I know the title of this thread is gonna elicit A LOT of negative reactions. Most of the people who will read this will either roll their eyes and comment in my stupidity, or become angry and yell at me, saying I am a conservative monster and stuff. But the thing is, I've seen many topics here, such as the ones about sexist commercials or the relationship between straight women and lesbians. And I found that the assumptions made when it came to straight men were almost always negative, such as "they are homophobic and least accepting of minorities, and are always agressive", or "its ok to portray them as idiot in the media, because they are the ones who have the power", among others. Many people seem to think that its unfair that straight white men hold most of the positions of power in society, but the reasons for it are actually much more complex and damaging to the majority of them than the simple "they opress everyone else". I am not a feminist and will never be, and even though I am gay and like most of you, got bullied by (supposedly) straight men while in the playground, I do not hold anything against them. After all, if I was straight, I would have been bullied anyway, and for the same reasons. Ill have to stop writing now, but for the ones interested, heres a video as an eye opener on the many ways men have it harder than women in our society, and that "male priviledge" does not exist (I never believed it did. Nobody ever priviledged me for anything). Those privileged blue bundles of joy - YouTube
"Privilege" is a nonsense social justice buzzword that doesn't actually exist. Aside from that, I have no idea what the rest of your post is getting at. Nobody aside from a few mentally ill radicals view straight men that badly.
I'm not going to rant at all. I just think that life is tough sometimes for both sexes, just in different ways. I got this article from the BBC website a couple of months ago which highlights your perception. I hope you find it interesting: 2 May 2012 Last updated at 13:23 GMT Masculinism By Tom de Castella BBC News Magazine An increasingly vocal men's movement argues that anti-male discrimination is rife. Who are the activists and what do they want? Feminists have spent decades trying to get equal pay and rights for women. But while, in the West at least, discrimination against women is rigorously challenged, a growing band of men's rights activists say no such protection is afforded to men. Many of these activists also believe that the media allow women to objectify and ridicule men in a way that would be unthinkable if the gender roles were reversed. A new book argues that on a whole range of fronts - from government, the courts and schools - men are being discriminated against. David Benatar, head of philosophy at the University of Cape Town, argues in his polemic The Second Sexism that across the world men are more likely to be conscripted into the military, be victims of violence, lose custody of their children, and take their own lives. Custody law is perhaps the best-known area of men's rights activism, with images of divorced fathers scaling buildings in Batman suits familiar in the UK. Benatar asserts that in most parts of the world custody rights cases are stacked firmly against men. "When the man is the primary care-giver his chances of winning custody are lower than when the woman is the primary care-giver. "Even when the case is not contested by the mother, he's still not as likely to get custody as when the woman's claim is uncontested." Education is another area where men are falling behind, the activists note. Tests in 2009 by the Programme for International Student Assessment showed that boys lagged a year behind girls at reading in every industrialised country. And women now make up the majority of undergraduates, Benatar says. "When women are underrepresented as CEOs of companies that is deemed discrimination. But when boys are falling behind at school, when 90% of people in prison are male, there's never any thought given to whether men are discriminated against." If sexual equality is to be achieved then male discrimination must be taken as seriously as sexism against women, he argues. Equal pay is the barometer in developed countries like the UK. According to the Office for National Statistics, the gender pay gap is still pronounced within professions. Women earn on average £8,000 less than a man as lawyers, £14,000 less as a CEO and £9,000 less as a doctor. But the picture may be changing. Last year the Universities and Colleges Admission Service discovered that women aged 22-29 have overtaken men on pay for the first time. And a survey for the Chartered Management Institute found that female managers in their 20s were earning 2.1% more than their male counterparts. Such controversies are feeding a sense that men need to set up their own support structures. The Men's Network, a charity in Brighton, aims to help "every man and boy in our city to fulfil his greatest potential". Movember, a campaign in which men grow facial hair for a month, taps into a feeling among some men that male diseases like prostate and testicular cancer are not taken as seriously as women's. As the old certainties break down, a masculinist movement claims men need their own equivalent to feminists. Aoirthoir An Broc, founder of the International Association of Masculinists, says there are thousands of male activists in India fighting the country's unequal divorce laws. An Broc, a web designer in Cleveland, Ohio, is planning to set up the first domestic violence shelter in the US for male victims. He says there's an assumption that women are always innocent and men the aggressor. In response he's coined the term "all men are good" to counter the negative perception. "We say that all men are men, all men are good, all men are worthy of love and respect regardless of race, sexuality, religion. We don't believe in cultural definitions of men." There's a cultural context, too. Some of the men's rights-type concerns echo those of feminists - male body image is a growing issue. And there are some who feel that while feminism has addressed discrimination against women, outdated attitudes towards men have not been tackled. Tom Martin gained attention last year after suing the London School of Economics' gender studies department for sexism. He says he was radicalised while working as a barman in a club in Soho. "I could see that male customers were being abused at every point," he says. Men had to queue and often pay while women got in free. They were goaded by bouncers to leave, while women were treated with respect. But worst of all, he believes they were used by women to buy drinks. But Martin says it is all about sex."Since the pill, women have been told they can and should be having orgasms. And because they haven't been, they categorise that as men's fault." He concludes that "it's women's job to make themselves sexually happy, it's not a man's burden." The psychologist Oliver James believes men are feeling "sexually threatened". Women are no longer reticent about sex or their expectations from a lover. Furthermore they are now more likely to evaluate a man's sexual performance in public and even deride men who "aren't particularly imaginative or clever" in bed, he argues. For feminists the men's movement is more straightforward. "It's the same old point that feminism has gone too far," says Mail on Sunday columnist Suzanne Moore. The continuing gender pay gap and the fact that men dominate senior positions in public life, show up where the real discrimination is, she argues. There are problems with the way boys are educated but "you can't make sweeping statements about all men being discriminated against", she argues. Kat Banyard, author of The Equality Illusion, says men make the mistake of fearing feminism when it offers them liberation from an outdated masculinity. "There's a belief that feminism is a zero sum game and that men are losing." To argue that men are now the victims of the gender struggle is absurd, she says. "For thousands of years women were subjugated as second class citizens. We've just started to change that in the last two centuries and there's a long way to go. The men's activists are denying history." Male rights campaigners have struggled to shed their "cranky" image, argues Tim Samuels, presenter of BBC Radio 5 live's Men's Hour. Most men don't see themselves as part of a movement, Samuels says. But they do want to talk to each other with a greater emotional complexity than previous generations of men - "even if it's not like Oprah". And whatever one thinks about the spectrum of men's rights activism, there are important issues, like the fact that young men are three times as likely to die by suicide as young women. "The men's movement tends to be dismissed as blokes scaling buildings dressed as superman. Whereas the women's movement is given credibility," Samuels says. There is a lot here to think about, but I think it shows clearly that we still have a lot of work to do in achieving equality in diversity. Men and women are different - equal, but different, just as homosexuals and heterosexuals SHOULD BE equal, but different. Who do you think is to blame? I do see huge changes but change is sometimes frightening and disorienting, and tradition is always a "safe" place to fall back on.
Thanks for the article. What I was really criticizing in the opening post (I know I couldnt quite get the message across, but I wrote everything very hurriedly and with little time) is the fact that many people nowadays criticize actitutes associated with men (violence, lack of emotions, homophobia, sexual impulses, etc), as if they did not serve any positive purpose to society and for men themselves. And yet, attitudes associated with feminity, such as empathy, (and even not-that-positive ones, like manipulation and vanity) are often glorified in the media aimed at women. Theres a really awful trope in the media recently (its even on a tv Tropes website) saying that "all the good men are gay". And even though I am homossexual I dont find that flattering at all. And for some people before me, there are radical feminists who DO hate straight men, and often take away government assistance to men who lost their jobs, believe circuncision is necessary when studies show anything but (see if the same would be said about female genital mutilation), and ban a father away from their children's lives simply because he's a man, and therefore, expendable. Like the article said, men are viewed as disposable by the government, women and even themselves. Little to no assistance is given to issues who affect mostly men. Sure, men commit most of crime and other illness of society, but would that be the cause of their disposability, or the consequence? Denying someone of help leads to violence and social issues.
Discrimination exists against both sexes, certainly. There is misandry (man hating) just as there is misogyny (woman hating). But the presence of one does not invalidate the legitimacy of the other as a problem, and I think they can both be worked on and fought against simultaneously. Do you believe that women should get equal pay for equal work to what men get? Do you think women should have the right to vote? Do you think that, overall, women should have the same opportunities (as well as needing to shoulder the responsibilities that come with those opportunities) that men have? If you answered yes, as any decent human being should, then you are a feminist. Feminism is nothing more then sex egalitarianism. Radical feminism might have left a bed taste in the mouth of people when they hear the word "feminist", but feminism is just belief that men and women should be equal. If you truly aren't a feminist (regardless of whether you wear the label or not), then I have no qualms about saying that you're a terrible human being. Oh boy, where to begin? You know those news stories that came out a while ago about "Straight Male Gamer" and his ilk pissing and moaning about the gay romance option Dragon Age 2, or other such games? He was objecting to the fact that another male character in the game might flirt with his male character, saying BioWare, by putting that in the game, was "ignoring their primary audience," the straight, male gamer. (Thankfully, BioWare told him to get over it.) The reason Straight Male Gamer got so pissy about something so insignificant is because of his straight privilege. Part of straight privilege is the fact that when straight people see any kind of romantic activity in media, they can usually rest assured that it will be the kind of romantic activity that they themselves partake in (i.e. a male and a female). We gay people don't get that kind of assurance. Part of privilege as an overall concept is that people with privilege are often so used to their privilege being catered to that when it isn't, they think that's unfair. So it was with Straight Male Gamer; he was so used to being flirted with by characters he found attractive (female NPCs), that when a male character flirted with him, he took umbrage to it. Do we gay gamers get pissy when a female NPC flirts with our male player-character, or vise versa? By and large, no, we don't, because we don't have the privilege of our romantic preference being the default. Some other examples off the top of my head: -If you're a white person, you have the privilege of knowing that, by and large, people aren't going to distrust you because of your race. That is often not true for people of color. -If you present as a man, you have the privilege of knowing that you don't need to be particularly cautious as you walk down the street alone. Women, on the other hand, often carry tools of self-defense, or plan their route along well-lit streets, or get rides if it gets to be too late, or walk in groups, because society has taught them that they are far more likely to have something bad happen to them while they're walking along the street at night than men are (and it's probably right). -If you present as a man, unwelcome flirtation is a pretty foreign thing (which is probably why homophobic men react so badly when a guy flirts with them), whereas it's something women deal with all the time. -If you identify as either male or female, you have the privilege of knowing that if you go somewhere with gendered bathrooms, you won't have to give any thought to which one you go into. Genderqueer people, especially those with androgynous gender presentation, don't have such privilege; they often have to chose between risking getting beat up or risking getting screamed at and kicked out. -If you're thin or of average weight, you have the privilege of knowing that when you get on an airplane, you'll fit in the seat. Fat people don't have that kind of assurance. -If you're right-handed, you can reasonably assume that any tool you may come across will be built for your easy of use. Left-handed people don't have that luxury. And since most people here aren't straight, I'm sure you'll be able to understand these example: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack II: Daily effects of straight privilege. That link is a list of many of the manifestations of straight privilege. The things on there are rights that we are fighting tooth and nail for, and they're things straight people can take for granted. That's privilege.
Are you suggesting that violence, lack of emotion, homophobia, and sexual impulses aren't glorified in media aimed at men? Because they totally are. And the fact that there's more media aimed at men than women means you see more of that in media than you see the glorification of empathy, manipulation, or vanity. Also, "as if they did not serve any positive purpose to society and for men themselves". Maybe they were helpful in the days of cavemen, but do you really mean to suggest that violence, homophobia, emotional repression, and not keeping one's sexual impulses in check are actually good things? Because that's a pretty radical claim that you better have some good reasoning to back up if that is what you're saying.
I am not a feminist, I am a humanist. Yes, I do believe in equal voting rights and equal pay, but I also believe in equal reproductive rights (and men do not have ANY of them), equal right to custody after divorce, and equal bodily right of not being mutilated as a child without your consent. A feminist is a person who puts the well-being of women over the one of men. A masculinist is the exact opposite. But yes, people who truly want equality should call themselves humanists. Straight priviledge exists; ratial priviledge exists; thin priviledge exists. But not male or female privilege, because society was originally built for white straight thin men and women, and not for genderqueers, people of color, etc. Many of your assumptions about disadvantages of being a woman are counterbalanced by disadvantages of being a man. Do you think NEVER being approached by the opposite sex is a good thing, or always have to initiate all relationships and risking rejection for it is a priviledge? Ask all the men who are lonely and still virgins at middle age if they believed their life would have been easier if a girl had ever taken the courage to approach them. Also, men are much more likely to be killed by strangers at night, but since society's role is to protect women from harm (even when they do not deserve it, which leads to shorter sentences to women in jail), they educated the fair sex to fear risks that arent there, while leaving young men, much more vulnerable, to ignore their safety by believing they are less likely to be assaulted. Leading to tragedies. Female priviledge exists nowadays, thanks to the radical feminists you were talking about. There is a huge social inbalance because, while men are still trapped in old gender roles, women can do anything they want, including deviating from them, without any criticisms. They can not do the housework, be promiscuous, cheat, abort children and wear pants, and society views it as acceptable. Men CANNOT deviate from their duties, and have to buy drinks, provide for a family to lose everything after divorce, and be judged by their sexual and professional performance far more than women. Now do you understand what feminism has truly done, and why it only caters to women? ---------- Post added 20th Jul 2012 at 12:13 PM ---------- Yes, homophobia and excessive promiscuity do not posess any particular advantage to any society. But the masculine nature of being agressive and competitive is what possibilitated all the technological advacements we have today. Women are getting into the workplace without desiring to fully adapt to the male world. Instead, they want to be treated as special there, by receiving maternity leaves, being able to balance work and home, and earning the same pay as men WHILE working less hours than them. Our society has become feminized and gynocentric, too focused on the segment of the population who does not produce as much and does not work to its fullest potential. Meanwhile, men are acting out their frustration by killing others and themselves, and thus limiting the productive work they could do for others and themselves. In 20 years, or maybe earlier, this is going to have disastruous consequences. And this woman can say it much better than I can: (yes, a woman with the same opinions as me) Fempocalypse!! - YouTube
You remind me of me before I went off to college and had finally seen more of the world. Before then, I focused on the disadvantages men have in this society, because I grew up in an extremely progressive household where I wasn't exposed to the kind of discrimination against women that is still so prevalent in this society. Thus, I only gave my thought to the disadvantages that affected me. But as I've grown up and seen more of the world, and actually sat down with women and talked with them about their experiences in this world and how their gender relates to it, I've seen just how far we still have to go before gender equality can be reached. See, before I went off to college, I hadn't yet had the experience of reassuring a friend after the business department of our university told her repeatedly to switch to another major because, as a woman, she wasn't cut out for it. I hadn't yet been begged by another friend of mine to accompany her home through the dark streets of our fairly ghetto city, streets that I never felt nervous on, because she didn't feel comfortable walking on her own. I hadn't yet listened to the dozens of stories my female friends have told me of creeps harassing them out in public; I have no stories of that type to tell, because people just generally don't mess with me.* I hadn't yet held another friend of mine in my arms while she cried because she had just been raped. I can only hope that time and exposure to the world will open your eyes to how complex this issue is, and to the fact that significant progress remains to be made on BOTH sides of the issue. I can only hope that time and exposure will sooth the anger against women that saturated your last post. Until then, maybe you should sit down with some of the women in your life and bring up these objections to have to feminism with them. Listen to their experiences and compare them to your own. I'm not telling you to do this so it can change your opinion: I'm tell you to do this because it can give you some perspective, and if you're truly on the correct side of this issue, perspective will not shake your opinion. *By the way, when I was talking about unwanted flirtation, it was from creeps, the kind of person you wouldn't want to go out with anyway. If you want to be equal to women in the "unwanted sexual attention" regard, then expect to be flirted with by fifty- and sixty- year old women that you wouldn't go out with even if they were your own age.
Those definitions of feminism and masculinism are incorrect. A feminist believes in equal rights for women (even, in some areas, decreasing female privilage so that men and women are more equal); a masculinist believes in equal rights for men. These are not mutually exclusive and most people support both. I don't know the exact definition of humanism, but I expect most people are humanists -- a broader category that encompasses equal rights for all genders, races, ages, etc.. I know that men do not have equal rights in all areas (you name some later in your post), and I agree this is a problem that should be solved as soon as possible. I am a masculinist as well as a feminist. Male and female privilage do exist. They are not exclusive and do not balance each other out. Men have privilage over women in some areas. Women have privilage over men in some areas. Some fields are primarily dominated by men or women, e.g. engineering and nursing. The existance of one does not invalidate the existance of the other; rather, it means that there are even more problems. Imagine a graph, where a spike up (^) is male privilage and a spike down (v) is female privilage. Ideally, the graph would be a flat line (--------) because there would be no privilage. However, instead it's like ^v^^^vv^vvv^v^^v because the privilages are in different areas. Both exist; both are a problem.
tl;dr: Women do not have de facto equal rights with men in our society, and are expected to perform mutually exclusive roles simultaneously. Also, most forms of anti-male prejudice in our society are rooted in anti-female sexism. Finally, the term "privilege" sucks. Feminism is, at its core, the radical assertion that women are human beings. And women are still frequently not treated as humans. There is still a significant wage gap between men and women, women are still horrifically underrepresented in politics, the list goes on. Essentially, the deal is this: women are expected to stay home and take care of the children, and not to be gold diggers who rely on their husbands for money; to not be frigid bitches who refuse to have sex, and not be sluts who actually enjoy it; to have perfect bodies, and not to spend any time on maintaining a perfect body; to have perfectly applied makeup, not too much and not too little, and not to spend any time or money on purchasing or applying makeup; to do all the shopping for their families, and not to waste their husband's money on frivolous purchases; to have babies, and not have her body look any worse afterwards. A woman, in our society, cannot win. The entire game is rigged so that any choice a woman makes is, by definition, a wrong choice. Men are simply not in this position. We don't have it great, either, of course, but it is theoretically possible to win. And take note of what all of the "wrong" choices for men entail (I'm using "choice" a bit nebulously here, so bear with me): Right choice: work hard at a job to support your family Wrong choice: stay at home to take care of your family while your wife works Right choice: Like to have lots of sex with lots of women Wrong choice: Don't like sex or like sex with men Right choice: Be unemotional and "objective" Wrong choice: Be in touch with your emotions Right choice: Like cars, sports, and beer Wrong choice: Like clothing, fancy food and alcohol, and knitting Right choice: Eat big, meaty meals Wrong choice: Eat small salads Notice what all the wrong choices have in common? They're all traditionally "feminine" roles or choices. Men can win by being as un-womanly as possible. One feminist theory posits that masculinity is defined by the things guys don't or shouldn't do. Men are emasculated by liking sex with men, wearing feminine clothing, cooking (unless as a job or outside on a grill), sewing, etc. This all sucks, of course, but it's not evidence of misandry per se; rather it's evidence of misogyny. Womanly things are bad and men become men by avoiding them. Misogyny, however, leads to misandry (and probably vice versa, but there's very little primary misandry out there outside of radical feminism). Women need to civilize their men because men are boorish barbarians; women must dress modestly to avoid inflaming the wild, uncontrollable lust of men; women must take care of nurture her children on her own because men are incapable of being nurturing parents. I would recommend reading through Ozzy's blog No Seriously What About Teh Menz, a feminist blog that looks at and analyzes the problems men face due to a patriarchal society; this article on rape culture, one of the biggest forms of misogyny in our society; and this male privilege* checklist. *Note: I really really dislike the term "privilege" as it's used in social justice circles. A better term would be "incidental advantage." The advantages I get from being white and male are not things I can throw away even though I might want to, and many of them are things I believe should apply to all people, not just me. Furthermore, a lot of SJ activists tend to use "privilege" as a conversation stopper (e.g. "you're only saying that because you're privileged, so shut up") rather than an opener. Also, many people with one form of privilege are so disadvantaged by lacking another that the privilege they do have doesn't mean very much (e.g. a man who is black, neo-pagan, impoverished, and an illegal immigrant is a member of a ton of minority groups and while he still benefits from male privilege, that benefit is fairly small).
This. I agree with all of what you said (Owen) about feminism and privilege. I also agree with what Mogget said. Privilege does exist. I do like Mogget's use of the word "incidental advantage." I'll use the word privilege because it's the technical term used by social scientists but I understand that you cannot choose to be privileged. Also, if a person says they are not a feminist I assume they don't know what feminism is. I hope they don't know what feminism is.. Men and women should both be equal, that is feminism. I don't think there is anything wrong with straight men individidually. It isn't like they purposefully were born male and straight. They are straight and male and that is totally okay. Yes, there are some people that hate straight men. It does happen, although not as widespread. It is not okay to hate on straight men or to practice misandry. Straight men can be very good, nice, wonderful people just like the rest of us. Pointing out that there is privilege in the world isn't the same as hating straight men. I am white and because of this, I have a lot of privilege. Does that mean I am a bad person? No, I can't change the color of my skin. But it doesn't mean I can't admit that I can walk into a store without the fear of being suspected or that I can pass through the day without any judgment due to my skin tone. Privilege does exist among races and also among sexes. In the U.S., there is white, straight, male, Christian, American-borne, English-speaking, cis-gendered, rich privilege/incidental advantage. Privilege isn't just something straight men have. Many of us have at least one or more privileges in life. Talking about privilege and discrimination and inequality shouldn't be about hating those with privilege. It should be about educating people and becoming more aware of how we are privileged. Here are a few examples of male privilege: (I found most of them on different websites.) 1. I have the privilege of being unaware of my privilege. 2. I can walk alone without the fear of being sexually assaulted. 3. My odds of being hired for a job, when competing against female applicants, are probably skewed in my favor. The more prestigious the job, the larger the odds are skewed. 4. I am far less likely to face sexual harassment at work than my female co-workers are. 5. If I have children and a career, no one will think I’m selfish for not staying at home. 6. My elected representatives are mostly people of my own sex. The more prestigious and powerful the elected position, the more this is true. 7. As a child, I could choose from an almost infinite variety of children’s media featuring positive, active, non-stereotyped heroes of my own sex. I never had to look for it; male protagonists were (and are) the default. 8. I can be confident that the ordinary language of day-to-day existence will always include my sex. “All men are created equal,” mailman, chairman, freshman, he. Here's a more concise list. The Male Privilege Checklist | Alas, a Blog And straight privilege: 1. If I pick up a magazine, watch TV, or play music, I can be certain my sexual orientation will be represented. 2. I do not have to fear revealing my sexual orientation to friends or family. It's assumed. 3.Because of my sexual orientation, I do not need to worry that people will harass me. 4. I can be open about my sexual orientation without worrying about my job. Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack II ---------- Post added 20th Jul 2012 at 04:32 PM ---------- I don't agree with discriminating against men at all. If you go through a checklist of male privilege, I think you might find that males are actually quite privileged.
Sexism against both men and women are two sides of the same coin. You cannot make headway against one without fighting against the other. I don't see sexism as a conflict between men and women; I see it as a conflict between the old culture and the new emerging culture. The old culture told men that being weak, vulnerable, and showing his emotions was wrong. It made him less of a man. On the other side of the coin it said that women were weak, overly emotional, and needed men to protect them. The new emerging culture attempts to eliminate divisions such as this by replacing it with the belief that self-reliance and strength are desirable, but so is being authentic to who you are by showing your emotions. It applies equally to both genders; women don't need men to protect them, they can be strong, confident, self-reliant, but they can also be vulnerable when and where desired. It says that a man can depend upon a woman to provide for the family, and he can stay at home with the children because he is just as capable as a woman at being loving and nurturing. The new emerging culture tells a woman that she doesn't have to follow the path of her mother and grandmother; she doesn't have to get married by age twenty-one and start popping out babies. She doesn't have to get married at all, nor does she have to have kids. It says that she can have sex when she wants to, and doesn't have to worry about virginal "purity." It is her choice. Her life. Her decision. She is free and independent. The new emerging culture tells boys that it's okay to grow up playing house, to dream about being a father, to dream about getting married and having kids. It doesn't have to be something he dreads, if that is what he desires. However, he also has the right to forge his own path, and doesn't have to follow the rules of his father and grandfather. The new emerging culture also tells boys (particularly teenage boys) that there is no shame in being a virgin, that having sex isn't some proof of his manhood. It tells men that it's okay to refuse a womans advances, and to do so doesn't make him any less of a man because he isn't out there sowing his wild oats. In essence, the new emerging culture is a direct assault against the old. The goal isn't to elevate women over men. It's to destroy the barriers between the sexes and provide equal opportunities for both. It's an embrace of individualism over collective conformity.
i don't have time to read and really get at the heart of this thread but i can offer something that may be beneficial to think about. "just because discrimination exists towards a minority, or a certain group is privileged doesn't mean that the privileged group doesn't also at times experience discrimination.The answer isn't to use one groups discrimination to discredit that which is experienced by the other (and in doing so invalidate arguments for equality). The answer is to identify discrimination and work to correct it." my sociology professor/some stuff added in by me
meh. Depends on who you're talking to. And l may be getting myself int trouble here but l find that when you speak with a lot of feminists, they give their views much more weight than exists in reality. Some of their views, not all. l know they still advocate for real issues but IME they are also grasping straws, desperately trying to make anything an issue and anything on their "platform" can be greatly exaggerrated. Who knows, they might even believe it l notice its common for them to block out information that doesn't serve their purposes so in their world, hetero men probably hold a lot of power and need to be metaphorically castrated. You step out into the world and see it's not really the case, l choose to acknowledge the struggle that every group has and if anything straight men are still one of the most exploited groups in society.
