So the regulars in the Men’s Rights subreddit are currently discussing one of the most important — if often overlooked — issues of our time, which is: How come nobody but us sees that the ladies aren’t oppressed any more? Or, as paranoiarodeo497, looking hopefully towards the future, has chosen to put the question: “What future event/tragedy do you think will happen that will make people realize not only are women no longer deprived but in fact equal to men?”
Alas, the Men’s Rightsers aren’t hopeful that anything will wake up the snoozing sheeple. BrambleEdge, for his part, worries that men will remain oppressed forever.
![BrambleEdge 17 points 15 hours ago (18|1) Seeing as men are deprived and far from equal to women, and people don't see it now, I doubt they ever will. I sometimes fear that gynocentrism is biological and not cultural. [–]Demonspawn [-1] 1 point 52 minutes ago (1|0) gynocentrism is biological Treating women as human beings and men as human doings? Yes, it is biological. It's also why "equality" isn't, and seeking it creates a system of female supremacy.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/bramble.png?resize=573%2C230&ssl=1)
Shrekem, meanwhile, turns to the work of eminent historian GirlWritesWhat for evidence that women were never oppressed in the first place:
![Shrekem 9 points 13 hours ago (12|3) The problem is that women were never oppressed or deprived, they just had different roles. Women are certainly not "equal" to men today, they receive special treatment and are immune to many laws that would get a man locked up for life. I recommend you watch Karen Straughan's video on "When female privilege backfires". permalink source save give gold hide child comments [–]villevillakulla -4 points 11 hours ago (4|8) I guess it depends on how you define oppressed or deprived, but it kind of sounds like you're full of shit, and "different roles" can be a blanket statement to mean anything you want it to mean. permalink source save parent give gold [–]Shrekem 5 points 8 hours ago (6|1) I would define oppression as "the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner" just like everybody else. I challenge you to come up with one example of women being oppressed in western society in the past few centuries. The treatment of women is nothing compared to real oppression like that of blacks during slavery.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/shrekem.png?resize=567%2C377&ssl=1)
IHaveALargePenis, in addition to being highly confident about his relative penis size, is also a bit more optimistic than his peers, suggesting that the irresponsibility of evil slutty single moms will eventually end up annoying not only single men but other women as well and thus, I guess, help to spark a new wave of antifeminism:
![IHaveALargePenis [+3] 5 points 12 hours ago (6|1) Government taxing bachelors to sponsor single moms/women in general. If shit keeps going the way it's going, everything women need will be provided by a government, while working less and claiming there's still a pay gap. It won't take a genius to put two and two together and realize that the benefits women get from the government, plus the benefits they get from working are huge compared to what men pay/get out of it. But that's not when things will change, not yet. What we're going to see is a rise of single, irresponsible moms who breed and have their lives paid for by taxpayers. And part of those taxpayers will be other women, who can't find men willing to "breed with them" or marry them, etc. These women will be working 40+ hours a week easy, will sacrifice greatly, miss their chance to have kids, and realize they're paying for all these irresponsible women to have their cake and eat it to (our society is pretty good at rewarding the irresponsible). That's when things will change.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/ihavealarge.png?resize=580%2C276&ssl=1)
But Scoundrel, a more pessimistic sort, can’t imagine any scenario that would get the evil femmies to admit that men are oppressed:
Sorry, IHaveALargePenis, but you’ve been outvoted.
Meanwhile, loose-dendrite, off on a bit of a tangent, warns those who might otherwise be susceptible to feminist-think that seeing similar numbers of men and women in positions of power would not be a sign of gender equality — but rather a symptom of FEMALE TYRANNY!
Huh. I was unaware that high IQ was a prerequisite to power in our society. Did anyone tell George W. Bush?
In conclusion, MRAs have once against shown that they can use any and all evidence to “prove” what they already believe. Another flawless victory over the forces of reality.
Ted Nugent should have faded gracefully into obscurity after “Stranglehold.”
One of the hidden joys of these guys is anytime they claim to know what feminists would say or do about something.
Smiley points out the hypocrisy within the NRA in regards to race.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AW4VT-C_XcE&w=420&h=315]
Luckily, someone realizes men need to stand their ground in the face of the unarmed feminist onslaught.
It’s fascinating that women have so much lower ambition and IQ and yet STILL managed to rule men. We truly are amazing.
Feminazi stole my ice cream
You gotta love the irony of a bunch of mostly white dudes who think (unsaid: white) men are oppressed by modern society dismissing feminism because (unsaid: white) women never had it as bad as slaves did. Like, take your pick, dudebros. Either it’s not as bad as slavery and therefore doesn’t matter or different degrees/axes of oppression must be considered on their own merits. I realize this is unlikely to sway a group of people who use terms like “divorce rape” sincerely and think child support is indentured servitude, but come on.
That’s some potent distortion they’ve got going on there. Wow.
No worries, auggziliary – I was just addressing the MRA who said that. I didn’t interpret that as you believing that men are more valuable.
I found the one person trying to talk sense: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1jp4q0/what_future_eventtragedy_do_you_think_will_happen/cbh1n9b
It goes about as well as you’d expect.
Wah-hah-hah.
I was just thinking about this today. I was musing on Dunning-Krugger, and people who manage to think they’re still the smartest person in the room when everybody disagrees with them and actual evidence shows they’re wrong.
I was thinking about what it might be like to see the world that way, to have any contradictory information just confirm your prejudices.
And here we have it. “So, we believe in this weird and wild thing and for some reason 99% of people think it’s horseshit? THEY ARE SO BRAINWASHED WAAAAGGGHH”
I should give villevallakulla credit, actually, and the responses are great too: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1jp4q0/what_future_eventtragedy_do_you_think_will_happen/cbgze5t
fractal_shark is my hero.
Sarahlizhousespouse
In response to my question you wrote,
——————————————————————————————————————–
Smiley points out the hypocrisy within the NRA in regards to race.
——————————————————————————————————————–
Oh okay. I see what you meant now.
One time I was told that just because chivalry is “male-centric” doesn’t mean it’s patriarchal. =S Yeah…
@bodycrimes I can understand that you might be confused as to where this free money comes from, but I’m an old timer, so I was here for the ongoing saga of The Big Book ‘o Learnin’.
What you do, apparently, is go sit in the middle of the street and cry, and men will throw money at you.
Is that Tina Majorino in your icon, or do you look a lot like her? I’m a fan either way, and here’s your welcome package in case you haven’t received one yet. It will help all and sundry to learn how sitting in the middle of the street and crying garners one money, how 12 year old girls wearing bathing suits at the beach is horribly offensive, and just how bad one milk machine technician’s life is because this one time he didn’t get a job.
By which I mean that there’s a link to the Big Book contained within, but we do call it the Big Book for a reason. This most recent troll has started making me nostalgic for Mr. Slave, the me me me me me shit is so much more boring than superdogs.
Apologies if you guys have already seen this, but it’s incredible: http://news.mensactivism.org/node/15197
Favorite parts:
@auggziliary:
I think it was a non sequitur; he was saying “If women were 53% of the electorate, why did they vote for a man?”
Sounds like something a 15-year-old MRA would write.
hometeam: Such a good example of “so close and yet so far.” He’s observed that it’s considered demeaning for men to wear a color associated with women, but not for women to wear a color associated with men. But he misses the obvious conclusion that, if female-coded things have a stigma and male-coded things don’t, that suggests that men are indeed considered more socially valuable or desirable. No, he just concludes that we need to find other ways to demean women.
Wow, hometeampaper, that article is so histrionic. The comment where the dude says that pink in his NFL or NASCAR nearly make him puke really takes the cake, though.
The US Presidential Elections: How The Fuck Do They Work?
Wow. That’s quite a tirade against the color pink.
For the record, I’d happily wear no makeup and/or not shave my legs or armpits and/or wear a gunnysack if it helped find a cure for prostate cancer. Is he saying he’d like me to do those things?
Because I those things usually meant I was an angry feminist.
David – you have used the flying squirrels one before. We had a splendid derail about the squirrels’ anatomy, especially the one on the guy’s shoulder, and iirc talk about how real sugar gliders are cute.
That Shrekem character just outed himself as incredibly ignorant, didn’t he? I’d love to have a time machine and make him live as a woman in various eras.