Support NeoGAF

[Messofanego]

I just watched it. Here's my criticism of the movie itself not looking at the contextual stuff:

There are some interesting points made regarding men's issues, but the documentary is REALLY problematic.

First of all, several of the big issues they bring up have some validity to them, but I think this is where they dupe people a bit. A premise is not a conclusion. They talk a lot about the issues, but rarely about the solution, and when they do, the problem always seem to be feminism. Not all of the issues have valid premises either, there is A LOT of anecdotal evidence. One case in Texas, one case in India etc. That's where it feels really manipulating to me, to give the cases a face so you can personally relate to them and not see the bigger picture.

The use of statistics is also a bit weird. She says custody goes to women 80% of the time and 20% to men. She doesn't really dig into those numbers. Should it be 50-50 because that sounds equal? What if like 75 - 25 is actually what it should be, that 5% were given wrong custody. If that was right, the numbers would still sound "unequal". 80-20 doesn't say anything really.

It also seemed a lot of the guys toned stuff down. You just know they try to hide some of their most shitty views, like a racist trying to not say the N-word even though they really want to. Especially that guy talking about innocent paternity (or what it was called), why the fuck did he use a girl fucking six guys at a party as an example? It just reeked of slut shaming.

An other major issue with the movie: she starts with saying she wanted to learn more about MRAs because of the vile articles they wrote, but she never really bring them up again (she "clears" one at the end, but not the 100 others) and never confronts the MRAs with it! She mentions r/theredpill and MGTOW quickly at the end almost as an afterthought. She makes the MRA seem misunderstood/victims throughout the entire movie. You know, there might be other reasons people protest them other than "feminists won't listen".

From a filmmaking perspective, documentaries like this always have a problem with the "voice of god", the authority of the narrator. It sort of takes the role as a moral compass and feeds you information you are supposed to take as true facts. Pro-tip for watching documentaries: always question the narrator. She say she started as a feminist, but never actually went into what that entailed. What were her original views? Her being a so called feminist seems to be used as a rhetorical tool "look, we changed a feminist's mind". Case in point, she NEVER questions the MRAs directly. Her only reaction was "I'm not sure how I feel, my views are being challenged". She then goes "oh well, I guess I need to interview some feminists now". Why? Aren't you a feminist yourself? Where's your journalistic back bone? Challenge those people! If you can't do it, at least put them in the same room as feminists.

There are also a lot of other problems, but now I just hate this movie too much to write more about it. I have to say though, I did feel my views were being challenged a few times and I learned a little bit, but in general it was pretty bad.

So, not only does the documentary lay the blame of the men's rights issues on feminism, but it doesn't even confront the toxic parts of MRAs? It doesn't even go into how she's a feminist? She never questions the MRAs? Doesn't put a debate between MRAs and feminists?

Wow, this documentary seems completely useless then. Isn't the whole point of the documentary to be balanced and not just focus on one side? Doesn't seem to have to come to fruition.

 

[Snowybreak]

It's true that men have higher successful rates of suicide than women, but it's also true that women try more often. The big difference is guns. Weirdly, none of the people who want to talk about male suicide seem to want to talk about guns.

This reminds me of an NPR piece from a few months back that goes into detail about the methods of suicide, and which methods are most commonly used by men vs. women.

The takeaway I got is that women are more likely to attempt suicide than men, but the reason men are so much more successful in their attempts is because they use more deliberate methods. Hanging, jumping in front of trains/cars, jumping out of buildings, jumping from bridges, and of course, guns. Women generally use more variable, less deliberate methods, Slit veins, overdose, etc., because they cause less pain.

So it then becomes a question of how to weigh this. Because the statement that men commit suicide more often than women is true, but it doesn't take into account the actual attempts, and the prevalence of suicidal thoughts between men and women.

 

[pirateluigi]

So, not only does the documentary lay the blame of the men's rights issues on feminism, but it doesn't even confront the toxic parts of MRAs? It doesn't even go into how she's a feminist? She never questions the MRAs? Doesn't put a debate between MRAs and feminists?

Wow, this documentary seems completely useless then. Isn't the whole point of the documentary to be balanced and not just focus on one side? Doesn't seem to have to come to fruition.

That's not how documentaries really work. They are made to make a specific point. Being balanced rarely accomplishes that purpose. With all documentaries, look at who funded it and why.

 

[Messofanego]

That's not how documentaries really work. They are made to make a specific point. Being balanced rarely accomplishes that purpose. With all documentaries, look at who funded it and why.

I know, it's just what the documentarian's purpose was and she lied, so more of a rhetorical question . I also detailed in previous pages about how much MRAs funded it.

Because those MRA people funded this Kickstarter and are in support of the documentary. They are overjoyed about this film, and donated in droves to get it made because of the name. If it was called something else, there'd be no call to action to make this a funding success.

People like Milo were excited that the film is about her potentially losing her feminism. Cassie Jaye did an interview with him. He brought attention to the film which caused the failing kickstarter to become a success. Along with Mike Cernovich. The MensRights reddit stickied a thread about appeals for donations to the kickstarter. Also, the Red Pill reddit.

Some of them even champion the Sarkeesian Effect, which well...I'll just let hbomberguy take it from here.

http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2...ing-at-a-place-and-another-place-pretty-soon/

http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2015/10/28/an-open-letter-to-cassie-jaye-director-of-the-red-pill/

 

[Ghost Rider]

So often I read threads on Neogaf and don't post because I feel guilty if I don't respond to someone else's response to my post. I apologize in advance to anyone if I miss a ham ento respond; I tend to be busy with teaching and family and forget to check past threads.

Saying men commit suicide more than women is a game of semantics. As Besada and others have said, it would be more accurately stated that men have higher rates of successful (ugh that sounds awful) suicide attempts than women. And as several posters have mentioned, it is because men typically choose more lethal means of suicide than woman-- guns, jumping from bridges/buildings, hangings. Women have higher rates of attempted suicide but because they tend to choose methods that are less instantly lethal such as ingesting mass quantities of pills.

As for the abuse that men suffer, that tends to go unreported due to the stigma attached to men who report it. This is especially true for men who are victims of sexual abuse. Due to the fear of being labeled or perceived as weak, or in cases of homophobia, labeled as homosexual, many men don't report the abuses so it is hard to get actual numbers of abuse.

Source--ex-wife studied this extensively and wrote several research papers on it while working on her MS at Columbia U in Clinical Social Work and Counseling. I helped her with the research and editing. She specializes in providing therapy for victims of domestic violence.

 

[Addi]

So, not only does the documentary lay the blame of the men's rights issues on feminism, but it doesn't even confront the toxic parts of MRAs? It doesn't even go into how she's a feminist? She never questions the MRAs? Doesn't put a debate between MRAs and feminists?

Wow, this documentary seems completely useless then. Isn't the whole point of the documentary to be balanced and not just focus on one side? Doesn't seem to have to come to fruition.

She goes into how she became a feminist (only being given casted as the dumb blond girl and how producer harassed her etc.), but she never really explains her original views and ideology, only that it's feminist. "When I hear these men talk about these issues I knew nothing about, I sort of get this gut reaction: "but what about women?" and I realise how it must feel for them when they listen to feminist issues "what about us men?"" It's "both sides" trash...

To be fair, a documentary doens't need to be "balanced", it can be used only to show views you didn't know existed or a world you knew nothing about. I just saw a documentary about rednecks in Louisiana that was interesting, the difference was that it was objective and observatory. Here she is too involved and it's way too subjective.

 

[Anton Sugar]

I bet Cassie Jaye knitted like seven pink pussy hats for the Women's March but then stayed home reading articles about Ivanka Trump's "progressive agenda" instead of marching for rights for LGBT/trans folk, refugees/immigrants, etc.

 

[Moff]

I bet Cassie Jaye knitted like seven pink pussy hats for the Women's March but then stayed home reading articles about Ivanka Trump's "progressive agenda" instead of marching for rights for LGBT/trans folk, refugees/immigrants, etc.

She did more than just march there, her last documentary was about gay marriage. I understand the reflex to try to discredit her, even if it's just silly speculation about her bring a hateful bigot, but her past work really speaks for itself. Which was one of the reasons I watched this one.

 

[Messofanego]

So often I read threads on Neogaf and don't post because I feel guilty if I don't respond to someone else's response to my post. I apologize in advance to anyone if I miss a ham ento respond; I tend to be busy with teaching and family and forget to check past threads.

Saying men commit suicide more than women is a game of semantics. As Besada and others have said, it would be more accurately stated that men have higher rates of successful (ugh that sounds awful) suicide attempts than women. And as several posters have mentioned, it is because men typically choose more lethal means of suicide than woman-- guns, jumping from bridges/buildings, hangings. Women have higher rates of attempted suicide but because they tend to choose methods that are less instantly lethal such as ingesting mass quantities of pills.

As for the abuse that men suffer, that tends to go unreported due to the stigma attached to men who report it. This is especially true for men who are victims of sexual abuse. Due to the fear of being labeled or perceived as weak, or in cases of homophobia, labeled as homosexual, many men don't report the abuses so it is hard to get actual numbers of abuse.

Source--ex-wife studied this extensively and wrote several research papers on it while working on her MS at Columbia U in Clinical Social Work and Counseling. I helped her with the research and editing. She specializes in providing therapy for victims of domestic violence.

And often it's the men who go after men who open up about being abused or raped.

 

[Sianos]

It is quite demonstrative that there hasn't been any literature posted in this thread written by prominent red pill folks, but they instead are being spoken of in indirect and theoretical terms.

Kind of casts some shade upon a body of work when it's defended as being actually not so bad, yet you're still not supposed to read what it says. Implies that it really is that bad. And when you do look, it actually is that bad. And yeah, you were told by well-meaning people not to read it because it is indeed that bad. But if no one goes dumpster diving, then less-well-meaning people will try and sell you that the trash is actually perfectly sanitary, but still don't look at it.

That's the problem with "don't look at the comments" mindset applied to swaths of the internet - if you don't, then other people will be able to downplay what they entail. People have been ignoring the festering in the dark enlightenment corner of the internet for far too long, and now it is metastasizing.

The Red Pill and related schools of thought are misogynistic, disingenuous, and not constructive to men's issues as a whole.

I'm sure a thread about actual men's issues (being forced to suppress emotions, lacking emotional support, losing friends as they age out of adolescence, among many other things) would be welcomed with positivity and sympathy around here.

This would be very much appreciated.

It is a damn shame that the groups that have hijacked the Men's Rights Activist label and other adjacent semantic handles promote the same social attitudes that prevent men from expressing their feelings and letting down their guard.

 

[Anton Sugar]

She did more than just march there, her last documentary was about gay marriage. I understand the reflex to try to discredit her, even if it's just silly speculation about her bring a hateful bigot, but her past work really speaks for itself. Which was one of the reasons I watched this one.

I don't think she's a bigot, but there's a dumpster fire in here. I mean, saying shit like this:

"We weren't finding executive producers who wanted to take a balanced approach, we found people who wanted to make a feminist film," she told the website Breitbart. "I started to see the bias towards women's films and against men's. There are no categories for men's films [when applying for grants], though there are several for women and minorities. I submitted the film to human rights categories, and was rejected by all of them."

The persecution complex is real. Hey, maybe no one wanted to be involved in an MRA doc called "The Red Pill" for very obvious reasons? The title alone poisons the well for *anyone* willing to do a Google search.

Complaining about how there are grants for women but none for men--what? Does she even understand what she's complaining about?

Beyond the association with deplorable human beings that she worked directly with to produce this propaganda (note: I recognize that many documentaries have agendas--that's not what this is) piece, a lot of her perspective reeks of White Feminism. She started on her path as a feminist because she was unfairly judged based on her good looks and wasn't taken seriously. I have to wonder how far her development took her beyond these core tenets of capitalist-centric feminism ("I deserve the same power as men").

From everything I've read and seen, she may be a feminist but she has an *extremely* narrow definition of what a feminist is.

I mean, this is just mind-boggling:

What's intriguing here is that these very commonly-known facts — that men have lower life expectancies, are encouraged to take life-threatening jobs, and are under-valued as caretakers by a society that expects them to provide material goods for their families— were actually surprising to a self-described feminist such as Jaye.
And it's not just that these facts are well-known. It's that the legacy of feminism is why men's issues have been studied in the first place.
Feminism is, in theory anyway, about the relationships between women and other genders. It should be surprising that a self-described feminist could know so little about men.

I'm not about to argue away someone's identity as a feminist, because that's not my place, but yup, some HUGE headscratchers in here from a "lifelong feminist" as she is described.

And SHIT, she still has that fucking scam-Cannes award listed on her page?

I'm really tempted to watch/listen to her interview with Sargon of Akkad, though.

 

[Big Nikus]

Oh yeah I remember all the fascists and neo-nazis on the HeWillNotDivideUs livestream constantly telling people to watch this documentary. I'm sure it's great ! Yeah !

 

[xandaca]

In case anyone here genuinely wants to have reasonable, solutions-based discussions about inequalities faced by men without the anti-feminist blame game, this is by far the best place I've found:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensLib/

The mods are excellent at weeding out the anti-women and unconstructive stuff while allowing different point of view to be heard.

(As for the documentary, haven't seen it and probably won't. I'm interesting in seeing every point of view on these issues, but prefer doing the work myself as documentaries tend to have a bias one way or the other, which is rarely helpful for understanding the complexities of the issues.)

 

[L Thammy]

Immediately knew after seeing this thread that some of my more naive friends would take this without question, and yep. I hope this simply put more attention on real gender inequality concerns instead of luring people to communities who seek to benefit from gender inequality.

I'm a little confused about the Cannes logo; what's going on there? Is it just a logo for an award they didn't win?

 

[Anton Sugar]

Immediately knew after seeing this thread that some of my more naive friends would take this without question, and yep. I hope this simply put more attention on real gender inequality concerns instead of luring people to communities who seek to benefit from gender inequality.

I'm a little confused about the Cannes logo; what's going on there? Is it just a logo for an award they didn't win?

It's a film festival that is in no way affiliated with the actual Cannes Film Festival. Instead, the Cannes Independent Film Festival (where she got her award) appears, at best, to simply be using the Cannes name for confusion, profit, and prestige. At worst, it was a scam. It's not even around anymore.

As of 2015, this event appears to be defunct. In our opinion the Cannes Independent Film Festival (CIFF) was a scam. It was not connected to the Festival de Cannes, Marche du Film, or any other official festival organisation. It was a coat-tails event, run from the UK, which sought to capitalise on the prestige associated with the city's name and famous festival.

Although CIFF was a real event, we questioned its legitimacy in the past and continue to believe that there was little or no value to filmmakers in submitting a film. Despite information to the contrary on the CIFF website, the festival had zero presence in Cannes for the years it claims to have operated, falsely described itself as an official part of the Marche du Film (2010), and in 2012 claimed links to the Marche du Film via a company (The Independent Festival Film Company) which was not registered for the event and had zero footprint anywhere on the web beyond the CIFF site.

It remains our belief that CIFF was one of a growing number of operations which are promoted as film festivals but are primarily intended to generate revenue via submission fees. These 'events' attach themselves to prestigious locations and accept submissions for up to a year in advance, making use of the sliding scale of fees offered via Withoutabox to maximise their revenues. Most offer some form of award structure, but in almost all cases, the awards are subject to an opaque judging criteria and it is difficult to independently verify whether awards are actually received by filmmakers or indeed, whether the winning films even exist.

I'm an independent filmmaker and I would be straight up mortified to be associated with a scam award, let alone still proudly promote it.

 

[proto]

How are women to blame for male circumcisions? Are American women holding scissors and snipping babies the moment they are born?

I don't think this part of the movie was supposed to oppose feminism specifically. It was kind of tangentially thrown in and honestly I think it's just kind of one of those things parents do without thinking about it.

 

[adamy]

Didn't you learn in school that you shouldn't use abbreviations before defining them?

What the fuck does MRA stand for?

 

[hey_monkey]

I don't think she's a bigot, but there's a dumpster fire in here. I mean, saying shit like this:



The persecution complex is real. Hey, maybe no one wanted to be involved in an MRA doc called "The Red Pill" for very obvious reasons? The title alone poisons the well for *anyone* willing to do a Google search.

Complaining about how there are grants for women but none for men--what? Does she even understand what she's complaining about?

Beyond the association with deplorable human beings that she worked directly with to produce this propaganda (note: I recognize that many documentaries have agendas--that's not what this is) piece, a lot of her perspective reeks of White Feminism. She started on her path as a feminist because she was unfairly judged based on her good looks and wasn't taken seriously. I have to wonder how far her development took her beyond these core tenets of capitalist-centric feminism ("I deserve the same power as men").

From everything I've read and seen, she may be a feminist but she has an *extremely* narrow definition of what a feminist is.

I mean, this is just mind-boggling:



I'm not about to argue away someone's identity as a feminist, because that's not my place, but yup, some HUGE headscratchers in here from a "lifelong feminist" as she is described.

And SHIT, she still has that fucking scam-Cannes award listed on her page?

I'm really tempted to watch/listen to her interview with Sargon of Akkad, though.

I will argue that it's not responsible feminism, certainly. How can you advocate for dismantling patriarchal structures if you don't understand them? Short answer: you can't. And the central issues here are patriarchal structures; that's the overlap between feminism and MRAs, if we want to talk about overlap. Men get overlooked and even mistreated in custody cases because women are seen as caregivers and men who want custody aren't accepted as "real" men or are decried in other ways. That's not due to feminism; that's masculine, patriarchal structures.

I understand her previous work has accolades. This, however, is ill-researched, slanted, nonsense absolutely influenced by... if not her backers, something. There were too many opportunities to dig deeper that were passed up. I watched part of it because I research digital communities but I put it aside for later because it's just shoddy work from a research perspective, for reasons already listed in the thread.

Didn't you learn in school that you shouldn't use abbreviations before defining them?

What the fuck does MRA stand for?

Mens' Rights Activists.

 

[AlimNassor]

Men have plenty of issues. MRAs have some legit points but, the whole movement is a broken mess designed to fight feminism instead of actually working together. Pathetic.

TRPs are a sad lot that get off to feeling "superior" over everyone.

 

[Messofanego]

Didn't you learn in school that you shouldn't use abbreviations before defining them?

What the fuck does MRA stand for?

Magnetic Resonance Angiography

 

[Oersted]

The feminist Cassie Jaye, who is an award winning documentary creator, is mostly known for her film "Daddy I do", about purity balls and other films about women's and LGBT rights.

My very first thought was with that description, she is anything but a feminist.

 

[hey_monkey]

I will say the reliance on FEMINIST! in descriptions of her makes me chuckle a bit. It's being leaned on a bit hard, eh? I focus on feminist scholarship and research methods and produce all sorts of feminist content, but the idea of constantly referring to myself, and having others refer to me, as THE FEMINIST [hey_monkey] is just kind of silly. I understand the aim here. Still silly.

 

[EatinOlives]

"It's about ethics in game journalism: the movie"

Sounds like you took the bait hook, line, and sinker, OP.

 

[Alcotholic]

In case anyone here genuinely wants to have reasonable, solutions-based discussions about inequalities faced by men without the anti-feminist blame game, this is by far the best place I've found:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensLib/

The mods are excellent at weeding out the anti-women and unconstructive stuff while allowing different point of view to be heard.

(As for the documentary, haven't seen it and probably won't. I'm interesting in seeing every point of view on these issues, but prefer doing the work myself as documentaries tend to have a bias one way or the other, which is rarely helpful for understanding the complexities of the issues.)

Piggy backing off this post, the subreddit posted an interesting piece from Time:
Women are Sexist Too

I never thought about sexism at home, but I've seen these instances before. Don't want to derail the thread, but I thought it was a good read.

 

[Haly]

I will say the reliance on FEMINIST! in descriptions of her makes me chuckle a bit. It's being leaned on a bit hard, eh? I focus on feminist scholarship and research methods and produce all sorts of feminist content, but the idea of constantly referring to myself, and having others refer to me, as THE FEMINIST [hey_monkey] is just kind of silly. I understand the aim here. Still silly.

Time to change your name to hey_feminist.

 

[hey_monkey]

Time to change your name to hey_feminist.

Oh jesus no, I'll stay a monkey, thanks. I can't imagine a scenario on a forum, even this one, in which that would end well.

 

[SomTervo]

I agree with your post. After reading OP the first thought I had was "Well if they are dismissive about men issues then they aren't feminists since feminism is equal treatment for all."

Feminism would support men talking about their mental health and not having them feel weak because they need to seek professional help. Not say, "Well women have it worst."

I'll have to find time to watch the documentary--hopefully this weekend.

This. I watched a few breakdowns of this documentary and while it's great to discuss and indulge in men's issues, her selection of feminist pundits reeks of second wave feminism that is pretty extreme and very long of tooth. Fourth wave feminism is far more tolerant and level headed.

Every feminist friend of mine would definitely be supportive of the issues she is putting forth.
Indeed, I agree they're issues.

But the fact is structural sexism harms everyone of every sex/gender. That's a core feminist tenet. It's still feminism even if it's dealing with men's roles and prejudice around men.

I don't think she's a bigot, but there's a dumpster fire in here. I mean, saying shit like this:



The persecution complex is real. Hey, maybe no one wanted to be involved in an MRA doc called "The Red Pill" for very obvious reasons? The title alone poisons the well for *anyone* willing to do a Google search.

Complaining about how there are grants for women but none for men--what? Does she even understand what she's complaining about?

Beyond the association with deplorable human beings that she worked directly with to produce this propaganda (note: I recognize that many documentaries have agendas--that's not what this is) piece, a lot of her perspective reeks of White Feminism. She started on her path as a feminist because she was unfairly judged based on her good looks and wasn't taken seriously. I have to wonder how far her development took her beyond these core tenets of capitalist-centric feminism ("I deserve the same power as men").

From everything I've read and seen, she may be a feminist but she has an *extremely* narrow definition of what a feminist is.

I mean, this is just mind-boggling:



I'm not about to argue away someone's identity as a feminist, because that's not my place, but yup, some HUGE headscratchers in here from a "lifelong feminist" as she is described.

And SHIT, she still has that fucking scam-Cannes award listed on her page?

I'm really tempted to watch/listen to her interview with Sargon of Akkad, though.

Hmm. Lots of good points. Esp "no grants for films about men's issues" or w/e. Classic "every day is men's film day" argument.

 

[KonradLaw]

Men have plenty of issues. MRAs have some legit points but, the whole movement is a broken mess designed to fight feminism instead of actually working together. Pathetic.

TRPs are a sad lot that get off to feeling "superior" over everyone.

I think there's some value to be found in Red Pill, more as a gateway to general manosphere than the actual subreddit that's simply cesspool. Men are kind of lost these days and feminism and more progressive mainstream really holds no answers to that. You just need to be able to look at things critically and realize a lot of TRP isn't advice from somebody successful, but a revenge for being miserable and blaming women for that instead of taking responsibility for your own life.

Plus I think a lot of outright misogyny is at least partially a tool to keep women out of those communities, which can be beneficial, even if they're often go overboard with it. Men do need spaces for themselves where there are no women around.

 

[spineduke]

Again, I read liberal, feminist newspapers. I read the Guardian daily. You'll see discussion of toxic masculinity by feminists all the time, but you will never see discussion of the issues I raised. That's what I meant. You just don't see much feminist discourse on the custody gap, the suicide gap, the life expectancy gap.

I'm not following, why should people who are fighting for womens rights be talking about these male issues?

 

[FiggyCal]

I'm not following, why should people who are fighting for womens rights be talking about these male issues?

I think many people who identify as feminist say that the title really only means that both sexes should be equal, and yet there are a lot of male problems that they [many of those who identify as feminists] don't seem to address -- as if men were already equal to women in these regards or that they are non-issues altogether.

 

[KonradLaw]

I'm not following, why should people who are fighting for womens rights be talking about these male issues?

Well. some feminist like to pretend the movement is about equality, instead of just fighting for womens rights.Which is a bit silly, because it wouldn't be anywhere near as effective if that was the case. It's just sad men's rights issues got monopolized by MRAs. The most sensible groups seem to be focused on one issue (like fathers' rights). It gets shitstormy when they try to create one big movement encompasing all men's issues.

 

[Corpekata]

I'm not following, why should people who are fighting for womens rights be talking about these male issues?

Not only that, he misses that the point of this like "toxic masculinity" DOES tie into things like suicide and the custody gap. The ridiculous idea that men aren't or should not be caregivers or emotional are both things discussions of that topic are about and feeds into both of those issues

I have no clue what he thinks a feminist dissertation on life expectancy is supposed to be about though.

 

[hey_monkey]

Not only that, he misses that the point of this like "toxic masculinity" DOES tie into things like suicide and the custody gap. The ridiculous idea that men aren't or should not be caregivers or emotional are both things discussions of that topic are about and feeds into both of those issues

I have no clue what he thinks a feminist dissertation on life expectancy is supposed to be about though.

Yep. And this stuff has been addressed in the thread. After a bit, it starts to look like people just don't want to see it. The language differs - toxic masculinity is the hip current term - but patriarchal structures, dominant systems, whatever you want to call them, that is what feminism evolves to address. It doesn't just affect women.

 

[Alienous]

I haven't seen the documentary but I've never truly believed the 'feminism is about equality' argument. It feels like a platitude that isn't backed by action. For instance, there's no way I can make sense of the gender pay gap being the key feminist issue of our time when issues like the male suicide disparity are so prevalent. Life is far more important value than money.

In truth I don't think feminism has to be concerned with equality. It should be focused on the betterment of issues impacting women, as that seems to be the spirit in which it was popularized. And a counter-balance would be necessary, but 'Mens Rights' seems like it's been hijacked by toxic sentiment towards women - the connotation I have for 'the red pill' is profoundly woman-hating.

Hopefully the documentary could inform that viewpoint - I'll have to find the time to watch it.

 

[SomTervo]

Well. some feminist like to pretend the movement is about equality, instead of just fighting for womens rights.Which is a bit silly, because it wouldn't be anywhere near as effective if that was the case. It's just sad men's rights issues got monopolized by MRAs. The most sensible groups seem to be focused on one issue (like fathers' rights). It gets shitstormy when they try to create one big movement encompasing all men's issues.

It's not "silly". Wtf.

Unequal representation of women means unequal representation of MEN, too. Feminism's cause is good for men. It wants to put both feet on the same footing. Weight men bear more should be shouldered equally.

 

[KonradLaw]

It's not "silly". Wtf.

Unequal representation of women means unequal representation of MEN, too. Feminism's cause is good for men. It wants to put both feet on the same footing. Weight men bear more should be shouldered equally.

No. That's not true. Feminism is only concenrned about raising woman's situation in places where they are disadvantages. It doesn't do anything to promote equality in places where women are better off.

If feminism would really be about equality it would change it's name long ago. Now, of course, plenty of feminism progress has been beneficial to men too, but more as a pleseant side effect that targeted goal.

 

[SomTervo]

I haven't seen the documentary but I've never truly believed the 'feminism is about equality' argument. It feels like a platitude that isn't backed by action. For instance, there's no way I can make sense of the gender pay gap being the key feminist issue of our time when issues like the male suicide disparity are so prevalent. Life is far more important value than money.

In truth I don't think feminism has to be concerned with equality. It should be focused on the betterment of issues impacting women, as that seems to be the spirit in which it was popularized. And a counter-balance would be necessary, but 'Mens Rights' seems like it's been hijacked by toxic sentiment towards women - the connotation I have for 'the red pill' is profoundly woman-hating.

Hopefully the documentary could inform that viewpoint - I'll have to find the time to watch it.

You're misunderstanding the context in which feminism operates. It's a context in which structural sexism (biased expectations put on both sexes) negatively impacts women and men. In very different but interlocked ways. Eg men being "encouraged to take more dangerous jobs". How do you fix that? Encourage women to take more of those jobs. (Hint: it's already happening in the uk and it works.)

No. That's not true. Feminism is only concenrned about raising woman's situation in places where they are disadvantages. It doesn't do anything to promote equality in places where women are better off.

If feminism would really be about equality it would change it's name long ago. Now, of course, plenty of feminism progress has been beneficial to men too, but more as a pleseant side effect that targeted goal.

You're defining first and second wave feminism (1920s-1970s). Feminism today has grown to become a body of philosophical and social theories that link to the entire gendered context of the world we live in.

It doesn't need to change its name to make that true.

 

[SoulUnison]

So I'm currently about halfway through the documentary, and I might have to pick up the rest tomorrow since it's almost 2 AM here, but... Does this make a massive shift in tone or methodology in the latter half?

All I'm seeing so far is an extremely polished and manicured image of "MRAs" that doesn't at all match up with the majority of individuals that have self-labelled themselves as "MRAs."

There are so many legitimate gender issues where legal statuses and decisions aren't made fairly and blindly of the subjects gender, but, at the same time, what I've mostly seen of MRAs is guys getting upset about real but often metaphorical situations that have never even remotely affected them while also whining about "liberals" and "virtue signaling."

I'm just seeing a really sanitized vision of a movement that I'm watching even close friends appropriate into Trump's barely-obfuscated Muslim ban and views like "The straight white male is under attack!" And, even when I try to get in and support friends and acquaintances on "MRA" issues I believe are legit, I see them being arbitrarily exclusionary and discriminatory. For instance, MRAs seem to have a huge sticking point over child custody, adoption, etc., but when I try to frame those issues by my own lens, as a gay man, I get a ton of "Whoa, let's keep 'Men's Rights' and 'Gay Men's Rights' separate, ok?" I once tried to participate in discussion on the official "MRA" subreddit and they left NO misunderstandings that my opinion wasn't welcome, as I wasn't the "kind of 'man'" they were advocating for.

It's really hard to be swayed by this documentary's presentation of reasonable and cherry-picked men when all the MRAs I seem to run into are hateful, reactionary opportunists.
I'm even watching friends I've had for a decade or more slip down the "straight white Christian male is the most oppressed group on this planet" hole, and I just don't know what to do about it.

A lot of it just feels like people who have never had any real difficulty or adversity in life inventing an obstacle they can congratulate themselves for overcoming and/or a battle they can never actually win so they can pat themselves on the back for being the brave, tireless underdogs.

"Men's Rights" is ruined at this point. The name itself is a complete joke.
If they want to do any meaningful work they need to separate the issues down to their base components and stop trying to cover them with an umbrella term like "Men's Rights."
How about a movement specifically about gender equality in criminal justice rulings?
How about a movement about equality in child custody? (Keeping in mind that there are actual differences in gender roles that MRAs are even themselves pointing out, and it's not as cut and dry as putting the kids where they "feel best."

Trying to cram all these social issues under a label that's already been ruined by its supporters is just creating an Oroborous of ineffectual whining.

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

I am involved in mental health, on this board and outside.

The mental health community knows the complexities of mental health and masculinity.

MRAs just disguise this as an affront to whatever "feminism" means to them. Which is a fucking cartoon of reality.

One that never existed.

You want to combat male suicide? You would support the feminist movements, not the other way around.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

And a counter-balance would be necessary, but 'Mens Rights' seems like it's been hijacked by toxic sentiment towards women - the connotation I have for 'the red pill' is profoundly woman-hating.

"Men's Rights" wasn't hijacked. It was formed out of a split in a larger Men's Liberation Movement, by people unsatisfied with feminism. It exists as a backlash to feminism. It has always taken umbrage when women gain rights, and has always been tainted with sexism.

No. That's not true. Feminism is only concenrned about raising woman's situation in places where they are disadvantages. It doesn't do anything to promote equality in places where women are better off.

Absolutely false. There are literally other men's groups using feminism to confront issues men face.

 

[DevilFox]

I had no doubt some gaffers would be against this documentary simply based on the name or its goal. Sad.
Given that I'm admittedly still new to this stuff, and I'm trying to read as much as I can these days, I suggest everyone to watch it, even (especially) those who label themself as feminists. MRA isn't trying to downplay Feminism, it never did as far as I know. If anything, it's the opposite. MRA is only trying to bring attention to a number of men issues that nobody seems to care for, God knows why.
Sure, there's an argument to be made about the funding but I'd say the results is pretty good regardless of that. The goal here was to increase awareness, after all. Side note: MRA wouldn't exist if Feminism did its job in this regard.
You can either agree or not with their cause, I only agree on some points, but to not even challenge your view is not a sign of maturity. It's the picture of a kid who covers his ears and shout "blablabla". What happened in Australia is pathetic, yet some people are perfectly fine with it because "yeah fuck these whiners, all they want is to destroy women".. please.
In my humble opinion, the more these issues get ignored, the bigger MGTOW becomes. And while I'm not very informed on this "social group", I don't like what I've read as it seems to be a group of men who just said "fuck it I'm going to do as I goddamn please". That attitude ain't going to help anyone.

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

I had no doubt some gaffers would be against this documentary simply based on the name or its goal. Sad.
I suggest everyone to watch it, even (especially) those who label themself as feminists. MRA isn't trying to downplay Feminism, it never did as far as I know. If anything, it's the opposite. MRA is only trying to bring attention to a number of men issues that nobody seems to care for, God knows why.
Sure, there's an argument to be made about the funding but I'd say the results is pretty good regardless of that. The goal here was to increase awareness, after all. Side note: MRA wouldn't exist if Feminism did its job in this regard.
You can either agree or not with their cause, I only agree on some points, but to not even challenge your view is not a sign of maturity. It's the picture of a kid who covers his ears and shout "blablabla". What happened in Australia is pathetic, yet some people are perfectly fine with it because "yeah fuck these whiners, all they want is to destroy women".. please.
In my humble opinion, the more these issues get ignored, the bigger MGTOW becomes. And while I'm not very informed on this "social group", I don't like what I've read as it seems to be a group of men who just said "fuck it I'm going to do as I goddamn please". That attitude ain't going to help anyone.

Oh please. Take a look at the people interviewied.

 

[Alienous]

"Men's Rights" wasn't hijacked. It was formed out of a split in a larger Men's Liberation Movement, by people unsatisfied with feminism. It exists as a backlash to feminism. It has always taken umbrage when women gain rights, and has always been tainted with sexism.

Yeah, 'hijacked' wasn't the right word, not sure why I used it. 'Based on' is better.

 

[hey_monkey]

Who and where are the people that don't care about these issues?

 

[TBiddy]

I've yet been unable to see the movie, but I definitely plan to. I never understood the whole "we don't agree, so we must shut it down" mentality. It's healthy to get your world views challenged once in a while. Otherwise you just get stuck in an echo-chamber, which isn't healthy in anyway.

 

[SoulUnison]

Who and where are the people that don't care about these issues?

Ironically, I only "care" about these issues because a couple of my friends have gone "extremist" about them gradually over the last year or so, and I'm sitting here thinking: "I wish I could have my sane, reasonable friend back. How do I do that?"
I'm watching friends retreat into echo chambers where they're only interested in content and relationships that enforce their victimized worldviews, and it's sad.

I can only take so much "white Christian males are the most oppressed group on this planet" before I lose all respect for that individual's ability to cultivate empathy or think even an inch outside of themselves.

EDIT: Like, how am I supposed to parse all the complaints that "men are 99% of combat fatalities in military service," when the same person using that statistic to defend their position is the first person who'll enthusiastically start a conversation on how "women are physically weaker and unsuited to combat service and it's just science and women need to accept that."
What am I supposed to think of someone who considered men's participation in the military a massive injustice while also refusing to accept even the hypothetical "weakening" of the military due to gender inequality?

I just see these people and I see "broken" individuals who desperately want everything to be "easy."

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I had no doubt some gaffers would be against this documentary simply based on the name or its goal. Sad.
Given that I'm admittedly still new to this stuff, and I'm trying to read as much as I can these days, I suggest everyone to watch it, even (especially) those who label themself as feminists. MRA isn't trying to downplay Feminism, it never did as far as I know. If anything, it's the opposite. MRA is only trying to bring attention to a number of men issues that nobody seems to care for, God knows why.
Sure, there's an argument to be made about the funding but I'd say the results is pretty good regardless of that. The goal here was to increase awareness, after all. Side note: MRA wouldn't exist if Feminism did its job in this regard.
You can either agree or not with their cause, I only agree on some points, but to not even challenge your view is not a sign of maturity. It's the picture of a kid who covers his ears and shout "blablabla". What happened in Australia is pathetic, yet some people are perfectly fine with it because "yeah fuck these whiners, all they want is to destroy women".. please.
In my humble opinion, the more these issues get ignored, the bigger MGTOW becomes. And while I'm not very informed on this "social group", I don't like what I've read as it seems to be a group of men who just said "fuck it I'm going to do as I goddamn please". That attitude ain't going to help anyone.

There's too much wrong in this post to even begin to address it. I'll just say to actually go read the history of the 'Men's Rights Movement' and why it exists rather than invest in an obvious propaganda piece.

 

[hey_monkey]

People: Y'all should pay attention. This stuff is important and no one but the non-shitty MRAs are talking about it.
Other People: Here are other people talking about it. Here's how. Here's what they say.
People: SERIOUSLY, LITERALLY NO ONE AT ALL IS TALKING ABOUT THIS STUFF.

 

[SeanTSC]

MRA/Red Pill shit is just another disgusting Alt-Right hate-branch. They also massively overlap with GamerGate. Blows my mind that people actually buy into the notion that they're actually anything else.

 

[A Fish Aficionado]

I've yet been unable to see the movie, but I definitely plan to. I never understood the whole "we don't agree, so we must shut it down" mentality. It's healthy to get your world views challenged once in a while. Otherwise you just get stuck in an echo-chamber, which isn't healthy in anyway.

To quote the brilliant Richard Feynman
"If it disagrees with experiment; it is wrong."

https://youtu.be/0KmimDq4cSU