The Unisex Brigade

permutationofninjas:

feministsaresexist:

meganmulder:

I wish I had about seventy million copies of this free online short book about continuing inequality between the sexes. 

Folks, if you’re reading this, you have internet and time and money and you’re lucky. Please, please, please, repay the universe for that luck and read this Little Book of Big Debate Starters and educate yourself. 

Because if you think you’re smart and you’re not a feminist, I just might have to jump off a bridge. Or push you off one.

(Kidding.)

(Maybe.)

Introduction:

Why is it that one in three women experience violence at some point in their lives?

Male violence rates are much higher.

Why in 2011, are women performing 66% of the world’s work, producing 50% of the world’s food, earning 10% of the world’s income and yet only own 1% of the world’s property?

Wrong.

Is being a woman in a war zone more risky than being a soldier?

Civilians now account for more than 70% of casualties in conflicts – most of them women and children.

This section mentions women and children being 70% of casualties, but then only mentions that they’re forced out of their homes to starve. Where are the husbands? Dead? Forced to fight? This isn’t targeting of women, this is targeting of a race or a country. This is what war is, and a lot of single-issue voting feminists support this simply because they won’t either vote for the one candidate who would stop wars like this because he’s pro-life (though, like all the other pro-lifers before him, won’t follow through on his promises to ban abortion), or they won’t stop supporting the government in the first place.

It’s true to say that in times of conflict, violence against women comes in all manner of gruesome forms – physical, sexual and psychological. As a weapon of war, rape in particular is horribly effective, used to conquer and control women and their communities, as we’ve seen in Bosnia, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Equal numbers of male rape in the places listed are severely under-reported and ignored by the few who do discover it.

Do some women really get sacked because they’re pregnant?

Before the recent economic crisis, it was thought that almost 30,000 women were forced out of their jobs every year – just because they became pregnant.

You want the government to force people to pay money to people that aren’t working for them because you think that’s all about equality. I’m not against personal contracts that protect women when they get pregnant, but those should be voluntary and they should not be enforced. Businesses (made up of people with individual rights to their own money) should not have to pay anyone for work they are not doing. Get your guns and your force out of other people’s lives, or you’re just supporting violence and inequality.

Oh, and feminists support patriarchal standards for fathers in the workplace, because all they do is mention their problems instead of actually doing anything about them.

Why are women still the poorer sex?

I’ve covered your wrong statistics already.

There are so many rules that girls are born into: rules about whether or not you’re allowed to be somewhere, rules about how to dress or speak, rules about what you are or aren’t entitled to just because you’re not a man. All of it limits the scope of where a woman can be and how she can act.

Ironically, this comes from that government involvement you love so much. Feminism isn’t going to save these women, at least not solely. Smaller governments with freer markets have freer, more respected women.

Are the world’s top-dogs really all men?

Of the world’s 188 directly elected leaders, just sixteen are women.

I would attribute this partly to the fact that a lot of countries are sexist or forces adherance to more traditional gender roles, and partly to the fact that the majority of women in countries that do allow women in politics still have a society that chooses to adhere to traditional gender roles. Just because women in freer countries aren’t exactly or close to half doesn’t mean that they’re being kept out of politics. Female traits are less likely to show leadership (though not always). Women have always been more committed to their families than men when it comes to time and childcare, and this is a choice. If men can balance work and family, so can women, they just have to find a man that will be the primary parent, or not have children for a while or at all.

Also, feminists don’t really help make women look like leadership material.

Why do girls get forced into having sex?

A UK survey found that 40% of young people know girls who have been coerced or pressurised into sex by their boyfriends, and 42% of young people know girls whose boyfriends have hit them.

The amount of people that know women that have been coerced into sex or hit doesn’t actually show the amount of women that have been coerced into sex or hit. This also, again, is ignoring the male side of things, which is equal in domestic violence, and almost equal in rape.

I’ve also already pointed out the rape of men in other countries is a severe problem, almost more severe because it’s thought to not exist and the victim is punished if discovered, due to male patriarchal expectations to be strong and straight.

Your 1 in 6 stat is also largely incorrect, because those types of studies don’t directly ask the “victims” if they feel they’ve been raped and assumes any intake of alcohol or other recreational drugs is proof of rape and intentional drugging by the “rapist,” and this often is not the case.

Do men still get a better pay deal than women?

The studies that show that women make less than men don’t take into account hours worked, career choice, difference in pay depending on the company, difference in major, difference in career even with the same major, job risk, or time off. Women generally make safer, more comfortable career choices, and take off more than men due to childbirth and taking care of children, which is all personal choice. If individual women want to put their career first, they can either not have a family or find a man that wants to take care of the kids more, and choose harder, more dangerous jobs like construction if they really want to make the same amount. This also falls back on the link I used to show that feminists don’t help men become more accepted when it comes to stay-at-home fatherhood.

Why are women still dying having babies?

This isn’t an example of sexism. It’s tragic and it should be stopped as much as possible, but it’s still very rare and still not an example of sexism. It’s an example of poverty and lack of resources, and sometimes just due to complications that couldn’t be prevented or cured. Again though, this is something that should be stopped as much as possible.

Why are more women than men at risk of HIV?

The conditions in developing countries are horrible, but again, more oppressive governments and poverty stricken countries (usually going hand in hand) are more sexist than countries with less government and a freer market. The conditions of these women and the way they’re treated are horrible, but by mentioning the more severe area of this issue, the UK is made to seem like it has a bigger problem than it actually does. While doing everything to prevent HIV is extremely important 7,300 people (not even just women) is not a huge ratio compared to the population of the UK, and none of the reasons for contracting it are sexist reasons, other than cheating maybe, but that’s hardly sexist necessarily.

Whose fault is it that women hate their own bodies?

A survey of over three thousand women and girls in ten different countries found that 90% wanted to change some aspect of themselves, body weight and shape being the main concerns.

Who doesn’t? Honestly? Men have expectations and perceptions of what’s attractive as a male as well, and many would change themselves to be more masculine just like women would change themselves to be more feminine.

Men hate their bodies too. Men are objectified too.

The links between pornification, discrimination and violence against women have been proven.

Oh really. (Funny, that link, like all of my others, shows better outcome with decline in government involevement)

Are boys getting a better education than girls?

Two-thirds of the children denied school are girls.

Again with the oppressive, poor, gender enforcing governments. When there’s poverty, it’s more likely that there’s going to be sexism. When there’s poverty, it’s usually due to an oppressive government. Get rid of the oppressive government, get rid of poverty, get rid of sexism. If the UK, America, and other developed countries don’t prove that to you, I don’t know what will.

Feminism isn’t anti-sexism and gender discrimination. It’s one-sided and makes women’s oppression a main issue above the actual main issue, which is patriarchy. Women’s struggles are important, but so are men’s. Women are disadvantaged by patriarchy, but so are men. The fact that this entire booklet focuses entirely on women, and not at all on the opposite end of the spectrum that is almost the exact same and sometimes worse, the fact that an International Women’s Day exists, while none for men who are oppressed and have no substantial amount of power get no recognition just proves that feminism does not care about gender equality and only reinforces the idea that women are weak by making them look like the only ones oppressed.

So yes, I am smart and that’s why I am not and never will be a feminist. Hope you’re not standing near a bridge. I’m glad I’m not anywhere near you though, wouldn’t want the feminist for “equality” to jokingly, maybe get all violent and homicidal on my ass. 

Enough said.

(via permutationofninjasarchive)

77825225672443:

That is because sexism is aimed at women.

Men are hit with crossfire, i.e. strict gender roles imposed upon women relate back in the ways in which strict gender roles then effect men. But they do not do so as strongly.

To take a telling case, look at the incredibly wealthy men who lead fashion (haute couture). Most of them are pretty effeminate.

Now, look at all the butch women who are wealthy-

Oh wait, there aren’t any.

This doesn’t mean that men aren’t derided for being feminine, or that gender roles do not also hurt them. But they are not directly imposed upon them.

This plays out in the same way that trans men want to reclaim the t~slur. The word is aimed at trans women. Google it. Guess who shows up? Exclusively trans women. Guess what population that word is aimed at? Trans women. Exclusively.

However, trans men sometimes are hit by the word, because they can be misgendered as trans women. This absolutely does fucking not give them the right to reclaim this term. Because this term does not apply to them.

The same way, as if I were to be called a racial epithet to a race I did not belong to. I could not reclaim that term. Nor could anybody except for the people to which the term is levied at.

tl;dr: men aren’t the direct victims of sexism, they are collateral damage, in the same way that trans men sometimes get hit with the t~slur even though it’s aimed at trans women.

So basically what you’ve said here is that men are oppressed by gender roles in the same way as women, through the same mechanism, from the same source, and that sexism affects them, but then you’ve decided that judging on your subjective experiences the sexism affecting men is not quite as bad as the sexism affecting women.

You know what? I would allow that as your subjective opinion. I personally would step back and note that the suffering is of completely different types, and realise that it is impossible and even a little offensive to compare two groups’ suffering, or to say that one is ‘more of a victim’ when clearly both are. But I could tolerate you wanting to think women had it slightly worse.

But that’s not what you’ve taken from this. You’ve decided that there can only be one ‘real’ victim, and so from that reasonableness outlined in the first paragraph you’ve concluded that ‘men are not the victims of sexism’, as there can only be one group of victims. That is unhelpful to say the least, and even contradicts what you had just said about gender roles (sexism) victimising men too. Men can be victims even though women are victims too. Men can be victims even if women are victimised slightly worse. You don’t need to simplify it to one group suffering and everybody else being fine. Real life doesn’t work like that. Who are you to tell men that their suffering is just ‘collateral damage’, when you are invalidating their experiences simply because it would be ideologically neat to have women as the only ‘victims’ - even when this contradicts what you know about how the gender binary works. 

Start listening to your head, not the outdated dogma that’s been crammed in there. You really were making progress.

^ Reblogging for above commentary.

Also, I don’t think theres anything ‘wrong’ with feminism. Fight for your rights, everyone should. The very fact that rights have to be fought for, among any group, is incredibly sad, but hey if it has to be done, then it has to be done.

Unfortunately, it would seem that some where along the line, people chose a common enemy: men. Now, while I agree that sexism against women is alive and well, thriving even, that does not mean that sexism against men is nonexistent. Posts saying ‘but what about teh menz?’ is just taking attention away from valid victims who deserve to have their piece heard, and who deserve to be recognized. If this happened to a woman (and it does) then they’d have a total fit, and in the end, they’d be heard. But when it happens to a man, its accepted and expected that they should just shut up, because men aren’t allowed to suffer! 

Women get more attention as far as sexism goes because most people don’t allow men to get attention. Its okay for women to fight, but not for men and the feminist movement really lends to this. While women may suffer more often, that does not invalidate the suffering that men go through.

(Source: iuwaehfoaiuwhefoiaulfjqn)

kevinwayne:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/11/981112075159.htm

I’d forgotten about this statistic. Stereotypes of men being strong mean that they are expected to work harder in most intense conditions for longer hours and retire later, leading to much greater stress and an early death. They are more likely to be killed at work, because they are stereotyped as strong. They are more likely to be murdered, because they are stereotyped as strong. They are more likely to kill themselves, because they are stereotyped as strong. On top of this, millions of them have been sent out to die throughout history in wars, because they are stereotyped as strong.

“Ah, but sexism can’t hurt men, because all it says is that they are strong”.

Don’t be naive. Every stereotype has advantages and disadvantages. Being seen as strong might seem good from a simplistic view, but it can be fatal. In the media we either glorify violence against men or we laugh at it, because they are stereotyped as strong. In the courts we overconvict male defendents and underconvict those with male victims, because they are stereotyped as strong. In everyday life we expect men to sacrifice their comfort, health, finance, and even their lives to protect women, because they are seen as strong.

In all of these areas, being seen as weak is a privilege for women. Stop saying ‘ah but sexism can’t benefit women, because all it says is that they are weak’. Don’t be naive. Being seen as weak saves women’s lives on a daily basis, and men are killed instead. Please go and tell their families that this was their privilege. Tell them that they were lucky, and that you’d rather be in their place. I didn’t think so.

Every stereotype has advantages, and disadvantages. Think about it.

^ Reblogging for commentary. (Does anyone know how to make it so I DONT have to copy+paste someones commentary? I hate how it cuts it off, blah.)