Occasionally the Men's rights activist groups will come up with some very good points.
Such as, The media objectifies and pressures men into looking and acting a certain way, just like they do with women. Men are expected to act and look like a impossible version of "Hyper-masculinity" the same way women are all expected to look like "Glam-Amazons."
Amongst other things. And you have to admit they're right about that part.
So I tend to see the Men's rights group as one full of possibilities and promise.... after all, why shouldn't both men and women have groups that try their best to represent the things that they're trying to fight for? Surely that could result in a world without gender inequality because both women and men were able to discuss the sort of issues they faced in a world that was so utterly obsessed with confirming to gender stereotypes.
So I'll browse MRA forums occasionally, in order to see what kind of issues men face today... and even get their side of the story on some of the issues that some people mistakenly think is a women-only issue, like in the cases of sexual assault. (1 out of 6 men get sexually assaulted every year. The more you know!)
There's plenty of sane, rational men who happens to be very good people frequenting those forums. But...Just like in the feminist groups, there can be a few nutcases who seem determined to completely ruin the name of the group they're in. Those nutcases seem to think that they're championing the group's cause, but all they are doing is running the group's reputation into the ground.
And then those nutcases wonder why nobody refuses to take them seriously, while the reasonable, sane men are utterly embarrassed to be associated with that kind of people. It's a real tragedy, because those sane men actually had very good points that should had been truly considered by all.
Here's what the nutcases say that ruins the MRA group's reputation, and thus why nobody will ever take them seriously:
1. Rape laws and other laws on sexual assault is just society's way of policing "Natural Male sexuality".
Yes, I've seen it worded that one too
many times for my liking. Okay, This is basically just a extension of the fear about being falsely accused of something they didn't do. I think that can be a very legitimate fear and one that we should discuss more often. However... The way they say it.. they seem to imply that men are naturally inclined to rape people.
Since you know, what with it being a part of Men's Natural sexuality that we're trying to police. Just to make sure that I wasn't reading too much into it... I actually had my brother and father read those posts in order to get their honest opinion.
My brother is basically a right-wing kind of guy... and will always vote Republican even when he clearly thinks that the current candidates were all bumbling idiots. Not that he would ever say that out loud, he's far too loyal for that. Heck, he's the sort who was against insurance and employers paying for birth control.
My father wasn't as "hardcore"... he's the kind that sits on the fence, if you know what I mean.
Anyway... their reaction to the posts were pretty much unanimous-- they read it the same way I did... that those nutcases claiming to be for "Men's rights" were saying that all men had the natural inclination to rape. Which sounds pretty anti-male to be honest.
These claims are always applied to laws and policies to eliminate sexual harassment, sexual assault, or rape, which is arguing that sexual harassment, sexual assault, and rape are completely normal male sexual behaviors.
Let's just posit for a moment that rape is a "natural male sexual behavior." Does that mean that we should allow it and if so, why are women and other men disallowed to determine who they have sex with?
I do not believe that it is in man's natural inclination to rape.. that a man naturally takes far more pleasure in having consenting sex with the partner of his choice. "rapist" is not the default state of masculinity. Stop being creepy.
"But that's surely not what they meant at all! You brought up that it was just a extension of the fear that men have, of being falsely accused! So why couldn't it just be about that and nothing more?" You might say.
Let's look at the hard facts here. 1 out of 6 men are raped every year. 1 out of 4 women are raped every year. And the rapes that affect men aren't just in prison only. It's also in the military, the police force and other places where the power is often unbalanced to the point where the men almost have no say in the situation.
The men are forced to comply, and go along with the rape... and often are threatened into silence. The predators also play up the men's fears that they will be seen as less of a man, that they were asking for it, etc.
Many of those fears are similar to the ones that female victims have too, although the reasoning behind those fears are slightly different due to gender.
And you know how many false reports of rape there are? compared to 98% of all cases, only 2% are false reports.
Yeah I know, that's still a lot of people when you take into account the fact that there's like 7.1 billion people on earth right now. But when you take the 98% into account that's still a ton more people who are being truthful about being sexually assaulted.
And the worse part? There's still a good chunk of the population who won't report being raped.... and that's also involving men into the equation here! So yeah, the number of actual rapes are still too damn high for my liking.
By updating those laws to cover for every sexual assault scenario out there, we're also trying to prevent rapes against men too. Shouldn't be that something that the MRA group supports? Since we're also trying to give rights to male victims. But no, some nutcases choose to focus on "Natural male sexuality" being suppressed, making it sound like all of this is a normal everyday occurrence for men. CREEPY!!
2. Obamacare.
According to conservative media, the Affordable Care Act's mandate that insurance companies can no longer discriminate is the same as "sticking it to men" and waging a "war on bros." In reality, the law makes sure insurance companies can't force women to pay more for health care just because they are women.
3.Commercials And Sitcoms Make Men Look Stupid.
Okay, I'll give them this one... this is certainly true to a certain degree. But they fail to take into account that those commercials and Sitcoms are equal offenders. I've seen commercials directed at men, that often portrayed women as brainless bimbos who would literally believe anything that was told to them. I've seen this one beer commercial where some hubby makes up the most weak excuse ever that nobody in their right mind would even believe, just to get out of the house in order to drink beer. And of course the wife falls for it! He's off partying while she's sitting at home thinking that he's out helping a friend out of a crisis situation.
And in many sitcoms, the women are always depicted as bitchy, dumbass bimbos, etc.. unless they happen to be a white stay-at-home mother then in which case they're often depicted as all-knowing, etc.
So basically... the Media seems to hate both men and women equally. And that's something we need to work on.
4. Men are the number 1 victim of war.
This is true...except the neglect to mention how this is due to the fact that until recently, men didn't ALLOW women to engage in war, and how women and men have been fighting to change this unfair law.
5. Men work more dangerous jobs compared to women.
Again, this is technically true, but again they neglect WHY THAT IS, such as it's a male dominated field that won't allow women to enter, or how women don't feel safe taking white collar jobs because the rate of male on female abuse is fucking high.
6.Men never get custody of their children.
It's true that women get custody more than men, but once again, they neglect to mention that most divorce cases are contested and that means that there was no fight in court, they BOTH mutually agreed to those terms.
Furthermore, they ignore how men who actually fight in court usually win.
7. Men shouldn't have to pay child support for an unwanted child. Alternatively, the women shouldn't abort the child that was created during an consensual act, if the man actually wanted to be a father!
In a perfect world they shouldn't have to. I kind of agree with this part...likewise if the father wants the child but the mother doesn't. In a perfect world, there would be reasonable discussion to be had by all... and that both sides would always get their say on it.
but that's where the logistical problems come in. Who the heck is going to help pay and raise the child, if not the other parent who had a hand in creating it? Ask them that question and watch them have no answer or say "She should just abort it or give it up for adoption if she can't afford it herself!", as if it's that easy.
What if she's the type who wouldn't ever get an abortion herself regardless of whenever she's pro-choice or not? And adoption has a paperwork nightmare to contend with.... If none of the family history is ever filled out by the mother's side or even the father's side, then that greatly reduces the baby's chance of ever getting adopted. All the adopting families are big on knowing the family's history, you see. They don't want any nasty surprises like a genetic disorder that might cost them big money in hospital bills.
So if the baby doesn't have a personal, detailed family history that borders on totally violating your privacy.... you can kiss that baby's chances of ever having a happy, healthy home for life. That baby will most likely grow up in foster homes and be at greater risk of being sexually molested by pedophiles for the rest of his/her life, pushed into drug activity and having this crippling emotional issue that comes from not being wanted by anybody at all.
But yeah, if you truly don't give a flying crap about that baby's life... then yes, it's just that easy I suppose.
And if the father wants to keep the child? Well, did you know that a pregnant woman is more likely to be fired from her job than a expectant father is? Pregnancy discrimination is very hard to prove, but it does exist in large numbers....
As a matter of fact, the encomony and the workplace is often set up in such a way to be very hostile towards parents of all kinds... whenever you be a nuclear family unit, a single parent, etc. It doesn't matter if you're a father or a mother... they will find ways to deduct your paycheck if you choose your family over work.
This often results in both parents having to work or one parent taking on a second job just to make ends meet.