Talk:Men's rights movement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Creation of relevant article.[edit]

"Female Privilege" ought to be made its own article, it's absurd that "Male Privilege" has its own, lengthy article while "Female Privilege" is relegated to a footnote on an entirely different page, if no one else will make this I will. Markovich Rashkolnikov (talk) 07:58, 3 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Agreed
Tiggy The Terrible (talk) 17:54, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You are assuming a false balance between two very unequal concepts. Binksternet (talk) 18:44, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So is your personal (and therefore undemocratic) assertion that they are "very unequal concepts" the only barrier between the creation of two separate pages? 131.172.31.171 (talk) 07:17, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The point is to portray as much of a neutral, unbiased standpoint, and this statement, as it is a small sample size, is biased. Cheeseburger3 (talk) 06:27, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed with the first point. 131.172.31.171 (talk) 07:16, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"destructive feminism" - kick off chapter[edit]

Hi, to get away from yes/no discussions, pointing fingers, etc that distract from getting issues solved and get to the next level, I'd like to bring your attention to how the debate on religion versus cults got a breakthrough and move to a next level by the insertion of the term "destructive cults".

So I would propose developing a chapter on "destructive feminism" and "destructive masculism".

There is nothing wrong in bringing men or women together in a mens-only or women-only group for eg therapeutic reasons, to accelerate healing or catching up: traumatized men or women that have lived under a dictatorship - terror - pathocracy ran by a gang with an antisocial personality disorder, e.g. women discussing and testifying to other women there is another way, there are other societies, or that they have found refuge in a democracy and that it is ok to let go of ptsd - destructive coping mechanisms. This is to shorten the time it would take to get fully functional and to a happy life into normal mixed groups.

Sincerely, SvenAERTS (talk) 12:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If a ten-years younger brother hits his abusive (260.24&25) caretaker

sibling, in New York State, he is instead the one guilty of elder abuse under (120.05-12). If John or Bruce Wayne's characters where in real life today, they would be incarcerated two years for each punch as felony assault. Provocation is no longer defence for assault, rage is no longer allowed to dethrone reason but is accused of blaming the victim. Injuctive restraining protective orders deny you the ability to confront your accusers and punish you for crimes you MIGHT commit; this "precrime" was predicted by George Orwell as "thoughtcrime". This is what happens when leftist parents didn't let their kids play with cap guns in the 1960s.

https://ncfm.org/know-the-issues/mens-rights-issues/ https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/weekly-standard/the-feminization-of-america https://law.unc.edu/eichner-research/ https://roarmag.org/essays/left-populism-feminization-politics/ https://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/meet-the-mens-rights-movement/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.88.200 (talk) 19:51, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possible inaccuracy or misunderstanding.[edit]

Under the first few sentences, it states "As a part of the manosphere," however, the manosphere is described as promoting masculinity and misogyny, however, under my experience, the movement has been largely quite the opposite. Many times, misogyny inside of the community, at least the one I know, has been quickly pointed out and discouraged, and a large part of the men's rights community has been actively pushing against the supposed forced masculinity from society. I would like to know if this is a misunderstanding on whomever added that sentence, or a misunderstanding from me of what the male rights community truly is. I personally believe that this could be fixed by a simple "Some view this as a part of the manosphere." thus being neutral, but still getting both views into the text. Cheeseburger3 (talk) 06:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: Under further, closer inspection of the article, multiple paragraphs, most of which use the words manosphere, also follow this narrative, further hinting towards either a sole individual making multiple edits or a misunderstanding on my part. Cheeseburger3 (talk) 06:32, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable sources. First-hand experience is not generally usable as that is considered original research. Since Wikipedia is a tertiary source, we do not publish original research.
This article has many sources for the connection between the MRM and misogyny. The article currently cites several reliable source (which are also independent sources) which have identified misogyny as a disproportionately prominent trait. Likewise, many reliable sources link the MRM and the manosphere, although the term "manosphere" is much newer than the MRM. Those sources are linked in footnotes throughout the article, and those sources are what we use to inform the article.
Grayfell (talk) 06:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"a curricula" should be "a curriculum" or "curricula"[edit]

because it is plural. 85.148.38.245 (talk) 14:07, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]