When will Masculism grow?

Post Reply New Topic

Masculism is the oppsite to Feminismen.

As we all know, feminismen is big today.

Do we need Masculism? Will it grow?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism

We hear many people cry about how bad girls have it.....

Things that sucks for boys:

We have to war
Less mercy to us
More time in prision of the same crime a girl does
We are not allowed to feel bad
More males gets attacked in a violent way (often from other males)
Its harder for us to get sex and partners
Males must be tough, strong, tall, good trained, much money, cool job, many friends, funny, good clothes etc.
Here in Sweden males cant work on kindergarden becuse of fear of Pedophilia
We are getting accused for being violent, hating on women, and loving sex
Etc.

Discuss.

Hopefully not. Everyone should just be seen as equals and seen down upon because they are different gender, a different sexuality, different religion, etc.

Supposedly feminism is concerned with some of those issues as well, but mostly I've been seeing it used as an excuse for hate.

"If I'm discriminatory against men, I'm not sexist, because sexism is prejudice based on sex + power, and women/intersex people never hold power over men"

"If I discriminate against white people, I'm not racist, because racism is prejudice based on race + power, and people of colour* never hold power over white people"

"If I practice hate speech against cissexuals (this means non trans) I'm not being cisphobic, I'm just venting..."

* I find this term to be quite a bit racist myself, and you'll find east asian people sometimes count as white depending on how much it suits the feminist speaking.

Back to the original post, we don't need a movement to solve these issues. Society has been progressing since the dawn of time (with the occasional NK and ISIS hiccups), if enough attention is drawn to an issue it will be fixed.

"Harder to find love" is not a thing a movement can fix, everybody is entitled to decency but not love.

There is a psyche of males that is often dismissed, misunderstood, misrepresented and parodied, but rarely given the regard it deserves. The book, Iron John, describes it well, and despite it being a best seller, its message has been forgotten in the 25 years since it was published.

The Industrial Revolution took men away from families, traditions, initiations and other things that are important to the male psyche, and what's left is a different character of maleness that is often parodied in alarming ways. Men are often depicted as macho, brainless, foolish or even too metro or feminine. Absent the rituals of our long evolved tribal origins, men find ways to initiate themselves, which often leads to exaggerated responses, both at the aggressive and passive ends of the scale. No wonder the media loves to parody 'maleness.'

Yet the attempt by men to regain some of this, through men's groups and the like, is often seen as more reason for scorn or fuel for parody.

When I first read Iron John, it was like a watershed of emotional release for me, making sense of a feeling of loss that goes back decades to my teen years.

Masculism is already so much a part of our modern culture that it goes unrecognized. It's one of those "Can't see the forest for the trees" situations. Most folks would call it the Patriarchy, wherein every form of authority and validation comes from a masculine perspective - things like standards for female beauty, standards for what makes a man a man, and how threats (real and imaginary) are handled, and laws that are made by men to define how much right a woman has to control her own body.

Masculism is the unwritten philosophy that keeps the Patriarchy in power.

Hopefully never. It's bad enough to have 30 years of lost gender relations and a nation of butthurt, wouldn't be any better if the girls were feeling the pinch by overly-emotional guys and opting out of the relationship world over a overreaction to feminism. What one gender does to the other they do to themselves and their own determent - it's a mass act of spitting into the wind. I'm amazed that the gender war in any way is still on really, it's as bad as theocracy, slavery, communism, and reverse racism in its level of applied IQ.

Well I wouldn't be able to support masculism anymore than I would support feminism...however I do see your point. There are still inequalities that males suffer from as far as laws, in the U.S males have to sign up for 'selective service' or getting drafted(though hopefully the government won't do that) either guys shouldn't have to sign up for that or females should to in my opinion. Also it is true males are expected to fit the stereotypical gender role and what not which is BS, seems more accepted when females deviate from gender norms than when males do. That is just a couple examples though.

perhaps humanism or something would be better...lol, obviously feminism doesn't do a good job of adressing those issues and masculinism would do a bad job of addressing issues more specific to females.

'masculism' was at its peak when women weren't permitted to vote and were regarded as chattel human beings.

I wouldn't like to go back to those days, thanks.

Both of the above arguments validate anti-feminism beautifully. If masculism is the opposite of feminism, what does your argument say about feminism itself?

We already have egalitarianism, which is the correct path for those interested in equality. Everything else is advocacy for supremacy of your chosen special interest group.

Egalitarianism is another word for feminism.

Egalitarianism is more inclusive than feminism, although you do get people who call themselves feminist and are more accurately described as Egalitarian or feminist who say "feminism is for everyone" (pretending to be egalitarian) but then go on to say that even discrimination against males is all males fault (victim blaming based on a narrative that all the world's problems are caused by males).

To summarise, an Egalitarian is someone who stands up for "Human Rights" instead of just the rights of one subgroup of humanity.

Hardly. Feminism, at its least extreme, is about female-entitlement, not equality.

Do you have any proof for that? The majority of feminists (including myself) want equality for women, not making one gender seem better than the other.

I want equality for everyone. Thank you for making my point for me.

What sort of equality exactly though....females and males are never going to be the same gender, as for legally as far as I know females do have equal rights I could be wrong so what is one right males have that females do not currently just as an example so I can get a better picture of what you mean. So what equality is it modern feminists are fighting for...and when its reached will feminism still exist? Or by then would it be seen as redundant and obsolete, that is what I think of it already but more because what needs to be adressed is gender roles in general and not forcing people into them and make sure there are equal rights for all regardless of gender and don't know feminism would be a proper name for that since it specifies females.

If people could separate such a movement from everything that's wrong with ones like MRA, they might have something. Assuming it's true and that's all there is to the law, I think it's ridiculous that men can't work as kindergarten teachers. Both sexes can be pedophiles, and there's no reason to assume that someone is just because they like little kids. There are a lot more loving fathers, uncles, and grandfathers than child molesters out there.