Is feminism the solution to what MRAs often complain about?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yes. A great point is made here: http://www.upworthy.com/people-freak-out-when-he-hits-her-in-public-watch-what-happens-when-she-hits-him

MRAs like to BLAME feminism for this sort of thing, but as it points out, actually ending it is part of the whole purpose.

[BaconBacon96]

I'm not an MRA but I disagree with you on this still.

Modern 'third wave' feminism is interested in stopping domestic violence against females, which is a noble cause. However, as far as I can see, they have done nothing related to stopping violence against men by females whatsoever.

[Boston Bread]

Modern feminism is the solution to nothing.

http://www.aauw.org/research/the-simple-truth-about-the-gender-pay-gap/
https://rainn.org/statistics
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/03/-sp-america-only-developed-country-paid-maternity-leave

These are some of the problems modern feminists try to address.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Modern feminism is the solution to nothing.

http://www.aauw.org/research/the-simple-truth-about-the-gender-pay-gap/
https://rainn.org/statistics
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/03/-sp-america-only-developed-country-paid-maternity-leave

These are some of the problems modern feminists try to address.

     While there are many ways in which men are privileged over women, there are also many ways in which women are privileged over men. As BaconBacon pointed out, modern feminists are oddly uninterested in dealing with the latter type of problem.

[Boston Bread]

Just because feminists don't focus on men's issues doesn't mean men's problems won't at all improve if feminists get closer to some of their goals. For instance if women earn an equivalent wage as a man doing the same work than there will be less pressure on men to earn. So there would be more freedom for men when it comes to lifestyle choices. When women are liberated so are men, basically.

[H. Ross Peron]

The more forward-looking variants of mainstream feminism have the capability of addressing the few legitimate complaints of MRAers (ie child custody, women signing up for Selective Service).

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

The more forward-looking variants of mainstream feminism have the capability of addressing the few legitimate complaints of MRAers (ie child custody, women signing up for Selective Service).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Just because feminists don't focus on men's issues doesn't mean men's problems won't at all improve if feminists get closer to some of their goals. For instance if women earn an equivalent wage as a man doing the same work than there will be less pressure on men to earn. So there would be more freedom for men when it comes to lifestyle choices. When women are liberated so are men, basically.

     That's an extremely simplistic way of looking at it. Which part of the modern feminist program will deal with asymmetries in domestic and sexual violence reporting and prosecution? It seems to me like more than a few people are trying their hardest to pretend that men can't be victims of certain violent crimes.

[ElectionsGuy]

Maybe. This sort of thing is no different than the reaction of a white person stealing something vs a black person stealing something. People have a stereotype that men are the ones who usually violently abuse women, and not the other way around. I do agree that the "patriarchy" of gender roles is a huge reason for this, but don't know what feminism would do about it, since its been around for a fairly long time.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

No. Feminism is the solution to nothing, and shouldn't exist in modern society in any way, shape or form.

[Hatman 🍁]

A forum with very few women is predictably awful when it comes to this topic.

[Mr. Smith]

It's not the only solution, nor should it be the first.

The first solution is for men to stop being silent and/or actively exploiting the patriarchal gender roles for gain and take the lead (and get beyond the superficial noise of "MRA's")

It's not THE solution, but it is A solution, and an important one.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

A forum with very few women is predictably awful when it comes to this topic.

This. Very much this. That we have posts saying anything but yes is incredibly disturbing.

This forum has incredibly warped and misguided perceptions on what the central tenants of feminism actually are. The reasonable issues that MRAs complain about are covered by feminism.

[politicus]

No. Feminism is the solution to nothing, and shouldn't exist in modern society in any way, shape or form.

Serious?

[Antonio the Sixth]

A forum with very few women is predictably awful when it comes to this topic.

This. Very much this. That we have posts saying anything but yes is incredibly disturbing.

This forum has incredibly warped and misguided perceptions on what the central tenants of feminism actually are. The reasonable issues that MRAs complain about are covered by feminism.

^^^^

[Marokai Backbeat]

What about modern feminism (a conversation that is near-impossible since there are tons of different forms of feminisms and what people even think of patriarchy varies wildly) seeks to solve these problems? Like, even if you accept that the concept of "the patriarchy" as some all-encompassing boogeyman still exists in full force in America and the rest of the first world to this day (and I'm not even sure I really buy into the "heads we win, tails you lose" logic that argues about the patriarchy's existence in America in the first place), "dismantling it" (what does this mean? what does this entail? none of this is specific whatsoever) is not some sort of panacea that trickles down to magically hocus pocus every problem that faces men and women away. Like, no social problem is solved this way. It's complete wishful thinking.

I think when MRAs blame feminism for this sort of thing it's obviously idiotic, but I find it no less simplistic than just blaming it on a squishy concept that everyone defines however they like depending on the argument. I just don't agree that feminism (again, what feminism? what does this mean?) is the "solution" because "magically solve every problem! who's with us?!" isn't an actual solution. Modern feminism is very light on specific constructive ideas to meet their desired outcomes (and exaggerates statistics a lot to get awareness while then quietly admitting when pressed they're not as dire), which is why a lot of people respond to it with a raised eyebrow. At least, it's why I do.

[Mr. Smith]

A forum with very few women is predictably awful when it comes to this topic.

This. Very much this. That we have posts saying anything but yes is incredibly disturbing.

This forum has incredibly warped and misguided perceptions on what the central tenants of feminism actually are. The reasonable issues that MRAs complain about are covered by feminism.

Not all of them, many certainly (thanks to crossover support or parallels [objectification is an excellent example of a parallel]), but definitely not all of them. And nor can it be that way. To expect that would be to expect MRA's to have all the solutions to issues women face (appallingly, one can find a lot of those egomaniacal ones that actually think they do ), to expect one minority to speak for all minorities, when in fact there are clashes at times.

And even if they did, as any human rights activist can tell you, in a case like this, the main responsibility to get the issues voiced need to lay on the disadvantaged group to lead (in this case men), who gain allies along the way (women and feminists).

[Deus Naturae]

I think MRA's who complain about stuff like this are being frivolous. "Don't hit girls" exists as a thing because women, on average, physically weaker and men fighting men is more of a natural thing, whereas men beating up on women is less so.

The real issues that hurt men are unjust laws in regard to divorce, child custody, and child support, as well as a disturbing trend towards ostracizing and punishing people based on the mere accusation of rape, no matter how baseless or problematic the accuser's story is. Feminists support and push all of these things, so no feminism isn't any kind of solution.

[ingemann]

I think MRA's who complain about stuff like this are being frivolous. "Don't hit girls" exists as a thing because women, on average, physically weaker and men fighting men is more of a natural thing, whereas men beating up on women is less so.

The real issues that hurt men are unjust laws in regard to divorce, child custody, and child support, as well as a disturbing trend towards ostracizing and punishing people based on the mere accusation of rape, no matter how baseless or problematic the accuser's story is. Feminists support and push all of these things, so no feminism isn't any kind of solution.

Seeing as feminism have been the major factor in giving women the vote, banning husband from being legal allowed to beat and rape their wife, removing anti-women disciminating factors, how far do you suggest we should push women right back?

[Deus Naturae]

I think MRA's who complain about stuff like this are being frivolous. "Don't hit girls" exists as a thing because women, on average, physically weaker and men fighting men is more of a natural thing, whereas men beating up on women is less so.

The real issues that hurt men are unjust laws in regard to divorce, child custody, and child support, as well as a disturbing trend towards ostracizing and punishing people based on the mere accusation of rape, no matter how baseless or problematic the accuser's story is. Feminists support and push all of these things, so no feminism isn't any kind of solution.

Seeing as feminism have been the major factor in giving women the vote, banning husband from being legal allowed to beat and rape their wife, removing anti-women disciminating factors, how far do you suggest we should push women right back?

Um, what? Are you seriously accusing me of supporting wife beating and rape? I'm suggesting that we should reform divorce and child support laws...your post is just a ridiculous strawman.

[ingemann]

I think MRA's who complain about stuff like this are being frivolous. "Don't hit girls" exists as a thing because women, on average, physically weaker and men fighting men is more of a natural thing, whereas men beating up on women is less so.

The real issues that hurt men are unjust laws in regard to divorce, child custody, and child support, as well as a disturbing trend towards ostracizing and punishing people based on the mere accusation of rape, no matter how baseless or problematic the accuser's story is. Feminists support and push all of these things, so no feminism isn't any kind of solution.

Seeing as feminism have been the major factor in giving women the vote, banning husband from being legal allowed to beat and rape their wife, removing anti-women disciminating factors, how far do you suggest we should push women right back?

Um, what? Are you seriously accusing me of supporting wife beating and rape? I'm suggesting that we should reform divorce and child support laws...your post is just a ridiculous strawman.

Wanting no feminism are a ridiculous strawman or a sign of a complete lack of historical knowledge, and we don't need to further back than 1993, when there was still American states which didn't recognised that a man could rape his wife. It's not the far past, it's relative new development that we recognise maritial rape as rape. So no it's not a strawman. It's a very legitime question, when did you think that feminism had gone to far?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

I think MRA's who complain about stuff like this are being frivolous. "Don't hit girls" exists as a thing because women, on average, physically weaker and men fighting men is more of a natural thing, whereas men beating up on women is less so.

The real issues that hurt men are unjust laws in regard to divorce, child custody, and child support, as well as a disturbing trend towards ostracizing and punishing people based on the mere accusation of rape, no matter how baseless or problematic the accuser's story is. Feminists support and push all of these things, so no feminism isn't any kind of solution.

Seeing as feminism have been the major factor in giving women the vote, banning husband from being legal allowed to beat and rape their wife, removing anti-women disciminating factors, how far do you suggest we should push women right back?

Um, what? Are you seriously accusing me of supporting wife beating and rape? I'm suggesting that we should reform divorce and child support laws...your post is just a ridiculous strawman.

I highly recommend this book.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

(among other charming quotes)

[afleitch]

It's unfortunate that the movement to counter the effects of patriarchy, which can negatively affect men as well as women is given the name 'feminism'. I am a feminist, and it needs a name change. Feminism when it is exclusive[/] leads to both intentional and unintentional misandry. That is no good thing. It's a movement for all.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

First off, I do think that our perspectives as a generally privileged cis-male filled forum probably aren't the same as those of women who undergo discrimination and sexism. That being said, a lot of people misconstrue feminism's intent. True feminism means gender equality. Don't let one bad apple spoil the bunch. I do know a few so called feminists that are extremists who tilt towards misandry as opposed to equality. Thus, I don't see them as furthering the goals of feminism at all. Gender equality creates a breakdown of harmful traditional roles and stereotypes, which clearly benefits men. True gender equality creates an environment where men and women have equal value under the law. Once again, this helps both sexes. I don't call myself a feminist for the fear of being seen as trying to make the movement about men because I bring up how equality helps men as well. I call myself an egalitarian who supports the root goals of feminism.

Fine post until the bold, which I want to respond to. You ARE a feminist, but you undermine its image and credibility when you call yourself an "egalitarian who supports the root goals of feminism." Bringing up male benefits does not make the movement about men; the movement has been and will continue to be largely about women simply because they are the ones who suffer from the imbalanced social structures in place today.

A forum with very few women is predictably awful when it comes to this topic.

This. Very much this. That we have posts saying anything but yes is incredibly disturbing.

This forum has incredibly warped and misguided perceptions on what the central tenants of feminism actually are. The reasonable issues that MRAs complain about are covered by feminism.

Not all of them, many certainly (thanks to crossover support or parallels [objectification is an excellent example of a parallel]), but definitely not all of them. And nor can it be that way. To expect that would be to expect MRA's to have all the solutions to issues women face (appallingly, one can find a lot of those egomaniacal ones that actually think they do ), to expect one minority to speak for all minorities, when in fact there are clashes at times.

And even if they did, as any human rights activist can tell you, in a case like this, the main responsibility to get the issues voiced need to lay on the disadvantaged group to lead (in this case men), who gain allies along the way (women and feminists).

Men are the one's being disadvantaged in the status quo? Even if we take the most favorable take on arguments MRAs like to focus on (ex. divorce, child custody), we still have to weigh those harms against those women endure. Writ large, women are far more worse off on both quantity and quality of problems; men are not the disadvantaged group in the slightest.

Men who are focused on fixing negative male gender roles that go under the MRA movement end up undermining the very cause they are fighting for, because the MRA movement is 1. attempting to shift the narrative that men are somehow victims on balance (which too many fedora types on this forum latch onto) and 2. the movement contains many individuals who want to reaffirm (whether intentionally or not) the patriarchy, which alienates feminists from solving these issues longterm. Integrating into the broader feminist movement is the only correct choice, for the simple reason alone that feminism is literally fighting for the same thing.

The real issues that hurt men are unjust laws in regard to divorce, child custody, and child support, as well as a disturbing trend towards ostracizing and punishing people based on the mere accusation of rape, no matter how baseless or problematic the accuser's story is. Feminists support and push all of these things, so no feminism isn't any kind of solution.

You clearly do not know what feminism actually is. I'll warn you here deus, based on your posts in this area (re. rape/women), it is best for you to not take another step down this road, lest you be willing to be flayed alive by the greater forum community. Please do some reading on the subject.

[Redalgo]

The objective of liberal feminism is equality between the sexes, and the method of choice is to work within the established system to capture the state from folks who defend tradition and oppose egalitarian values. I am a feminist. There is no plan to establish a matriarchy or otherwise subjugate men.