Men certainly aren't valued for being masculine, but what are they valued for, beyond what they can provide to other people? Nothing. Feminism took away the roles but didn't replace it with anything useful for men and valuable to others.
Feminism goes out of their way to cancel male spaces while building up female spaces. Video games made by men for men? Bad, needs to include women! And so on. But when men tries to get a place in female spaces they just say "go make your own, don't depend on women for everything!", as if they let men make their own spaces...
Feminism also started shaming men who complain about women. Women are still allowed to complain freely about men. Don't they understand how damaging this is for men's mental health that they aren't allowed to let out steam while women are free to do so?
And lastly they are practicing a lot of toxic masculinity. If I bring up male issues as I did here, feminists will come and say things like "Are you so weak that you need to complain and let out steam just to manage your day? Grow up!", or "Why do you need your own space, can't you handle women around you? Don't be a child, just learn how to socialize and all your issues are solved!". Those are examples of toxic masculinity, they fail to acknowledge that there are actually a lot of weak men out there who would benefit greatly from having greater access to these things. But instead they just say that men have to be stoic or they aren't welcome in feminist society. And I bet this post will get such toxic masculinity responses from feminists who argue that men just have to be more stoic and everything will be fine.
"But feminists says men should cry more!", they say that, but they don't mean it. If a man cries such that it inconveniences a woman, guess what? It is the man who is bad. The woman complaining about the main crying is obviously correct, the man should have been stronger, but now he is so weak that it burdens the woman and that is bad. "But you can't expect a person to handle too much emotional labor!", well, the thing is, I've never seen a situation where a woman complained about a man crying and feminists didn't took her side. How can that be taken as anything but toxic masculinity? If they really wanted men to cry more then they should encourage women to handle that burden rather than totally drop the ball and shame men who dare to cry.
> If they really wanted men to cry more then they should encourage women to handle that burden rather than totally drop the ball and shame men who dare to cry.
There's some truth to this, but it's also omitting something that's extremely important (and therefore changes the entire tone of this argument): we should also encourage men to handle that burden rather than totally drop the ball and shame men who dare to cry. It's not men vs. women. It's men and women together. That's what feminism is.
No true Scotsman there. It is true that people who say that aren't for equality, but they still call themselves feminists and feminists still welcome them as their own. That is the point, feminism as a movement isn't really for equality, they say they are but they aren't really or else those wouldn't get accepted in the movement. Your movement gets colored by the rotten apples in it, just like mens right has a lot of bad apples so do feminism, and what those bad apples do will also get attributed to feminism even if you think it shouldn't.
> There's some truth to this, but it's also omitting something that's extremely important (and therefore changes the entire tone of this argument): we should also encourage men to handle that burden rather than totally drop the ball and shame men who dare to cry. It's not men vs. women. It's men and women together. That's what feminism is.
You say it is men and women together here, but why do they just blame men for this? Most men live with a woman just as most women live with a man. The woman is his closest link, she is what affects him the most, if she practices toxic masculinity then there isn't much he can do. And as most men have experienced women like that they will teach their kids and each other that they have to be stoic and not cry, since otherwise women will not see them as a man. Sure, there are women out there who can accept a man who cries and do it well. But, as long as there are lots of toxic women out there who refuses to let a man cry there isn't much men can do, the "men don't cry" will live on as long as such women exists. And feminism doesn't try to do anything at all about those women.
> feminism as a movement isn't really for equality, they say they are but they aren't really or else those wouldn't get accepted in the movement
You keep bringing this up, but you haven't provided proof. Whereas people blaming women (instead of cultural sexism as a whole that's practiced by both men and women, and therefore the target of feminism) for their problems has plenty of proof in the comments here.
To be fair, there are people who call themselves feminists while being toxic, such as Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists. Mainstream feminism decries these groups, as evidenced by the backlash against J.K. Rowling. This kind of exclusionary behavior is _not_ acceptable.
And finally, if you believe in equality, then let's champion it. Even if you believe that women are making it hard for you, positively commend those who are behaving in an equitable way, and the same for men who are behavior in an equitable way. _We_ get to decide how the world should be. Let's make it happen!
But they don't reject the "kill all men" people. That is just a harmless joke apparently. And I bet you will defend that statement right now, since way too many feminists have defended it and if you accept that the phrase is bad then you admit that you are wrong. Maybe we need a "MERF" terminology, Male Exclusionary Radical Feminists to denote the bad apples you say aren't really feminists? But until that term appears and the movement actually takes a stance the movement wont be for everyone.
> I'm defining feminism, as defined in literature such as _Feminism is for Everybody_
Right, just take their marketing material. Also, you know, Trump really just wanted to make America great again, that is what he said, why should we look at what he actually do instead of just listening to a slogan?
No, it isn't. You are just imagining that woman and feminist are synonyms. They are not.
Oh yes, I totally remember the Feminist Jihad of 2016 when women rose up and destroyed Video Games forever!
Do you think that having diversity in video games, both in the creation and consumption of it is somehow destroying video games? If so that is your own sexism talking.
>as if they let men make their own spaces...
Men are free to make their own spaces. They do it all the time actually.
>Feminism also started shaming men who complain about women. Women are still allowed to complain freely about men. Don't they understand how damaging this is for men's mental health that they aren't allowed to let out steam while women are free to do so?
I can still complain about women. So can you. Feminists haven't stopped that. Unless by complain and let out steam about women you mean being misogynistic, then yeah that's your own sexism talking.
>If I bring up male issues as I did here, feminists will come and say things like "Are you so weak that you need to complain and let out steam just to manage your day? Grow up!", or "Why do you need your own space, can't you handle women around you? Don't be a child, just learn how to socialize and all your issues are solved!".
Emphasis on "how you did here" because what you are doing is creating straw men and being sexist. However men are free to talk about male issues. https://old.reddit.com/r/MensLib
Also, feminists aren't saying the shit you claim they are saying about men there. Not all women are feminists. Especially since you are claiming that
>But instead they just say that men have to be stoic or they aren't welcome in feminist society. And I bet this post will get such toxic masculinity responses from feminists who argue that men just have to be more stoic and everything will be fine.
Because feminists do not want men to be Stoics. They literally want men to talk about their issues, their emotions, and their wants and desires. The opposite of stoicism.
>But feminists says men should cry more!", they say that, but they don't mean it. If a man cries such that it inconveniences a woman, guess what? It is the man who is bad. The woman complaining about the main crying is obviously correct, the man should have been stronger, but now he is so weak that it burdens the woman and that is bad. "But you can't expect a person to handle too much emotional labor!", well, the thing is, I've never seen a situation where a woman complained about a man crying and feminists didn't took her side.
Again, I question if you've ever actually talked to a feminist before. I cry in front of my wife all the time. Feminists do not want men to be strong to the point of not wanting them to have emotions. That's not what feminism is about, at all. That's a prime example of internalized patriarchy on the part of the woman. You seem to think that feminist === woman. That is not at all the case.