In what ways are men discriminated against?

I always find these sorts of threads rather saddening and frustrating, when men raise issues or concerns they are often shouted down, told to stop whining or mocked. Miss Elizabeth is just unusually open about it.

There seems to be a general belief that because to be female is difficult (a proposition I agree with) to be male must be easy (something I very much don’t agree with).

It would be more accurate to say that its difficult to be human but because of societal expectations and other factors men and women experience different, but many overlapping, problems and frustrations in life.

It is treated as zero-sum game where a ‘victory’ for men must be treated as a ‘defeat’ for women, or vice-versa. Too often it appears that to build one gender up it is necessary to tear the other gender down.

When a someone raises a concern about how men are treated they are often met by a 'Ah, yes, but…" argument where their complaint or concern is twisted to somehow actually be a negatively women-centered issue and that while men may have some minor complaints they can be dismissed because the female half of the species has it worse. Its tiresome and tends to shut down debate

In my experience it usually comes down to two negative sides of one coin, to take an example, women often state that they are not treated seriously in the workplace and assumed not to be competent, the flipside of that is that a man may by default be assumed to be competent but god forbid if he admits he’s not 100% sure about something and could do with some help. Its acceptable for a woman to say she needs help, not so for a man, and that extends far beyond the workplace into the life experience of men and women in general. I believe men experience more social isolation and alienation than women and it is in many of the intangibles of life. We are both forced into rigid social roles and expectations and there are plenty of people of both genders who chafe against the restrictions placed upon them.

It is my belief that there seems to be a certain amount of retrenchment on the subject of equality with both sides digging in and hardening their positions along gender based lines, the zero-sum game I mentioned earlier where any gain for men is seen as a loss for women and vice versa.

This idea that we should divide ourselves from the other half of humanity because of an accident of birth or indeed that we somehow share a common goal and interests because we happen to have the same genetalia as some random stranger is frankly bizarre, not to mention dangerous and is a direct cause of many of the problems in the world today.

Making men and women competitors, if not outright enemies, of each other is the most fundemental divide and conquer category of them all. And its such a shame that so many people not only fall for it but believe its the only natural and correct way of things.

Can we not accept that men have legitimate grievances as well as women? Just saying that women have it worse (something I’m very far from convinced is true in 21st century western society) isn’t really an answer.

As a man I am constantly being told that by being born male I have won the great lottery of life, so why doesn’t it feel like it?

edited to add that I haven’t had the opportunity to read all of this thread yet, but I will.

I agree with this. It is of course unfortunate that this happens. What always seems to get swept under the rug in discussions like this is that the idea of a rampant, uncontrollable male sexuality originates from… wait for it… the policing of women’s sexuality. And just as frequently, men are able to use that idea as an excuse for bad behavior. After all, boys will be boys.

And for the record, I’m a man. I understand how some of the stuff mentioned in this thread can suck for us. Some of it is truly a problem. But for the most part, the comparison to sexism (as in, the systematic oppression of women and the privileging of men. which by the way does not mean that men have it better in every way. This social structure hurts men too. In a lot of ways.) is just ridiculous.

Agree with this point completely. The idea that men can’t control their sexuality is one that hurts men and women. After all, women in conservative Islamic countries don’t have to wear black sheets from head to toe because of anything they did-- but because men supposedly will go so buck wild at the sight of collar bone that they’ll be forced to rape everybody in sight.

That’s your opinion.

While we are on the subject of discrimination, how often do you see a male wet nurse?

That’s not what sexism means.

And many have been at pains to say they do not believe men have things worse overall (though that would be an interesting discussion in itself). The OP just asks for examples of men being discriminated against. What’s the problem with listing such things?

Here you go.

You don’t have a right to fuck women. You don’t have to “pay for access” or anything like that. You choose to. So suck it up.

Practically every single (*legitimate) complaint of anti-male discrimination has a partner in anti-woman discrimination. No one is a winner. Men earn more? Men are expected to pay more. Women get to wear more different types of clothes to work? Women have to spend more on clothes to maintain a professional wardrobe. It sucks for everyone, and feminists are really the only group working to fix it, for men and women. Now, they aren’t perfect, and they absolutely focus harder on women’s issues. As they should.

WOMEN took the initiative and worked to fund breast cancer research, so DUH here’s more money there. Men can bitch, or they can start the male equivalent of Komen and fix it. Feminists have been fighting hard for decades to enact these changes, and now they they are finally seeing some results, certain overly entitled groups of men are bitching that they aren’t included. Well, get to work and fix it then. Or shut up and wait, and eventually feminists will fix it, and not get any credit. Again.
*of which there are few in this thread

It is. Men can face discrimination and prejudice because they are men, but not sexism. Defining sexism as any discrimination based on gender is not useful. This is why you do not see misandry as often as misogyny. These concepts do not carry equal weight.

The OP specifically asked “Valid examples that would justify a mens’ rights movement.” as in, situations where men’s civil rights are being trampled upon. Equivalent to the civil rights movements of women, racial minorities, LGBT, etc. I’m sorry, but in that context most of the examples given in this thread are laughably pathetic. Yes, sir, us having to pay a cover charge and being depicted as bad at housework is a flagrant abuse of our rights! WE SHALL OVERCOME BROTHERS.

Oh, wait, whoops. I forgot that men pay cover charges where women don’t because women are viewed as commodities and the fee is waived so they will show up so that we (ie, the ones viewed as having the money in the first place) will show up. How horribly abusive that is to us. :mad:

Likewise you don’t have a right to a husband so quit complaining if you live in a country where dowries are expected and often put a great financial burden on the bride’s parents.

Yes, because having to pay $35 to get into Pure and not getting free well drinks all night is the exact same as someone effectively selling their daughter.

No, it absolutely isn’t. Sexism is precisely defined as discrimination based on gender.

If you mean something different, then use a different word. Don’t try to redefine a word just to try to beat down a discussion.

Ah, I had forgotten about that. Maybe we should restrict the discussion to issues such as custody / visitation rights in that case.
In the UK there is a group called Fathers for Justice which campaigned for the rights of, well, fathers. They used to wear superhero costumes, just to get media attention, which worked, but didn’t help much in getting people to take the issue seriously. There hasn’t been any obvious effect on the law.

It was an argument of principle. miss elizabeth was implying we cannot complain about cultural practices that disfavour men because we have the option of simply going without sex.
And in any case we weren’t talking about the nightclub entry thing.

It took feminists a pretty long time to see results too.

Uh, she was specificially responding to a post that mentioned cover charges amonst other things. What do you think that person meant by “cover charges” if not. . . cover charges?

[QUOTE=blindboyard]

Let’s rephrase it then, men are more likely to be unemployed, and unmarried men make less money for the same work than unmarried women do, but are expected to pay for access to females and female affection, in cover charges, paying for meals, gifts, whatever else.

[/QUOTE]

Well “cover charges” was one part of that sentence. And it was the cheap part: paying for meals, gifts etc can be a lot more money.

But point taken, I did miss that. I haven’t heard the expression cover charges before, so I didn’t realize the allusion to the nightclub thing, which I agree is merely a minor annoyance.

Sorry, I thought we’d moved on to broader examples. I certainly am not claiming that my experiences are worth a revolution; in truth it’s the fact that they’d be so trivially easy to rectify that makes them annoying. It’s petty discrimination that would take little effort or cost to avoid, yet it still happens.

TL,DR version: I’m not persecuted, just irritated. Doesn’t mean discrimination didn’t happen.

Yes but Thatcher was a more recent example, the Falklands being a current event at the time.

Well, I’m a woman who pays half the time and wouldn’t be horrified if someone bought me an expensive gift when it wasn’t something I could easily or readily reciprocate. There are many women like me. Now, perhaps it’s just my generation (I’m 26) vs an older generation, but splitting things equally appears to be far more common in my peer group than older folks.

I’m a human being, not a whore whose vagina you’re purchasing access to. I can’t even imagine what I would do if a man I was on a date with expressed this opinion. Perhaps your looking for needy goldigers is what’s drawing goldiggers to you. Just a thought.

Yeah, because that is the same thing. When the fathers of nubile women start setting their suitors on fire because they don’t treat them to a nice enough dinner, I’ll grant you the equivalency.

Hell, it’s not even women who end up paying for the dowry. It’s basically men extorting other men, with the women used as expendable bartering chips.

Well said.

Look guys, here’s the point we’re making: there are plenty of legitimate ways men are discriminated against in our society (several of which have been mentioned and discussed in this thread, namely the sex predator point), but some of the stuff getting thrown around here is just nonsense. It’d be like me comparing my shitty week at work literally to the Gulag- that doesn’t help my point at all, it just makes me look like I have no perspective whatsoever.

I wasn’t talking about myself; I was talking about a difference in cultural expectations. No, I don’t go for “needy goldigers”, whatever that would mean in practice.

:rolleyes:
You may as well argue sports are evil because people kill over them.

First of all I didn’t claim an equivalency between dowries and paying for dates, let alone people killing people over dowries.

The argument was a qualitative one, not an equivalency.
The point had been made that one is not forced to have sex, so whatever cultural expectations there may be attached to doing that we cannot complain about. The point was, if that logic held, one could not complain about dowries either.
I did not say you could not complain about being burned alive.