The feminist movement is getting out of control.

[StraitTalk]

This is what happens with most couples, unless there has been serious abuse or one of the parents has been involved in criminal activity etc.

I was kept from my dad growing up (allowed 1 visit per week) because my mother was vindictive and using me and my siblings as a weapon against him. Years after they split, my mother still found ways to hurt my father. Oversimplifying something doesn't make you any more right about whatever it is you're arguing.

I think you are blind to your own arrogance ignorance as you have cut down men repeatedly in this thread under a guise of equality. You have been called out numerous times for this. Your posts smell of someone trying to convince themselves they're not that person.

[Silverstarqueen]

So were you kept from your Dad, or did he see you once a week? Your statements often seem inconsistent.
Whatever was going on between your parents, it's likely it went both ways. Children are often the least aware of just what is happening between parents or why it is happening.
I was kept from my mother for many years. I later asked the family what was going on and it was nothing like the story I was told as a child. She made every honest effort to keep custody but the courts were poisoned against her.There was no logical reason why I was kept from her, she was not involved in any illegal or abusive behavior, and had a job and support lined up to raise me. That's just the way the shake of the dice went.
I can forgive your personal attacks against me, you obviously are deeply affected by the disharmony between your parents.

[rustled]

Ah, I see.

Thanks for sharing your experience. It explains why you're unable to see the bias you've been displaying in your posts. The residual effects of disharmony between parents and extended families can be difficult to recognize and tough to overcome.

My sympathies.

[Silverstarqueen]

Fortunately there was no disharmony between my parents or extended family, so no sympathies necessary.
Which is probably why i don't harbor animosity toward men in general, and as I said, I have only met a few loo-loos, most men are pretty reasonable.
And it's probably why, as i said, I think most decent men would be able to single parent, take primary custody or at least joint custody, no reason why they can't. Some choose not to, that fine too, I am sure they have their reasons.
And why more of them should at least try to make a case in court (or mediation) for access to their children, if in fact they really want primary parenting responsibilities.
Judging from the statistics I posted, relatively few men actually do, at least half or more agree to the custody/ access agreement, or mediation, before it ever gets to court, so presumably they are agreeable with the arrangement.
Of those who actually do see it thru to court, a fair number seem to get the access that they seek. Of course it isn't always going to work out and that is disappointing for them.

[Silverstarqueen]

Oh, and the ridiculous video about the Scum manifesto< not sure if it's meant to be humorous or what.
The Scum Manifesto was written by one woman in the sixties. She was the only member of her "organization", and was later found to be schizophrenic (after shooting Andy Warhal and going to prison). So the statement by the narrator that her "Scum Manifesto" was popular among feminists, is , I guess some effort at humor or just to mislead the viewer. Her views were not endorsed by the National Organization for Women. The suggestion that the rantings of a schizophrenic somehow represents feminists in general is ridiculous , but certainly great fodder for men's rights activists.

[rustled]

Your statements seem inconsistent.

As I understood your post, you were kept from your mother, there was no good reason for this, the courts were poisoned against her, you were not told the truth as a child. The implication seems to be that the family would be doing the poisoning. Perhaps I misunderstood, though, and this is not what you meant? My apologies, then, and I'm back to wondering why you can't see your bias, but really it's none of my business. We each have our own perspective, and the wheel keeps on turning.

(Not sure what the Scum Manifesto is. If that's about Julie Lalonde, I was referencing her organized efforts to shut down the voices of others by threatening the theatre, and questioning why you wouldn't find that type of thing objectionable.)

[Glacier]

Oh, and the ridiculous video about the Scum manifesto< not sure if it's meant to be humorous or what.
The Scum Manifesto was written by one woman in the sixties. She was the only member of her "organization", and was later found to be schizophrenic (after shooting Andy Warhal and going to prison). So the statement by the narrator that her "Scum Manifesto" was popular among feminists, is , I guess some effort at humor or just to mislead the viewer. Her views were not endorsed by the National Organization for Women. The suggestion that the rantings of a schizophrenic somehow represents feminists in general is ridiculous , but certainly great fodder for men's rights activists.

Speaking of ridiculous, your equation of rape as justification for feminism is the most ridiculous thing I've read all year. There's like 1 guy in the 60s who was pro-rape. Rape has absolutely nothing to do with feminism. 99% of the population condemns rape with vehemency. The government condemns rape. The courts condemn rape. Society condemns rape. Everyone is against it no matter how much they love or hate feminism. Most people want rapists to get tougher sentences if anything. There is no rape culture (though there are rapists just as there are murderers -- and we don't live in a murder culture last time I looked).

[Silverstarqueen]

Your statements seem inconsistent.

As I understood your post, you were kept from your mother, there was no good reason for this, the courts were poisoned against her, you were not told the truth as a child. The implication seems to be that the family would be doing the poisoning. Perhaps I misunderstood, though, and this is not what you meant? My apologies, then, and I'm back to wondering why you can't see your bias, but really it's none of my business. We each have our own perspective, and the wheel keeps on turning.

(Not sure what the Scum Manifesto is. If that's about Julie Lalonde, I was referencing her organized efforts to shut down the voices of others by threatening the theatre, and questioning why you wouldn't find that type of thing objectionable.)

My statement was accurate. There was no "implicit" message. Further details are no ones business. My point was that children are sometimes kept from their parent (could be the father or the mother) and they are not always given an accurate story as to why, or what is going on. I got the whole story as an adult, and it wasn't what I was told as a child.

As I said, on my comment about the Scum manifesto, it was in relation to the ridiculous video just posted earlier (late last evening). Which said that the ranting of a particular woman (not an "orgnaization") was somehow indicative of feminists in general, when in fact this woman was schizophrenic and her rantings were not supported by Women's organizations at all.

[Silverstarqueen]

Oh, and the ridiculous video about the Scum manifesto< not sure if it's meant to be humorous or what.
The Scum Manifesto was written by one woman in the sixties. She was the only member of her "organization", and was later found to be schizophrenic (after shooting Andy Warhal and going to prison). So the statement by the narrator that her "Scum Manifesto" was popular among feminists, is , I guess some effort at humor or just to mislead the viewer. Her views were not endorsed by the National Organization for Women. The suggestion that the rantings of a schizophrenic somehow represents feminists in general is ridiculous , but certainly great fodder for men's rights activists.

Speaking of ridiculous, your equation of rape as justification for feminism is the most ridiculous thing I've read all year. There's like 1 guy in the 60s who was pro-rape. Rape has absolutely nothing to do with feminism. 99% of the population condemns rape with vehemency. The government condemns rape. The courts condemn rape. Society condemns rape. Everyone is against it no matter how much they love or hate feminism. Most people want rapists to get tougher sentences if anything. There is no rape culture (though there are rapists just as there are murderers -- and we don't live in a murder culture last time I looked).

Perhaps you could quote where I equated rape as justification for feminism.
Feminism, is about women seeking basic rights and treatment, such as the right to be reasonably safe from assault, and about supporting women in dealing with their efforts to deal with that trauma, and/or the justice system afterward.

[Atomoa]

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comme ... -after-all

John Robson: I attended a men’s rights meeting and these activists really aren’t so scary after all

I attended the inaugural meeting of the Ottawa branch of the Canadian Association For Equality (CAFE) last June, a small, underfunded gathering of mostly mild-mannered men and women concerned about the lack of domestic shelters for male abuse victims, the disproportionate tendency of men to drop out of school, commit suicide, go to jail and so forth. And it was disrupted by organized protestors blowing whistles, shaking noisemakers, etc. As we knew it would be.

MRAs note that men account for 94 per cent of workplace fatalities in the United States and three quarters of the suicides, and comprise less than 40 per cent of university undergraduates but get 60 per cent more prison time for the same offences. And they blame harmful stereotypes of masculinity that also make men drown their pain in alcohol or work themselves into an early grave.

Such complaints provoke conspicuous unease across the spectrum, and a strong hint of “suck it up, buttercup,” because to admit distress and ask for help is not truly manly in precisely the old sense that feminists ostensibly despise. Especially regarding female violence against men. A man who cannot take it, without hitting back, is a sissy (remember Sam Spade lecturing Joel Cairo in The Maltese Falcon). Hence men who instead seek help when battered endure the scorn not just of the “patriarchy” but of the feminarchy as well.

So what if men did take the feminists’ ostensible cue and chuck the whole manliness thing? What if we started to cry, refused to do dangerous or disgusting jobs, repudiated the notion of “women and children first” into the lifeboats, and did not feel like failures if we did not earn money? What if we stopped being “men”?

In the Red Pill, one MRA agreed that women had too often been made sexual objects. But, he complained, men had been made “productive objects.”

[Glacier]

Perhaps you could quote where I equated rape as justification for feminism.
Feminism, is about women seeking basic rights and treatment, such as the right to be reasonably safe from assault, and about supporting women in dealing with their efforts to deal with that trauma, and/or the justice system afterward.

Rape has absolutely nothing to do with feminism. Women already have basic rights like not getting raped. Society already condemns rape in the strongest terms. It's already against the law to harm women just as much as it is to harm men.

Sure, help women who are victims (though you don't have to be a feminist to do that), but posting this story tells me that you think rape in the military is the result of women not having rights (which it isn't): viewtopic.php?f=31&t=58542&p=2103939#p2103939

[Silverstarqueen]

I think men nowadays can be anything they want. There is no set definition as to what is "manly", who has to earn the daily bread, who gets to cry, who gets to do the tough jobs, who can raise the children. I don't think that's just a result of feminism, which has helped women redefine their roles, but also a result of men realizing they are free to shape their own lives as they see fit. See, it's not that complicated.

[Silverstarqueen]

Perhaps you could quote where I equated rape as justification for feminism.
Feminism, is about women seeking basic rights and treatment, such as the right to be reasonably safe from assault, and about supporting women in dealing with their efforts to deal with that trauma, and/or the justice system afterward.

Rape has absolutely nothing to do with feminism. Women already have basic rights like not getting raped. Society already condemns rape in the strongest terms. It's already against the law to harm women just as much as it is to harm men.

Sure, help women who are victims (though you don't have to be a feminist to do that), but posting this story tells me that you think rape in the military is the result of women not having rights (which it isn't): viewtopic.php?f=31&t=58542&p=2103939#p2103939

27% of the women members had experienced sexual assault since joining the military. So because they were female members, that would be a feminist issue, and because they would need support to help rectify the situation, they seek support from feminists.
Do you think these women have the right to continue in their military career without having a 27% chance of being a victim of sexual assault? Their senior officer certainly seemed to think it was an important issue, and seemed to be frustrated by the continued assaults even after his order that this type of abuse was to stop. So feminists pretty much agree that it continues to be an issue, until it is resolved better than it has been.
What do you think is the cause of women in the military being sexually assaulted at such a high rate?

[Glacier]

27% of the women members had experienced sexual assault since joining the military. So because they were female members, that would be a feminist issue, and because they would need support to help rectify the situation, they seek support from feminists.
Do you think these women have the right to continue in their military career without having a 27% chance of being a victim of sexual assault? Their senior officer certainly seemed to think it was an important issue, and seemed to be frustrated by the continued assaults even after his order that this type of abuse was to stop. So feminists pretty much agree that it continues to be an issue, until it is resolved better than it has been.
What do you think is the cause of women in the military being sexually assaulted at such a high rate?

What do you think is the cause of men in the military being sexually assaulted at such a high rate? Just like women, men also experience much higher rates of sexual assault in the military as compared to the general population.

[Silverstarqueen]

I think it's because the perpetrators believe they will get away with it,(obviously they have so far) and will not have to suffer any consequences. So they feel no particular need to change their behavior.