I dislike the term "Men's Rights Activism" because it refers to "activism" rather than "philosophy". The philosophical base is far more important than what individual activists do if your aim is to actually understand what a movement means. If you disagree with what some Men's Rights Activists (MRAs) do or say, that doesn't mean Men's Rights (MR) philosophy is bad; it just means that some people interpret it badly. A person could say "many self-proclaimed MRAs do this...", but it wouldn't mean anything because that statement isn't tackling the underlying philosophy of MR, just some people who interpret it how they want and try to spread their own interpretation.
Academically rigourous MR movements have the same philosophical underpinnings as academically rigourous feminist movements. Both movements operate under the same framework (gender-oriented empowerment), and neither movement is a singular political or social or philosophical ideology.
I think in many ways the condition of men and the condition of women improve together. Legal benefits which women have are built on the same traditional sexist beliefs about femininity and masculinity which many feminisms focus on; that men are emotionally-stunted and strong, and women are overly-emotional and weak. Inequality regarding child custody and paternal leave (for example) doesn't exist in a society where it is truly understood that men and women are equally competent at paid work and childcare.
What I'm trying to say is that any good feminist philosopher should support MR, and any good MR philosopher should support feminism. As for actual activists, I neither know or care what they do. All I have to say is that I don't expect an activist to give equal attention to feminist and MR activism, because activists are not required to be good philosophers.
I'm sorry, I used the term Men's Rights Activist because I thought that was their official title.
"Activists are not required to be good philosophers" Ouch! Apply cool water to burned area!
Do you teach/study religious education/ philosophy and ethics? You sound incredibly professional without pouring too much of your heart out (like I tend to do...)
Don't worry: Men's Rights Activism *is* the term those people use for themselves. Most sociologists would use that term too. I just don't use it myself because I'm pretentious and a nit-picker :P
I study sociology, which means I have to be at least vaguely interested in feminist theory.
How do you feel about Men's Right Activism?
← View full post
I dislike the term "Men's Rights Activism" because it refers to "activism" rather than "philosophy". The philosophical base is far more important than what individual activists do if your aim is to actually understand what a movement means. If you disagree with what some Men's Rights Activists (MRAs) do or say, that doesn't mean Men's Rights (MR) philosophy is bad; it just means that some people interpret it badly. A person could say "many self-proclaimed MRAs do this...", but it wouldn't mean anything because that statement isn't tackling the underlying philosophy of MR, just some people who interpret it how they want and try to spread their own interpretation.
Academically rigourous MR movements have the same philosophical underpinnings as academically rigourous feminist movements. Both movements operate under the same framework (gender-oriented empowerment), and neither movement is a singular political or social or philosophical ideology.
I think in many ways the condition of men and the condition of women improve together. Legal benefits which women have are built on the same traditional sexist beliefs about femininity and masculinity which many feminisms focus on; that men are emotionally-stunted and strong, and women are overly-emotional and weak. Inequality regarding child custody and paternal leave (for example) doesn't exist in a society where it is truly understood that men and women are equally competent at paid work and childcare.
What I'm trying to say is that any good feminist philosopher should support MR, and any good MR philosopher should support feminism. As for actual activists, I neither know or care what they do. All I have to say is that I don't expect an activist to give equal attention to feminist and MR activism, because activists are not required to be good philosophers.
That is what I think about Men's Rights Activism.
--
Goodvibrations
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I'm sorry, I used the term Men's Rights Activist because I thought that was their official title.
"Activists are not required to be good philosophers" Ouch! Apply cool water to burned area!
Do you teach/study religious education/ philosophy and ethics? You sound incredibly professional without pouring too much of your heart out (like I tend to do...)
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Don't worry: Men's Rights Activism *is* the term those people use for themselves. Most sociologists would use that term too. I just don't use it myself because I'm pretentious and a nit-picker :P
I study sociology, which means I have to be at least vaguely interested in feminist theory.