If men were oppressed

Post Reply New Topic

The people rebelled, and the USSR intervened to keep the people from seizing the power.

I've been waiting for something like this for very long. I feel that it should be made into a full length movie. Thanks for posting it.

Without first back reading so as to taint my train of thought, this is what I think of male oppression (not man of woman).
(USA Based)

Females bare the children, when they gained their freedom in many ways man lost his, for man can not have child without woman, and so along with their equality woman was granted the right to judge man, if any man was not up to womens standards they wouldn't get to have child, even if woman were worse then man men would still have to live up to womans standards or parish his lineage, in this way woman dominates over man. there is no equality in that, women (unless sterile) can always have a child by choice, man has no such rights or choice. so men must always live up to womans expectations, not the other way around, not if he wants a family and child. and admit it, there are some men out there that no woman would really want, while a woman, regardless of how ugly or messed up she is, can always just go out and get knocked up to have child, just because most don't, doesn't mean they cant.

A woman can walk into a bar and most commonly have their pick of men, not the other way around.

Secondly, men are being stigmatized, not long ago a small boy had a crush on a little girl, and neither of them really knew what sex was, yet the schools and stuff wanted to charge the boy with sexual harassment, the boy was hardly even 8 years old. in our prisons, the ratio of men to women are for 200 males its like 26 females. why? because women are considered an asset, and their reproduction cycle is taken into account. this is not an equality, in most legal cases women are treated with kid gloves.. if a mother wanted to let her child sleep with her its considered fairly OK, but if a child were to sleep alone with the father he is liable to be charged with being a pedophile even if nothing occurred, basic reasoning is better to be safe then sorry, ruining mens lives, as if were all sick and evil and perverted. In a vary large number of custody disputes, one of the first things a man is slapped with is that is he is a potential domestically violent person or a pedophile, its used to help take full custody of the child from the father, for once you put those doubts in the courts mind it matters not if he is guilty or not, better safe then sorry when it comes to children. where its rare you would see this the other way around with women.

And even though its gotten better, women in most places (in the USA) are greatly favored in child custody courts, men have no real rights when it comes to their children.

You may say men are more violent and sexually driven, then your accusing a person because of his sex, not his current or past actions as an individual.

Please do tell, out of all these abuse and or homeless shelters, how many are for men with children, compared to women with children? the states cant afford to help both, not enough funding (or so they say). and there seems to be more of a call for one then the other, instead of treating each as individuals and case by case.

On the flip side, I do agree women should have full equal rights as the men. but there needs to be some kind of balance. equal rights shouldn't be special rights. and men should have the right to reproduce too with the same amount of rights and dignity as any woman, not having to live up to a higher womans standards while they are no better then men are.

The courts and women seem to not think taking a mans children, or that of not allowing him to reproduce while they would a woman, is not abuse. when it is. men have hearts too, and their breaking.

1)women judge men; men judge women. Women judge other women; men judge other men.
2)ever heard of hiring a surrogate?


Unattractive men can generally find women who are willing to live with them, if they are willing to lower their standards to something below 'supermodel.' If they just want a kid, they can hire a surrogate in the same way that women can go to a sperm bank and buy sperm. If they want a spouse, though, either gender has to be willing to compromise.

BS. A low-status woman cannot just walk up to any man, in a bar or otherwise, and get him to have unprotected sex with her. The only men willing to do that sort of thing are idiots: not exactly quality father material.


What you're not saying about that case is that the boy kissed the girl, despite her telling him not to, and had a history of following and harassing her, despite her telling him not to. If we don't see that behavior as 'cute' in an adult, we shouldn't see it as 'cute' in a kid.

Mostly because men are vastly more violent than women.
Women do sometimes get off for crimes that men would be convicted for, given the same circumstances, granted; however, that doesn't change the fact that far, far more men get into the system in the first place due to their own actions.

*snort*
my brother and his wife would be surprised to hear that, as would their friends be. Dads taking even basic care of their children get all kinds of fond looks and social approval, pats on the back for being a good dad, when they do things that are simply expected as a matter of course for mothers.

This was a trend in the 90's, but I haven't heard of it so much recently. Lately I hear more about women being falsely accused of violence, neglect, drug abuse, etc in order for men to get custody. Any person who would falsely accuse their former spouse of crimes, in order to get custody of the children, is an evil, selfish jerk who doesn't care about the children at all. Kids are better off with two parents, even after a divorce.

Legally, the courts give custody to the parent who was the primary caretaker. Since women are still, almost always, the default primary caretakers, they tend to get custody. When men step up and care for their own children more, the courts take that into account and treat them more favorably.

Yes, there should be resources for men with children, absolutely... but, statistically, how much of a need is there for homeless shelter space for men with children?

Again: hire a f*****g surrogate.

A pregnant woman can get most all of her needs met with state assistance funding for pregnant mothers.
To pay a surrogate would most likely cost a healthy fortune, not to mention the medical costs he would have to pay out of pocket. contrary to many of womens thought, not all men are made of money. and why would a "single" woman want to go to a sperm bank if they can get knocked for much cheaper by someone they find attractive and with good features that can genetically be passed on (other then to circumvent future legal issues where the father is concerned or that of screening out diseases. .)



I said most, not all. and there are lots of horny men out there that would be willing to oblige her. never said anything about smarts, humans are evolving animals after all are they not? hmm, I strike a nerve there?


Ouch, you missed the point, yes there is an natural attraction children may share for the opposites of their sex's, but at that age their not thinking of sex, just the attraction and the fascination. yes he was inappropriate, and an autistic, but still sexual harassment charges is a bit to much and the wrong way to handle it. it would have been best to make him see a behavioral therapist and school councilors until he got past his difficulties, scheduling the children and their classes so they have the least amount of contact as possible.. the charges, is a statement of other, it infers a predatory action of intent, which the boy did not have. Now consider this as general over all perception of men and how others judge them. We each are individuals and are different then others, even in that of our own sex. and should be treated as so, as individuals. not others being bias due to sex. its a discrimination.


I have had the sad experience of knowing my share of abusive women, just when men mention these things they tend to get laughed at and frowned upon. mostly because women are more verbally and emotionally abusive then men while men tend to get more physical. but quite frankly, I would have preferred those women I knew to beat the crap out of me instead, it would have been a lot less painful and wouldn't have hurt for as long. emotional abuse can affect a person for a life time. bruises heal. their should be laws against that behavior that people can protect them selves with, esp for men. for no abuse mental or physical against either sex should be acceptable. neither the less, most men would be afraid to report anything, when it could cause him to lose everything he has worked for, including his children.

And to say men get into prison far more due to their actions, thats an oxymoron when women get just slaps on the wrists for the same crimes. and do you have any idea how many men were put into prisons that they are now DNA finding to be innocent after all? not all men are evil, but society goes over kill on them, giving them the lesser of the benefit of the doubt.

Men are more expendable, while women are viewed as more of an asset.

And just to note, I have never been violent in my life, in fact I am pretty much a pacifist.



Perhaps, times are changing, but I have gotten no pats upon my back for raising my son. in fact, take for instance, I at first had to fight with the schools to report to me and set up meetings with me concerning my son, they kept wanting to call his mother and not me and was expecting her to deal with any issues they may have had with him, when I am a full time parent, he lives with me. It took me a long time to pressure them into insuring both parents were notified, but esp me. and no I don't have full custody, the mother wanted that, I forced her into 50/50 even though I could have taken much more then that. its just she is more interested in her social life and I take care of him on his school days, when she wants to spend time with him have at it, when he wants to call her or him, great. I want them to have a good relationship.

And there was another time, out side a grocery store, I had my son in his car seat in the back as was right and lawful, but my two back doors recently broke so they wouldn't open, so I had to pull him over into the front with me to take him into the store with me. some lady seen this and automatically assumed I was driving with my son in the front seat. when I noticed her I could tell something was funny about the way she was acting, so I ran into the store to talk to her and her supervisor, and I am glad I did, she was calling the cops. If it would have been a mother more likely the woman wouldn't have paid much attention.

It seems I am always having to watch my back because of peoples bias. I never get pats on the back. even though I have 6 parenting certificate on my walls and been basically raising my son on my own since he was 19 months old (he is 8 now).. although I think the biggest reasons I get targeted that way is because I am obviously autistic so people assume the worse of me because they cant read me so well..



True, like I said, times are changing, but here is where your own bias stands out, "jerk" is what is termed for males, as if some male done you wrong and your sounding bitter. men are still getting slammed with false accusation out there, I should know, I was put through 3 years of it., but it will all balance out in the end, the laws are changing. other then that I agree with you.



This is an unfair default, for the child always starts with the mother because she gives birth to it. and it can arguably be said it needs its mother for a time until its weened, therefore she is the primary caretaker to start with, placing man at a bad disadvantage. and its hard for men to just step up for their own children more if the mother does not want to see him, only that child support, thus isolating him even more from the childes life, making it even harder for him to get a foot hold in it. and if your divorcing or divorced there is no real incentive for the disgruntled mother to want to relent any more custody then she has to.



Your missing the point, just rearrange the system for either or, treat them all as families and individuals in need. stop segregating so much because of bias, stop with the excuses.

Last edited by AspergianMutantt on 17 Feb 2014, 10:06 am, edited 11 times in total.

No, the mujahadeen rebelled. Most Afghanistanis didn't want to live under the yoke of Islamic fundamentalism.

The USSR intervened to maintain stability and prevent the USA expanding its sphere of influence in the region.

Rambo 3 wasnt a documentary of the war, you realise that right?

First of all, there were many rebelling groups, and not all were fundamentalists, but against the communists, they had the people's support. Second, the Afghan communist government is widely regarded as the worst government that has ever been in Afghanistan. The Soviet intervention caused 2 million violent deaths. Regardless, muslim fundamentalists backed by the people against an opressive regime, are still by definition freedom fighters. Even though jihadism is a bad thing, it's still the lesser of two evils against communism, as it would be against national socialism.

Regardless of whether they were documentaries or not, both Rocky IV and Rambo III hit the nail on it's head when describing the Soviet government.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iONYYY7lHo4[/youtube]

Medicaid only kicks in if the woman in question is significantly below the poverty line. Otherwise, either her insurance covers part of the cost, or she covers the whole thing out-of-pocket... just as is the case for a man with a surrogate. Different states have different surrogacy laws, and depending on the contract and on the state laws, the woman in question may or may not have to cover her medical costs.
Again, the type of man who will 'knock up' a woman for cheap are not good genetic donor material; why try to get impregnated by Joe Schmoe who lives in his mother's basement (regardless of how good looking he thinks he is), when for a few hundred to a few thousand dollars, you can get some medical student's semen? Like I said, the type of man who will have unprotected sex with a strange woman is not a winner.

Most, but not all, men will be able to find a life partner if they really want one, too. There are lots of horny women as well.
As for striking a nerve, yes, absolutely: whiny men with a simultaneous victim complex and complete unawareness of their own privilege definitely rub me the wrong way.

That's probably why the sexual harassment charges were dropped. As for the "point," the point was to teach him *before* he was six-two and two hundred pounds that violating another person's space is not acceptable behavior.

It's profiling. Similar, but not quite the same thing.

This is definitely a terrible problem with our culture; the idea that men are somehow 'less masculine' if they are vulnerable, or if a woman hurts them, is absolute BS and needs to change.

I humbly suggest that you've never seen someone who has been the target of a true beating. People who say s**t like that generally have no real idea of the damage that one person can inflict on another; it's not like tv. It's not just a black eye and a little soreness the next day. It's an eye literally blown out of its socket, teeth knocked out of your mouth, jaws broken, ribs kicked in to puncture your lungs, kidney(s) and or spleen burst, knees capped with baseball bats to prevent you from running, concussions, brain damage, etc, etc, etc.

Eyeahh, when you say, 'especially for men,' you lose a lot of credibility. There are, in fact, lots of domestic violence laws (the VAWA applies to both men and women, for example, despite the name); what needs to change are not the laws, which should apply *equally* to all victims and perpetrators, not "especially" to one gender or the other, but the social attitudes that makes men more ashamed and makes people less likely to take abused men seriously.

Uh, two points. 1)look up 'oxymoron.' You're not using the word correctly. 2)The fact that women are sometimes (by male judges) treated more lightly than men for similar crimes is a completely separate issue from the number of crimes actually committed by either gender. Even if every single female criminal was successfully caught, prosecuted, and given maximum sentences, there would still be more men in prison because men commit more crimes than women. Especially more violent crimes.

Numerically, too many. Statistically, practically none.

Men are only expendable if you don't believe in monogamy and don't think that fathers matter in their children's upbringing. That tends to only be the view of people who think that a man's most important contribution to a family is monetary or genetic (hint: not feminists. We're the ones trying to get dads more involved in child-rearing).
And I'm an aspie with a berserker switch and a black belt. I guess we both defy the stereotypes of our genders, neh?

Good for you (virtual pat on the back). And I don't mean that in a condescending way. Sounds like you're working to be a good parent, and that is commendable regardless of your gender. Just out of curiosity, where do you live? It sounds very unlike the part of California I'm (and my brother is) from.

Don't be so sure. There is ****tremendous**** social pressure on women about their parenting philosophies and behaviors. Look up the term, 'sanctimommy.'

That's probably true, but it doesn't have anything to do with your gender.

*snort*
I disagree. I deliberately chose that word as a gender-neutral insult, since I was talking about both men and women in the paragraph above it. I went though a couple of terms in my head and settled on that one as most applicable. ;p
I've used it for both men and women IRL.

A couple of points:
1)breast pumps.
2)formula
3)day care
If you want to go au naturelle, then yes: it's easiest for the mother to be the primary care taker until weaning. However, it's far from locked in, in this day and age. An infant could be cared for by people other than its mother even back in the dark ages, when women died in childbirth left and right.

That's when the court system steps in. It is entirely appropriate for a man to sue for greater visitation rights to his children if the mom is denying him access for no good reason. And it works.

No, I'm not missing the point. The problem with 'unisex' accommodations is that women tend to get raped in unisex accommodations.
Look up 'rape in homeless shelters' or 'homeless woman raped' if you don't think that's accurate. Having a kid doesn't mean that a man is safe around unrelated women. No, that's not bias; it's profiling and prevention.