more than women. Even if they don't claim membership, if they advanced that view, they adhere to the key tenet of MRA ideology.

For race, class, sexual orientation, or other.

who/what is responsible for these classifications?

Not women and certainly not feminists.

so confused....

I've been alarmed by the misogyny blooming here and elsewhere.

friggin interesting.

and for very good reasons, I expect. There must be tremendous amounts of abuse: personal and/or intellectual, and very little productive discussion.

I don't use ignore, but I have personally preferences as to who I'll interact with as well. DU has a great search function.

As long as we're at it.... Can you hear me?

as soon as you arrived.

Because of this:

as in one who argues that men's rights are being taken away by feminists.

that last part is how I see it and could be institutionally wrong.

Would like edification and/or clarification from one of the more educated in the group.

I should have been able to figure that out...maybe with a little context.

Economy Group.

I edited to add more definition. I hope that I got it right. I am learning, too.

Based on his/her comments below. He/she seems to feel there's a tremendous amount of 'abuse...and very little productive discussion.' I have trouble believing that someone who is ignoring so many members of this group would really be happy here. So perhaps welcoming him/her to this particular group is a bit premature.

peace. let it start here.

Perhaps we might see a coming together happen right here, right now.

I would rather Demeter hash it out with sea (I am thinking that is the only one on ignore since sea has made the most posts in this thread).

Maybe something good can come of this. I don't know. But, it would be "nice" if it did.

But, I am sick and tired of people abusing sea, and I think she's entitled to one fucking place on this board where she can post and not be attacked. If Demeter wants to make nice and behave appropriately for this group, fine. But I have a problem with him/her coming in and trashing one or more members of this safe haven group, and then expecting to be welcomed with open arms.

ignore. Now, it might be disingenuous and obtuse to come in here and NOT expect to see sea here (! say that 3 times fast)

and that is why I am giving the benefit of doubt.

I am cautiously optimistic that something good could happen here.

I understand it looked like I was "open arms" but, it is the truth that I do value Demeter's contributions else where on DU and I really am happy that Demeter is curious enough about this subject to ask questions.

I do think it is not good form to "call out" that one has someone on ignore. ugh.

yes.

to yourself and know we can handle a differing opinion in respect and appreciation for all you bring. saying. you want to approach it in this manner. i respect that also. cause i have listened to you enough, i know why you approach in this manner. and you will be true to yourself.

I understand this is a safe haven and (trust me after what has happened to me on DU in the past few weeks) I appreciate having a Safe Haven.

It would be nice to see some healing and positive energy come from all this and I know that if anyone can take it you can.

You are a Warrior Woman, for realz.

An MRA is a mens rights activist, who believe feminism is the reason for any problems they have.

No, I don't. Should I?

I don't normally advocate for people to put me on ignore.

on my thinking. I hate to sound so cliched, but I like football and beer and loud music and my libido is perfectly healthy. I try my best not to make anybody uncomfortable but that doesn't mean I don't take notice of good-looking women.

So when MRA's make the "feminization" argument, all I can do is pretty much shake my head and laugh at these poor, pathetic, deluded little boys...

certainly in a feminist home. i was strongly the primary parent. defining their masculinity was theirs to do. not mine. not their father. not society and media. and not peers. but theirs. they have done such a good job.

there is nothing that could make them feel feminize. reading your statement.

maybe why these men are feeling masculinity is being feminized is because they are literally threatened in the manliness with an empowered female. has nothing to do with others. has nothing to do with women. has everything to do with these men loose their identity with a strong, confident, secure, competent woman.

my boys never would. a woman is not tied to their identity of gender. nor you

so most men are saying huh....

it is very real to these men.

meh...

pondering

Weak people have the constant need to lean on others, strong people only from time to time. Weakness builds more weakness, strength builds more strength.

The rest that's been posted is merely symptomatic of that main characteristic.

It's really too bad. If they concentrated on righting some very real wrongs out there, like getting the small end of custody arrangements even when they're good parents, instead of just organizing woman bashing sessions that spill onto GD, most of us would have a very different opinion of them.

Thanks boston bean

3rd wave. They dislike second wave.

I'm definitely second wave. I came of age in the 70s, and the new freedom for women was a tonic to my young adult soul. I was dying to shake the dust off my one-horse town, ultra-Catholic upbringing, and I must say I had FUN! Jeeze, did I have fun.

The 3rd wave is a bit confusing to me, but I think that's a product of my privilege. I struggle to understand much of it. I've heard rumors of a 4th wave and that will be even more interesting to learn about.

learned on du. and it is one our "feminist" men continually throwing it in our face to dismiss what we say and prude shame us.

of your privilege. It seems to me that the "3rd wave" women are attaching 'privilege' to a lot of life-experiences (intersectionality) that don't necessarily deserve it.

in her post #93 downthread.

In addition to what she says, I'd add that many of the 'current' 3rd wave feminists are young white women who are indeed rather 'privileged' themselves calling out other white women on what they see as 'privileges' they themselves do not have. I'd also venture to say that they do this because they like to think they are sticking up for WOC (women of color) which is commendable but somewhat misguided.

For instance, an older married woman may be called out on her 'privilege' because she is perceived to have more assets, has a husband as a back-up, that she is 'cis', etc. However, simply because a woman may be white, older and married it does not necessarily follow that she is privileged/gains by these things in any way. Well, except for the white part...

ETA - except for being white in a country where "white is right"

I was raised as a feminist (mom was an ERA activist) and grew up around a lot of primarily lesbian feminists in the 70s and all of whom were white or Jewish. I remember my mom complaining that WOC were none too happy about the way in which they were not being very well represented in the movement and she had some rather petty things to say about that.

Back then though, iirc, 'privilege' wasn't a concept that was widely understood. That is, I think, the one truly good thing that came from the 3rd wave - the mainstreaming of the concept of privilege.

But, like with a lot of things, it's become over-used and mis-placed and thereby becomes watered down and confusing.

full concept of it all ... and, that cartoon sea posted does not help matters for me.

In hindsight, it is confusing and I can see why a Fourth Wave is developing.

Do you know anything about it?

Welcome to the fourth wave of feminism. This movement follows the first-wave campaign for votes for women, which reached its height 100 years ago, the second wave women's liberation movement that blazed through the 1970s and 80s, and the third wave declared by Rebecca Walker, Alice Walker's daughter, and others, in the early 1990s. That shift from second to third wave took many important forms, but often felt broadly generational, with women defining their work as distinct from their mothers'. What's happening now feels like something new again. It's defined by technology: tools that are allowing women to build a strong, popular, reactive movement online. Just how popular is sometimes slightly startling. Girlguiding UK introduced a campaigning and activism badge this year and a summer survey of Mumsnet users found 59% consider themselves feminists, double those who don't. Bates says that, for her, modern feminism is defined by pragmatism, inclusion and humour. "I feel like it is really down-to-earth, really open," she says, "and it's very much about people saying: 'Here is something that doesn't make sense to me, I thought women were equal, I'm going to do something about it.'"

more at link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/125531146

ugh. It should not have to be so complicated. Should it?

talk talk talk

thanks to sea ... lol ...

I remember now having seen this before, but didn't read it thoroughly...

Interesting.

Was E. C. Stanton 1st wave?

I guess 2nd wave would be 1960s and 1970s with workplace, reproductive, and educational equality.

Then in the 1990s, I'm guessing, we have Joan Scott, Judith Butler, and a move toward gender theory.

i had an excellent article on one of the shakers, how she shifted. saying a fail and ended up escalating womens issues to today. where the fourth are more badass and louder and smarter and more educated, more along 2nd wave. deciding that battle had not been fought and won. very exciting. and it seems like the big push is coming from the UK.

argument. so i did not add that one. the dem men use that one. i think MRA lump all feminists and do not like any of them.

feminists one way or another. that has been exclusively coming from the liberal, feminist vowing men that luvs them there 3rd wave. have you seen this toon? a favorite.

the liberal, feminist vowing men ... uhm ... they claim title but, it does not make them so. I doubt their Liberalness and call them Libertarians.

They conflate the two terms, imo.

The original third wave feminists were women of color who called out white feminists for not taking the issues faced by women of color into account during their discussions of feminist issues.

Since then, however, the term has been co-opted by what many refer to as 'fun feminists' - feminists who are pro-objectification, pro-pornography, and pro-prostitution.

Ironically, many if not most feminist women of color are none too pleased by the insistence of liberal white feminists that porn and prostitution are harmless if not empowering for women. (Of course, since it is women of color who are disproportionately exploited and abused in the sex industry as compared to white women.)

I think that helps answer the question I just asked xulamaude.

I assume MRA are reactionaries who oppose feminism or gender equality (same thing).

Anyway, the idea that we as a society are not as tough, brave, determined, aggressive as we used to be and that the cause is that men have become too much like women. "I agree with equal rights for women, but...."

A friend of mine from high school says that very thing... he's on his sixth marriage and has seven children. He's been paying child support since we graduated HS in 1984, and complains quite often about how unfair it is that he has to contribute to his own children's well-being.

As an aside, he announced a few months ago that he and his newest wife are expecting a newborn in early spring.

There was a time when I felt bad for the guy, but these days I'm simply amazed by his dedication to making the same mistake over and over again.

we have the opportunity to change course. first with a gentle whisper. then a talking to. a yell. a nudge, then jab. finally a brick up side the head.

the opportunity is there.

it is amazing how man people ignore or dismiss that little whisper

it didnt hurt. good.

Really?

They say this because they perceive a woman's "value" is in her fuckability / childbearing abilities.

They either claim it's because education has been 'feminized' or because there's a conspiracy in which women in academia are plotting against men. It's never due to socialization / culture. Nuh uh. Never.

11 signs you are a men's rights activist

I kinda like being an Evil Harpie. Looks badass to me.

Run, little rabbits run

Another switch in genre and one of my favorite all time movie endings

"Death Proof

this one that i heard the other day.

menz were biologically born with the male gaze cause they had to scan the horizons for a suitable woman to plant seed. men are biologically made to spread there seed.

if they are planting seed just ANYWHERE cause they were born this, then how can they be selective, too.

The need for human contact is for touch. Not to use women's bodies as masturbatory aids. This fact is lost on MRAs.

but so few men have any training or interest in being a companion to anyone, male or female, rich or poor, young, old, whatever, because the current, horribly dysfunctional US culture insists that all men are islands and cogs in an impersonal corporate machine, and shames men if they aren't.

It is this companionship that sustains marriages, families, parent-child relationships, communities, and democratic governments.

But modern male culture is fascist to the core: the Organization Man on steroids. There's no equality, there's dominant and submissive, up and down, and struggle. There's no co-operation.

You get one member in a marriage try to pull that dominance stuff off in an American marriage, and you have no marriage. Or in a family...it falls apart.

in an effort to look 'smarter'.