It really disappoints me to still see some of the sentiments expressed in the links of the OP, the implications rising from the OP itself, this community, the Internet, the Western world or the world in general - leaving no major differences between westerners who still cling to Aristotelian concepts of women or modern-day Islamic
heroes (
case in example).
It reminds me of all those arguments people expressed against the expansion (or even the introduction) of democracy in the 1800s (and afterwards). First the dudes in control derided the non-nobles for "being fundamentally dumber and crude - in all ways fundamentally different from us" and "giving them suffrage would dilute the greatness of our nation/race/religion/you-name-it", preventing them from having any say in how things were ran. Eventually, concessions were made there and there and the voting base kept on enlarging (while the nobles were crying out "WE TOLD YOU SO!" if even the smallest of things went wrong) - to working classes, non-whites, et cetera.
But whenever any man who felt discriminated against - whether they were workers, black, Asian, Irish (the list could go on) - they would always return home and remember that they can always dish out their anger, shock and outrage against a
certain group of humans (if they were even classified as such) and it wouldn't be legally or morally wrong because hey, what rights do they have?
And what rights could they even lay claims to due to not being able to run as fast or play rugby as effectively as men could (etc.)? They made (and apparently still do) long lists of the why and how things were how they were (and was meant to be for all perpetuity), hell, occasionally even getting some female activist to even give their consent to it and say "LOL IT'S TRUE" - who knows why. But as time went by, things did start changing for the better (in the Occident, at any rate) - suffrage would become universal and previously unthinkable (yet, in a modern view, incredibly non-offensive) scenarios of women acting as
human instead of just
female increased.
Until at some point those who once had more or less limitless power over how things were run decided that "whoa, this process has gone too far!". Sentiments like "hey, whoa, we only LET you have those things so we wouldn't have to listen to your complaints" or "it's not like you have any real power anyway" or "it's not like those things actually matter!" would pop up. New expressions came into the play, such as "hey, I respect you as a
human but sadly you're also a
woman which is why x + y + z = you suck" or "OH NO MEN ARE UNDER SIEGE".
Which is roughly where we are now. Men would throw in points like "it's not rape, we're programmed to do that" or "look, all these things from the past were false but obviously this one about men and women is true as
gravity!" to counter giving women the opportunity to attain their personal goals and dreams in the same way as men could. The goal posts are continuously being moved to justify man-made concepts and regulations to prevent further "dilution" as theyw ould call it - often stated in a faux-respectful tone. For example, several Islamic countries justify their women being absolutely under their closest male relative's control with "it gives them security".
Then again:
Spot-on, I'd say. Of course, the points I've applied to women can be applied to other groups of people as well, but at any rate in these modern times it seems like men have started to fight back against all the progress made in a relatively short time span (~200 years) - but especially against the one group who they still think shouldn't have any say in anything ever. This has resulted in meltdowns of the Dave Sim and Scott Adams variety. Perhaps it's because of genetics (the innate human urge to hate others to survive seems to have a particularly worse
sui generis variety against women), cultural influence, certain groups' influence, desire to fight against authority/state (especially if they're "going on about affirmative action") or what have you.
But it's going to be the day when I'm departing from a Holocaust Denial/Neo-Drapetomania conference in New York City when I'm going to give any legitimity to
"men's rights".
...
And the reason I'm blabbering about all this stuff is actually from a quite personal approach. I've seriously felt hurt and mistreated by women in countless of occasions. But despite all those incidents and all the pondering I've done afterwards, my resolve in supporting and advancing women's rights (in my way) has never been damaged. Naturally this has elicited other people (well, men) to react like "WOW LOL FEMINDOCTRINATED" - both online and in real life.
While I genuinely want everyone to be able to attain their personal happiness (admittedly without hurting others... which can get difficult, I admit)), I guess all this is still just a
truthiness-kind of a feel in my gut and I'm going to stand by it even if it's going to take me to an early grave. Even if it was a result of something as measly as just asking "why are you treating these people worse than others" when the rights of those who have only had them for a couple of decades (maybe a hundred years at best) are once again threatened.
[TL;DR] FGR the Feminazionist thinks the men's rights movement and the excuses used to prevent practical equality for all are bull****.