Mariella Frostrup: Men face 'double standard' over celebrity lust - Sensationalist Headlines

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44287094

She's not wrong. She's kinda intentionally brushing past the context of #me too, but it's still a little disconcerting that people are so blasé torwards the objectification of male stars.

Cause men want it obviously.

Not always.

It was sarcasm. That kind of thinking is usually what people use to justify why it's okay to act like that towards men but not women.

Theres a sort of strange reversal of roles that has happened in the culture over time, where now women are free, and perhaps even encouraged, to talk and express about sexuality and even sexual desire, while men have to be coy, bashful, talk in a coded manner or even pretend to be borderline asexual on these same topics. some people view this as a victory, which is bizarre to say the least. It seems to me its the same shit but a different foot being forced to step in it now.

We will just have to wait until history releats itself, but this time around for mens rights and feels, i guess.

eh i still feel like alot of this shit doesnt exist outside of tumblr and hipster circles

it does. We're talking about media representation, probably the largest monolith of western culture. Basically the only way men in media can get away with openly/brazenly talking about sexual desire these days is if you fall into some category of people expected and allowed to not to play by the rules. An example would be gangster rappers.

Or people like Sean Connery who are seemingly given a pass on all of it.

It's reactionary. It'll even out in time, don't worry.

yeah but you're bringing up stars of yesteryear when the culture was different. Thats what i mean when i say the roles have reversed, comparing the ways male celebrities of today approach sexual desire vs the stars of yesteryear is in stark contrast, and connery is probably on the extreme end of the spectrum. I've seen presumably heterosexual men labelled closeted gays because of how bloodless they appear towards women in the public eye, but this is intentional, and smart on their part given the current climate. sean connery hasn't really been in the public eye for over a decade at this point unless something new has come up I'm not aware of.

eh, mens rights are already a thing although the focus is on parental rights and circumcision at the moment rather than social double standards.

Mens rights aren't really a thing, if you're a part of any of those organizations then you're essentially viewed as a bigot racist Nazi. Wiki article under mens rights, one of the first things mentioned is that it's viewed as backlash to feminism by scholars. I'll believe in when I see a guy equivalent of the mattress girl fiasco.

Because it by and large is a backlash by insecure white dudes. The most prominent "men's rights" groups are legitimate batshit misogynists, see: red pillers and A Voice for Men. Men have a few problems but a) they're hardly exclusive to just them and b) male gender roles as a result of toxic masculine culture are just as harmful to men and a good many feminists want to do away with female and male gender roles.

Perhaps they're so bitter because people like you constantly tell them that their problems are really actually not important, and if they are, then we need to fix women's issues first and it'll definitely totally trickle down to men.

Well what I actually said was that men suffer from being pigeonholed into male gender roles the same way women are with female gender roles and since the goal of many feminist groups is to abolish gender roles altogether... yeah, that helps men too? I appreciate you trying to twist my words to turn me into some kind of misandrist, but please try a little harder.

But the line "feminists actually want to fix this" is such nebulous tripe I have trouble imagining why you said it. Feminists are just like the MRA's you JUST described. First off, they're individuals, with their own thoughts, feelings, and biases. They're not a unified group with a solid well defined goal. Secondly, even if those are issues feminism has identified as being worthy of fixing I think that's a bad mindset. I don't think we need to wait for feminists to say "Yeah you guys can start working on your issues now". I think our society would be better if we were honest about these issues, and I don't think how you described your opposition is honest. There are plenty of issues that need to be dealt with, that are currently brushed under the rug.

There is more to the issue than gender roles. Theoretically, but the actual actions taken and policies backed tend to mainly help women (which makes sense, considering it's feminism. It's in the name). You can't just go out and "abolish gender roles". That takes a huge amount of time. However, you can institute policies and laws that counteract the negative effects. You're the only one who said misandrist. I never said you hated men. You shouldn't assume that just because I disagree with you that I'm trying to paint you as literally hating men. What a ridiculous thought.

Well, what circles are you interacting with? I discuss gender issues often with several of my friends, men and women. We consider ourselves feminists. We believe, for example, men should be afforded equal custody rights, they should be allowed to show their emotions without being judged, they shouldn't have to be pressured into being masculine, etc. I fail to see why there's been a line drawn in the sand that says "feminists don't care about men's issues" or "we need MRA's for x" because it's simply not true and you can easily go out and find like-minded people to do some activism on the issues that you care about. People, as you said, are individuals. And I think you already assume so much with the word "opposition." We're supposed to be on the same side, aren't we? Men and women get mistreated in different ways under our current culture, women just tend to get more of it. It's an issue of proportion, not importance. If someone earnestly comes up to me and says "hey, the standard for men on X issue is bad," I'll probably agree with them. Take the OP, for example. I don't see what was dishonest about what I said. The preeminent men's rights movement is A Voice for Men, who are hardcore reactionaries that say some truly awful shit. If you want to actually help men in society, those lot aren't the ones to throw your chips behind.

I didn't see any feminists running to the help of men who are raked over the coals with alimony payments and child support to the point where they can't even afford food. When they get declined from the food bank because they apparently make too much money. Christie Blatchford Reform Flawed Child Support Guidelines Pushing Men To The Brink Guys are literally feeling the country to get away from it. Deadbeat dad flees to Philippines leaving four kids without supp.. Article calls him a deadbeat that when it's clear that he was forced to pay more than he could ever afford. Honestly, fuck female support group funding for the first world, they have enough. The media supports them , the government supports them , the public supports them. Funnel some of that money and attention into mens rights. The suicide rates are ridiculously skewed and fucked up. https://imgur.com/a/xxxJ2 When you have men literally killing themselves and leaving their own country due to how unfair they're treated due to their gender then there's a huge problem. That problem is namely people like you who like to blast mens rights associations because of what they read on the social media feed which is heavily skewed due to the influence of feminism.

I agree it's not nearly as big as feminism however there is nothing wrong with it being a reactionary movement to feminism, just because it doesn't have the equivalent of a mattress girl doesn't make it any less of a pro-rights movement.

Look at how you spoke about the group, and tell me YOU don't consider them opposition. Based solely on your words, and your representation of them, anyone who even remotely slides towards being an "MRA" would see you as a massively dishonest person to have a discussion with.

It's not only just sewed because of social media, it's also the press printing hit pieces and spreading falsehoods like it's a movement of nazis and alt-righters.

Not just the press.

I'm afraid to marry because the divorce rate is roughly 50% and if I do get divorced I know I'll probably get fucked financially for the rest of my life.

Marriage is better without children. If you're married and have kids in the first world then you may as well leave the country when the divorce comes around.

To be fair, the 50% divorce rate doesn't factor in those who have been married numerous times, and that group of people divorce way more often than those who marry once.

Well when you have the founder of the biggest MRA website in the world on the record saying he would vote "not guilty" on a rape trial no matter what the evidence said, or writes articles about how women are asking for it, yeah, you're goddamn right I consider that guy my opposition. A struggling father who just wants custody of kids? No, he's not my opponent.

I have heard some debate on the 50% rate but again the odds don't really seem favorable unless they're at least over 75% imo