Friday, 28 September 2012

Why do MRAs bring up the draft?


And an introduction to Salientsights, a new blog featuring John the Other, Integralmath (Justicar), NurdyDancing, myself and others! The full transcript of this video (I'm posting but a teaser, how manipulative!), posted on Salientsights, is linked at the bottom. :)






So a while ago, I stumbled on a video from TheTruePooka (link in the low bar) attacking MRAs such as myself for "blaming feminists for the male-only draft." It leads me to wonder if Pooka has problems listening when a woman speaks.Very few MRAs would blame feminism for something that's been happening throughout most of history, or even lay blame on feminism for being unable to change the situation Pooka. I certainly never have.

Feminists DO, however, get criticized by MRAs for their MARGINALIZATION of the draft and their dismissal of it and other traditional male obligations when offensively speaking about so-called historical "male privilege" and "patriarchy." So let me try to spell this out for you so we can clear the air a bit.

It wasn't even 90 seconds into your video when you drop this astounding strawman: "lately the people who are putting this argument forward are saying it with an implied hostile tone that suggests that America's male-only draft is the fault of women, especially feminists."




/teaser. If you want to read the rest, you know what to do.


30 comments:

  1. An excellent response to those who complain that MRAs always bring up the draft or SSR as being discriminatory to men. Feminists have conveniently not pushed for any equality or special privilege here. A privilege to be drafted ( or go to jail) I don't think so . Next time I am reminded (shamed) that women only got the vote a century ago, I will have a great explanation for them. In Canada , high school kids are are taught a very different history surrounding the vote for women and how it was linked to conscription of men in WW1
    Thank you GWW , keep them coming.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I loved this video -- the draft, the vote and female privilege, all in one -- but why Salient Sight? Is that where you'll be posting future blogs, GWW?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I fear that the reason this video is even needed might be the same reason why it won't actually work. Feminists never actually LISTEN to what we're saying. We talk about the distinction between how men EARNED the right to vote and how women were GIFTED the right to vote.

    All they hear is "You don't want women to vote!", and because they can't deny the reason in the other half of the sentence ("unless they accept an obligation like men do") they instead ignore it and focus only on the first part as an example of how we "hate women" and "want to take their right to vote away."

    ReplyDelete
  4. OT:
    1) GWW, I wish you would post your transcripts (such as for the highly-informative Neoteny one) on this blog. Also, its much easier to have higher-quality comments/discussion here than on youtube.

    2) Re: the 'Atheists you asked for it', the primary reason you identified is that some people joined the atheist movement coz they hated the 'God regime'.. and this bears out in a documented way in the case of Marcotte. However, another possibly more significant reason is that atheists are predisposed to perceiving misogyny (and even buy the history-of-oppression story) due to the "realization" that the scriptures have lots of seemingly "misogynistic" stuff.
    for e.g God Hates Women: Christianity, Islam, and the Inherent Denigration of Women in Scripture
    Do you think MRAs can debate/defend against this, and offer a balanced view? I could give it a shot by myself, but I dont have any christianity background.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I saw your video on the poster tear-down in Vancouver and thought I would share some back-ground on the people who turned up with boxcutters. They are led by a common-law couple. She is a radical femenist and union activist. He is a far left activist leader who gets involved in various activist causes in and around Vancouver.

    They are known for labeling anyone who does not agree with them as a misogynist, racist, religeous nut, government agent, etc. They turned up mid-way through the Occupy Vancouver movement agressively pushing their agenda, bullying those who wanted to include issues they did not agree with and labeling anyone who even tried to question their cause or tactics as misogynist, racists,. . . . you get the idea.

    They also are part of a group that regularly practices "Cop baiting." A radical activist tactic where they purposley antagonize the police to the point of actually breaking the law. When the police try to stop them they then make outrageous claims of police brutality to anyone who will listen.

    Below are some links to blog posts by an original Occupy Vacouver organizer who has been a regular target of their attacks. He also has a couple of good posts about what happened that day:

    http://www.genuinewitty.com/2012/10/25/a-letter-to-mathew-kagis-schoolteacher-sasha-wiley-shaw-apologies-please/

    http://www.genuinewitty.com/2012/06/28/vancouver-asseroles-sic-gone-stupid/

    http://www.genuinewitty.com/2012/07/25/occupy-vancouver-asseroles-sic-go-fishing-feat-jennifer-allan-mathew-kegis-bill-good/

    Oh, and btw. The Woman who said “I’d prefer that you didn’t talk to me, because you hate women. Thank you.” is a teacher who is the president of her local teach union.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think you are so important to this country. You are a very good speaker, and your content is so real and organized. I wish you all the best, I will follow your Blogs be well From NYC.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I found this and thought of you, GWW:

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/health/health-board-blames-staff-shortages-on-feminisation.19372475

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi there. This isn't directly in response to the post to which I am attaching this, but I wasn't really sure where to make my first post. I hope you don't mind, and if you do feel like moving it to a more appropriate place, please feel free to do so.

    I have been watching many of your videos on Youtube, and I agree with you almost 100%. I say 'almost' because really, no two people are ever going to agree all the time. You bring up some very excellent points about gender relations, and I as a man in today's society, often feel outnumbered and demonized when I do speak up about some inequality. For your strong and capable voice, I thank you. For helping show me that there are safe places for men, that there are places where men can go and speak their thoughts without fear of censorship or ridicule, I thank you. For advocating equal rights, I salute you.

    That having been said, one of the points that I differ with you is in the definition of feminism as you so often employ it. I have long considered myself a feminist. However, I have never subscribed to feminist theory, save when I was very young and really had no solid concept of academic theory. It is my contention and belief that all ideas, beliefs, and practices change over time. Sometimes that change is evolutionary and sometimes it is counter-evolutionary, but it is never static. Nothing in this life is ever static, but always characterized by change.

    Recognizing this, the theory of feminism to which I subscribe is one of equality. It is not based on a presumption of automatic male guilt, nor of patriarchy, nor of feminine status elevation at the expense of men. It is merely a word with which I identify. Perhaps 'humanist' would be more accurate, if there were not already religious/spiritual connotations attached to it. Perhaps Male Advocate would be more accurate, as I am a male and am just now coming to realize how much "female hypoagency" (a phrase I learned from you) actually exists in the social sphere. Perhaps none of these terms approach the type of egalitarian ideals which I hold close to my heart -- and I am awaiting only an appropriate term to rise onto the linguistic scene and into my heart.

    In short then, I am only decrying the mass lumping together of all feminism as being one sole shade of one sole ideology. In turn, I hope you can recognize that in so doing, you are essentially placing the MRAs/MRM into a similar situation, one in which the angry extremist ideological adherents of classical feminist theory are perfectly justified in labeling the entire collective of equal-rights-minded men as misogynists and bigots. Clearly, this is NOT the case.

    There is much variety in life and in social groups who feel comfortable identifying under a united banner. Please consider the impact of railing against individuals (who enjoy a sense of comfort by identifying with a given term, when there are many others with whom you have no qualm also may identify with that term.

    This is all for now, but I am now following this blog, and you on YT, so be sure I will return some future day.

    Peace and Blessings upon you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Shak

      I really loved your reply. It pretty much hit on my feelings 100%. Like you, I am a male and have described myself as a feminist, as I see feminism as being about empowering and supporting people of both sexes to redefine their gender roles and reach towards gender equity. The problem that I see is that the term "feminism" gives the movement an assumed lean towards women as activists and women gender roles as the subject. I know many feminists who don't see it as a female centric movement, but none-the-less the language, rhetoric, and extremists have helped to frame it that way.

      I just want the discussion to stop being framed as male vs female. I actually started looking at male gender roles because I was concerned about sexual abuse of women. The way I see it, we're both in it together and if you want to change things like sexual abuse, you need to look at gender roles on both sides. And more importantly, you need the help of both sexes to make changes. Rape doesn't stop when women are made stronger, it stops when fathers (and mothers a bit) raise their children to respect the women around them, teach their boys empathy, and support their boys emotionally.

      Delete
    2. @ Shak again...

      Actually... after reading and watching more, especially from this blog... I think I've found a better way to define myself. I suppose I don't support feminism but I support WRA and MRA. So could I just say I support anyone who wants to criticize and redefine gender roles or create new gender identities for the 21st century.

      More simply put, I support empowering humans to reach their maximum potential. As a teacher, I've found that one of the best ways to empower a person is to give them an identity and role models. And one of the best ways to invalidate a human is to strip them of their identity, culture, and role models.

      Delete
  9. It is fascinating that in UK "modern feminism" demanding total equality didn't start until just after 1961. By coincidence the year the draft for men ended.
    In WW2 women were subject to national service in factories, on the land or in the forces, but it was relatively easy to avoid if family demands required the girl to stay at home. If women "deserted" they were subject to martial law or imprisonment.
    Of UK WW2 fatalities about 92% were adult males (17.75 yrs+), with the remainder being women & children.
    However the most striking difference between men & women were the numbers of men mentally and physically damaged. I cannot recall ever once encountering a woman with several damage from the war, but men abounded and they were treated quite badly. Most I recall were sad, lonely people whom had given their youth for the nation, and had effectively lost all hope of a happy life.
    But to their individual credit I do recall a few women who did challenge the way these men were treated.

    ReplyDelete
  10. http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/myths-of-the-manosphere-lying-about-women << I think you need to write a response to this. This is just my personal opinion though, but I would like to know why they have such different facts then you.

    ReplyDelete
  11. My mother, who was a soldier in WW2 (Signal Corps), remarked no woman was ever forced to learn to kill, forced to run into a hail of bullets, saw his friends cut down around him and then came home to find that the person he most wanted comfort from was either resentful or indifferent to the experiences and the impact of war, or had abandoned him for another man, or presented him with the child of another man for which he was legally responsible as her husband with the explanation "I was lonely..."
    Some of her male peers at school never came back, and her father had been the only man in the village to return from WW1. My father returned a profoundly changed man from Korea to an unsympathetic world, and eventually it wreaked his life and ours.
    My mother who had been a soldier when asked if she was a feminist replied "No. I have never needed any man's permission to do what I wanted, and why should I want to surrender the advantages I have for equality". But to my sons she was cool granny who could field strip a Sten SMG and Bren LMG.
    It was her contention that feminists had fabricated a past that was a woeful distortion of the realities, and that worked to the disadvantage of most men and women.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Well said..I am exactly looking for the same post that I have got at your blog, I am not sure if someone can let me know, is their any way to book Escorts Barcelona or may be one in Escorts Madrid , please help
    http://www.Callyourescort.es

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hello,
    I have been thoroughly enjoying your videos (I believe I'm caught up on most of them now). Very enlightening information on a subject that I only have a sort of intuitive knowledge of, ie I believe in egalitarianism and can see that modern society and the majority of feminist thought does not align with an Egalitarian Ideal. It was really the subsidized birth control issue here in the states that really got me scratching my head, as any subsidies raise a red flag for me, and I happened across your youtube channel. I just wanted to say that, though I don't agree with you 100% (who agrees with anyone that much?) that I appreciate your work and knowledge on the subject and hope for your continued success in debunking untruths and spreading information that will hopefully bring about, at the least, some critical thinking as it has done for me.
    Thanks again.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Funny Epic Girls, Troll Images of Girls, Girls Funny and Loll, Funny Hot Pictures of Girls
    hotentertainnews.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  15. Great video as always Girl Writes What, you're definitely one of my favorite equal rights activists on the web, glad I finally got around to following your blog.

    ReplyDelete
  16. You just posted an incredibly offensive video on another website where men are fighting for the right to take care of their children; F4J or Fathers for justice. You should be ashamed of yourself by implying that most or all men run from their responsibilities. Look, if you hate men that's your right but please stop spewing your hate all over those who don't deserve it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which commenter are you talking about? Also, could you post the link to said video?

      Delete
  17. World's Most Latest Vehicles and Latest Cars pictures, Most speed and Expensive Cars with hot pictures
    worldlatestvehicles.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  18. Jesus F'ing Christ. Maybe I'm just a computer idiot or new at commenting on blogs but leaving a comment is a job and a half.

    Anyway, I'm a male. I agree with most of what you're saying. The beauty, in my opinion, is that much of what you speak about is common knowledge. No fact checking. Why is that beautiful? B/c fact checking is a pain. You're basically reading sites on the net (or books in a library) for people who agree with the original fact. It's like you're just asking a bunch of people who does and does not agree with a certain assertion.

    But when you speak about things that most people have actually lived through every day they don't have to fact check. They just think of them in the new way and go "Oh, yeah, that makes sense.". Or when the thing in question is common knowledge. The draft for example. No one is going to go "Wait a minute. What's this 'draft' thing? Is that real? Did that happen?".

    A few points. Atheism is just the lack of belief in a god. What you describe in your video about atheism/ feminism is more like skepticism or scientific method/ attitude. Also, you seem to view the world through your attitudes about feminism and through evolutionary psychology, which is fine but I would be interested in hearing your opinion of Islam or Islamic cultures/nations and their relation to feminism. You know a lot about feminism but how much do you know about Islam? And this is not, by any means, my attempt to convert you TO Islam.

    Anyway, I applaud your efforts. And you most certainly earned that award (the one that looks like a glass plate). Mens Rights movement is lucky to have you.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Amazing post in this blog. Hope more people reaching your blog because you are sharing a good information. I noticed some useful tips from this post. Thanks for sharing this.......... Best PPI Claim Company

    ReplyDelete
  20. Amazing post in this blog. Hope more people reaching your blog because you are sharing a good information. I noticed some useful tips from this post. Thanks for sharing this..........
    PPI Claims Made Simple

    ReplyDelete
  21. please forgive me for "tl;dr" - i did get about 2/3's through. i've read a few other things of yours while on a search for somewhere to discuss . . . gender balance? (the question mark is because all words: feminism, equality, misogyny, misandry etc are so charged as to require full disclaimers to use)

    let's say this: i want to pursue the idea of equal treatment for all and where that isn't possible - equitable treatment. to that end, what i see of feminism is missing elements. but the conclusion that - and therefore the whole structure is false is something i can't swallow.

    unfortunately, as the result of groupthink mind or the internet or maybe a weakness of the "movement" itself there isn't much room to discuss what is missing. many years ago this led me to seek and discuss with people within the MRM and, yeah, no thanks. if feminism has hatred in it too then i guess i like my hatred with a shade less vitriol.

    i'm happy to give examples of any of these things if this becomes an open discussion - but this isn't my blog so . .

    one thing that caught my eye was the ERA bit. you say the ERA would take away protections. you see these protections as unfair to men and blocking true "rights" for women. you say feminists back the ERA (yes, i caught the 'when looking'). wouldn't that be something you and the larger MRM would agree with then? and if not, why not?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. if feminism has hatred in it too then i guess i like my hatred with a shade less vitriol

      Good for you. People who are at the receiving end get a good sense of vitriol. I dont expect you to empathize with men who are at the receiving end, hence you have no clue what vitriol lies in feminism. Luckily for you, there are plenty of ex-feminist women who have received a SMALL dosage of vitriol that men regularly get. Maybe you can go read their description of feminism. for e.g bluharmony at skepticink.com

      Either way.. we MRAs dont give a damn what you stinking feminists think, we are only trying to reach a vanguard that can see through your crap. congrats on the backlash feminism is experiencing, not just from MRAs, but from commoners. And studies show that wimmin are less happy now than back in the 60s, while men's happiness has been steady. Howz that working out for you?

      Delete
    2. ugh! also apologize for apparently replying on the wrong post! internet fail. sigh.

      Delete
  22. You are awesome. Thanks for being who you are and doing what you do.

    ReplyDelete

Commenting policy:

All comments are welcome here. I refuse to censor points of view that differ from my own.

I recognize that I may be challenging the deep-seated beliefs of some people, and perhaps stirring up emotions in others. However, I would ask:

- if you care to respond to anything that I have said, please do not simply link to or quote some statistic. Do not simply regurgitate things you have been told are true. Think about what I am saying. Respond with an argument. Offer something from your personal observations, and explain to me how you feel your statistic is connected to your experience.

- If you wish to be part of a discussion, try not to dismiss what I or a another commenter says out of hand. Yes, that means that some lines of thought or ideologies may not stand up to scrutiny (perhaps even my own).

- Remember, ad hominem attacks diminish everyone involved. If you want to criticize anything, do so passionately and directly - but debate is about attacking ideas, not people.

Have at you!