Men's Rights Activists Call For Boycott of Mad Max: Fury Road 776
ideonexus writes: Aaron Clarey, author of the blog Return of Kings and prominent figure in the Men's Rights Movement, is calling for a boycott of George Miller's new edition to the Mad Max franchise "Mad Max: Fury Road," calling the film a "Trojan Horse feminists and Hollywood leftists will use to (vainly) insist on the trope women are equal to men in all things..." and citing the fact that "Vagina Monologues" author Eve Ensler was brought in to coach the actresses on playing sex slaves who escape a warlord's possession. Critics have been applauding the film, which currently scores 98% on RottenTomatoes.
Sooooo...... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Sooooo...... (Score:5, Funny)
No, it isn't a good movie. Not anywhere near a good movie. Actually kinda a dumb movie. It does have lots of car chases and explosions to distract you from the fact that it is a bad movie. I'm sure it will be successful - nobody eats at McDonalds for quality food but they still eat there.
Well I suppose if you like movies about neurotic New Yorkers whining about their sex lives on the couch at their shrinks office and sitting around a table at some cafe slurping a latte while venting their outrage over people who pick their noses at traffic lights then a Mad Max film might seem like a bad movie.
Re:Sooooo...... (Score:5, Informative)
Very little CGI was used in Mad Max.
"Over 80% of the effects seen in the film are real practical effects, stunts, make-up and sets. CGI was used sparingly mainly to enhance the Namibian landscape, remove stunt rigging and for Charlize Theron's left hand which in the film is a prosthetic arm." http://www.imdb.com/title/tt13... [imdb.com]
Re:Sooooo...... (Score:5, Interesting)
What helps is to identify the protagonist. By the classical definition, it's the character with change. Mad Max undergoes no change. The protagonist in the movie is not Mad Max, but instead the wives/harem. And the antagonist is the villain (not always the case, but is here). The villain wants the harem to not change.
Same setup as #2. Where Mad Max wasn't the main protagonist, but a plot device for the villager's protagonism (yes, I know that isn't a word, but it's still a word if you know what I mean).
If there's "no plot" then the speaker is too dumb to find it. If it had "no plot" then it would fail in the theaters, no matter how much of a spectacular it is.
Yeah, disappointing (Score:5, Informative)
Road Warrior was peak Mad Max, it's eminently rewatchable. Thunderdome II, not so much.
I looked briefly at the massive "MRA" "activists" behind this. One mental patient with a wonky web page.
Makes me wonder who's behind the massive publicity behind this non-story.
Meanwhile I have a friend who's paying child support in *two* states for a kid he has sole custody of his only child and putting her through college despite the fact his toxic ex beat the kid. Bue she went to school with the prosecutor, who knows the judge in a small town in Georgia. Backwoods southern justice strikes again.
Family law is still the 900 pound gorilla in the room.
Re: (Score:3)
I hope it's some kind of clever trick George Miller came up with to boost viewings.
Re: (Score:3)
The best 1980s action movie: Aliens, with Sigourney Weaver taking the gun-toting action role.
And thinking of it, if Steven Seagal was to star in a chick flick instead of Jennifer Aniston, that would be a sign of true gender equality
It's true, but Seagal has little charisma outside of his chosen genre. I don't think most women want to think of him as anything other than an action star. Most men for that matter.
Gerard Butler and Hugh Jackman are most famous for their action movies, but they have serious chick-flick cred as well. Hugh was in Kate and Leopold and Australia and in a number of stage musicals. Gerard Butler was in Phantom of the Ope
Re: (Score:3)
Makes me wonder who's behind the massive publicity behind this non-story.
Recently all the media, even 'respectable' ones like the New York Times, have become desperate for anything to bring in page views. If there is a story that brings eyes to someone else's page, they all want a piece of it.
Re:Yeah, disappointing (Score:4, Insightful)
The recent revelations in the Sulkowicz/Nungesser case made it necessary to find an MRA boogeyman to beat up on for a bit, since they didn't actually have anything they had to make something up. Hence claiming that people who outright despise the men's rights movement are "MRAs".
Re:Yeah, disappointing (Score:5, Informative)
EDIT: to clarify my position, I am Egalitarian and see that both men and women have problems, but unlike many people, I'm not afraid of examining all sides just because some of them are slandered or they disagree with my current perceptions. Facts over buzzwords...
Return of Kings is anti-MRA anyway. He's a pickup artist and believes that men's rights is a lost cause and everyone should be scamming women instead.
For those who want a thousand-foot overview: The fact is that men and women have problems. Men have far bigger family problems and a huge percent of men regularly get screwed over by the legal system (just ask any divorce or family court lawyer or look at the statistics). When men find out just how bad the situation is (both this and other issues) and what a big risk relationships with women are, they do one of three things: opt out of relationships (the majority and becoming a huge social force), become pick-up artists (second most popular), or lobby for change as MRAs/Egalitarians.
The problem is multi-sided. PUA (pickup artists) consider MGTOW (opt-out) and MRA to be losers. MGTOW consider PUA to be risky and MRA to be trying to solve an unsolvable problem. MRA consider MGTOW to be passively protesting and consider PUA to be scum that hurt the cause by constantly mistreating and slandering women.
Feminists (to be clear, the rather extreme ones that control much of the media, not the ones like most of the planet) consider MGTOW to be losers, ignore MRA, and claim PUAs abuse is actually from the MRA. These Extremist-Feminists make things worse by actively and loudly fighting against the MRAs legitimate concerns (shared parenting, family court reform, male genital mutilation, criminal justice equality, recognizing male victims, etc). The fact that you are reading an article claiming a PUA is an MRA (despite his stating many times that he despises MRA) shows that either no research or mis-characterization is at work here. This only fuels the MRA to focus on the Extreme Feminists in power as the primary obstacle and the fight continues (when in fact, most MRA agree with many women's issues).
When politics control social equality, everyone loses (except the politicians and their spokespeople).
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Yeah, disappointing (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yeah, disappointing (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yeah, disappointing (Score:5, Funny)
Itâ(TM)s whether men in America and around the world are going to be duped by explosions, fire tornadoes, and desert raiders into seeing what is guaranteed to be nothing more than feminist propaganda, while at the same time being insulted AND tricked into viewing a piece of American culture ruined and rewritten right in front of their very eyes.
Is that message "Australia is a crucial part of the USA"? I'm a little confused.
Re:Yeah, disappointing (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My point is that the anecdotal example of a guy who had to fight for custody of his kids is pretty well trumped by the statistical example of 1500 women killed by their husbands/boyfriends each year.
Do I have to take you by the hand to some of the MRA forums where you will find apologia for violence against women? No friend, not everybody in the MRM is "opposed to husbands or boyfriends killing women".
Here is
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The mythos around thor goes back long before there was a marvel comics..
Re:Yeah, disappointing (Score:4, Interesting)
You haven't really lived yet Amiga.....
I spent about a year paying child support in NC that was redirected by the state to go to the father of another child by my ex-wife. The other father had a fairly wealthy family and connections to get custody and require support from my ex who couldn't/wouldn't pay so the authorities gave them my payments. My child’s needs were evidently irrelevant. Thank God I was able to get custody of my child eventually by waiving support from my ex.
There is some really sick shit going on in family courts and Social Services departments these days. Thank God we survived, my child is now about to turn 22, but I pray for all those who have to deal with the "system" our officials have put in place.
Re:Sooooo...... (Score:5, Interesting)
No, it isn't a good movie. Not anywhere near a good movie. Actually kinda a dumb movie. It does have lots of car chases and explosions to distract you from the fact that it is a bad movie. I'm sure it will be successful - nobody eats at McDonalds for quality food but they still eat there.
It's the first big-budget action movie in many years with practical effects. This is a huge deal for fans of the genre. Action movies have been shot badly for so long now people start to forget wheat they're supposed to be like. All CGI and jumpcuts to hide the fact the actors aren't in the action, which really detracts from the fun. Long (duration) shots with no jumpcuts so you feel the action rather than yawn at camera tricks, wide shots so you can actually follow what's going on in a fight: this is the stuff that makes action entertaining. The action scenes in the Indiana Jones movies (recent abomination excepted) are great examples, with shots that last about 90 seconds between cuts, practical effects, and stuntmen performing all the action on screen, it all makes the movie immersive in a way that, say Guardians of the Galaxy isn't. I liked the latter too, but none of the fights made me wince when someone got hit - a neat film, but not engaging in that way.
Is it a Mad Max movie though ? (Score:3, Insightful)
I go to see Mad Max movie for Mad Max.
If you go to see John Wayne in Chisolm, you expect to see cattle barons fight in the west you don't expect to see the little girl from True Grit. So is this a Mad Max movie (Hard to do without Mel Gibson to begin with) or is it Tank Girl.
Re:Is it a Mad Max movie though ? (Score:5, Insightful)
No more so than any other brand.
Think of the people that read the Perry Rhodan, or the destroyer Novels. Mad Max as a brand has certain expectations. Both have been going on forever and are able to do so because they meet expectations. Mad Max has it's own expectations.
The setting is post Apocalyptic Australia.
There must be a group of people struggling towards the future.
They must be opposed by the forces of chaos and evil trying to plunge mankind deeper into darkness.
Then there is Max the rogue element driven by his loss. The tragic and flawed hero who stands against the darkness.
I don't care if they decided to make a movie with Charlize Theron as the action lead. I actually enjoyed Aeon Flux may have been one of the few people that did. The key is that when I went to see Aeon Flux I had a pretty good Idea of what I would be getting which was about a certain style and aesthetic. Many people complained the movie wasn't consistent with the cartoon but they miss the point that the cartoon was nowhere near self consistent.
So if this isn't a Mad Max movie, that's fine but it is false advertising.
Re: (Score:3)
Errr No
And yes I do get what you are saying, it's just wrong. It's no different than going to the supermarket buying an Enteman's poundcake and finding some odd gluten free, immature grains concoction in the box instead. In cinema terms, it would be like going to see a Nora Ephron movie and getting Chuck Norris instead. Both maybe fine, but neither is what was advertised.
Re: (Score:3)
I just got back from it and it is a Mad Max movie. There is a shitload of Mad Max. There are other characters also, so if you watched the first Mad Max, and were upset by there being other characters ("I didn't pay to see Goose!") then maybe don't go.
No one pays to see me :-(
Re:Sooooo...... (Score:4, Interesting)
It's a damn good, straight-to-the-chase, no-holds-barred action flick, with absolutely stunning fabrication and stunt work and very little CGI. It is visually stunning, darkly humorous and never boring.
Is is arthouse cinema with obtuse symbolism and pathetic neurosis-filled characters? No, and it doesn't have to be. It's meant to be a big fun rollercoaster ride, and doesn't try to be anything else. There's no romantic subplot pointlessly tacked on, the closest to that is a very brief between two characters where one of them has been a sex slave all her life and one is a gasoline-crazed psychopath, but that's OK. It's very brief and sets up the latter character for his eventual act of ultimate heroism. There is no filler, just action from start to finish.
It delivers exactly what it set out to do and doesn't try to be anything more than it is.
Re:Sooooo...... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it isn't a good movie. Not anywhere near a good movie. Actually kinda a dumb movie. It does have lots of car chases and explosions to distract you from the fact that it is a bad movie. I'm sure it will be successful - nobody eats at McDonalds for quality food but they still eat there.
People like you always crack me up. Mad Max: Fury Road has an audience approval rating hovering around 90% and in the end that's what counts and it's what makes a movie good, when most of the people who watched it liked what they saw. Anything else is irrelevant. Some of the best movies I have ever seen got dumped on by critics even though the audiences loved them. I'm sometimes tempted to hypothesise that in order to judge the watchability of a film the best way is to find somebody like you or some opinionated snob of a film critic like Leonard Martin and watch only the stuff you guys don't like.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Sooooo...... (Score:5, Funny)
That should teach you to use a watch to tell the current date.
Let me try and whore for some more Karma: It's an Apple watch.
Re: (Score:3)
Good movie? (Score:2)
I was astonished to see it open at 9.0 on IMDB. I had read that it's just one big chase scene with no plot. Is it actually interesting?
Re:Good movie? (Score:5, Insightful)
This happens a lot on IMDB. The first people to see a movie are usually hardcore fans who have been anticipating it for a long time, and will enjoy it no matter what. So there's a sampling bias at the start, then normal people start watching the movie and the average rating goes down.
Re:Good movie? (Score:5, Interesting)
I was so ready to be disappointed, fearing that this would be another jumpcut, way-too-zoomed-in CGI-infested snoozefest like so many other action movies of the last few decades.
I was pleasantly surprised to be presented with a lean mean, no-holds-barred guns-a-blazing action blast with tons of awesome practical effects and long-duration shots that really let you take in every bit of the insanity instead of only showing you glimpses. It was great, honestly, truly great.
Re: (Score:3)
It's somewhat ironic that you'd accuse him of being unable to read when it's clear that you didn't bother to read the preceding comment so as to understand the context for his response. The previous comment was talking about the IMDb score, hence why he was as well. RT's score had nothing to do with this thread until you brought it up.
Re: (Score:2)
I was astonished to see it open at 9.0 on IMDB. I had read that it's just one big chase scene with no plot. Is it actually interesting?
Since "Fast and Furious" is on its 6th sequel, yes, many people find big chase scenes with no plot to be interesting.
Re: (Score:3)
To be fair it's more like 2 or 3 enormous chase scenes with a little bit of plot on top.
But oh man, those chase sequences (all nearly goddamn two hours of them) are utterly amazing. Awesome practical effects, absolutely insane stuntwork and some of the coolest vehicles ever built (and gloriously smashed to bits).
I know it sounds a bit silly when you sum it up like you did, but it really is one hell of a rollercoaster ride.
Sorry MRAs (Score:4, Funny)
I can't hear you over this tiny, tiny violin.
P.S. have any of these idiots ever heard of the Streisand Effect?
Re:Sorry MRAs (Score:5, Insightful)
P.S. have any of these idiots ever heard of the Streisand Effect?
Yes, that is what they are hoping for. You had never heard of this group before, and now you have. Achievement unlocked (for them).
WT everlovin F ? (Score:5, Funny)
It's a Mad Max retake. Weird vehicles, Crap blowing up. Post apocalypse...
It's a gorram movie.
Had you not so thoughtfully informed me, I would never have known, or wanted to know, that some woman associated with the "Vagina Monologues" was also involved with this. And you know what? I not not give a rats ass.
I don't watch Mad Max for it's deep social message.
Re:WT everlovin F ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Good grief, dude. Not everything has some deep underlying 'message'.
Well, I would agree with you...except, they brought in the author of the 'Vagina Monologues", Eve Ensler, to consult on making the film. You do not bring her in unless you are putting in some deep underlying message which she would approve of. For that matter, Eve Ensler would not have consented to consult on the film unless she agreed with the message.
Re:WT everlovin F ? (Score:4, Informative)
You see a conspiracy where there is none. They had sex slaves in the plot and wanted to do a better than average portrayal, making them proper characters instead of the usual generic dross. They got in an expert to consult.
What exactly are you trying to say? That this person taints everything she touches? Can you provide specific criticism of the film to support that point? Or are you just saying it is a zero sum game and that men must lose out for women to be portrayed positively in movies?
Reading a novel out of a fortune cookie? (Score:3)
Makes perfect sense to bring her in.
Also the "message" is where the good guys save people from cartoon grade over the top bad guys. Of course she and everyone else agrees with the message.
Re:Agreed. (Score:5, Funny)
I'm kind of in two minds here. I think I'll hedge my bets by pirating it but deleting it without watching it. Or at least not properly paying attention.
Looks like I'm going to the movies. (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, I was on the fence about spending money on this movie, but this has ensured that I will. (If this is a bit of false outrage generated by someone attached to the movie in some way, they're definitely earning their pay.)
The Road Warrior (Score:2, Insightful)
I have a hard time imagining any remake being better than the original. It little dialog, but excelled at making you feel for the characters and what was happening at the moment.
Tie that will a limited budget, it was showed they knew how to create a great movie.
Re:The Road Warrior (Score:5, Informative)
In the original it was more dark and grimy, it felt more dramatic, and the atmosphere in general was sad... very sad.
In the remake, you have drum trucks and flamethrower electric guitars, it's a much more humor-ish comic take, which makes this, again, not a sequel, but a cash-in remake.
It's not a Mad Max movie. The main character isn't Max, the atmosphere isn't Mad Max's, it just happened to have spiked cars chasing plated cars in the wastland.
But hey, how many movies with spiked cars and crazy wasteland chase scenes do we get every year? Am still down for it.
Why on earth is this important? (Score:3, Informative)
I'm Confused (Score:5, Funny)
Am I anti-men thinking this sounds really stupid or have I just internalized my philogyny?
People fall for an idiot's clickbait -- Film at 11 (Score:3)
Some idiot writing something on a web site is hardly news particularly when it's a bitter divorcee talking about mass entertainment. What is this doing on Slashdot? Or is the new revenue model to woo readers away from Jezebel and Salon?
I await your answer, you have two days (Score:5, Funny)
There's been too much violence, too much pain. But I have an honorable compromise. Just walk away from this article.
Fine for me, but not for thee (Score:3, Insightful)
For fuck's sake.
First of all, Aaron Clarey himself says he's not an MRA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Second of all, so what if he was?
I'm tired of MRAs being the boogeyman of feminists looking for someone to blame everytime a tampon slips out of joint.
Oh, was that sexist?
Or did I get to say that because I'm a woman and not "punching down"?
Feminists are allowed to "disown" or "hide" any of their own rank that doesn't play along with the narrative (such as: #killallmen or the SCUM manifesto). Do MRAs (the quiet, non-extremist variety) not get the same benefit of the doubt? Is that really equality, women?
When was the last time you actually talked to someone claiming to be an MRA, rather than just shouting them into silence before actually listening to their points of view? Or do you just blindly listen to The Mary Sue and Jezebel, because they've never shown any biased reporting, right?
This isn't because I'm an MRA (I'm an egalitarian; there's room at the table for everyone with a gender-based axe to grind). I'm just annoyed with feminism needing any enemy to latch the hate onto every time someone dare criticize a woman for anything, instead of, you know, dealing with it like grownups do.
Especially since Eve Ensler wrote a piece that is supposed to be empowering to women that condones not only rape, but statutory rape.
So, feminism, can I broad-brush blame you for that? Is that okay?
Oh shut up (Score:5, Funny)
Part of "being a man" is not being a whiny bitch.
Just sayin'.
Re:Oh shut up (Score:4, Insightful)
That's funny, but you make a really important point.
If there really is a "femininization" of culture going on, what does it say about masculinity that these men are pissing themselves and crying like giant titty babies?
Of the qualities that are traditionally thought of as "masculine", is throwing a tantrum because an action movie has important female characters among them? Is crapping on the floor in fury when a woman is hired in your department among them? How about completely losing your shit for eight months because some woman criticized your favorite video game? Is that masculine behavior.
I have to wonder what kind of role models this relatively young group of MRAs grew up with.
Let's look at how one of the best-known MRAs, Paul Elam, describes his own conversion to the cause of "men's rights":
Got that? His mother forced him to take his diarrhea medicine and he realized it was a woman's world. Jesus wept.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Oh shut up (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh stop.
To suggest that being dismissive of some wuss whinging about a MAD MAX movie contributing to the gynocracy somehow means that I would therefore not care about a son (or anyone) being falsely accused of rape is the sort of histrionics that one might have, 60 years ago, attributed to an overreacting woman.
I'm not saying that the militant feminism hasn't gone too far (it has, but I submit that's symptomatic of the overwhelming force of political correctness generally, actually). What I'm saying is:
I directly dispute our culture's determination that "anything the feminine way" is the "right" way and anything "the male way" is some sort of pathology that needs to be corrected ASAP.
Part of classical masculinity is, to me: ...none of these are exemplified by men crying about the latest Mad Max film.
- if shit bothers you, you go fix it, you don't piss and moan over the fence to other people trying to gin up sympathy.
- lead by doing, not by "calling" for leadership
- there's nothing wrong with feeling emotions; there are places where displaying them is ridiculous or inappropriate
- be strong; understand some shit is trivial and not worth regarding. You give it power by whinging about it.
- understand that you are not a special snowflake
- you deserve only the respect you earn
Re:Oh shut up (Score:5, Insightful)
Part of being an adult is, to me: ...none of these are exemplified by anyone crying about the latest Mad Max film.
- if shit bothers you, you go fix it, you don't piss and moan over the fence to other people trying to gin up sympathy.
- lead by doing, not by "calling" for leadership
- there's nothing wrong with feeling emotions; there are places where displaying them is ridiculous or inappropriate
- be strong; understand some shit is trivial and not worth regarding. You give it power by whinging about it.
- understand that you are not a special snowflake
- you deserve only the respect you earn
FTFY.
There's no reason why men should be considered as the only sex to be able to exhibit these traits w/o detracting from their identity as male or female.
"Incredibly feminist action film"- Charlize Theron (Score:5, Insightful)
I've also heard the synopsis of the film, and it sounds like Charlize Theron's character is the main character in the film and women come to the rescue in the film. It sounds like it really sidelines Mad Max in an attempt to push a political agenda, I liked the Aliens movies, but it wasn't a bait and switch like Mad Max appears to be -- we knew that Sigourney Weaver was the star.
Re:"Incredibly feminist action film"- Charlize The (Score:4, Insightful)
Because it looked like the sort of thing that could generate 400+ comments and have people looking at the advertisements on the page.
Yes, and the increasing number of things framed as MRA vs SJW fights are part of it. It's the new bitcoin article of the week.
I was going to see it anyway (Score:2)
Just different versions of the future (Score:3)
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever." - George Orwell
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a feminist monster truck rally - forever" - Me after watching Mad Max
Re:Just different versions of the future (Score:5, Insightful)
That sounds kind of awesome, tbh.
everything is wrong with shitty clickbait article (Score:5, Informative)
1. Return of Kings is not MRA. Return of Kings is anti-MRA. That's a pretty big difference.
2. It's not plural activists. It's *one* guy.
3. This is the first time ever I've seen someone use RottenTomatoes as a reference for movie quality? Why?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What is a reference for movie quality, if it's not a site where movie reviews are aggregated?
Do you have some machine that measures movie quality?
Is slashdot all-in on the genderwagon? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think this is the first time I've seen "MRA" in a slashdot headline (I could have missed some, but I do check reasonably often). It's certainly the first time Return of Kings attention-getting trollish posts (including stuff like "why girls with short hair are damaged" and "why to date a girl with an eating disorder") has baited slashdot, that I'm aware of.
But the bigger concern is- is slashdot going to really enter this territory? This is hugely controversial stuff. We've already seen "feminism Friday" become a thing- normally some genderwarrior-bait story near the end of the week, normally told from a feminist perspective- sometimes legit, sometimes not. One piece that is largely controversial on slashdot is the "should we bend over backwards to get girls in tech" thing, obviously built in controversy for a bunch of professional tech people, and we see it *over and over again*.
But this is beyond that. You would expect people to have differing opinions on that stuff, and whether you are opposed or in favor, it's pretty relevant. Random gender warring stories, such as this, are not.
I'll also point this out: the editorial staff seems to be pretty strongly on one side. It may be difficult to give MRAs a fair shake, but certainly, by calling RoK an MRA website, and by linking that as the first thing ever, they aren't even fucking trying. This would be like calling out "feminists" and then linking to some really ludicrous 70s-edge position as being the standard-bearer. A Voice For Men's website is probably a better place to start if you want to actually go find non-strawmen points to analyze / refute- they at least self identify as some version of MRA, not some reactionary / PUA crossbreed like RoK.
The people who discuss these gender things online tend to be full-on soldiers, on both sides. They will do or say anything to slam the other side, they will dox, they will make false claims, they are fighting a fucking war. And you want the slashdot commenters to be in on this? Gross.
Re: (Score:3)
Parent should be an article submission; it's time for the Slashdot community to consider what this attempt at polarisation will lead to.
Error in headline (Score:5, Informative)
That web site is not an advocate for "mens rights", it's a flaming, garish train wreck of a crock of shit. (Tell us how you really feel)
Men's Rights activitst? (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.returnofkings.com/31590/5-reasons-i-am-not-a-mens-rights-activist
Clearly not a men's rights page. He even has reasons why not.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Except, well.... men aren't a majority group.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe not in terms of the planet's population, but in many industries and in positions of power and authority, men are still a majority.
Re:Men's Rights morons (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe not in terms of the planet's population, but in many industries and in positions of power and authority, men are still a majority.
...and those men comprise an exceedingly miniscule percentage of the male population. The rest of us in the 99.999th percentile aren't as "empowered" as those guys.
BTW, males DO outnumber females worldwide, but females outnumber males in the vast majority of the developed world.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Except, well.... men aren't a majority group.
Why would this be a "troll"? It's a true statement. In fact, as the gender obtaining only 40% of college degrees, they are becoming a distinct minority in well-educated populations.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No...because they feel that empowerment slipping away, and they fear payback.
Re:Men's Rights morons (Score:5, Interesting)
and they fear payback.
I think that is a relatively healthy fear.
I am not a "men's right's activist", nor am I feminist. I don't believe in men's rights, or women's rights or any kind of "group rights." Just individual rights. Equal rights to all under the law. Cover the individual and cover every smallest minority imaginable without playing favourites.
Growing up, I knew a lot of men who went through divorces. They would all complain about how biased the system was in favour of their ex's and how screwed they were getting. I always assumed they were just bitter and angry and biased themselves (I was taught that there is always two sides to every story). Until I went through a separation myself, and my lawyer (who represents both men and women and comes across as a very down-to-earth guy; e.g he urges his clients to seek mediation and not litigate whenever possible), told me flat out that in his experience the system is biased in favour of women. That's not necessarily feminism, in fact it's ANTI-feminist because it treats women like helpless, disadvantaged charity cases who need the support of men to take care of them. But I think that's what a lot of "men's rights activists" fear, and rightly so. It's unfairness in the disguise of seeking fairness.
Re:Men's Rights morons (Score:5, Insightful)
Men's rights and white power groups and other groups that "fight" for the rights of an already empowered majority exist only because they choose to ignore history.
There are no such thing as "group" rights. If a man is denied custody of his children during a divorce procedure, that isn't some how okay because his grandmother was denied a job. Whining about a movie is silly, but MRAs have some valid points about discrimination against men in family law. For instance, most domestic violence laws are written as if men are the sole abusers, when most DV is actually perpetrated by women. In California, the police can only arrest the "dominant" (physically stronger) partner, regardless of who was the initiator or the aggressor. So a woman can attack her husband, and he goes to jail.
Disclaimer: I haven't seen the movie.
Re:Men's Rights morons (Score:4, Insightful)
Men's rights are alive and well.
Men's rights are alive and making progress. Slowly.
Not at all the same thing.
Re:Men's Rights morons (Score:4, Insightful)
It would be so if only MRAs actually cared a fig about discrimination or violence against men.
If you follow the movement, you'll see it has a lot less to do with making anyone's life better and a lot to do with attacking women.
Ah yes, the classic "pay no attention to the rationality of the argument, I can assure you that somehow it's all about invisible oppression."
This appeal to emotion is something I've never understood. Does logic warp in the presence of such accusations? Do valid points become invalid if countered with claims of misogyny? Is 2 = 2 somehow not correct because the author was accused of being an MRA (and therefore bad by association)? How do you rationalise away the valid points about discrimination against men by claiming that arbitrary persons attack arbitrary women?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Men's Rights morons (Score:5, Insightful)
Some of the points the men's right movement are valid and worth debating, such as disparity in prison sentencing [umich.edu] and child custody [fsu.edu]. However, this Return of Kings guy is a fucking moron.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Men's rights and white power groups and other groups that "fight" for the rights of an already empowered majority exist only because they choose to ignore history.
I have a cousin, who for gender-related reasons, is having difficulty getting into college. Is this right? No, you do not get to know the gender of my cousin, that is irrelevant to whether or not it is right or wrong.
These people that you think are ignoring history, they really aren't. The men's rights groups that fight for discrimination that favors men, as wrong as they may be, aren't ignoring history, they are trying to preserve it, to preserve their power and influence. Again, I am not saying such
Re:Men's Rights morons (Score:4, Insightful)
Um..
Just exactly when are you going to stop helping females and take your foot of the back of young men? The ratio is 60/40 now-- when will it be "enough" to stop having hundreds of groups helping females but few helping males?
---
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07... [nytimes.com]
Most institutions of higher learning, except engineering schools, now have a female edge, with many small liberal arts colleges and huge public universities alike hovering near the 60-40 ratio. Even Harvard, long a male bastion, has begun to tilt toward women.
"The class we just admitted will be 52 percent female," said William Fitzsimmons, Harvard's dean of admissions.
Women now outnumber men two to one at places like the State University of New York at New Paltz, the University of North Carolina at Greensboro and Baltimore City Community College.
---
seriously--- I'm retired and don't really give a shit- I'm not a "men's" activist-- but I see in my gaming groups and in my in-laws relationships how the males are suffering while the females are still getting assistance and help even tho things are well past 50/50 (i.e. "fair") now.
At the last place I worked before I retired, 70% of managers were females and they openly discriminated in favor of females for team leader positions the ratio was 80% female to 20% male. They did things which would be illegal if a man did it. The law wasn't being equally enforced.
People hire people "like" them unless the government gives them a reality check. Women are equally able to discriminate, behave in a prejudicial fashion, and abuse the power of their positions.
The area where it is imbalanced in favor of males is at the very top. Among 60 year old males- the percentages are m ore like 80% male and 20% female. Where we need affirmative action is at the top- not in the bottom or even in the middle any more.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Advocates of social progress and civil equality always eventually emerge victorious, and the stubborn, narrow-minded bigots clinging to the status quo always eventually lose.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
yup
the arc of history is clear: progress is real. it wasn't long ago the idea of gay marriage rights or marijuana legalization seemed distant and impossible
bigots, sexists, racists: they may whine and bitch, or go full douchebag and do immoral things, but their fate is clear and certain: the dustbin of history. they are losing, and they will lose in the end
don't get me wrong, sexists, racists and such losers will always exist. it's just that they will no longer dominate the social, legal, and political stat
Re: (Score:3)
I've seen racism and sexism shift back to being normal in my lifetime. I don't think the arc of history bends towards justice, I think it's a constant struggle against normal human tendency to be bigoted and discriminatory.
Re: (Score:3)
this is not a dating site. if you're interested in such things you should be happy to know that gay rights are increasingly accepted. good luck to you and your romantic interests
Re: (Score:3)
You last point is heavily offset by the gender selection problems in countries that have more people in each of them than entire North American continent. I'm talking about China and India. They're looking at male:female ratios worse than 130:100 in edge cases and female life expectancy is not as high because of childbirth and sanitation issues.
Not arguing with your first points. Here in Nordics, we're traditionally far ahead in the matter of equality of sexes, my home country of Finland was the first one i
Re: (Score:3)
That's a poor example. A better one would be if "The Matrix" was titled "Neo" and then involved Trinity kicking a lot more ass and being the main character, rather than Neo.
Re: (Score:3)
Why don't they call themselves masculists?
Re: (Score:3)
Shouldn't that be masculininists?
No, because the female analogue is not femininist.
I am a crackpot
You don't say. ;-P
Re:You can't make this shit up. (Score:5, Informative)
The Men's Human Right's Movment is more concerned with the following:
The unfair way in which family courts treat men with regards to custody, child support and alimony
The lack of services for male victims of domestic violence.
The male suicide rate.
Selective Service and the Draft
Infant circumcision.
Women earning positions of power or being represented as powerful isn't even on their radar. Several of the most prominent men's rights activists such as Karen Straughan are female.
I hope this is educational.and might open your eyes a bit.
Did you read the article? No, you didn't. (Score:4)
This isn't a call for a boycott.
Well, let's see what TFA says:
Not only REFUSE to see the movie, but spread the word to as many men as possible.
What part of the word "boycott" do you not understand?
Re: (Score:3)
A woman can be equal or better (stronger etc) than a man. There probably are a lot of women who could lift more than I can or beat me up. However, on average, women are weaker than men. Also, the strongest woman is most likely weaker than the strongest man. Why else there would be a need for segregation in sports? Have women compete against men in weightlifting, boxing etc.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They seem to get laid once, after which the woman runs away. Or she smells the dork long before something happens. And hearing the stuff that comes out of MRA's mouths, I can't blame her...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Except for the fact that, yknow, they're diametrically opposed ideologies. I mean there's plenty of overlap in the sense that feminists insist they're the same people for politicial convenience, but that's it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Except for the fact there's hard evidence [youtube.com] proving you're wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
give them a generation or two without ramming our perverse ideas of women down their throats as soon as they reach 12,
12? What world are you living in? My son came home from his first day of school at age 5, crying. He had picked out a Dorothy the Dinosaur backpack for school. It was pink. I suggested the blue Wiggles bag, but he liked pink. It's bright and fun.
He was made fun of and teased for having a "girl's bag". At age 5. By a bunch of other age 5 children trained that pink is bad, and blue is good, and one must conform or be tortured.
That's the world today. 12 would be a big improvement. Parents train their
Re: (Score:3)
This case is ridiculous, no one sane will argue with that. However, the whole "white men can get and do anything" means the ones that don't fit in the over-generalization are fucked.
ie: the kids who are raped before age of consent (let say a teacher or something), the offender gets pregnant, and then can go and sue the kid for child support, and is almost garenteed to win. Those are uncommon, but because we're no in a cuture of "the majority is never right", we're VERY quickly flipping the table 180, and it
Re: (Score:3)
Minority factions push back a little against centuries of white dominance and millenniums of male dominance........and this is what we get? Crying foul for men's rights? Lol. What a frigging joke. I'm a white male who won custody of his children. The mother did not. I feel very comfortable in saying a man can achieve anything they pretty much want in this life through balancing their desires, morals, and motivations, of course.....white men, especially. Arguments like these -- reverse racism, men's rights -- are coming from the lazy white men who actually have to work to obtain a goal rather than have it handed to them on their majority-filled plates.
Being white has only been an advantage for about 500 years in the west. Before that, it was better to be Arab. Before that it was Mongolian. Then Chinese (or possibly Roman). Then there's a brief Greek period in there. Before that it goes back to the Arabs (Persians actually). Its generally been better to be male in a dominate culture, but if your culture is conquered it flipped to female damn quick.
The truth is that in the US its more about the amount of $$ your family has than anything. The rest
Re: (Score:3)
Who the fuck watches a kickass action movie just so they can find some Tumblr shit to complain about?
There's an entire subgenre of trolling called "Social Justice Warriors" that do nothing but watch movies, TV, read books, and stalk people on social media so they can cherry pick stuff to whine about. They're a particularly vile form of Internet troll, focused mostly on Tumblr and Twitter but a lot of them are entitled trust fund kids so there's a significant number of them infesting colleges and starting to latch themselves onto legit businesses.
Symptoms include made up or redefined [slashdot.org] words ("Racism = preju