> The comments in the article by the men are pretty clearly about them believing women do not deserve to be there.
Part of the problem is that a more nuanced discussion is cancelled on the mainstream platforms, so many flock to echo chambers which tend to radicalize its members.
It's absurd that basically any advocacy of men's rights will get you shouted down as chauvinism. Feminists claim they fight for equal rights, but then are not willing to take any men issue AND are not willing to acknowledge any organization focusing on men's rights in principle.
The problem is not men's _rights_. It's men's _mental health_ and _education_. And, feminists do definitely support those things. But, when your answer to your problems is "We need more power" and you already have a really disproportionate amount of it then of course feminists are not going to be happy about that.
> The problem is not men's _rights_. It's men's _mental health_ and _education_.
Statements like these are a part of the problem. Of course I believe in your case you maed it in good faith, but it shows how much needs to be done.
One good example is obligatory military service, and the situation of men in Ukraine. While all women can freely escape the war, men have to suffer constant fear.
Also, the article starts with examples from Poland. You may notice there is a 5-year gap in retirement age between men and women while lifespan gap is ca 8 years. That is men, if they manage to retire, would enjoy only 7 years of their retirement while for women it's over 20 years. This is both sad and unfair, for many reasons.
> And, feminists do definitely support those things
In the same way prosecutors definitely support rights of the accused: notionally, but their hearts aren't really in it and they're motivated to look away.
Some would consider mental health and education as "rights". And there are examples of legal rights where men are at a disadvantage, e.g. instances of positive discrimination, parenting rights etc. These are all of course debatable, but feminists usually just dismiss any such discussion out of hand in principle.
> and you already have a really disproportionate amount of it
Citation Needed. We live in an absolute gynocracy, and nearly every current statistical data point, from college attendance, to graduation rates, to job placements, to career advancements, to legal favoritism, to divorce outcomes, to hours-adjusted compensation, to dating and relationship control, to transfer payments, to reproductive rights, to social services availability, to de facto legal presumption, to the production-consumption gap, to... ad nauseum, indicates this.
What is completely unacceptable is for people like you to pretend that we live in 1974, when claims like the above were true. The overcorrection has been fierce, rapid, and brutal in the last decade or two.
People like you need to look at a fucking calendar from time to time and realize that 20th century talking points don't apply anymore.
> And, feminists do definitely support those things.
Nah. They say they do, but they aren't actually willing to put any effort toward it and they shut down discourse when it is mentioned all the time in practice.
Until you acknowledge this, you're just contributing to misandry, indirectly.
Part of the problem is that a more nuanced discussion is cancelled on the mainstream platforms, so many flock to echo chambers which tend to radicalize its members.
It's absurd that basically any advocacy of men's rights will get you shouted down as chauvinism. Feminists claim they fight for equal rights, but then are not willing to take any men issue AND are not willing to acknowledge any organization focusing on men's rights in principle.