture we're missing something.
Horror stories like yours are plentiful. Yet the courts take no interest. Politicians turn a deaf ear to changing things. Newspapers prefer -- as Tom Martin boldly fought against and lost -- the woman-angel/man-brute motif.
But take heart. The Men's Movement is growing.
Once a woman does not earn less than a man doing the same job, does not walk into any political and/or business meeting that isn't dominated by men, can dress any way she wants without being called a slut, can trust that if she reports a sex crime she won't be disbelieved if she had drunk alcohol or dressed 'provocatively', does not read about the constant injuries and crimnes committed against women of all ages in the developing world - then the feminist agenda can be called passe and the feminists can be proud to have won.
I am a man, and a feminist.
"It seems obvious that liberating women from gender-based discrimination would help men, too"
"apart from appealing to a sense of justice, how else can house husbandry be sold, if not as an antidote to the male burden of being breadwinner?"
Is that *it*? You may want to consider re-branding.
Hey Al - clearly you've bought the feminist linebut have you actually done any fact checking? The wage gap myth has been totally debunked, the workplace is dominated by men mostly because they don't interrupt their carrers to have children, feminists have been taking back the slut word by holding very public "Slut Walks" (they are proud sluts); the media disproportionatley focuses on stories about women and DV because that's what they choose to do to sell papers.
Al, I think you are chivalrous, male-apologist fool. I agree that you are also a feminist as evidenced by you smug self righteousness and lack of a clear understanding of the real world. Gyno-men like you are a big part of the problem.
Men = dominate
is the language of feminism.
Just be being male I am automaticaly "dominating" woman.
Women do not earn less for doing the same jobs. They earn less ON AVERAGE because they do different jobs.
Some simple business economics. Why would a company employ a man who wants £1 when a woman will do the same work for only 76p? That company would make huge savings and put its competitors out of business.
But that's never happened. Women earning less than men (for the same work) is another feminist myth the men's movement is exposing.
As for sex crime, there are nowadays large numbers of accusers with no evidence. The numbers of these women surged in the 90s when governments promised them impunity for filing false reports.
Feminism is nonsense from top to bottom. It is a big step forward for all of us -- both men and women -- that someone has had the guts to mount a challenge against it. (No woman wants to see her son falsely accused of rape.)
"Once a woman does not earn less than a man doing the same job"
THe only women earning less for doing the same job as men do so because they work less hours and less hard or are less competent and therefore have lower bonuses.
Equality means getting the same wage for the same amount of work and skill. Companies really are quite ruthless when it comes to lowering costs and maximising profits. If women really earned less for doing the same work as men then there would be zero female unemployment.
"please do some research into patriarchy and then you will see that it shapes structural inequalities that affect both men and women."
Matarij, feminism has turned into a female supremacist/hate movement resembling more and more movements like the KKK and the Black Panthers. What you refer to as "patriarchy" was just a social order born out of necessity. Modern people are much removed from the challenges humanity had to face for thousands of years, and thus are myopic to the steps populations had to take to survive.
Once a man is not expected to perform the most dangerous and unpleasant jobs in society, does not walk into a prison, a mental asylum, or a homeless shelter that isn't dominated by men, can gaze upon female beauty without being called or even arrested as a pervert, dirty old man, sexual harrasser, potential rapist, or a paedophile, can trust that if he is one of the thousands of men subject to false allegations each year he can be granted anonymity and thus escape having his life destroyed, or if he reports being the victim of domestic violence the police won't laugh in his face or arrest him, does not have to read constantly about the ways that men and boys are perverse, violent, useless - then feminists are not sexist and the men's rights activists can be proud to have won.
I am a man, and an anti-feminist.
A slut is a slut. You have no right to expect my opinions to change just because you dislike the cold hard facts of life. Maybe women should stop calling each other sluts?
Generally the only women who dislike the term are those who are too ugly o be sluts and those is it is appropriate for.
Generally the only women who dislike the term are those who are too ugly to be sluts and those it is appropriate for.
@Fred Well said, have you ever heard so much self righteous bullshit in your life, You're not really a man are you Al? a lady-boy maybe, but not a man in the true sense of the word.
Yes, feminism is sexist by definition, although there are feminists who are genuinely more interested in equality for all, which is to be applauded.
One thing I was worried by is the notion of 'grossly inflated rape statistics'. Given the stigma involved, I would argue that the statistics are still under-estimates. Cases being dropped are not necessarily a sign there there was no rape: they are also a sign that there is a lack of evidence. Sexual crimes are likely to be far more prevalent than we think. What is difficult, however, is amassing the evidence to secure conviction.
"While British feminist writers and campaigners from the F-Word blog to UK Feminista explicitly try to engage men.."
That statement is as about untrue as untrue gets. Try posting comments that relate to men on either of those sites, you'll get "this site is not about you" as a response.
I'd also like to know what "feminist writers" you are talking about, Bindel?
I am against feminism because it has been behind many of the following, acceptable double standards in society. How can women calim to want equality when -
Feminism is mothers rights, but no fathers rights.
Its women being treated like princesses in prison and men being treated like animals. Female prison guards humiliate male prisoners in showers and strip searches, but the reverse is unacceptable,
Its bodily choice for women, but forced genital mutilation for baby boys
Its female reporters allowed in men’s locker rooms, but privacy and respect for female athletes
Its generating a mythical pay gap so women will be able to earn more than men some day through misguided legislation
Its women getting everything in a divorce, and men being torn away from their children
Its Female sex offenders being slapped on the wrist, but male sex offenders being incarcerated the rest of their lives
Its men being sentenced to more time for the same crime than women
Its a feminized education system that cripples natural behavior of boys, tailers learnign to giels strengths, then girls claiming they are smarter
Its women being allowed to drown five children and using the fact she is a woman to get away with it (Andrea Yates)
Its women being allowed to use domestic violence as an excuse to murder a sleeping husband, even though there is no evidence of domestic abuse
Its men being jailed for defending themselves against a an abusive wife, but called a wimp if he takes the abuse
Its women demanding respect from men, but never having to respect them in return
Its women having the choice between abortion, adoption, dropping an unwanted baby off at a hospital, raising the child with a father, or raising the child without a father, but the only choice men have is to agree
Its women labeling men as abusive when the US government has shown women cause more child abuse than men.
Its female rape being horrendous, but male rape being funny and made in to comedy movies
It’s more health care spending going towards women’s health even though men live an average of 5 years less. Breast cancer receives 7 times the funding of prostate cancer.
Its allowing women only clubs and banning men only clubs
It’s doing everything we can to help girls in math and science, but letting boys fall further behind in everything else.
It’s defining equal pay for equal work as men playing five sets of tennis, but women only playing three. Maybe women claiming 3=5 is the reason for the above point
Its cutting men’s sports in college in favor of women’s sports that have no interest
Its female murderers being mentally ill, but male murderers just being evil
Its claiming men walk out on their family when its actually women who file 80% of divorces
Its men being portrayed as evil, stupid or buffoons on TV and all women being perfect or superior
Its women wanting equality for their gender, but men being called chauvinist pigs when they want equality for their gender
Its fixing the education system when girls are failing, and blaming the boys when boys are failing
Its women being allowed to level false accusation against an innocent man without consequence
Its women claiming they are the ones oppressed, whilst ignoring all the above and more.
I bet sianushka is an ugly.
I think feminism clearly served a purpose when womens issues really were a marginal affair and women faced a great deal of discrimination in all aspects of social life - and arguably it still does as it would be wrong to say that issues of discrimination no longer exist (much like social class there seems to be points where just as we beleive the battle is over and class is no longer relavant it comes back with a vengance)
However, in part because of the successes of feminism (and shift from modernity to post-modernity) there needs to be a more holistic view of gender relations and an acknowledgement of diversity - for instance where do transgender identities fit into the traditional binary along with women performing traditional male roles and vice versa.
This is not just desireable, but essential for any future progress and understandings to be made. Obviously the very notion of feminism as representing just one perspective becomes problematic for this endeavour.
Telling the truth about feminism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5OdQGbVNa4
Just out of interest - are you all the same person? Your common vitriol betrays you. No wonder women feel victimised - now I do as well.
PS Stock up on plasters, you must need them for your knuckles dragging along the ground :-D
Laughable, laughable caricatures of hate-filled misogynists. Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
I'm dispapointed that Tom wasn't successful but not surprised.
In 1997 Tony Blair created the Minister for Women position. Fifteen years on and although there has been a couple of name changes its role is still to prioritize women's rights. This priority seems indefinite and unchallangable.
UK males must lobby their MPs and ask that the priority be regularly reviewed with statistics from independent sources, not just those from women's interest groups, because some statistics used by Harriet Harman under the previous government were questioned by the office for national statistics.
As we saw with the failure of the issue of false rape allegations, and now Tom's case, while ever the law says women's rights have to be prioritized then trust me there is only going to be one winner.
Tom: you deserve a better outcome for your courage in standing up against inequality. But don't lose hope yet.
PPS Lots of love from a Gyno-man Femi-nazi Lady-boy xx
Groups like UK Feminista engage with men and care about our issues? Is that a joke?
Somehow I don't think that moaning about Playboy is at the top of most men's list of priorities. Most of their campaigning isn't even of interest to women outside of their middle class feminist studies clique.
Feminist groups like that are utterly hostile towards men. They often come out with blatantly sexist comments that would see people losing their jobs if the genders were reversed. For example, blaming men for the financial crisis, as if it was an issue of testosterone rather than economics.
They outright deny men's problems, mocking men's rights regardless of evidence, while exaggerating the problems faced by women. Even questioning dodgy feminist stats, like the manipulated wage gap figures, is enough to get you banned from those sites. Forget about bringing up issues like higher male homelessness, unemployment, suicide rate, poorer educational performance, etc.
Yet despite all that people still let feminists get away with claiming that they're a movement for equality!
It's a shame if Tom Martin has lost his case, but at least he helped to expose feminist bigotry, and brought men's issues to a wider audience. He can be proud of that.
"And he presumably hopes his lawsuit, if successful, will create a precedent for anti-feminist discrimination cases"
No it will create a a precedent for anti-discrimination cases.
Tom Martin clearly went on that LSE course just so he could take them to court for "discrimination"..what a silly boy he clearly is...
Feminism has to be challenging to both men and women or else it is bot doing its job...
"Does feminism discriminate against men? Tom Martin thinks so. "
The key issue is whether the LSE is preaching hatred for men. Gender studies courses do exactly that, wherever they are held.
Time to expose the nonsense of feminism on a nationwide scale and to abolish these courses.
I can only talk from personal experience, the girlfriends i have had the majority of them were attracted to bad-boys, they might kick up a stink occasionally but deep down they like it when you're a little mean to them. It helps keep the relationship fresh and a bit edgy. Best of all they take it out on you in the bedroom , all in all a win-win situation.
So, "is feminism sexist?" according to this article? Yes?
Wage gap isn't to do with women earning less per hour for the same job, it's because women part-time work or take a career break to have kids - what, and society doesn't need children to be the next workforce or anything?
If we want to close the wage gap more men will have to look after children more the time to share the burden of it economically.
"Wage gap isn't to do with women earning less per hour for the same job, it's because women part-time work or take a career break to have kids"
And because they take easier, much less dangerous jobs and commute smaller distances. In the UK 97% of work place deaths are men. Most are paid a premium for risking their lives, and everyone is happy with them doing the work because we regard men as disposable.
If you want equality then women will start having to work in unpleasant, dangerous areas, where death, disease, injury or a much shortened life-span are very real possibilities.
We do seem to be going down a different route to that to close the gap, whereby hysterical feminists insist that women in cushy jobs get paid exactly the same as the hard working men, instead of a fair rate. it certainly will reduce the wage gap, but it's decreasing equality and fairness.
An MSc student at the gender studies institute of the London School of Economics. We're all doomed! What possible use is such a qualification beyond the sheltered world of those posting their b@llocks above?
And feminism is just another example of women saying one thing and doing something entirely different.
Every man knows what women say and actually do are two completely different things.
They say that gender roles are unfair. But they still want to be protected by a man.
They say that men dominate. But in relationships they always say they want like it when the man takes the lead to an extent.
There are many woman's rights which society justifiably had to introduce through legislation and social policy over the past century.
The built up anger and the constant bombardment of images and verbal descriptions of women being abused were necessary to effect change. But as so often happens with big social change, the afterglow of that anger and those images persist so that the previous 'beneficiaries' (men) become demonised and their rights no longer justified.
Ordinary men and women have both been victims throughout history. We live in a more just society today but the justice is now becoming skewed by the power of the women's lobby. Male human rights are not being properly addressed.
Men fill the prisons. Men die younger. Violence against men is largely trivialised by the justice system. Men have no reproductive rights (probably the main cause of the oppression of women in the past). The authorities have a one-eyed view of domestic violence. Tertiary education is dominated by women. Men see great efforts by governments to increase representation of women in fields such as science and engineering but nothing is being done to get more equal numbers of men into primary school teaching or nursing or child care.
The growing men's movement worldwide will mushroom if only woman's rights are going to drive government policy into the future.
yes more men will have to do more childcare if we want to close the 'wage gap'. But most women CHOOSE to do childcare. It's not men's fault. It is not even a feminist issue it is a families and gender issue.
Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.
Germaine Greer, Feminist, Activist and Pedophile
Feminists like sianushka are utterly predictable.
They'll never engage with critics of feminism. They just aren't capable of backing up their dogma with evidence and reason.
With the dominance of feminist ideology in academia, even college educated feminists are indoctrinated rather than taught to think.
Instead of engaging in debate they just spew empty cliché and rhetoric, then flounce off back to a feminist echo chamber where they won't be challenged.
It's something I've seen again and again.
Is feminism sexist? No it's sado-masochistic. It damages both sexes equally, so empowers only the gay community. (Or is that too controversial for the New States...er..person?)
once again nearly all the comments on here are proving why we still need feminism.
On US TV the only permissable violence to portray is against white males. Feminism is a flop...
Learn how to argue.
If it wasn't, it' be called "egalitarianism" or "equalism". Every man has become a punching bag, every boy a potential rapist or patriarch.
I used to call myself a male feminist, but after reading snipe after snipe I had just had enough.
I'm an egalitarian now, and wish fair treatment for everyone, but feminism is definitely not about that, nor has it ever been.
To answer the question: yes.
Good reading: Warren Farrell, Wendy McElroy, Pelle Billing, Christina Hoff Sommers, etc. Another is Erin Pizzey - the "mother" of the modern battered women's shelter. She even in the early 70's realized the women are as capable of violence as men, but the feminist movement suppressed her findings because the idea that women use violence in much the same was as men didn't fit with their patriarchy mythology.
The problem now is that feminism has successfully sold the man=bad,women=victim mindset, and this mindset is not supported by real research, but by hate. Feminism is - and perhaps always has been - a religious mythology just like any other. Unfortunately, chivalry has kept too many men quiet. That is beginning to change though....which is a good thing.
Now it is up to feminism and feminists to decide for themselves: change or parish.
Nichi Hodgson is a writer and broadcaster specialising in sexual politics, censorship, and human rights. Her first book, Bound To You, published by Hodder & Stoughton, is out now. She tweets @NichiHodgson.