Male Privilege

[boston bean]

Has America fully expunged itself from all forms of male privilege in society?

74 votes, 5 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	10 (14%)
	No
	64 (86%)
	5 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[MissHoneychurch]

1. I don't think any Western society is that far yet

Women have come a long way the last 100 years. But still the men are the ones who do the politics (mostly) and are still being paid more than women for the same job (unless you work for the public and are paid by taxes).

And unfortunately in the U.S. certain circles try to turn back the time and take away those hard fought for rights women have these days.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

20. It's easy to say "Western Society" but what about Middle Eastern, African and Asian societies?

Honest question.

DISCLAIMER -- I do not, by any means, claim to know these other societies apart from briefly touching upon them in college. I have not yet had the opportunity to travel internationally. I'm no sociologist.

That being said, do women in these societies enjoy political, social and economic opportunities as much as we do in "Western societies?"

That's not to say -- lest any hastily jump to the wrong conclusion -- that I deny gender inequality in Western society or suggest that women in Western society not fight that inequality just because they might have it worse. That's not what I'm suggesting at all but I think inequality in Western society is more a legacy rather than an active policy. There are those who cling to biases for their own comfort and profit but those types will always exist everywhere. However, those types are also the subject of ridicule by our society as a common whole. No one would dare campaign for the repeal of suffrage because they would be scoffed out of the public forum. I think the gains made make the final push for full equality all the more important but on that same note Western society -- I believe -- has much to offer the world when it comes to combating misogyny and inequality.

[seabeyond]

23. agreed. we do have much to offer the world in combating misogyny and inequality.

but, this is where i have an issue with this. years ago talking to my father in law about a sexist issue he brought up (he brings them up regularly with our 18 yr marriage), when i argued with him, he smugly concludes, i should appreciate living in the u.s. because we have had so many gains. why.... look at how other countries treat women.

probably the first time, certainly not the last time, i have heard that argument.

i am not talking about other countries. i am talking about right here in the u.s. and the issue is not dismissed, diminished or won because of the "worse" that is happening elsewhere.

if we want to continue to be an excellent example for the rest of the world, we do not sit on our haunches waiting for the rest of the world to catch up before we are allowed to address the issue

that argument is used often. and it fails in every manner.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

26. It's a danger on many topics

Poverty -- "We have the richest poor"

Yeah, but we should do better.

Pollution -- "Those other countries are in even worse shape."

OK, but let's stop poisoning ourselves.

Politics -- "At least we don't have coups."

Fine, but could you please peel the "I punch hippies" sticker off your car bumper?


The day you stop reaching higher is the day you start sinking lower.

[seabeyond]

30. this is exactly where i go when i hear that argument. in just about everything in life.

do i appreciate, am proud, recognize all we accomplish in this nation? yup. but, having come this far, to watch us take steps backward, or watch a concerted effort to dominate and control girls/women in other areas makes me even more mad.

looking at a religious sense. for a person who knows it is a sin, to sin (to me), is much worse than the person who is ignorant of the sin.

for a person to promote misogyny knowing what it is, is much worse, than those in other areas that has not reached our enlightenment.

for me, to see the u.s. still work strong on creating misogyny is much worse than countries that have not gotten to where we are. to KNOW it is wrong. to be educated in the bullshit. to have evidence it is bigotry.

[MissHoneychurch]

28. I did on purpose wrote "Western Society"

as the question was about the U.S. I also thought about Germany and Europe.

Maybe it more depends if a society is patriarchal or matriarchal. And the Western society is definitiely patriarchal.

[redqueen]

2. I noticed that the pay gap has been mentioned.

*waits for the usual MRA talking points about the wage gap*

(Yes, MRA talking points, just like "arguments" against global warming are most often right wing talking points.)

[hifiguy]

61. Alerted.

Your constant claims that "MRA talking points" are posted on DU are a TOS violation. It is a flat out lie.

[stevenleser]

70. Unless you really explained your alert well, chances are it will not be successful

Most people don't understand what an MRA or MRA talking point is and don't realize that what she essentially did was equivalent to saying DUers are using KKK or Neo-Nazi talking points.

[seabeyond]

72. a lot of people make sexist comments. that does not make them either sexist or misogynist. bogus

interpretation on your part.

[Scout]

106. apparently, DU community disagrees with you. n/t

[hifiguy]

107. Whatever. A lot of pretty nasty things are allowed

to stand. This is just another of them. I am not a big advocate of alerts unless it is a RW troll or something clearly over the line - like lying about other DUers. But my faith in the jury system here is not great.

[Marrah_G]

134. Red- could you explain what MRA is and what the talking points are

Until this group of posts today, I had not heard of it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

144. MRA = Mens Rights Advocacy (or something like that) ...

Talking Points:

"Poor, poor, put upon men" arguments that are, IHMO, the same as the "reverse Discrimination" arguments.

[Marrah_G]

162. thanks

I liked the quote from you down thread in seabeyond's thread. Sometimes it takes having someone able to explain things in just the right way to make things clearer.

[1StrongBlackMan]

167. Not a problem ...

I suspect that those that WANT to understand, have no problem understanding ... because they read TO understand; not to create a counter-argument.

[redqueen]

174. Oh so very well said.

Also, Google is very helpful for those who read things they want to know more about.

Salon had an excellent piece a while back about how these groups were gaining mainstream acceptance and influencing laws. Scary stuff really.

And here we are years later, unable to pass VAWA. So... effective and scary.

[Major Nikon]

222. Here's an expanded explanation of what's involved

The SPLC has designated some MRA organizations as hate groups. The list is here:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/misogyny-the-sites

Most of these sites appear to be blogs ran by one person or very small groups with an agenda of hate. Now I don't know exactly what's in those sites because I'm not going to them. From the SPLC's description, it's some pretty vile misogynistic garbage which in some cases appear to even advocate for the murder of women.

Redqueen loosely uses the term "MRA" to define anyone who dares challenge radical feminist "theory", and lumps them into the same group that the SPLC defined, which of course is quite sexist but that doesn't seem to slow her down much. So in other words, if you dare post a peer reviewed study which disputes the false assertion that ALL of the gender pay gap is due to discrimination, you are now posting "MRA" talking points, because as we all know due to the "patriarchy" it would be impossible for all of the gender pay gap not to be due to discrimination. It sounds crazy I know, but that's the score.

[HiPointDem]

297. The "wage gap" articles repetitiously posted here are partly fraudulent themselves, and

Last edited Fri Aug 17, 2012, 08:11 PM - Edit history (1)

that's not a men's rights/right wing talking point, it's the truth.

[redqueen]

304. Fraudulent?

Interesting word choice.

[HiPointDem]

316. yes, it's fraudulent to trumpet claims that there's a !!!28%!!! wage gap (or whatever the big

number is) without mentioning that when adjusted for years of experience & similar factors, the gap shrinks to something like 7% (or whatever the number is).

that's why i said "partly fraudulent". there's a wage gap, but nowhere as big as what's trumpeted.

The gap between the working class and the 1%ers + their paid courtiers is the most significant gap to the bulk of the population.

as you know full well, since this discussion has taken place before with you in the mix.

[opiate69]

306. Ah, but you see....

it is a mens rights talking point because..... well because they say so, and they`re like, super smart or something..

[4th law of robotics]

370. If you deny the Patriarchy, as an organized conspiracy by all men against all women, exists

then you are an MRA: http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/patriarchy-blaming-the-twisty-way/mra/

Oh also, all men exist in a perpetual state of "pre-rape" and should be assumed guilty unless proven otherwise.

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/patriarchy-blaming-the-twisty-way/consent-or-the-legalization-of-womens-humanity/

These are facts. Anyone who disagrees hates women. Obviously.

[davidpdx]

3. I didn't vote because I disagree with the idea of the poll

The obvious answer is no, but the nation has come a long way over the last half century. If Mitt-Ryan gets elected that could be undone pretty quickly.

Confusion countries like South Korea are a long way behind us. Though it is worth noting that they have had a woman prime minister.

[boston bean]

4. What do you think was the idea of the poll? nt

[davidpdx]

5. I think the poll is limited given the options you gave

It seems to be an all/none option which I don't agree with, hence the absence of my vote. The polls on DU (I'm talking about in general not just your poll) aren't scientific so what does it matter if I answer or not?

[boston bean]

6. I was very specific in the question about America.

To your point, of course women in other countries have not made the strides we have here in America. However, that doesn't mean that women here in America have achieved total equality and should not fight for further equality.

I thought it was a pretty simple question. yes or no, has America expunged itself from male privilege. Some men and women do believe we have. Some don't. You said that it hadn't, so you could easily answer the poll with a click of the mouse.

[Whisp]

158. Canada is another Country.

Just thought I'd let that be known.

Where exactly are women in the U.S. 'striding' further than in Canada (and many, many other countries who treat women much more fairer just by the fact of proper health care alone)? You can say that when we have health care here?

I would rethink that 'we are #1' position you have on this.

[boston bean]

159. You are, once again, attempting to subscribe words and opinions to me that I did not write and that

I do not hold.

[Whisp]

160. this is what you said:

of course women in other countries have not made the strides we have here in America

are you taking Mitt 101 lessons?

[boston bean]

165. Are you calling me a republican?

and exactly what is the issue with the sentence.

I had in mind countries like Afghanistan. You disagree with that?

[Whisp]

168. but you didn't say that.

I okay, I'll let you go on that one.

You could edit it tho, because it does sound pretty silly as it stands now and I'm not convinced that the U.S. is some kind of leader in the area of human rights, but, meh. You can have that one too.

[boston bean]

173. never said what you are stating.

I thought you weren't going to "supply" me any more.

Please do not supply me anymore.

[redqueen]

175. Apparently what you *meant* to say was ALL other countries.

So glad we have someone capable of detecting words you didn't say so that they can tell you where they think you might have gone wrong (you know, if you said them, of course), who is also gracious enough to let you get away with ... er ... not saying them? I'm not sure how it works, really.

[Warren Stupidity]

64. wtf are "Confusion countries"?

"Confusion countries like South Korea are a long way behind us. "

Confucian? Ipad malfunction?

p.s. we are barely ahead of "confusion countries" and way behind many of our cultural and developmental peers.

[Freddie]

7. As long as government can control

A woman's power over her own body, there will always be 100% male privelege

[MadrasT]

8. No. Among other problems, men still have overwhelming institutional control.

Executive positions in government? Mostly men.

Legislative positions in government? Mostly men.

Judges? Mostly men.

CEO's and boards of Fortune 500's? Mostly men.


Why Are Men Dominating the Debate About Birth Control for Women?

As long as we have ^^^this^^^, not just not, but hell no.

[aquart]

49. Castration is also a method of birth control.

I look at them and it just leaped to my mind.

Perhaps it's fortunate that I do not rule the world.

[seabeyond]

9. it would be like me not owning "white privilege" which i think is pretty damn clear and evident

and i would have to work pretty hard and going in circles to suggest there was not white privilege. the evidence and obvious is all around me in many many ways.

[slackmaster]

10. I voted No because obviously there is discrimination against females

I don't like the bass-ackwards way of describing discrimination against one group as "privilege" given to another, with the obvious implication that the treatment that males receive is somehow undeserved.

The solution is to elevate females, not to knock males down until everyone is treated equally poorly.

[boston bean]

11. Do you think women want to "knock down" men?

Or do you think women would just like to be equal?

Most women I know love men and wouldn't want to hurt them in any way, but would like to achieve the same in equality terms.

Like more women in congress. Perhaps a female president. More women CEO's?

And leave our bodies the hell alone.

[slackmaster]

13. When someone uses a term like "privilege" in a pejorative manner, it sounds so to me

Or do you think women would just like to be equal?

Yes I do, and I think they should be treated as equals to men, but "women" didn't write the OP and I'm not responding to them. I'm responding to the OP.

[boston bean]

16. It is not being used in a perjorative manner.

It's a word. I think you are reading it the wrong way. It's a description, and not a negative one, but one of truth. I assume both of us believe is the truth. Because you agree it exists, however you just don't like the word.

What word would make you feel more comfortable?

I won't waste my time responding to your last sentence.

[slackmaster]

25. The issue is basic human rights

Males get more of them than females do.

[boston bean]

40. So you would have had no objection to my post had I written

'more human rights' instead of privilege?

ok.

[slackmaster]

71. That's correct, because though you may not have intended it that way, I read privilege as pejorative

As in the ill-gotten gains of a corporate fat cat or corrupt politician. That's how the term was generally used where I grew up, which happened to be La Jolla, California. My mom taught me a very important lesson while living there. She said:

"If you want to spot the biggest crook in town, just look for the man who drives the fanciest car and wears the most expensive clothes."

And she was right! We had J. David Dominelli, Ivan Boesky, C. Arnholt Smith, and several other famous robber barons in town at the time. Those men of "privilege" were considered scum by just about everyone who lived in San Diego because their "privilege" was attained by stealing from others. Privilege has always sounded like something bad to me, except in specific circumstances like "the driving privilege."

It's certainly true that men don't have to worry about being discriminated against in hiring because of their gender, but that isn't the problem - The problem is that women DO have to worry about it. The fact that you as (I presume) a woman have cause to be concerned about discrimination in pay is not the result of me as a man not having that problem. It's that way because employers tend to discriminate against women. BTW, I'm sure you are aware that in some states it's still perfectly legal to do that.

The condition described as male privilege is actually what should be the norm for everyone. The fix isn't taking privilege away from anyone, but extending to those who have had it withheld unfairly.

[boston bean]

75. As to your last statement, it was you who ascribed that meaning to male privilege.

I have already explained up above what was meant. It it seems to me that many understood without the extra explanation.

Seems we are in agreement. Male privilege still exists in America. Thank you.

[slackmaster]

104. We are in complete agreement that inequality exists and that it's a major problem

The only difference is that I wouldn't use the same words that you have chosen to describe it.

[boston bean]

109. ok. I think the word I chose was fitting and fine.

have a good one!

[seabeyond]

110. you really do not have much of a choice. you did not "create" male/white privilege. it is well

established long before you created this poll. using the terminology that is designed per definition is just what we all do, in life.

[seabeyond]

12. examples of male privilege to better understand. example of white privilege, too.

The Male Privilege Checklist

1. 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.

2. I can be confident that my co-workers won’t think I got my job because of my sex – even though that might be true. (More).

3. If I am never promoted, it’s not because of my sex.

4. If I fail in my job or career, I can feel sure this won’t be seen as a black mark against my entire sex’s capabilities.

5. I am far less likely to face sexual harassment at work than my female co-workers are. (More).

6. If I do the same task as a woman, and if the measurement is at all subjective, chances are people will think I did a better job.

7. If I’m a teen or adult, and if I can stay out of prison, my odds of being raped are relatively low. (More).

8. On average, I am taught to fear walking alone after dark in average public spaces much less than my female counterparts are.

9. If I choose not to have children, my masculinity will not be called into question.

10. If I have children but do not provide primary care for them, my masculinity will not be called into question.

11. If I have children and provide primary care for them, I’ll be praised for extraordinary parenting if I’m even marginally competent. (More).

12. If I have children and a career, no one will think I’m selfish for not staying at home.

13. If I seek political office, my relationship with my children, or who I hire to take care of them, will probably not be scrutinized by the press.

14. My elected representatives are mostly people of my own sex. The more prestigious and powerful the elected position, the more this is true.

15. When I ask to see “the person in charge,” odds are I will face a person of my own sex. The higher-up in the organization the person is, the surer I can be.

16. As a child, chances are I was encouraged to be more active and outgoing than my sisters. (More).

17. 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.

18. As a child, chances are I got more teacher attention than girls who raised their hands just as often. (More).

19. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether or not it has sexist overtones.

20. I can turn on the television or glance at the front page of the newspaper and see people of my own sex widely represented.

21. If I’m careless with my financial affairs it won’t be attributed to my sex.

22. If I’m careless with my driving it won’t be attributed to my sex.

23. I can speak in public to a large group without putting my sex on trial.

24. Even if I sleep with a lot of women, there is no chance that I will be seriously labeled a “slut,” nor is there any male counterpart to “slut-bashing.” (More).

25. I do not have to worry about the message my wardrobe sends about my sexual availability. (More).

26. My clothing is typically less expensive and better-constructed than women’s clothing for the same social status. While I have fewer options, my clothes will probably fit better than a woman’s without tailoring. (More).

27. The grooming regimen expected of me is relatively cheap and consumes little time. (More).

28. If I buy a new car, chances are I’ll be offered a better price than a woman buying the same car. (More).

29. If I’m not conventionally attractive, the disadvantages are relatively small and easy to ignore.

30. I can be loud with no fear of being called a shrew. I can be aggressive with no fear of being called a bitch.

31. I can ask for legal protection from violence that happens mostly to men without being seen as a selfish special interest, since that kind of violence is called “crime” and is a general social concern. (Violence that happens mostly to women is usually called “domestic violence” or “acquaintance rape,” and is seen as a special interest issue.)

32. 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.

33. My ability to make important decisions and my capability in general will never be questioned depending on what time of the month it is.

34. I will never be expected to change my name upon marriage or questioned if I don’t change my name.

35. The decision to hire me will not be based on assumptions about whether or not I might choose to have a family sometime soon.

36. Every major religion in the world is led primarily by people of my own sex. Even God, in most major religions, is pictured as male.

37. Most major religions argue that I should be the head of my household, while my wife and children should be subservient to me.

38. If I have a wife or live-in girlfriend, chances are we’ll divide up household chores so that she does most of the labor, and in particular the most repetitive and unrewarding tasks. (More).

39. If I have children with my girlfriend or wife, I can expect her to do most of the basic childcare such as changing diapers and feeding.

40. If I have children with my wife or girlfriend, and it turns out that one of us needs to make career sacrifices to raise the kids, chances are we’ll both assume the career sacrificed should be hers.

41. Assuming I am heterosexual, magazines, billboards, television, movies, pornography, and virtually all of media is filled with images of scantily-clad women intended to appeal to me sexually. Such images of men exist, but are rarer.

42. In general, I am under much less pressure to be thin than my female counterparts are. (More). If I am fat, I probably suffer fewer social and economic consequences for being fat than fat women do. (More).

43. If I am heterosexual, it’s incredibly unlikely that I’ll ever be beaten up by a spouse or lover. (More).

44. Complete strangers generally do not walk up to me on the street and tell me to “smile.” (More: 1 2).

45. Sexual harassment on the street virtually never happens to me. I do not need to plot my movements through public space in order to avoid being sexually harassed, or to mitigate sexual harassment. (More.)

45. On average, I am not interrupted by women as often as women are interrupted by men.

46. I have the privilege of being unaware of my male privilege.

http://www.amptoons.com/blog/the-male-privilege-checklist/



1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.

2. I can avoid spending time with people whom I was trained to mistrust and who have learned to mistrust my kind or me.

3. If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live.

4. I can be pretty sure that my neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me.

5. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.

6. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.

7. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization," I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.

8. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.

9. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for this piece on white privilege.

10. I can be pretty sure of having my voice heard in a group in which I am the only member of my race.

11. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another person's voice in a group in which s/he is the only member of his/her race.

12. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can cut my hair.

13. Whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability.

14. I can arrange to protect my children most of the time from people who might not like them.

15. I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection.

16. I can be pretty sure that my children's teachers and employers will tolerate them if they fit school and workplace norms; my chief worries about them do not concern others' attitudes toward their race.

17. I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color.

18. I can swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty or the illiteracy of my race.

19. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting my race on trial.

20. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

21. I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.

22. I can remain oblivious of the language and customs of persons of color who constitute the world's majority without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.

23. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider.

24. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk to the "person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.

25. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.

26. I can easily buy posters, post-cards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys and children's magazines featuring people of my race.

27. I can go home from most meetings of organizations I belong to feeling somewhat tied in, rather than isolated, out-of-place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance or feared.

28. I can be pretty sure that an argument with a colleague of another race is more likely to jeopardize her/his chances for advancement than to jeopardize mine.

29. I can be pretty sure that if I argue for the promotion of a person of another race, or a program centering on race, this is not likely to cost me heavily within my present setting, even if my colleagues disagree with me.

30. If I declare there is a racial issue at hand, or there isn't a racial issue at hand, my race will lend me more credibility for either position than a person of color will have.

31. I can choose to ignore developments in minority writing and minority activist programs, or disparage them, or learn from them, but in any case, I can find ways to be more or less protected from negative consequences of any of these choices.

32. My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people of other races.

33. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.

34. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.

35. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having my co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race.

36. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it had racial overtones.

37. I can be pretty sure of finding people who would be willing to talk with me and advise me about my next steps, professionally.

38. I can think over many options, social, political, imaginative or professional, without asking whether a person of my race would be accepted or allowed to do what I want to do.

39. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.

40. I can choose public accommodation without fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated in the places I have chosen.

41. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help, my race will not work against me.

42. I can arrange my activities so that I will never have to experience feelings of rejection owing to my race.

43. If I have low credibility as a leader I can be sure that my race is not the problem.

44. I can easily find academic courses and institutions which give attention only to people of my race.

45. I can expect figurative language and imagery in all of the arts to testify to experiences of my race.

46. I can chose blemish cover or bandages in "flesh" color and have them more or less match my skin.

47. I can travel alone or with my spouse without expecting embarrassment or hostility in those who deal with us.

48. I have no difficulty finding neighborhoods where people approve of our household.

49. My children are given texts and classes which implicitly support our kind of family unit and do not turn them against my choice of domestic partnership.

50. I will feel welcomed and "normal" in the usual walks of public life, institutional and social.

http://jimbuie.blogs.com/journal/2007/11/50-examples-of-.html

[Care Acutely]

18. Outstanding list and post! Thanks :-)

[seabeyond]

36. it helps to read them, then it is easier to say.... ya, i see. not about an individual life

comparative to another, per se. but, advantages that we do not recognize and it is only mere acknowledgement that they exist that is being asked.

we are not going to be able to change all this. BUT... for example, when i ask a question and a man looks over my head and gives hubby the answer, hubby will say, dont tell me, tell my wife.

he recognizes what happens and speaks out. making the man aware. a man that had probably not even thought about it.

[lumberjack_jeff]

89. White privilege is real. Male privilege is not.

That is why the forms of privilege are ALWAYS conflated, because the candylike coating of white privilege is necessary to "prove" the empty center.

[seabeyond]

90. we would have to disagree on the male privilege and agree on the white privilege. nt

[dawg]

181. I have to disagree with this.

Male privilege is very much real. It isn't nearly as pervasive as it was a generation ago, but it still exists. I have seen numerous examples in real life. And the evidence isn't just anecdotal; there are plenty of statistical measures that also point to continuing male privilege.

There are a few things that cut in the opposite direction, as well. And men, as a group, are facing worse and worse outcomes as time marches forward. But our sisters in the 99% are dealing with the same setbacks.

Ultimately, we are all in this thing together and need to reconcile ourselves to each other, brothers and sisters, in the greater struggle against those who would control and divide us. But I don't think we can do this without men acknowledging that we still have a residual, unfair advantage.

[lumberjack_jeff]

195. It is absolutely true that poor women, women of color and lesbians suffer all the same problems...

... as their male counterparts.

But their problems don't derive from being women. Earlier this week, there was a discussion about an airline which moved the men from sitting next to unaccompanied children. The only basis on which this makes sense is that women are the only ones who can be trusted being around kids. If each gender is inherently less (or in-) capable of the variety of tasks on which society depends then the world will always be, and in fact must be, unequal.

And no. I don't acknowledge that the residual differences of the patriarchy constitute advantage. In fact, I'd argue that the opposite is true. The only residual bits of the patriarchy which are still tolerated are those bits that benefit women.

The patriarchy is, in essence, the authority of men to decide how to best protect the women. That protection responsibility is still firmly in place, but without the authority. In fact, this is the source of much of the tension with 2nd wave feminists; it is men's responsibility to protect women who would (if empowered to make their own choices) engage in the sex trades, but at the same time, it is inappropriate to make other decisions such as setting conditions on welfare benefits.

My issue with this is misdiagnosis. So long as we're tilting at the windmills of non-problems, the actual structural injustices deriving from class, heteronormativity and race go unaddressed.

[dawg]

199. I think we can cordially agree to disagree here.

We both agree that there are some circumstances where the advantage is flipped and society puts men at a relative disadvantage. The airline story may be a good example of that. Child custody is another. But I've seen the ugliness of anti-woman discrimination up close. I've seen qualified women passed up for promotions that went to dramatically less qualified men. As an accountant and auditor, I have had access to payroll records for hundreds of companies. I can see trends, and they aren't entirely explainable by time out of the workforce or differing skill sets. There is still this notion that "Susie" is just one of the office "girls" and not to be taken seriously, even though she has the same degree and credentials as upper management. Hopefully, this is in the process of going away, but it still exists.

[lumberjack_jeff]

202. Of course.

[Major Nikon]

223. You're talking about illegal discrimination

It's kind of hard to call something a privilige if it's prohibited by law.

Just sayin'

[dawg]

226. Regardless of legal status, the effect on people's lives is the same.

By your definition, there would be no such thing as white privilege either. And while that might reflect the law of the land, the situation on the ground is much different.

I understand that the term "privilege" may be politically charged to some people. And it certainly shouldn't be taken to mean that men somehow don't deserve the things they have accomplished. Perhaps a more adequate way of describing what I'm talking about is a residual societal disadvantage with which women must contend.

[Major Nikon]

229. Those are two separate issues

I didn't offer any definition of anything, so I'm not sure what you're referring to as my definition. But let's run with what appears to be your definition and say anything that unequally affects gender is an example of "privilege". Women receive more goverment health care funds than men. By your definition, that would be an example of female privilege. But the suggestion of such would be ridiculous because there's very valid sociological reasons why. So you can't just point to unequal outcome and say it's due to privilege. Furthermore the reasons for white privilege don't translate to "male privilege", so one should be careful about trying to use the same definition for both.

[dawg]

235. Do you think there are valid sociological reasons for all unequal outcomes ...

between men and women?

Personally, I do not. I have seen gender bias first hand. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt vis-a-vis the definition of "privilege". Something you said in an earlier post made me think that you only considered it privilege if it was instituted in law. Apparently, I misunderstood your point of view.

[Major Nikon]

236. No, I don't

Obviously gender discrimination exists and it should be dealt with. For about the last 10 years, I have been volunteering for a part time position in my company's civil rights branch of our human resources division. We do things like process EEOC complaints and investigate civil rights violations. So I see all sorts of civil rights issues that happen in the workplace, including gender discrimination, and I'll be the first to tell you that it does exist and it's quite common. However, there are certain feminists who believe the opposite, which is that there are no valid sociological reasons for unequal gender outcomes. For instance, the gender pay gap for women is around 77%. So the big question is how much of that gap is due to discrimination? Well, it's pretty hard to measure that because those who discriminate don't usually identify themselves, and those who are being discriminated against may never know. Sociologists who perform objective studies on this issue look at the sociological reasons why there is a gender pay gap and determine the amount of the gap that is attributable to those reasons. Anything left is designated as unexplained and most likely a big portion of that is due to discrimination. The numbers they come up with that I've seen range from about 10% to as low as about 2%. Then when you consider that women are far more likely than men to choose jobs that have better benefits in lieu of better pay, the unexplained portion of the gap becomes even smaller once total compensation is considered. Certain feminists, and by no means all of them, take the extreme position that because the "patriarchy" oppresses women, all of the gender pay gap is due to gender bias and there are can be no valid sociological reasons for it. Going even farther, some feminists (some right here on DU) consider any suggestion to the contrary is "hate speech", even if you are just referencing peer reviewed or government studies on the issue. I find that behavior not only more than just a bit disgusting, but counterproductive to achieving greater gender equality.

[dawg]

238. I think what you just articulated is a reasonable and thoughtful opinion.

I suspect that the remaining gender pay gap is a little higher than the 2-10% range the studies you cite suggest, but that could be due to my personal experience here in the "enlightened" part of the country we call "Georgia". Otherwise, I pretty much agree with everything you just said.

[redqueen]

241. You agree that pointing out that the effort to minimize the fact that women are paid less

as an MRA talking point is the same thing as calling it "hate speech"?

The unreasonable efforts extended toward portraying the measurable difference as somehow meaningless, no big deal, or worse, justifiable and fair, is an MRA tactic.

[dawg]

257. No, of course not.

I agreed with the poster's position that, while gender bias does continue to negatively impact women's outcomes, it doesn't explain all of the differences between men and women's pay. To me, that is a reasonable position and I wanted to give the poster credit for that.

As for the hate speech aspect of the post, he claims "some" feminists think it is hate speech to say what he is saying. I personally have not seen anyone claim that, so I have no opinion about that assertion

My opinion on the whole issue can be summed up as follows:

It's better than it used to be.
But it's still pretty bad.

I don't understand the reasoning of the people who are so invested in trying to deny or minimize the size of this problem. But when someone I'm arguing with says something that I find reasonable, I like to give them credit for doing so.

[redqueen]

263. Ah, ok, that makes sense.

Just making sure.

[lumberjack_jeff]

318. If the actual scope of a problem is less than popular reporting or conventional wisdom says...

... then honest people interested in a good faith discussion will point it out.

Some people are simply invested in truth.

[Major Nikon]

324. Redqueen just demonstrated exactly the bad behavior I was talking about

Pretty much right on que. At least she should be commended for being consistent, albeit irrationally consistent. Notice how she labels any attempt to "minimize the fact that women are paid less" as a "MRA talking point" and "hate speech".

You can read this government sponsored study which demonstrates exactly what I'm talking about, and you can find it referenced right on wikipedia. It explains in great detail the portion of the gender gap due to discrimination is "not very much" [page 2]. Also in this study you'll see that they found that for women and men who had never been married and never had a child, the gender pay gap actually favored women by 8% [page 25].
http://www.nber.org/papers/w11240.pdf

Wow! Empirical studies sponsored by the government are now MRA "hate speech"? Brilliant!

Either that or Redqueen is just trying to turn the debate into an emotional issue by spewing vile, ridiculous and false allegations when she can't possibly deal with facts and reason on an adult level. I'll let you decide which.

[lumberjack_jeff]

311. That is exactly your intent.

You've told us that SPLC calls some MRA groups hate groups (they don't), AND you reserve the right to tell DU who among us are MRA's despite the fact that none of us self-identify.

Don't be coy. We can see you trying to connect the dots.

When we know the difference between the qualitatively and quantitatively same work, we can talk about eliminating it. But not until. When "study directors" compare the pay of people without noting that the men in the study work 10% more hours than the women, it's apparent that we're not having a good-faith discussion.

[Major Nikon]

323. Georgia may be one of the better states in this regard

Their gross gender pay gap is just shy of 80% compared to the national average of 77%. No data exists on what part of that is attributable to discrimination, but at least their aggregate is better than most of the nation. Surprisingly states like RI, CT, and ME are worse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Gender_pay_gap,_by_state.png

[lumberjack_jeff]

314. But it was men who made that law!

Sooo, uh....

[laundry_queen]

376. #46 nt

[joeglow3]

239. Isn't accepting stereotypes as fact fun?

Men and women judged equally for sexual practices

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/both-men-and-women-judged-for-sex-lives-study-is-this-equality/article4484905/?cmpid=rss1

[seabeyond]

242. i have heard fluke called a "slut". not edward, dsk, schwarzenegger, gingrich

craig, sanford, clinton, kennedyzzzzzzzzzz, condit, weiner, spitzer

and so so so many more.

[joeglow3]

247. Wow. You should try to get this study of yours published.

After all, if that crappy one I cited can get published in a professional journal, your in depth analaysis is sure to be a shoe in.

[seabeyond]

249. lol lol. regardless of reality presented to us daily, it does not meet your objective. got it.

but then, you are one of the 14 that does not bellieve privilege exists, right? against the other 94%. much more reasonable that reality is wrong, and you are right.

i read your OP when you first put it up. i am glad to hear it. maybe this will be an area when things shift. we are not there. that is obvious. unless you choose to ignore reality so you do not have to recognize it.

[joeglow3]

258. I believe it exists, but things like this raise an eyebrow

Clearly, I naturally assumed the statement about women being held to a double standard regarding sexual activity was true. However, this study has shown me that sometimes reality is different from what you remember and/or are taught. While, I still think the majority of those items on the list true (many are obviously true), it makes me wonder what some of these would look like if an actual study was done (potentially confirming we are moving in the right direction).

[seabeyond]

259. then you are not living in the real world. do your own observation with your eyes wide open now

on all these. lets see if you are better at recognizing.

[redqueen]

267. Do all the women and girls who are constantly insulted as sluts and whores online,

as they attempt to play enjoy video games, not exist in the real world? Or all the feminist bloggers, or female journalists who dare to discuss women's issues?

Or maybe since the abuse is only online, it doesn't count?

[seabeyond]

269. it isnt just on line. here alone we will hear comments about women we do not like

we will defend and protect the stripper/prostitute until it is not to our advantage and then we will hear what men really think about these women.

walk of shame about girls having one night stands. and declaration to see who the s**** are.

it is all over in our media and programming and comments from men everywhere.

it is totally dismissive to suggest that study proves out shit.

tides turning? i dont know. maybe and good. BUT... as i say, when men are talking about strippers and prostitutes for their entertainment they are so very very respectful of these women as human beings, until they are not talking about them in that manner anymore. so if asking the question then of course the college student is going to make a comment like that. it is so grown up and adult like. until the are with buddies or drinking or pissed then hear the word slut and so much more fly.

[joeglow3]

287. So, since I see more CFNM porn than stripper porn, can I assume men are the victim?

All I asked for was actual scientific studies on some of these things. I would bet my life if this can up yesterday, you would say there is a clear, strong double standard against sexual habits of women. Now that we have an actual scientific study (that is being published), you seek to minimize it and/or say it is wrong because of what you have witnessed. Maybe you just hang around a bunch of dickheads and need to find a new circle of friends.

However, I am shocked that I am being blasted on DU simply for asking for empirical studies to be done.

[opiate69]

250. Yeah.. nobody ever called John Edwards bad names...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002751063

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=6305

http://metamorphosis.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=116272

[hifiguy]

290. Seriously? Edwards has been hammered at great length

as a two-timing scumbag shitheel on this very site. I was one of the hammerers in a couple of threads. Same goes for Schwarzenegger, Craig, Vitter, Gingrich and others. Just because different descriptors may have been used has no bearing on the huge moral opprobrium visited on them.

And the "person" who used that epithet against Fluke is not a DUer. What Vicodin Limbosevich says is irrelevant to the discussion of what happens and is said here.

[opiate69]

291. not just on this site, but specifically by HER!!

And yet, we`re the bad guys for pointing that kind of shit out.

[hifiguy]

300. To some around here we would be the bad guys

if we pointed out that the sun rises in the east, penguins live at the South Pole and blue cheese is moldy. That makes those thinks no less facts.

[MadrasT]

244. This study is about a subset of the general population, college students.

It is in no way representative of the entire culture.

It is interesting to notice that this study appears to show that we are "leveling the playing field" but we are not there yet.

[joeglow3]

248. True, but I would argue this is also the biggest playground

I can honestly say, I have never had a conversation about someone's sexual activities in my 30's. However, in college, it was an hourly conversation.

[4th law of robotics]

369. You realize a good chunk of that list is entirely subjective

It leans heavily on qualifiers like "feel" or "expect" or "probably".

I wonder why it didn't cover the usual criteria used to define a groups privilege: like life expectancy, incarceration rates, comparisons of sentences for the same crime, homelessness, death by preventable causes, drug use, public health resources made available for that group but not others, and so on.

I wonder . . .

[bigwillq]

14. No (nt)

[99Forever]

15. Who has more "privilege?"

Me or Michelle Obama?

Me or Ann Romney?

meh.

Divide and conquer.

Way to do the 1%s work for them.

[boston bean]

17. The division is not in pointing out the privilege, the division is that it exists. nt

[99Forever]

22. Cue the Democratic Circular Firing Squad.

Way to miss my point.

meh

[sufrommich]

19. The President of the United States is black,

therefore racism doesn't exist. That's the same argument.

[boston bean]

21. Coming from a someone who I assume, due to their screen name,

is a supporter of OWS, you would think could recognize privilege.

Just because 1% of people have privilege over the 99% doesn't mean that perecentages in sub groups of that 99%, that there aren't inherent inequalities due to race, gender and sexual orientation etc, seems strange to me.

Especially since most of the 1% are powerful, rich, straight, white males.

[Romulox]

27. Why can't class be examined head on? Is it to maintain the myth in your last sentence?

Especially since most of the 1% are powerful, rich, straight, white males.

This is clearly untrue. A full 50% of the 1% are women. It's strange to pretend otherwise.

[boston bean]

29. Are you speaking of the wives?

Of course, class should be tackled head on. But discussing inequalities amongst different groups in society is also necessary.

It is not an attempt to divide.

[Romulox]

31. I'm speaking of the 50% of the ruling class that is female. We can't pretend them away.

"But discussing inequalities amongst different groups in society is also necessary. "

Right. That includes class. And the ways that race and class intersect.

[boston bean]

35. And the way sex and class intersect, no?

That is what is being discussed here. So, it seems we agree, no?

[Romulox]

38. I'm no longer sure to what I'm being asked to agree. I think class privilege is rarely examined,

in our society, or on these boards.

There is a decent sized thread about Chelsea Clinton on the front page right now in which several are saying, in essence, what's wrong with being born into (wealth-based) privilege?

It seems there is a lack of consciousness here on DU that there might be something objectionable about a person receiving massive wealth, access, and other privileges based on heredity.

That Chelsea is a woman doesn't seem to have hampered the inter-generational transfer of power to her, even a little bit.

[seabeyond]

39. at 13 she had a nation diss her looks for her worth, that you would not have had with a boy.

that would be one example of the privilege even though she is part of the 1%

and i agree with you on the chelsea thread in a couple ways.

firstly holding up her looks as if it means anything. and secondly, not recognizing her advantages.

[Romulox]

42. That doesn't negate anything I just posted. Some bad stuff happened to her, AND she inherited

wealth and power beyond the average person's dreams.

[seabeyond]

47. my post was showing that i obviously was not negating a single thing you were saying.

it is clear that there can be two issues at one time.

you on the other hand negated my point.

i am saying, yes.... male privilege exists even in chelseas privilege white 1% life.

you on the other hand, dismiss the male privilege and only allowing the recognition of the 1% privilege.

[Romulox]

60. If this is the part where you start disagreeing with things I haven't said, I'm out. nt

[seabeyond]

68. Some bad stuff happened to her, AND she inherited

" Some bad stuff happened to her". i point out male privilege and it is dismissed with some bad things happened. it is not a matter of misinterpreting what you are saying. it is pointing out how casually you appear to dismiss an obvious experience in male privilege with " Some bad stuff happened to her".

pointing out that yes, male privilege exists even in a privilege white 1% like is seeing the whole. not just one over the other.

[boston bean]

50. you have already stated that intersections with class have a bearing.

I agree. However, focusing on male privilege is helpful to the class struggle, it is not a division or anything of the sort.

I assume you think Hillary Clinton has more privilege, and I would agree. However, Bill Clinton is even more privileged I believe. Would you not agree?

[Romulox]

58. No, I wouldn't agree that Bill Clinton is "more privileged"; Hillary is Secretary of State of the US

She is a very powerful woman. And a millionaire many times over. Bill Clinton is a figurehead, though also quite wealthy.

[boston bean]

62. I couldn't disagree more. Her life history proves it.

I'm not going to get into an argument about the sexist treatment of hillary from liberals and nut job republicans. But it happened.

It's a well documented fact.

[boston bean]

44. because class privilege exists does not mean male privilege does not exist as well.

If there were no class privilege, do you think that male privilege would no longer exist?

I think that male privilege would still exist. And vice versa if there were no male privilege, class privilege would exist.

There are many different struggles and different groups pushing for more equality is not dividing anyone. One groups gains, is a gain for us all.

[Romulox]

51. I don't think both can be true though--either CLASS is the dominant privilege, or GENDER is...

There are many different struggles and different groups pushing for more equality is not dividing anyone. One groups gains, is a gain for us all.

Again, I don't agree. The push for more female CEOs may be admirable, but it has little to do with the challenges the average woman faces.

[seabeyond]

53. i think the black community would disagree. especially black women.

though we can ALL acknowledge and recognize that white has privilege over black. i think any reasonable person would recognize that the male in the black community has all kinds of privilege over the black woman.

because the black community is treated less, do the black women have to shut up and not address their issue?

[Romulox]

55. Black men have some of the highest unemployment, highest incarceration, young adult mortality,

MUCH lower rates of graduation from college, and many other negatives.

Can't you see this "the incarcerated black male enjoys a great deal of privilege over black women" begins to break down?

[seabeyond]

56. wow. ok. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

103. Black women live longer, suffer less violence, and are more likely to go to college than black men.

On the issue of black males’ education in the United States, sorting out hyperbole from
reality is difficult. It is hindered by the lack of knowledge of trends in college completion and
the educational milestones that contribute to college completion over time for different
race/gender groups. On the one hand, it is well known that black males trail black females on a
range of key educational outcomes including graduating from high school, enrolling in college
4
and completing college. In any given year since 2000, among black college degree recipients, no
less than 66 percent are women (Snyder and Dillow 2009: Table 284). Such facts appropriately
spark concern about the educational progress of black males relative to other groups.

http://www.columbia.edu/~tad61/Race%20Paper%2009232009.pdf

[boston bean]

54. We disagree. I do not believe that either is dominant.

[Romulox]

57. I was hoping to disagree after a vigorous discussion of the matter, but I accept your position. nt

[hifiguy]

67. Privilege based on economic class has an infinitely greater effect

on everyday people's lives in the real world than any other form of privilege. Marx was correct in pointing that out. Hereditary privilege, which is real, makes all other "privileges," which are largely abstractions, pale in comparison.

[seabeyond]

69. says a man, lol. thanks for letting us know this. damn, now we can sit down and shut up.

thanks.

silly women.

[hifiguy]

78. Where did I tell anyone to shut up?

As usual, you are responding to something I didn't say.

Economic class divisions are universal. They effect every person in a society where they exist to the degree they do in this country. The privilege of hereditary wealth is the greatest and most destructive privilege of all. That is a fact not subject to refutation and is the only thing I pointed out. To claim I said anything else is a lie.

[boston bean]

79. You do not get to decide which "destructive privilege" which affects them more.

It is not a universal fact.

That's quite presumptuous.

[hifiguy]

84. A staggeringly imperceptive statement.

The economic structure of a society, by its very nature has an effect on each and every human being living in that society. Therefore it is universal. Can you truly not understand that simple fact?

[boston bean]

88. You are not hearing what I said. You do not get to decide for people which

privilege or inequality they experience affects them more, and which causes they lend their time and voice to.

I believe that class privilege is an issue. I can speak out about both at the same time, you?

It has nothing to do with numbers.

[opiate69]

92. of course she can`t...

that whole little crew remind me of Otto from A Fish Called Wanda... Read a few things here, there and on "the google", and suddenly they`re "intellectuals".... Of course, what`s sorely lacking is common sense and critical thinking, for those skills would represent too great a challenge to their ideology.

&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[seabeyond]

95. ah. cause jumping in with a post of insults it what you define as "intellectual"?

thanks for the heads up.

[opiate69]

100. Well.....I would love to jump in and debate, but....

I really just don`t feel up to having words put in my mouth. I`ve been around to long, and have seen.it too many times, to think that`s not how it`d go.

[seabeyond]

101. what does that have to do what i posted or what i addressed about your post of insults? nt

[opiate69]

105. insults? nah... just satire!

btw.. how`d that alert go?

[seabeyond]

108. ah. now playing games is showing off your "intellectual" ability. gotcha. nt

[opiate69]

111. just follwing my new favorite motto.

http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/never_wrestle_with_a_pig_you_get_dirty_and_the_pig_likes_it/

[seabeyond]

114. wow. more insults to make your point. i guess you continue to make mine.

thanks.

[seabeyond]

80. sure it is refutable, if you are a woman. to a man, nope, not refutable at all. and how did you

tell me to shut up?

by continually telling me how our issue is not important because your issue is more important. get in the back of the line. we will get to YOUR issue when we see fit.

but, you already know how twice, you have let women know their concern is insignificant.

[hifiguy]

86. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

[seabeyond]

87. you got that dude. nt

[Marrah_G]

149. Privilege based of economic class, heredity privilege is huge

But then you also have to consider the differences in the day to day life of people in the same economic class, but of different races or genders.
I'll give an example:

I am a white, single mother of the lower working class.

I have a neighbor who is also a single mother of the lower working class who is black.

She has all the same struggles that I do.

She also has the added struggles of dealing with racism towards her, of prejudice and discrimination against her.

We both have 2 sons.

My sons are are looked at by others as people who are expected to succeed unless they fuck up.

Her sons are looked at as lucky or special if they do succeed in life.

I don't fear my child will be killed or arrested when they leave the house.

Her sons have a much higher chance of being arrested or killed.

My sons have never been pulled over for no good reason or patted down, just because.

Her sons will forever grow up "walking while black" and "driving while black"

_____________________________________________

My life is less stressful, because I am white.

[hifiguy]

151. I cannot disagree with anything you are saying there.

Not a thing.

[Marrah_G]

161. Thanks- I didn't always get that though

I thought- privilege, what privilege, look at my life, it sucks..... I would get angry at the suggestion that I had some sort of privilege.

But then I learned what privilege means in this context and my eyes were opened, over a cup of coffee and because of a very patient neighbor/friend.

[Nikia]

146. I think that it is incorrect to say that 50% of the ruling class is female

Obviously 50% of high level politicians and business people are not female. Sure most of those men are married and it can be assumed that they have children of both genders at a similiar level than the rest of the US population. Those women might live in a nice house, wear nice clothes, can have most material possessions that they want, and take part in expensive hobbies. That does not necessarily translate into power or privilege in other forms. For example, in many "Royal" societies, men always have preference in successsion. It is not just kings of the countries, it is often the case in business as well. Even when the family does not own the company, the patriarch is usually more likely to mentor his son(s) than daughter(s).
The role of the rich wife can be a not so good position to be in, especially if she doesn't have her own money. She knows that she can be traded in for a younger model and be left with relatively little economically. She may feel powerless to influence her husband in any meaningful way or even spend money on anything other than things that make her look higher status. It may be acceptable to her husband for her to spend money on expensive clothes or salons but not donations to organizations that she values or even children from a previous marriage.
A higher percentage of women married to powerful men are not in the workforce. While not having to work can be seen as a privilege, it can also be not so good of a thing for the reasons in the paragraph above and also the fact that often it is their job to do everything for the enhancement of their husband. They look pretty so their husband can look good. They work with charities of their husband's choice so that their husband can look good. They host fancy parties so their husband can look good. His success is tied to her success.
Real privilege is the opportunity to do what one wants with one's life without others inhibiting it because of one's group status. Yes there are other groups besides gender where this is the case. While some privileged daughters may have this more than most other Americans, in many cases they are held back by sexism, often in their own families.

[99Forever]

33. I'm NOT making an "argument."

Especially that one.

I'm offering a heads up. This is the kind of crap that divides the Democratic Party and IS NOT PRODUCTIVE.

I've got a news flash for you "victims." I'm male. I'm white. Neither of which insulates me or millions of other white males from the FUCKING DEPRESSION gripping this Nation.

Great fucking "privilege," eh?

meh

[boston bean]

41. Your issue not with women, or women fighting for more equal rights.

Why take such offense?

[99Forever]

43. Your framing is offensive. Period.

[boston bean]

45. I'm sorry you feel that way. I didn't mean to be offensive.

I'm trying to understand by re-iterating my understanding of what you write. And I'm not sure why what I wrote was so offensive to you.

Women seeking equality is not harming or dividing anyone, period.

[redqueen]

66. "Women seeking equality is not harming or dividing anyone, period."

Well said.

And hmmmm...

The 'stop waging class war' argument that the .1% and their enablers love to use... how different is that from other less oppressed groups using the 'you're dividing us and helping the other side' argument (or derailing tactic?) against more oppressed groups whenever they dare to attempt to address the issue of their being oppressed?

[Scout]

115. where's that anti-feminist bingo card thingy when you need it?

or, derailing for dummies?

LOL

[Major Nikon]

209. That's not what Betty Friedan had to say about it

Betty Friedan and other liberal feminists often see precisely the radicalism of radical feminism as potentially undermining the gains of the women's movement with polarizing rhetoric that invites backlash and hold that they overemphasize sexual politics at the expense of political reform. Other critics of radical feminism from the political left, including socialist feminists, strongly disagree with the radical feminist position that the oppression of women is fundamental to all other forms of oppression; these critics hold that issues of race and of class are as important or more important than issues about gender.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_feminism#Criticisms

[seabeyond]

48. basically you are fighting that women cannot bring up discriminatory issues cause they offend you.

sorry.

you are gonna just have to be offended.

but, that may be an example of male privilege right there.

[99Forever]

73. Bullshit.

What utter condescending claptrap.

Sorry you have such a hatred for men.

[seabeyond]

74. bah hahahaha. lol.

still

[Scootaloo]

303. I can't help but laugh...

"What utter condescending claptrap.

Sorry you have such a hatred for men. "

So are you for or against "condescending claptrap?" I mean, since you appear to be making hte rounds as a condescending claptrapper yourself...

[Scout]

113. you do not comprehend what male privilege is. Period.

it means, ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL (race and class among them) males have privilege over females.

it DOES NOT mean that a middle class black male has no male privilege when compared to a someone of a different race and/or different class, i.e. a female 1%er.

this is not a hard concept to understand, unless one makes it so.

[seabeyond]

156. omfg

you are so unfucking unfeminine, lol. fuck.

needed a laugh

now need a nap

[99Forever]

166. A perfect example of arrogance.

"If you only 'comprehended it,' you would agree with me"


Insult, condescension, arrogance, all rolled up in one neat little ball.


I'm not "stepping away" from anything, especially the crock you are laying out.

[lumberjack_jeff]

118. fightng for "more equal" rights?

What could be wrong with that?

[boston bean]

128. cute. My grammar might have been off.

But still, the point stands. Because one cannot be more if it is equal.

Do not try to make it seem like I want to drag men down, when all I would like to do is lift women up.

I hope you don't have a problem with that, do you?

[lumberjack_jeff]

176. It's not just the grammar.

Equality; You can't get it in "more" or "additional" or "for women" flavors.

I'm absolutely for equality. For instance, gays lack equality because they can't marry. African Americans lack equality because their communities are generally impoverished and their schools are therefore underfunded.

No one has explained to me in a definitive way what institutional inequality looks like for women. Equal pay for equal work? Arguments on that basis emphasize the former and neglect to even consider the latter. Counting Senators? Since 54% of voters are women, these are the elected officials that women have chosen. Besides, an infrastructure exists for the purpose of electing women, no comparable credible organization exists for men. "Vote for men" is sexist because despite being a minority of voters, as well as a minority of the adult population in general... well, it just is.

[boston bean]

177. I am not here to convince you of something of something, because you already hold a very strong

opinion, where were absolutely differ.

I don't agree with you that male privilege does not exist. I do not agree with your opinion that women are no longer discriminated against. I do not agree with your opinion that women have achieved full equality. Ok. We will not agree.

I'm happy you've given your opinion and to know that your opinion is most definitely not common here on DU.

[CreekDog]

180. it's hard for men, but for women, on average, things are even harder

you talk about this recession, LOOK, during good times, a ton of women, especially single women and their children live in poverty.

that's what male privilege is. doesn't mean every male has it good, doesn't mean they are free from discrimination.

but on average, there is an advantage in income and status that women don't have.

it sucks. i hate all poverty. fixing it would be the best thing we could ever do and it would help men, women and children in poverty.

but because of the inequity now, it would help more women and children than men.

[4th law of robotics]

374. The poverty rate for men and women is 18/20%

Not exactly a massive gap there.

Now if you want to factor in other things like sentencing disparity, graduation rates, suicide rates, life expectancy, homelessness, prison populations and the like you might have a more robust interpretation of the reality of the situation.

If you want equal outcomes there will be 2% fewer women in poverty (or 2% more men).

But you'd also have to accept life expectancy that is reduced by about 6 years, a 10 fold increase in the number of women in jail and a lot more homeless women.

[lumberjack_jeff]

91. He overcame a lot of barriers.

He beat many odds; he went to college, stayed out of jail, and lived to middle age.

The thing is, black women are statistically more likely to have avoided those pitfalls. Being a black man is subject to a double-dose of disadvantage.

[LanternWaste]

46. look at the topic from an objective perspective allowing for a large sampling...

I think we should look at the topic from an objective perspective allowing for a large sampling rather than predicating our opinions of matter merely on topical examples and aberrations.

I while I certainly don't think that examining or discussing forms of social disparity is "doing the 1%s work for them", I can readily imagine that in not examining it, we are indeed enabling the 1%.

[aquart]

52. Ann Romney or Mitt Romney?

[99Forever]

77. Either or.

Which kind of makes my point.

But, let the "we're the only victims" crowd whine away about this great "male privilege" I can't seem to remember ever experiencing. It's just fucking wonderful for unity of purpose.

meh

[boston bean]

82. It exists and people discussing it, is not whining.

And people have every right to discuss and work to make things better.

I have no idea what threat you might see by women fighting for equality, when they point out male privilege. It's quite confusing.

[KansDem]

93. You raise an interesting question

I had a discussion about "female privilege" with my wife after Tom Barrett lost the Walker recall. He was slapped by a female "supporter" who was disappointed with his conceding the race.

I thought what would happen if a female politician was slapped by a disappointed male supporter? I think we would have seen a very different response.

[seabeyond]

97. yes. violence of any kind should be addressed in gender neutrality. it is not hard to call out

a wrong. even if it is my gender.

[KansDem]

119. Agreed.

Unfortunately, the mindset still exists.

There still remains a subtle form of sexism that I'd like to address. There still seems to be a divide between what "men" do and what "women" do.

For example, it used to be in my house that when the pilot light went out on the water heater, it's "my job" to light it. Why? My wife could do it as easily as I could. Why are some "jobs" meant for men to do and some for women to do?

I like to believe there is no "division of labor" in my house: I wash dishes, do laundry, shop for groceries, etc. I tended to my infant daughter; changed her diapers, bathed her, fed her, and watched her for a year while I was working on my PhD. My wife and I shared responsibilities.

We started our marriage with a "50/50" approach to household responsibilities, although my wife's health now prevents her from doing much of the work, so my involvement in maintaining the house and yard has increased dramatically.

But there is no denying that the mindset of "men's chores" and "women's chores" exists and is perpetuated by women as much as men. Let me cite an example. I had an opportunity to visit the United Kingdom in the late 1980s. It was a tour set up by the college I was attending and offered great savings on air flight, hotel, meals, and sight seeing. And it was open to the general public as well as the students.

The tour group consisted of about 2/3 students and 1/3 residents of the community. We had a fabulous time! The day we were leaving to return to the US, we were instructed to bring our luggage down to the lobby as the coach driver wanted to load our bags. There was a roped off area for us to do so. Many of us dropped off our luggage and went to breakfast in the hotel restaurant. We had just enough time to eat before boarding the bus.

However, there was one student who was constantly late, i.e. tours, sightseeing, etc. Late for practically everything! Well, I dropped off my bags and went to eat. When I finished, I went to board the bus--we had only a few minutes as the driver was almost finished--and here comes this student through the lobby with her bag to leave as she went into the restaurant. I thought, "How is she going to eat and be on the bus in time to leave?"

I didn't notice what happened to her. Her bag got loaded, however, she didn't get on the bus in time and we left for the airport. To make a long story short, we arrived at the airport; the driver unloaded the baggage; we collected our baggage and went to wait in line to check in. We could see the sidewalk from our line and saw one bag remaining: the student's.

We had gotten word that the student was taking a taxi to the airport, but while we were standing there, an older woman from the community looked over at a few of us guys and asked, "Well, are any of you going to bring that bag in?" I stood there wondering why it was "our" responsibility. None of us said anything, to which she added, rather huffily, "If it was mine, I'd want someone to get it!"

I looked at her and said, "All right, I'll get it. But you'll have to look after it." She didn't say anything after that and the "discussion" was dropped as the student had arrived in the cab and retrieved her luggage in time to get in line with the rest of us.

The point is: why were we "boys" expected to fetch the bags? Why didn't the woman just go out on the sidewalk and get them herself? Is it because it was a "man's responsibility?" Was it because it involved "physical labor?" Was it because it involved a “weak female?”

The lady didn’t say why we “boys” should be the ones tasked with retrieving and watching the bag. Although this was only one experience, I've noticed such attitudes all my life.

My mom was a remarkable woman. She could perform minor electrical and plumbing work around the house. She could do minor carpentry. And I helped her frequently. We did "home improvement" on the weekends or summers when I wasn't in school. I guess I’m spoiled because I don't understand the division of "men's work" and "women's work,” a view shared by both sexes. It's getting better but there's still a way to go.

I remember reading stories during the late '60s and '70s about "liberated women" who could change the oil in their car or operate a table saw. Why not? It's all about independence. And about realizing one's dreams and aspirations. Don’t depend on someone else to do it for you.

While women have made great strides in equality, there is still a lingering sexism in attitudes about who does what shared by both sexes.

[seabeyond]

124. yes... lets call all that out. i know i do often. did the other day with three teens sittin at

dining room table. i agree.

lets knock the shit off. but, we have to be aware in order to do just that.

standing in an isle in the grocery store with my son when he was about 15. telling him about different spaghetti sauces and the ounces in the container for one reason or another. a woman standing there laughs about how important to teach the boys cause men do not know how to shop.

my mouth dropped open. how dare she say something like that in front of my son for a couple different reasons. firstly, i did not want him to buy into that bullshit. second, it is an insult. third, not true. and more....

i told her that is ridiculous, that my hubby kicks my ass in the kitchen.

son and i discussed it and i told him why i thought it so offensive. more toward male. he came back to tell me why it was offensive toward women.

people like to suggest i am a man hating meany. i am all on your side here.

i would tell that woman, the girl could get it, not the mans job. but then i have made sure i always pull my weight in carrying my own stuff.

i do not see it as the mans job.

now.... kids. how often do you hear people say, he babysat his kids. no, he took care of them. he is a parent. it is ingrained that a father "babysits".

but i dont know this is exactly what we are talking about.

[Codeine]

210. Off the subject entirely,

I just wanted to say that you're a remarkably talented writer. I wish I could express myself half as clearly and entertainingly as you.

[KansDem]

234. Thank you!

Your compliment made my day!

(Fellow Californian here -- I grew up in Long Beach)

[Marrah_G]

129. That is not what privilege means in this case

Privilege is not about comparing your life to the life of someone who obviously has a very different and much easier life. It is about comparing your life to the life of someone who's situation is the same as your, with the exception of being a different gender or race.

I see both sides of this issue talking past each other and not hearing what the other side is saying but rather hearing what the each thinks the other side is saying.

If everyone could take a deep breath and realize that we are all on the same side and that 99% of DUers are good people, good progressives then maybe people could start talk to each other instead of at each other.

[LadyHawkAZ]

340. You're looking at it from the wrong angle

although you had the right idea. Phrase the question this way: Who has more privilege, Ann Romney or Mitt Romney? Michelle Obama or Barack Obama? Is their power equal to that of their husband, within their social class? If they were to separate, would they be on an equal footing to their husbands? It's not just one single problem with one single cause- the dividing lines are horizontal as well as vertical, class as well as gender, orientation, race, religion etc.

You're right that it's just another way to keep us divided.

[seabeyond]

342. You're right that it's just another way to keep us divided.

this was interesting and got me thinking.

wouldnt the privilege itself keep us divided and isnt that much of what we see with all this. so the mere recognition of it isnt going to necessarily create the division. the struggle of accepting and not accepting may escalate the division. but, that only brings it out loud. whereas the recognition and acceptance there is a privilege should bring us together, not divided.

i can only bring it to personal. i have white privilege. i know this to be true. so it allows me more of an understanding and empathy of others and they appreciate the understanding and recognition. which ends the division, not creates it.

[LadyHawkAZ]

343. I don't think it's quite that simple

because a lot depends on if we are recognizing the actual disease or just the symptoms. 99Forever actually made a very good point, although it was couched in a denial that male privilege exists- it does exist, but like all the -isms it is artificially created for the reason he gave- to keep the non-ruling classes divided and fighting each other. Just recognizing the existence of those divides doesn't eliminate them, because too often we're focusing on some of the individual symptoms or behaviors rather than recognizing that the actual problem is not between us, and that we all have a common enemy causing it.

Here's an example near and dear to DU- porn. Sexual imagery has been part of humanity since the cave days. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. Sex is normal. But the human sex drive, when properly manipulated, is also a fantastic divider, a source of friction and therefore a profit potential- so enter Megachurch, stage right, chiming in on the sinfulness of pornography and the degeneracy it causes outside Megachurch. Bans get enacted, leading to legal strife with more secular organizations, reinforcing Megachurch's message about degeneracy and strengthening its member base- which produces higher donations. Organizations are set up to help "cure" the problem of "porn addiction" and lead members back to God- which produces yet higher donations from people now convinced that their natural urges are a sickness. And now everyone's fighting amongst themselves, with other groups, and even with their own bodies- with, in fact, everyone except Megachurch. While meanwhile, off on one of their business arms, someone's quietly raking in the profits from porn on the side- and turning that money over to Megachurch as well.

Think I'm off on a tangent? Google the LDS, Utah's porn ban and the Marriott chain. This actually happened. With porn becoming more socially accepted, there's been a more recent push to mix it with extreme violent imagery and create a new unacceptable, divisive standard (remember the old 70s porn? Much more real), but the message at the bottom- "Porn is Bad"- is a construct. It's one of those symptoms, deliberately placed to corrupt a natural order and create division. Religion has gender division and sexism, not to mention hatred of normal sexuality, built right straight into its doctrine: it's the biggest dividing force society has and reaps the greatest profit from it. This is why people like Ann Romney, while privileged, are not equally privileged with their husbands- even within the church structure, divisions need to be kept. But people prefer to look at the pictures of evil that the church projects, and fight with each other about it, rather than go after the actual source.

That's a DU example, but you can find the same fingerprints anywhere, on any dividing cause. Choose life! Immigrants are coming to take our jobs! Black men deal drugs to your children! Stay at home moms are welfare queens with Cadillacs! Wage gaps! Death panels! At the bottom of it is someone who is making a lot of money off that divisiveness and wants to keep it as it is- but what we actually wind up discussing is how to fix those artificial symptoms. American society will quarrel over regulations for abortion, border fences vs. amnesty, drug wars and prisons, welfare reform, wage equality laws, health care reform- but not who's got a vested interest in creating and maintaining those problems. You find that in little corners like DU sometimes, out of the mainstream, but not in the general population.

So just saying "there is a problem with X-ism" doesn't really do much by itself, because the focus isn't on the real problem, just the carefully created symptoms. Fix those and a new set of symptoms will be created and put in place. What WILL help is saying "there is a problem with X-ism, because we have been taught that X-group is our enemy. The actual source of the problem is X-ForProfitGroup. Let's take them down". And I don't think we're ready for that quite yet.

I hope all of that's coherent, it's late and I'm sleepy and sick.

[hifiguy]

347. Brava!! That is one of the very finest posts I have ever read

on DU in the seven (on and off) years I have been here. One must always look behind the curtain to find the Wizard and you have done that in exemplary fashion. :thumbs up:

[rrneck]

351. Bullseye.

Human emotion is the worlds oldest natural resource. A friend of mine says that fear and love are the only two real emotions. Just look at how much money is made from ideologies based on one or the other.

[LadyHawkAZ]

353. So many of those are artificially created and manipulated too

that it's difficult to tell which are real anymore.

[redqueen]

355. Male privilege exists in primate groups. It has nothing to do with 'ruling classes'.

It might be exploited by ruling classes (as are many things), but thinking that that's the source of male domination of women, that's simply conspiracy theory nonsense.

[LadyHawkAZ]

356. You're kidding, right?

Years of feminism pointing out that these behaviors are learned, and are media and culture driven, not innate, with cultural references and trends, then along comes you and suddenly it's genetically coded. Which of course would have nothing to do with the fact that I pointed out how actual genetic programming is manipulated and distorted to give us the "Porn is Bad" message, and the for-profit motives behind it.

And you wonder why your opinions are not respected. I will now return to conversing with people I do respect.

[redqueen]

358. Yeah, cause primates don't learn from other primates.

That's some powerful logic there.

[LadyHawkAZ]

360. Aaaaaaand now we're back to learned

which was exactly what I said in the first place.

[redqueen]

361. Did you somehow get the impression I was disagreeing that it was learned?

My disagreement was with the assertion that it was simply a tool used by ruling classes to divide the lower classes.

This dynamic existed before language, before the written word. Not all animals behave in such ways, but some do.

[LadyHawkAZ]

363. Yep, and that was exactly what you did

And the gender dynamic as we know it is a tool exactly as described. Learned, not hardwired, and for a reason. It keeps a specific class in power and produces profit. I even gave a very good example. Thank you for agreeing, three pointless and contradictory posts later. Have a nice day.

[redqueen]

364. It does keep A class in power. Not 'classes'.

It keeps people who fight against misogyny divided from those who think those who fight it are just 'helping the 1%'. Which isn't where those who want everyone to just STFU about male privilege and accept that there is no patriarchy are going with this idea of yours that they love so much.

Look at what happened in Egypt. People overthrew the government, and women expected things to change... but no, as in almost all similar cases, women continue to be oppressed by their fellow freedom fighters after the revolution.

[LadyHawkAZ]

367. In modern eras there have been more than one type of ruling class

Last edited Sat Aug 18, 2012, 11:05 PM - Edit history (1)

More recently the "ruling class" has been based on money, but it has been, and still is in some societies, based on birthrights. Hence the plural "S". And finally, we're moving a little closer to what actually made you angry. Yes, it's there to keep two groups fighting. I said that in the first post, which you disagreed with. We'll skip the usual pre-programmed copy/paste "STFU". I just had a steak and bait doesn't smell too savory.

Egypt overthrew its government but not its religion. I covered this in the first post, which you disagreed with. Until they are willing to admit they've been duped by a comparatively small group of men with an agenda and take on the institution that is creating the division, things aren't going to change. I believe I just said this in the first post, which you disagreed with- obsessing on the symptoms and aiming the attempts at change at the "enemy" that has been preselected for them aren't going to do anything meaningful. Both genders need to figure out that they're being played, and played against each other. All of which I already covered in the first post, which you disagreed with. Did you read anything of it past the porn part?

Why on earth don't you just come out after the part of the post you actually didn't like, instead of doing this big dance around it with these pointless and contradictory posts about ideas you aren't even really disputing and hairsplitting over plurals? Please. Save us all some time.

[rrneck]

357. Ruling classes assert privilege. That's how they rule. nt

[Ben_Caxton]

24. It's difficult ....

... to find any group that doesn't enjoy a privilege of some sort somewhere.

Would be better to have a reasonableness standard otherwise there doesn't seem to be a point.

[boston bean]

34. I think you are correct, but does that make it not true?

Women are 51% of the population in America. In almost every subgroup of women, an inequality exists based on sex alone.

[Upton]

32. Yeah...

I'm sure all the men who were drafted, often forced to fight and die for a cause they didn't believe in, were just exalting over their "male privilege"..

[OriginalGeek]

63. You mean the men who lived in such a patriarchal society

that they were raised to believe it was their duty to protect the poor, defenseless womenfolk?
The men who would have (and did) scream bloody murder at the thought of women fighting beside them?
The men who expected their women to stay home and raise babies and have a supper waiting for them when they returned from war?

yeahhhh riiiiight...no male privilege in that society...

[Upton]

76. Okay..

but I hardly consider being used as cannon fodder to be a privilege. It was the ultimate disadvantage..as death or mutilation was often the outcome. This was a burden exclusively on men, mostly lower class men...but apparently, in some circles, it's considered bad form to even bring it up...interesting...

[OriginalGeek]

81. Come on man

you know that isn't what this is about. Of course war sucked. How does war sucking make women more equal?

[LadyHawkAZ]

359. The last draft was in 1972

Which was not a privilege in any sense of the word. However, at that time, if the guy got passed over or lived to get home, he returned to the ability to get credit and a home in his own name, to the good jobs in the "help wanted- male" column, and to a wife that he could still legally rape. Times have changed a bit, and the same wouldn't be true today, but as of the last draft there were extra perks to being a man.

[Quantess]

37. One (two, actually)

that should be very salient to people interested in politics, is the underrepresentation of women in congress, and also the underrepresentation of women in political discussions / female political pundits on television and cable news.

Discussions about women's access to birth control... even those discussions consist mostly of men. It's crazy. There was a pie chart recently, that showed about 75% of the people shown discussing birth control on MSM were men.

[hifiguy]

59. No, but if you can show me one modern society that has

I will eat my hat. Compared to the privileges that come with wealth (see, e.g., Willard Romney and Lyin' Ryan for only two high profile examples), it is pretty damned insignificant. It is something that exists primarily in the minds of certain ideologues and not so much on the ground for an average working person.

[ecstatic]

65. If anyone on the Rmoney /Lyan ticket was a woman

Obama would win in a landslide. For some reason, it's OK for male candidates to be unhinged and ill-prepared.

[lumberjack_jeff]

94. Women are 54% of voters.

If your argument is that McCain lost because of sexism against Palin, then some explanation is required.

[ecstatic]

192. I'm saying, the R&R team is unqualified, but

due to male privilege, they still might win. An unqualified female ticket would never win.

[boston bean]

216. That's been proven. Lots of unqualified men have been president. Ermmm Bush....

The USA hasn't voted in an unqualified or qualified woman.

But the MRA answer to that is women are a majority in this country and could vote a woman in, so it has nothing to do with any institutionalized inequality.

[Major Nikon]

224. Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome

I get that most rad-fems can't grasp this concept because under the "patriarchy" unequal outcome automatically means unequal opportunity. Unfortunately this idea doesn't enjoy much acceptance outside the women's studies department of a few universities, which is naturally attributable to the "patriarchy".

[lumberjack_jeff]

83. Since the purpose of this poll was to harvest names for your ignore list, count me as a "yes".

Women can't point to a single element of privilege that manifests itself in any meaningful way to a typical man's life.

In fact, every factor that demonstrates heterosexual or white privilege (more blacks in prison, more violence toward gays) presents in men.

"more men in congress"? Like that f'ing matters to the guy who can't get a job, can't get public assistance and can't get in college.

[boston bean]

85. I don't have anyone on ignore...

Thanks for participating.

[4th law of robotics]

372. You just host a group that immediately banishes anyone who disagrees

totally different.

[boston bean]

375. That is not the case.

I suggest if you have an issue with your blocking you pm me and let me know the err of my ways. I'm all ears. We can work it out if you really want to...

[4th law of robotics]

377. It it exactly the case

the HoF is an echo-chamber. Literally there is no dissent. Not for any length of time at least.

You banned me for pointing out the source you guys were using was from a bigoted individual ("why I hate men part . . . &quot .

You were of course wrong to ban me, and many many others. That is obvious and I suspect you are aware of it. But I have no interest in being "allowed" back in to a group on the precondition that I only parrot the official mantra and never entertain an independent thought.


I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy evidenced by you bragging that you don't have anyone on your personal ignore list while using your authority to ban dozens.

Frankly I feel a little sorry for y'all. To be so often reminded that you are wrong (hence the need for censorship) while at the same time being too stubborn to change or learn.

[boston bean]

378. I didn't read your response, except the subject line, which is false.

So I stopped right there. If you want to discuss your blocking with me and really want to participate as a good member of the group, please DU Mail me.

[4th law of robotics]

379. Reading isn't a four letter word

Give it a shot.

Then your reply would not have been necessary.

[boston bean]

380. Shoot me a DU Mail. Give it a shot.

Then we discuss all of your grievances and see if we can come to a satisfactory conclusion.

[4th law of robotics]

381. Er, no

I've been quite clear on this.

I have no interest being in a group like the one you host.

Limiting people to specific topics and culling ad hominems is one thing.

Your group squashes all dissent. That is something quite different.

On any issue there is precisely one acceptable opinion. (No seriously, go back and look through some of the threads on that forum and see how many entertain competing ideas.)

For me this is not acceptable. Even where I agree with y'all (hypothetically) I would still like to be able to hear alternative views.

Admitting that you were wrong for banning people who disagree (or who point out the sources you are using are less than savory) would be good for you personally. A growing opportunity. But it wouldn't much change my opinion.

[boston bean]

382. Ok, then. I hope you could move on, since you have no interest.

That is good to hear. We have now resolved this to my satisfaction.

Have a great day!

[Upton]

98. That crossed my mind also..

it's obviously some kind of flypaper poll. I think I'll vote "yes" too..

[Marrah_G]

96. Not voting

The majority of DU knows it has not. I have to ask why you feel it necessary to ask this question here?

[seabeyond]

99. actually, there have been quite a few comments made that male privilege and patriarchy does not

exist and only a small, loud group thinks so. they have been left unchallenged.

i do not know boston beans intent, though.

[Marrah_G]

112. Yes and everyone knows who they are and they are challenged all the time

This just seems like another post not meant to gather poll results but to rather start another long thread of the same fights with these same people.

There has to be a better way to educate people on this topic. Just yelling back and forth doesn't work.

[boston bean]

116. I didn't think that I yelled at anyone. I wanted the communities opinion on a subject.

Happens all the time on DU. I've seen lots of polls asking questions. Isn't that what a poll is for?

Many, including you, are making this personal about a group (s) of people. No need to do that. And if people would stop doing that, I think it would help immensely. No one had to respond, and no one was forced to vote. I find it an interesting subject. Hence, I posted.

Thank you!

[Marrah_G]

123. Believe it or not, we are on the same side

I'd even like to think we view each other in a favorable light. I just think you would have been better served to have posted a well thought out OP on what male privilege is, what MRA is, what MRA talking points are. Just the poll is an invitation for people to just start yelling past each other again.

[boston bean]

125. I can't control what others do. I don't even want to try.

I think the poll speaks for itself, as do the replies.

I do see a lot of insults, and snide, rude comments and personal attacks, but that is not a reflection on me or my post.

I am not responsible for it.

I think a post like you describe would be very interesting. I don't have the time, nor do I at this moment, want to put one together. Please put one together if you like and if I can, I will participate.

[Marrah_G]

130. Well okay- your poll got the results you wanted then

[boston bean]

137. Yep, I did. Hopefully more will give a vote. The day is still early!

[seabeyond]

117. i am hearing a lot of discussion. as a matter of fact, i needed clarification on a point

and pm'ed a person about his own experience. it was very interesting. allowed me a clearer picture of exactly what privilege is. and i hope he will allow me to post his reply cause i think even people that agree there is privilege, his words take it a bit further.

[Marrah_G]

120. I think one big thing would be...

... for someone to explain what MRA is in a sort of MRA-for-dummies sort of style (I had no clue what it was) and then clearly and concisely state what the talking points are that are seen here and why they are offensive. People can learn.

I didn't get what white privilege was (I certainly don't feel privileged as a poor single mom) until I had a conversation face to face about it with another single mom who was black. I get it now. We face the same problems, she just has to deal with a whole bunch of other issues at the same time.

Privilege doesn't mean rich or well off in this case. Privilege means having something a little easier then someone else in your same situation due to race, religion, gender, etc. It's not whether my life is easier then Michelle Obama's ( of course it's not) but rather is my life a little easier then a black mother in my same basic situation because I am Caucasian.

I get it now.

[seabeyond]

139. maybe.

but, i really am not much into battle right now. lol. i am not good at drawing up an op like that. i have thought to do it in hof, but i cannot get a clear picture in my mind how i would address it. there are issue mra speaks about that i am all on their side, and there is a growing movement that is very destructive. they are both a part. others understand it better, or better at creating an OP and i could share opinion on both sides.

[Marrah_G]

141. Maybe you could suggest it in hof

and then maybe a few people could get together and put something together. If it's written in an easy to understand, non confrontational way I bet more then a few minds could be changed.

[CabCurious]

122. What was the point of asking a rhetorical question?

[boston bean]

126. To take a poll and get peoples opinions.... nt

[CabCurious]

131. You CARE about the opinion of the trolls who says no? Of course not! lol

You were just making a poll for fun. Admit it!

[boston bean]

135. I have nothing to admit. I wrote a post on DU in the form of a poll and asked a specific question

to get peoples opinions. That is all.

[seabeyond]

136. actually, when a person disagreed then there was conversation

and even a better understanding that the word itself is offensive, not the reality of the definition of male privilege. i thought that was interesting. that the word itself is the turnoff that stops people from listening to one another, even if they may agree with the concept.

so, even in disagreeing, there is the opportunity to better understand.

[Zorra]

132. Apparently, there are a few DUers who still believe that there is no

male privilege in the US; so it is not a rhetorical question in everyone's POV..

That kind of validates the post as a topic for discussion.

[Quantess]

140. I know why! To:

1. Get into arguments with people who disagree
2. Get people worked up into an angry lather
3. See the names of people who voted yes, so you can add people to your "shit list"
4. See if anyone admits to being a card carrying member of the Men's Rights Assoc.

[seabeyond]

143. arent you doing 1-4 with your post? nt

[Quantess]

148. I posted upthread in support of the OP

but since it was so reasonable, nobody felt compelled to comment. So, when I came back to look at the thread again, I reached the conclusion that the main objective was to zero in on the people who voted "yes". Just my observation.


Edit: changed no to yes.

[boston bean]

150. Perhaps, the interest was piqued with those who disagreed.

Those who did not, there might have already been agreement and less to say.

That doesn't mean someone is creating a shit list. And I really don't appreciate the accusation.

[seabeyond]

155. i dont feel like i am a part of 1-4. i think i find the topic interesting. i have learned stuff

from both those that agree there is still privilege and those that disagree. even understanding the term, i have gained more knowledge and a better understanding.

that is my intent.

[seabeyond]

127. an even more excellent description of male privilege that will help even those that get it,

to understand better.

i brought up the point of male privilege in the black community. others disagreed. not being black, and recognizing the issues in their community, instead of plodding away with my opinion, i asked 1StrongBlackMan if he would tell me how he felt about it. i always love to listen to his perspective. he seems to always let me see things from a different angle. i respect what he has to say. he did not disappoint. i like what he says because in his example i think it gives a clearer picture of privilege. thanks 1StrongBlackMan.

IMHO there absolutely is male priviledge in the Black community; but it doesn't necessarily come from within the Black community.

Let me explain ... evidence of priviledge can be found in the assumptions given about the individual. For example, the priviledged person is assumed more competent, assumed to be smarter, assumed to be more responsible, assumed to be more in control of decision-making.

However, after generations of Black women being the primary breadwinners (in intact families) and generations of the "absent" Black male, there are no such assumptions given to the Black male among Black people.

But that does not stop the larger community from making such assumptions.

Does that make sense?

[Marrah_G]

133. good post!

[opiate69]

183. So.....

Privilege is evidenced by the assumption of power, control, etc.... but....
Within the black community, there is no such assumption.... and....
Outside of the black community there is this assumption(despite the fact that the image of the shiftless, lazy, angry, absentee father black man is still unfortunately widespread outside of the black community) ergo:

male privilege exists??

[seabeyond]

188. it really is pretty simple and clear

i would think with all the intellectual power you have, you would get it. maybe it is the 11 of you lacking the decoder ring that is getting in your way.

[opiate69]

189. well.... with all due respect to 1strong...

am I supposed to believe that someone who can`t even spell privilege can understand it? Then again, I suppose it makes sense to you since it seems to be written in the same stream-of-conciousness word salad manner as most of your posts are

[seabeyond]

191. omg... more insult. how nasty. it is one thing when being nasty to me, that is fine

but, i am not much into ugliness to another poster that was merely doing me the favor of answering a question for me.

what a very sad post.

[opiate69]

194. and yet....

this mote of dust will continue to revolve around the exceptionally average star, in a dusty arm of a galaxy in an insignificant corner of the immeasurably vast universe. Que sera, sera.

[boston bean]

213. I've tried to stay above the fray, but

you are just being extremely mean, imho. There is no need for it.

[opiate69]

220. Um....yeah....

Because, I mean... You and your little crew have always been the absolute picture of civility, class and dignified discourse. One can't possibly imagine why anyone would be anything less than reverential and fawning in dealing with any of you.

[Marrah_G]

233. That was a nasty comment

You win at the internet.

[4th law of robotics]

373. Black people live shorter lives than white people

are more likely to end up in jail or on the streets, addicted to drugs or given harsh sentences for the same crimes than whites.

They are far less likely to graduate highschool or college and more likely to be deemed problem students requiring drugs or punishment.

They are over-represented in low-level jobs and are generally considered by many to be violent and anti-social.


Is this proof that they are a privileged group? Or are all these things evidence of a lack of privilege?

[AngryAmish]

138. Side note: When did MRA become acceptable usage around here?

It is dehumanizing and belittling.

[boston bean]

147. I'm not sure why you are asking me. Did the OP mention MRA? nt

[AngryAmish]

152. Oh no, I just saw it in the thread.

That is why I put "side note" in the post. Cheers!

[redqueen]

187. How is labeling a style of talking points...

such as the ones used to try to claim the very real wage gap either doesn't exist or is reasonable and justifiable, "dehumanizing and belittling"?

The fact that anyone on the left argues these points is evidence of how much progress MRA's have made.

[lumberjack_jeff]

197. Would it be fair to label you a "radfem" against your wishes...

... based on my perception of the style of your talking points?

NO ONE, not one person, here is an MRA.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11142007

Yet, you insist on your right to use it as a slur.

[redqueen]

205. Who did I label an MRA?

I said the talking points are used here.

That's simply a fact.

[boston bean]

215. Lets list some of the MRA talking points. I'll start.

1) Institutionalized inequality does not exist.
2) The Patriarchy is a conspiracy theory
3) Categorizing feminists they don't agree with as Rad Fems, or radical feminists, to broad brush a group of women they see as the enemy
4) Women instigate and cause men to batter them
5) Men are not privileged because they were drafted to fight in wars
6) Feminists are prudes and need fainting couches or get the vapors. All derailing strategies. Which in itself is sexist language.

[gollygee]

190. The term MRA?

That's what they call themselves.

[lumberjack_jeff]

198. Who?

Which DU'er calls himself an MRA? Just one, this should be easy.

Let me help you with your search.

[gollygee]

203. I don't know about DUers

I thought you meant that the term MRA is a horrible term in and of itself. But I have known them and they use the name for themselves. I don't know if any DUers call themselves that though.

[lumberjack_jeff]

204. The term is not used as an abstraction by posters in this thread.

It is used as a slur toward specific DU'ers.

[gollygee]

206. Oh

I haven't personally seen anyone call another person an MRA, but I'll take your word for it as I haven't read every post in the thread. I have seen people say they've seen MRA talking points - the same arguments and language you hear from MRAs, and I have to agree with that. My brother is an MRA and calls himself one (he is also a conservative Republican and fan of Rush Limbaugh so obviously not a DUer) and I sometimes see very similar things said here that I only otherwise hear from him, so I associate those statements with MRAs and consider them to be MRA talking points. That doesn't mean I think the person who said those things is an MRA, but I am bothered by seeing what I feel are MRA arguments used here. Or maybe I'm just surprised. It's probably my mistake for assuming all Democrats are pro-feminist.

[hifiguy]

293. Accusing someone of throwing around "MRA talking points"

is not one bit different that accusing someone of throwing around "Republican talking points." It's a clear slam on the person being accused and unwarranted unless the people making the accusation can back it up with links and evidence.

The main difference is that virtually all DUers can spot a 'puke talking point when they see one and most wouldn't know an "MRA talking point" if one bit them on the behind. So it's a much easier slur to throw carelessly and maliciously around and escape the consequences for their incivility.

[boston bean]

295. Stating that the patriarchy is a conspiracy theory is an MRA talking point.

I see that all the time. Is it ok to point that out?

[hifiguy]

305. The very term "the patriachy" implies concerted group effort,

something consciously organized. It may be that patriarchal values derived from the oppressive Abrahamic religions are commonplace in western cultures. In fact it is undeniable that they are and that they do not redound to the benefit of either men or women albeit in very different ways.

To invoke "The Patriarchy" is like nothing so much as invoking "The Illuminati" or "The Freemasons" in that it unmistakeably suggests conscious, concerted, organized efforts by persons unknown in pursuit of a particular agenda. In that respect, yes, it is a conspiracy theory in the same way that the Illuminati are. It's a boogeyman. I don't know any guy who's ever gotten an invite to the meetings because no one ever has. Use the language of conspiracy theorists and you wind up lumped with them.

I can honestly say I have never read a website, book, or pamphlet published by any "Men's Rights" group. What little I have heard about them predisposes me to think they are by and large whiny (and often right wing paranoid) assholes who raise valid points once in a blue moon, such as child custody preferences and male-specific health issues. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then. There are those on DU who attribute any disagreement with their narrow and blighted ideologies to being part of The Patriarchy or MRAs. That is pretty much beyond ridiculous. Genuine disagreement need not be fueled by sinister hidden agendas.

[MadrasT]

310. That's how you think of the term "the patriarchy"?

As a reference to a conscious group effort?

I've never thought of it that way.

To me, "the patriarchy" means something more like, "remaining vestiges of the patriarchial system of values derived from the oppressive Abrahamic religions". To me, it's just shorthand term for that.

And not meant to sound like it's some kind of group like "The Illuminati" or "The Freemasons".

Maybe I need to start saying things like "Oh, that's obviously a result of remaining vestiges of the patriarchial system of values derived from the oppressive Abrahamic religions" instead of "Oh, that's obviously a result of the patriarchy."

'Cause if I say the latter, what I mean is the former...

[hifiguy]

319. "Historical patriarchal values"

summarizes it quite succinctly and far more accurately. It also provides extremely valuable context with its use of the word "historical" as that necessarily implies a process rather than a group. It also implies that evolution is possible. FWIW, I find that phrase a much better descriptor which carries much less baggage and makes the point directly.

I am not being flip in the slightest. That phrase would be a far less antagonistic and monolithic way of making the point you are driving at. Cheers!

[MadrasT]

328. That's good to know. Thank you.

I am well aware of negative reaction to phrase "the patriarchy" and you've helped me to understand why, and helped me to think about a better way to reference what I'm really talking about without being quite so alienating.

"Historical patriarchal values". Let me sit with that for a while. I think I like it, and I like your explanation of why you think it works better.

Cool.

[hifiguy]

331. De nada.

I am exceedingly fussy about how words are used and prize the greatest degree of precision possible in language.

[gollygee]

301. Someone responded in a thread I started with a post from an MRA site

not a hate group MRA, but a MRA (and pro Ron Paul) site anyway. It was an article called something like "Misandry: The Only Respectable Bigotry" or something, with a subtitle of "The Feminism of Imbiciles", and the website had a list all up the left side of the page full of MRA articles. I'm not throwing out accusations. I'm stating plainly that I have seen MRA talking points here. People asked for links in the meta-discussion forum and I linked it there, and they replied that it wasn't a hate group anyway, which is true. Not a hate group but definitely an MRA site.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021139684#post33

[lumberjack_jeff]

196. What's unfortunate is that it's used despite the fact NO ONE here self-identifies as MRA.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11142007

It is therefore a slur.

[Whisp]

142. bullshit poll question.

never / always
all / none

etc.,
if a poll has these words, it's a bullshit poll.

But you got the vote button you wanted pushed. Pretty cheesey and sleight of hand if you ask me.

[boston bean]

145. I guess it's not bullshit then.

I don't see the words:

never / always
all / none

in the OP.

[Whisp]

154. I do

Has America fully expunged itself from all forms of male privilege in society?

CNN is looking for more poll people, I heard.

[boston bean]

157. I apologize for upsetting you so, Whisp. Really. Didn't think such a simple question would hit a

nerve.

If you have some gripe about the way I posted a poll, how about letting me know exactly what it is, instead of stating I wrote something I did not write.

[Whisp]

164. whatever, bb. You are getting your drama fix

because it's been pretty quiet there at your ranch lately and you need your confrontation.

I won't be supplying you any further.

[boston bean]

169. Once again, making accusations that have no basis in reality.

Thank you though for kicking the thread atleast.

I'm pleased you won't be "supplying" me any further.

[demmiblue]

163. Just a question...

Do you ever divorce yourself from the person who is asking the question from the question itself?

Obviously, I am not a person who makes many comments... I am more of an observer.

If it were another poster who asked this question, would you respond in the same way? Or is your answer contingent due to the OP?

[Whisp]

170. contingent to a certain camp of thinking

that I disagree with in many areas.

I think if Skinner made this poll I'd probably have replies in much the same way too.

[demmiblue]

171. So, the question itself is problematic to you?

Good to know.

[Major Nikon]

200. It's a bullshit poll question because male privilege and female privilege will always exist

Unless of course we ever reach the rad-fem utopia where the only differences between men and women are the plumbing. Even then it's hard to imagine unless they start transplanting wombs from women to men on an equal basis. I'm not sure anyone outside of rad-fems would ever want to live in such a society.

[Whisp]

207. if women took over power from men

as men have now with their privilege of being CEOs, presidents and sitting atop the tip of the power pyramid, I am sure if it were radfems in those places, they would fuck things up as badly. Ego and selfishness and greed and all that rest of that rot is not confined to one gender.

Equality is also accepting that everyone is capable of having these traits, regardless of gender or any other label.

[polly7]

217. Yep. it's always so beneficial to discuss complex issues based on answering either of two black

and white options. What else could be expected? Nothing about males being passed over for certain traditionally female jobs, males expected to provide in an economy hiring no-one and suffering the mental anguish when there is nothing, etc. etc. I didn't vote, because imo the only male privilege exists at the top of the 1%, and those struggling underneath face the same discrimination as women do.

[boston bean]

230. You don't believe that the 99% of women and men are equal.

I don't.

[polly7]

240. I believe they face the same challenges, yes.

As someone who's never even considered not being equal except for the fact I'm outweighed and don't have the strength of a man, not once have I applied for a job I've been turned down for ... and some of these were in traditionally mens' fields. Maybe in Canada it's different, but I honestly see men here struggling to find work as oil periodically slows down and farms are eaten up by big corporate owners, and unfortunately, I've been on calls where they simply couldn't handle the pressure any more. I guess I don't see the 'patriarchy' beating women down, when women have more rights than ever before. I refuse to be a victim of anything, and believing that I'm somewhat of a lesser person because someone is continually telling me I am, is just bullshit. Sorry, but that's how I feel.

[boston bean]

243. Who is talking about any victimhood, besides you?

That is really pretty insulting. Pointing out inequalities does not mean someone is cowering in a corner feeling like a victim. Can you recognize that? In fact, it takes a lot of courage to point it out. Considering the attacks many receive when pointing it out. And I'm not talking about DU. Republicans feel black people ought to just get off the pity pot and pull themselves up by their bootstraps as well. It's quite a common opinion, that many have, eh......

You see the world through a very personal lens. And I'm glad that you have gotten every little thing in your life that you have wanted and have never ever felt the inequality. I can accept that. Why can't you accept that others have different experiences. And that just because you have had a different one, does not mean others haven't experienced something different. You think that others who have experienced it are all wallowing in victimhood and there could not be any other possible reasons for their experiences, except that they brought them on themselves. And that fighting for more equality somehow means someone is just unhappy and won't get anywhere with that type of attitude??? Well, I certainly feel differently. I ADMIRE people who pave the paths to equality. THE MORE THE BETTER.

Of course strides have been made, and more will be made, but not if we settle for less.

[MadrasT]

245. +1

and

[polly7]

262. Another one that laughed at those who objected to the word fucktoilet.

That says more than you know, and it's not good.

[seabeyond]

264. you should object, it is offensive. but, one should at least put some effort and honesty

to how and why it was used instead of using it as a platform to dishonestly interpret usage as an ax to grind.

[polly7]

265. You should pay attention.

People objected to its use, no matter the context it was used in. Two chimed in like pre-schoolers taunting me for objecting to it at all.

As I say, pay attention.

[seabeyond]

270. when a person is willing to ignore context of what was being said, it is obviously about the battle

and not so much the truth.

[polly7]

273. I understood the context when it was first written .......

did you miss all that?

The word was later being defended, over and over. A huge joke was made that I was like a little child just learning a new swear word, and why should it bother me? Others had asked to never use it again no matter what context it was used in. Yet ........... still defended. And turned into a huge funny! Over nothing. Because not a single man even hinted at such a thing. You don't get it, do you?

Ah well.

[seabeyond]

275. i have not seen the word used but by your group after that one post.

so i guess you are proving it out once again in this thread.

[polly7]

277. You haven't seen it defended over and over and laughed about?

Where've ya been?

[seabeyond]

279. when people continue to disregard context and meaning and usage for their outrage

i would imagine others put in the time to explain, thinking there is a lack of knowledge, not purposeful intent to misrepresent.

you can have the last word on this subthread also.

[polly7]

281. Basically,

they had a good laugh over it.

[MadrasT]

288. Not playing.

Have a great day.

[polly7]

325. Not any more .............. anyway

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=93883

BTW, it wasn't just me who found the word disgusting.

[MadrasT]

329. Your subject line is accurate.

This kind of interaction doesn't feel good to me and I don't want to go there again.

Have a great day.

[polly7]

352. It didn't feel good for me at the time.

But you sure had fun with it. I get why it's uncomfortable for you now. No worries.

[redqueen]

255. Very ell said. nt

[polly7]

261. Yeah, from someone who laughed and implied I was like a

child because I objected to your word fucktoilet to describe women. That thumbs-up means a lot.

[redqueen]

266. You failed to comprehend. First of all, it IS NOT "my" word.

Secondly, It's not having an objection to the word that was childish.

It was saying it over and over and over. And here you are again, obsessing over it, repeating it and having no understanding of what the word even means. Still.

[polly7]

268. No kidding.

We all know it's not your word. You introduced it here to describe how men here view women. Which is bullshit, not one man even hinted such an ugly thing. Obviously, you believed her words so much you chose to parrot them. And then you laughed and defended it after repeated objections of many people who found it disgusting, not just me whom you hate so much ..... there were a lot of us. I found it sad, actually, that you had to resort to childish tactics to tease me about it. 'good grief, like a child just learning a new swear word'! Yep, funny stuff there, redqueen.

[redqueen]

271. More reading comprehension issues.

If you know it's not ky word, don't say it is, as you just did before I corrected you.

I didn't say that it is "how men view women". It is how a certain type of man views women. And it may be that he only views certain types of women that way.

[polly7]

274. LOL.

The posts are all still here.

[redqueen]

282. Then quote and link, if you think I'm misrepresenting what I said.

Also, I don't hate you. I don't even know you.

[polly7]

283. No, do your own search.

As I said, they are all still here, it should be easy for you to look up your own posts, and I don't have the time right now.

[redqueen]

286. Typical. nt

[polly7]

307. Not really, I usually do supply links

but had to run for a second.

Here ya go
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=93880

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=93883

If you read the rest of the thread, you'll see many objected to it, as they did in many others. But you choose to defend it by saying 'twisty' or whoever TF that is, said it somewhere in some book and that you brought it here to explain how men see women. Well NO man I know has ever told me in words or by actions that that is the case. Your ugly shock terms turn off more people to your message than you realize. Because you have NO tolerance for the viewpoints of anyone who calls themselves a feminist, a humanist, or just a compassionate person with the hope for equality for all, unless they tow the line that porn is BAD and men have only one thing on their minds, and that they can't possibly suffer from discrimination. You all say you're here to educate. Really??? You lost me when you laughed at mine and others concerns. Actually .......... long before that.

[redqueen]

313. tl:dr your weak, sad dodge.

THIS is what you were supposed to back up. I know you didn't forget. You just side stepped it. Again, typical.

You introduced it here to describe how men here view women.

I already tried to explain what was childish. Won't bother wasting any more time on this derailing job. Nicely done, BTW. Masterclass.

[polly7]

315. It's all there.

Read it and weep.

[opiate69]

320. ...

Somewhat decent points from the judges. Apparently they aren`t too put off by the attempt at the "subtle" storm-off.

[seabeyond]

272. what do you think a man is saying about a woman using the term MILF?

do you think it is for some connection? do you think it is about respect toward the women? seeing the woman as a person? or is it a means of reducing woman to.....

lets see how honest you can be with this very very simple question.

[polly7]

276. Fuck MILF.

My friends and I point out men we wouldn't kick out for eating crackers, either. Is that a reason to have a fit over?

[seabeyond]

278. you are selective in your outrage. i guess i got my answer. done posting to you, also

have the last word

[polly7]

280. No, not at all.

I direct outrage where it's due.

[hifiguy]

335. That whole ridiculous "MILF" dustup was what could be called

an unintentional malapropism in which an acronym which means one thing one place - in this case it means Moro Islamic Liberation Front in the Philippines -means something that, in another place where the acronym is inappropriate and funny as a result of that inappropriateness.

The same thing is just as funny for the same reasons in these cases:

FART: Ferrovie Autolinee Regionali Ticinesi (Regional Transport Authority for Canton Ticino, Switzerland)

And then there's

FART: Florida Association of Respiratory Therapists
FART: Fast Action Response Team

FART acronyms from http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/FART

[polly7]

345. Yes, it was an unfortunate, sad article with a very unfortunately

worded heading. Anacronyms are joked about every day ...... our EMS instructor said he'd never seen such a bunch of depraved nuts after hearing the ways we changed ours to remember better. Dark humour, or even normal humour from anyone seeing something like this title isn't disgusting, or perverted, or any of the crap they were trying to make it out to be. The most disgusting thing on the thread was the new word introduced by redqueen .......... err, twisty, whoever the hell that is who thinks women are what she said - to shock us. Apparently it's the only thing that will get through our thick skulls .... shock. And then to defend it over and over on many threads after being told how demeaning it was by some very reasonable women. Not only defended, but made jokes to insult those who found it offensive. That makes me believe only certain women are worth being treated as equals by the very people educating / googling for the cause, us poor know-nothings. We're told men are the cause of most of our problems, yet are being stabbed in the back by our own. That is what pisses me off.

Sorry for the rant.

Now alert .... anyone who wishes to do so!

[hifiguy]

348. Some people are so dogmatic and humor-impaired that

I don't understand how they can get through a day without sticking their heads in the oven. Some genuine and healthy silliness is necessary to keep from going mad.

[polly7]

260. Insulting, really?

What is more insulting is telling us ad-nauseum how put upon we are and how everything we do is in some way affected by the patriarchy. As a woman, I see where men are just as hard done by in today's economy, I see their concerns laughed and scoffed at, I see very little resources available to help them. I've seen the suicides right up close ... as close as one can get, so don't tell me the patriarchy is making these men kill themselves. If you want to be a victim, be one ........ but don't ever compare yourself to a woman in a third world country or developing nation where simply being born female is considered a curse.

Oh, and I see the world through the lens of many co-workers, friends and family and by reading and watching the news, where women have made astonishing advancements and accomplishments. You have no fucking idea what I 'think' so don't try to elevate your poor, poor women on DU shtick by putting words into my mouth. Instead of bemoaning the DU rape culture and telling women like me who HAVE dealt with DV and helped victims of it, or organized and worked to help the homeless that we're rape supporters, or whatever the hell that was supposed to mean, maybe you should consider that male and female both experience bigotry and discrimination. Definitely, that will always be the case, but to assume that women here have it so bad because the dreaded patriarchy is making us all victims, is insulting.

[boston bean]

289. Polly, I do. The difference between me and you

is I don't see it as a one way street. I can see it from every angle. Pity you want to attack women who voice honest opinions, and call them wallowing in pity.

Do you only feel sympathetic to one side of the issue.

Just because someone identifies as a feminist and speaks out about issues concerning women, does not mean they hate men, or don't care how men feel, or any other thing. Get it?

It's one cause, a different struggle. And many many many feminists can walk and chew gum at the same time. Pointing out inequalities women face is not harming men, or attacking men. PERIOD.

PS It isn't hurting women either. PERIOD! Go tell Susan B Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton that their decades of struggle for the right of women to vote was insulting. Because there were men and WOMEN who felt everything was just fine too. They didn't feel there was anything wrong at all!

[polly7]

312. I don't see it as a one way street either. Where did you come up with that one?

I do see it from every angle, and that doesn't include the concerns of women only. No, I feel sympathetic towards every person on the planet suffering from some sort of bigotry. You're preaching (and I say that literally) to the choir here .... speaking about any type of bigotry of course is not discounting the prejudice towards and the troubles of any other group. They're all connected. I've stated that inequality stems from those at the top with power, who harm men, women and children of all races. Maybe if you saw men as equals you'd realize there are many, many concerns they face that are identical to those we women do and that they, as a group, have much less in the terms of resources to cope with them. Of course this conversation would be much different were we talking about women from out of the U.S. and Canada, but as far as I know, you didn't specify we weren't. I do see republicans and conservatives up here trying to derail womens rights long fought for, but thankfully, in our case, they won't get far with it. Hopefully they won't there either. As far as porn - if consenting adult women enjoy it and wish to participate and profit from it - good for them. If they don't wish to, there are laws to protect them. Just as with men. Probably the only thing we agree on is the sexualization of young girls. That really frosts me, and it's the stupid mothers (mostly) who push for it. Instead of bemoaning the men so much, why no concentrate on movements that educate rather than demonize. It seems it might do more for these young girls than anything else.

[boston bean]

337. If I saw men as my equal....

hmm.. If I were their equal in every way, I might be able to see it. However, on a whole and in society, that is not the case.

I just don't know what else to tell you. And my disagreement isn't some off the wall radical feminist temper tantrum. It's well accepted and factual that there are many areas where women are not equal to men. Gosh, why am I even having to say this or argue this on a liberal website.

Please believe what you want. If you don't like what I post, and find me insulting, I ask you just refrain from having any further contact with me. It's really just becoming a circle jerk and it's just not worth my time.

[polly7]

346. Why do you say things I haven't said?

'Radical feminist temper tantrum'? Does it help your cause to blame me for giving you this label? You seem to see a lot of things people here have never written.

I will believe what I want, thanks for your permission.

An yes, I do see men as my equal fighting for the same opportunities in this troubling economy and with the same worries, if not more. As I said, if it's the sexual aspect that bothers you most, women have fought for the right to express themselves any way they choose. I agree that some find little choice in it because, again, of the economy .... but then so do men. If women are being mistreated, they have the law to turn to. Hopefully, more and more education and social programs will help those who feel they have no choice. If my opinions constitute a circle-jerk for you, then you really had no interest in anything I had to say anyway. Which is perfectly fine.

[hifiguy]

349. It's what some people around here do.

It's their regular M.O. When you won't accept facts and logic you have to fall back on something. And for many, that is twisting words or pulling things our of their rear ends. I used to think those of us on the left were better than that. I was wrong.

[opiate69]

172. "fully expunged itself"

[Whisp]

178. apparently it's a trick question/poll

that all who have the decoder ring know, but the rest are just filed away as ignorant.
It's sort of cute tho, in an attention getting way.

[opiate69]

179. lol.... I was just thinkin`....

I hate it when I try to use a new, fancy word and get it wrong


(think we can send away for the decoder ring? I do hate being left out! )

[Major Nikon]

208. Here's the way it should have been worded...

Has the Radical Feminist utopian idea of completely abolishing all gender roles been fully realized?

[boston bean]

214. wow, as far as I know mens rights activists aren't too happy with their

assigned gender roles either. Do you harbor as much anger for them as you do "Radical Feminists".

They do blame feminists for it though. Which is utterly laughable, because feminists want to bust up gender roles and Mens rights activists would actually benefit.

Feminists on the other hand recognize gender roles as a societal/cultural phenomenon and do not hate men.

Also, to recognize that some of the problems of inequality stem from constructed gender roles, isn't something that only "radical feminists" believe. Actually it's pretty mainstream feminism.

[Major Nikon]

218. Do you and redqueen have any other tactics besides false accusations?

It was kind of funny at first, but now it's just getting old and tired and frankly pathetic.

I don't harbor anger against even Republicans and least of all rad-fems who are a dwindling minority becoming less and less relevant with each passing year thanks to the 3rd wave and 2nd wave feminists who want no part of a divisive and irrational message that trots out truly nutty ideas like heterosexual sex is essentially rape.
http://radfemimages.wordpress.com/the-gears/#PIV

I have no problem with the rest of the 2nd wave and 3rd wave and support their efforts.

[bluestateguy]

182. No.

But neither has any other nation.

[lightcameron]

184. LOL

[Nye Bevan]

185. I wish I had the same life expectancy as a woman (nt)

[Zalatix]

254. Me, too. My male advantages can't be all that great if it kills me early.

[Zoeisright]

186. Of course not.

Men make most of the money, own most of the property, don't have government trying to control their bodies, make up most of the court system, the legislative branch, and the executive branch. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool.

[Monk06]

193. As far as I know the island of Lesbos is the only jurisdiction where women have an advantage re

property rights and political power. If anyone knows some other examples I love to hear them.

[orpupilofnature57]

201. We've been struggling with it for a nanosecond.

[hifiguy]

252. When viewed with an eye towards the immense course of history

you are of course utterly correct. Not that this fact matters to some people.

[seabeyond]

253. of course it matters. i thought it a very good point. doesnt mean people, women,

are not going to continue to speak out.

[orpupilofnature57]

333. As they should .

[Spike89]

211. I "voted" not to vote

Not because I don't believe there is male privelege, but because I think it is an incomplete way to think of the problem of gender equality. Just to be clear on my stance, I do believe there is much work and sadly, probably generations of attitude changes needed in the area of gender fairness.
However, my feeling is that every group should be privileged...ok, that actually sounds pretty hokie. What I mean is that I would hope that someday there is fairness and each group's strengths would be recognized and rewarded fairly, and that at the same time, "outliers" would never have to worry about gaining access to a group that they don't have "privileged" status in.

[boston bean]

212. I appreciate the comment, but your reason for not voting

has nothing to do with the OP. No where was it stated that it was the only way to think of gender equality. If you feel there male privilege exists in America, nothing should stop you from voting in the poll.

[hifiguy]

246. It had everything to do with the OP,

which was presented in a Manichean black/white, either/or format. The nuances of the issue and Spike's thoughtful response simply don't fit in to that rubric and never can. I "voted" the same way for exactly the same reasons. We often mock the reichwingers, justifiably, for being unable to see shades of gray. You are doing exactly the same thing - not being able to see shades of gray.

[seabeyond]

251. we also mock the reichwingers, justifiably, for ignoring reality. nt

[opiate69]

256. at least, when we`re not citing their anti-porn "studies"...

amirite?

[boston bean]

292. Au Contraire

I see plenty of grey.

The question was a very simple one. Although, to understand the meaning of male privilege one must be able to think in the abstract.

If one can do that, and they feel there is male privilege, the two options to this questions are sufficient.

[Spike89]

332. Well, I don't think it is a meaningful term

Of course I could have voted, but in my opinion it is a silly question as the problem isn't privilege, but lack of access and fairness which are not the same thing.

[boston bean]

336. So, you take umbrage with the word privilege.

I'm not sure what other word to use when referring to a person who receives more benefits or more access or more power or more money for just being male, or white, or whatever.

And it is a very common term to describe the inequity.

[Spike89]

338. Maybe so, it strikes me as Harrison Bergeron-ish

I don't believe the problem is someone else is getting too much, but that some have trouble getting what they deserve. I am very aware that this is simple word play, but words are very important to me. I don't think the path to fairness should be crouched in terms that imply taking, but rather in positive terms.
I really don't have some Men's rights agenda that I'm trying very hard to hide. I truly believe that equality of opportunity (gender, racial, you name it) is the grail we as people and a society should be striving for, and I feel focusing on "how good they've got it" isn't as effective an approach as focusing on ending the negative hurdles many groups face.

[YoungDemCA]

219. Of course not.

There's still plenty of male privilege in American society. The rise of feminism has changed a lot for the better, but we still have a long way to go.

[Major Hogwash]

221. Number 200.

And the "war on women" continues unabated.

[undeterred]

225. I regret that I have only one vote for this poll.

[Norrin Radd]

227. Meant to hit "No"

[seabeyond]

228. the nifty thing with du3 polls is you can change them a zillion times.... nt

[eek MD]

231. I see

I see that it's the time of the month where men are supposed to don their sackcloth and ashes, and feel guilty because of how great they have it. It's so important to reflect about being undeserving of all the things we've worked to obtain in our lives, because they were essentially handed to us on a silver platter. I'm sure all of those people with short-term memory loss appreciate the constant reminders... These threads are so unifying, aren't they? I mean, they must be unifying since so many people voted that male privilege exists in your poll, right? Not divisive at all.

[boston bean]

232. Nope, not what it is about at all. nt

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

237. My god, the number of FRA talking points in this thread are astounding!

[Skittles]

285. YES

REALLY shows how insecure they are

[AngryAmish]

294. Who is this they you speak of?

[lumberjack_jeff]

322. Exactly! And the southern poverty law center is tracking FRA groups as hate groups.

Or at least that's what I heard.

[Skittles]

339. I would say you are more insecure than are they

[Skittles]

284. LOLOL

FUCK no

[HiPointDem]

296. One-percent privilege is the main and most pernicious form of privilege in society today. Where

male privilege exists it's very often entangled in one-percent privilege.

[boston bean]

298. Male privilege exists in all the percentages. nt

[HiPointDem]

299. you saying so doesn't make it so. 'male privilege' is a 1%er divide & rule tactic v. the lower

classes.

[boston bean]

302. you're saying it doesn't, doesn't make it so.

Women are still paid less than men.. for doing the same jobs

Women have not achieved equality in management positions... for every day jobs.

[HiPointDem]

309. the widely circulated articles saying so simply compare average wages in an industry by sex.

they don't compare individual "jobs" and they don't look at factors like years of experience, qualifications, etc.

"Everyday jobs" are typically not open to easy discrimination of that sort. Wage scales and criteria for raises are in place. That's why the "wage gap" is lowest among the poor and lower middle class.

The wage gap is an issue of upper-class liberals. The wage gap that matters to most of the population is the gap between the 1%ers and everyone else. -- particularly the working class.

[hifiguy]

308. Agreed 100%

My avatar long ago pointed out that there is one privilege that trumps all others and is universal across time and place: economic privilege. That privilege affects everyone in a given society: black, white, red, brown, male, female, gay, straight, or any other demographic subdivision you might care to use.

There is The Capitalist Class and there is Everybody Else.

Until that conflict is equitably resolved no other issues can be.

[polly7]

317. Perfect!

And THAT is what we should all be working against. This petty blaming one another will get us exactly nowhere.

[hifiguy]

326. Thank you, polly7!

Haven't seen you around too much lately. Have a great weekend.

[polly7]

327. Yvw ... and You too! nt.

[lumberjack_jeff]

321. Wedge issues: you're doing it wrong.

Men are only 46% of voters, so they'd seem to be a tempting wedge target, but when women marry, they tend to adopt their husband's voting habits.

http://www.nytexaminer.com/2012/08/why-do-married-women-vote-republican/

It seems reasonable to point out that when women marry, the tendency is for her to work fewer hours outside the home and him to work more. Her economic interests are tied to his employment. Rhetoric which attacks him also attacks her economic interests.

[JoeyT]

330. It's silly to claim that it has.

Last I checked right wingers weren't trying to push through laws telling me what I can do with my body. Women can't say that. If I get mugged there isn't a huge stink over how much the clothes I wore cost. If a woman is raped, what she was wearing is the *first* thing talked about.

It's isn't a complicated question. Anyone that insists men don't *really* have any advantages is an idiot.

[lumberjack_jeff]

334. If you get mugged, there isn't a huge stink, period.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/gender.cfm

[yewberry]

350. ...which is hardly the point.

And why not post the companion to your handy chart?

[lumberjack_jeff]

354. You're proving my point.

No one gives a shit that you're getting mugged, because the mugger was probably a guy too.

[flvegan]

341. Well, this thread went about as expected.

[Taverner]

344. Why would anyone think it had?

[craigmatic]

362. There's always going to be preferential treatment as long as society and institutions are run by

people. Now I would say that female priviledge is on the rise. Men still have to sign up with selective service and women still for the most part get the better end of child custody cases. I'm pro-equality myself.

[JoePhilly]

366. The poll question could not be wored in a much more biased manner.

Let's examine the question

"Has America fully expunged itself from all forms of male privilege in society"?

There are 2 phrases dripping with "response bias" crammed into this rather short question.

Let's examine "response biased" phrase $#1: "fully expunged". The word "fully" makes the desired response (that desired by the person asking the question) obvious. Rarely is anything "fully expunged". And so for one to response YES, would mean that they are fairly sure no one can provide an example, ANY EXAMPLE where the thing is not "fully expunged". Therefore, the only answer to this question can be NO.

Now let's examine "response biased phrase #2: "All forms". This phrase basically repeats the first biased phrase, and reinforces it. It flat out says, "All forms". Which means, if you can find even one example. ANY EXAMPLE, the answer to the question must be NO.

There are 2 basic reasons why some one creates a poll question with this level or response bias built into it.

#1: The have no idea how to write OBJECTIVE poll questions.
#2: They had an intended out come for the poll question.

Not sure which of these applies to the owner of this poll.

[polly7]

368. If you look back at these polls started here imo, to cause heated discussion out of their own group,

they're all loaded with the implication that women are really far down, nearly right at the bottom, when in reality ......... we've got more rights and recognition of those rights than ever before. This GOP war on women is going to fall flat on it's ass, imo, because it's only being used as an issue to get the radical fundie vote, and will fail. I take great issue with women who see themselves as sexual objects and do nothing to dispel the illusion that being female is being less than and catering to the ideals of men. I don't see it as men demanding us (except for the fundies and republican / conservative nuts who have no business in politics anyway and those sickos who corrupt at every opportunity whether it's with legalized porn or anything else ....... in which case, the law needs to be consulted). Where are these strong female role models, besides googling for information and using shock tactics to educate those of us who've already lived it and learned?

The 'patriarchy' exists right at the top, and is no means male only. Once we get rid of the inequality of economic superiority to the scale it is now, women, men, children of all races will begin to see equality. Education is key, with the co-operation of World Bodies recognizing the importance of the contribution of women. Here in Canada and the U.S., I just don't see the unfair advantages I keep hearing males have. I know I'm going against the popular opinion, but if women want to be seen as equal, then ... be. jmho.

[NYC_SKP]

371. America will NEVER have fully expunged itself from all forms of male & female privilege in society.

This is a wedge issue poll that I originally voted "yes" on as a matter of snark. Now I simply refuse to vote in a poll that I think is divisive by design.

America will NEVER have fully expunged itself from all forms of male & female privilege in society.

And "good looking" privilege, and "young and fit" privilege, and "more articulate and outgoing" privilege.

Anyone who suggests today that privilege no longer exists is as ignorant as someone who thinks that the absence of privilege shall ever happen.

As long as individual human beings are different one from the other, and as long as these differences put us into groups, there shall be privileges of one group over another.

Surely you know that, yet you create a poll. For what purpose I do not know.