Oy, Sorry for more Rush Limbaugh-related crap, but this cartoon, by Gary McCoy, was just too appalling not to post.
I’m not even going to get into the slut-shaming, or that the cartoonist is bizarrely trying to fat-shame someone who is not actually fat, but I would like to point out once again that WE’RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDING FREE BIRTH CONTROL (even though that sounds like a nifty idea to me). We’re talking about INSURANCE COMPANIES COVERING BIRTH CONTROL LIKE THEY COVER OTHER MEDICAL EXPENSES. You know about insurance, right? That thing that people PAY FOR THEMSELVES, with THEIR OWN MONEY?
Are Rush and his fans really so ignorant and obtuse that they’ve somehow convinced themselves that this is about the government paying for birth control? Or are they deliberately misrepresenting the issue, knowing that most of their readers/listeners/whatever won’t bother to check the facts?
Buttman: Georgetown, a university. A university which offers BC to it’s employees; whom it pays from the tuition being paid by the students whom it is charging for healthcare services which it is denying them.
So your, “It’s against their morals” is bullshit.
A counter argument is unnecessary. You may have all the BC pills your doctor is willing to prescribe for you, or even an IUD, although I am mystified as to where they would put it.
Oh, wait. I have an idea.
@Quakers: “…But hey MRAs are right when they say men are disposable…just not in the way they think…”
Ah. Interesting. Under that senario, it would obviously makes sense to put more resources towards men’s health since. That’s why men get resources…oh, wait, no. Men get less resources and use about 1/3 less healthcare than women.
Of course [I don’t mind a men’s rights movement]…if it helped men.” -PFKE
I hope you don’t mind that the MRM consut or seek approval from feminists about their work.
Antz: <i.Obamacare mandates coverage for women, and not for men, and the response of the manboobz geniuses is “provide a citation showing that insurance companies do not already cover vasectomies.”
Since that’s a patent lie (go ahead, show me the gender limiting language, the part where it says, “This Act only applies to female citizens of the USA”, or equivalent language.
Or, since that isn’t really what you are claiming (is it), but rather that women are being favored over men.
So, go ahead, prove it. The law is available. Show the actual text, not your (questionable) glosses of what it means.
Got it cupcake? Too hard to understand? Concentrate!
You can do it. I know you can.
The problem with you Mags is you completely and totally ignore the vast amount of hatred the current movement has for women (and oddly enough, in many instances men) in favor of what? Basically saying there should be a Men’s Rights Movement? Most of the posters here agree there should be because there are issues that need addressing. However the current movement spends all of its time in seething hatred towards women. How is that helping men?
During second wave feminism, there was a great deal of hatred. Many of the women celebrated in women’s studies courses were angry. Accusations leveled at men were scurrilous. Much of feminist thought today is based upon negative assumptions about men…men are privileged by patriarchy, they are harassers, wife beaters, rapers.
Men have plenty to be angry about. Just because feminism dismisses men’s anger doesn’t mean their feelings are not legitimate. Their anger will help fuel and grow the MRM.
Mags, what work? The MRM, in its current form, does nothing but whine on the internet. And what they whine about isn’t about helping men, it’s about hurting women. It’s a bunch of middle-class white dudes who are pants-shittingly scared about any perceived loss of “power.”
Angry about what? So far all the anger I have seen has nothing to do with positive ways to help men out but to tear down women because women are too “uppity.”
You know what is a legitimate anger?
Being angry because a man is raped in prison and no one cares.
You know what is not?
Being angry because women are not stoned to death any more for being raped.
@Magdelyn
I have no problem with an MRM, I DO have a problem with the current incarnation of it. I’ve come across MRAs from both the States through manboobz, and in India because I myself am South Asian, and I find myself rarely in agreement with their methods, and a lot of their aggrievances. I certainly don’t agree with the “rampant misandry in our society” theory.
I’m not USian, so I don’t have as much knowledge as other posters, but what I have seen makes me think that feminists are right about this issue.
For one, the Viagra coverage vs Pill coverage seems to be spot on.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/08/05/289117/hannity-blasts-insurance-coverage-for-birth-control-defends-viagra-that-is-a-medical-problem/?mobile=nc
I’m guessing that Hannity is right that Viagra coverage is more widespread than pill coverage, since his opponents also say the same thing.
A quick search didn’t give me much useful info about coverage for vasectomies vs tubal litigation, so I’m not going to comment on that (I’m writing a paper right now so I don’t have the time to do more research)
Women DO use more healthcare than men. However, the issue of men SEEKING healthcare less than women, is one that has been covered quite well by many researchers (something that was covered in both my kinesiology classes and my psych classes). Again, a quick search found this study
http://unc.academia.edu/DerrickMatthews/Papers/305681/Masculinity_medical_mistrust_and_preventive_health_services_delays_among_community-dwelling_African_American_men.
That the field of medicine has focused on men as a template is also well documente:, see the recent findings of different symptoms in women for strokes and heart attacks, for example.
Finally, my main issue with the MRM is the lack of citations, and contortion of a lot of the citations that they do have, for most of their claims. That, and the fact that I think a lot of the things that they blame women for is ridiculous, and littered with double standards. If there are articles or authors that you think have legitimate issues that they address then feel free to link.
False dichotomy: feminism not solving all problems relating to men does not mean men won’t benefit from more feminism.
Straw man: no one here has a problem with a men’s rights movement per se, the problem is with the misogyny and retrograde values prevalent within the MRM as it exists. See also: No, Seriously, What About Teh Menz? I certainly don’t want such a reactionary and hateful movement representing my interests: they’re more likely to get it wrong than right.
I’m also pretty sure Shadow was not saying “feminism has no obligagtion [sic] towards 1/2 the worlds [sic] population,” but I’ll let Shadow resolve the ambiguities in what “those problems” means.
I hate to tell you this hellkell, the vast VAST majority of men have absolutely no power. Maybe you know a bunch of CEO’s of fortune 500 companies. Maybe you lunch with members of congress. Personally, I don’t know anybody that fits into the elite of this country.
That’s exactly why I put power in scare quotes, Mags. Instead of doing things to help, they think women are getting all the power. They, like our buddy NWO, think feminism is zero-sum. It ain’t.
But they DO have privilege, and any threat to that sends the MRM into paroxysms of hate.
lol
1) Men actually are privileged by patriarchy, so yes. I do not find this to be a “negative assumption” about me because I recognize it and because I have sympathy for people whose lives are inhibited by male privilege.
2) Some men are “harrassers, wife beaters, rapers [sic]” and feminism attempts to address gendered violence but that does not mean “much of feminist thought” assumes “men” are such.
The more you try to argue the more embarrassed I get for you, Mags. You have many misconceptions to dispel.
Moewicus, i hope u don’t take offense that i don’t respond to your posts. firstly, i find male feminists to pretty icky most of the time…they remind me of people like hugo schwyzer and mickael kimmel…people who obviously despise men. second…as soon as you argue that all men are privileged by patriarchy, you pretty much lost all credibility. the fact that you don’t deny that much today’s feminist thought is based upon the vilification of men as a whole pretty much sums up why your commentary is both bigoted and, for all intents and purposes, useless.
Whatever, Mags, stay cozy in your assumptions and misconceptions.
At first I was excited to see Mags engaging in an actual argument, but then I realised that all she was going to do was repeat “men aren’t actually privileged” over any over again.
Are you illiterate?
@Katreya
Yes. Yes I am. I can’t believe your literatism. I am soooooooo offended that you are so bigoted.
What I meant is that feminism, as a movement, has no obligation to address issues that face men solely. And, while I do agree that a lot of what feminism achieves also ends up benefiting men, I do think that a movement centred around men will be more beneficial when attacking issues that men face. The only obligation that feminism has towards men is the same obligation that any other movement has, namely not to harm others (loss of power over women or privilege over women is obviously not harmful) in their fight for equality.
Obviously many (I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a majority) individual feminists care about men’s issues, because, as a species, we tend to care about our fellow man.
lol. Thanks for reminding me of your hate on for him, Mags. Now I get to remember an entire sociology department laughing their asses off at you XD
@mags
Which men are disadvantaged solely by their gender?
I hate men… good to know. I’m sure my co-husband has noticed this. One wonders why he’s not asked for some sort of divorce.
Oh wait, he’s a feminist too… maybe he hates me?
Perhaps it’s just that we both hate sexism, and, “men” aren’t the issue, but rather behaviors are.
@rutee….sociology is a fake discipline…like astrology. I wouldn’t care what those clowns are laughing at…sociology – what a waste of an education.