The Red Pill: The Strange Art of Men's Rights Activism (Part 2) | Big Joel
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 май 2018
- I'm back at it with The Red Pill lol.
Support me on Patreon: / bigjoel
Follow Ash Barton on Instagram: / gunt_mother
Follow me on Twitter: / biggestjoel
My sweet sweet sources (be sure to tell me if I made a claim that I forgot to cite.)
www.washingtonpost.com/local/...
journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/1...
www.cdc.gov/ViolencePreventio...
nationalpost.com/health/is-ste...
www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/ma...
family-law.freeadvice.com/fam...
nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/...
www.wrdw.com/home/headlines/Ai...
www.theatlantic.com/politics/...
www.gofundme.com/g8b7btmk
www.washingtonpost.com/graphi...
www.busin 
Кино
I followed this one left-wing/feminist group back when I had Facebook, and one guy shared a link to an article about a man who was physically abused by his wife. He laughed at it and said "men cannot be abused by women because of the power balance".
He got torn apart by over a thousand feminists in the comments. Nobody agreed with him. Feminists are not trying to hide abuse against men. We all take it very seriously.
Well said. From what I've seen it's ONLY feminists who are bothered about it! A lot of men do laugh it off although that does seem to be changing with younger generations.
@@ultimatetadpole9607 I'm glad feminist care much more about it than the film represents, but caring about it is not an exclusively feminist position. Also when you say "Only feminists...A lot of men" you're equating a movement with a gender. It also greatly depends on what country you're from, for instance I'd say that American men and women are much more likely to laugh at it than in my country, because they're ridiculously conservative in the US.
@@KarlSnarks To be fair, feminism as a movement has lead the charge in challenging gender dynamics. Additionally, feminism does not exclude any sex or gender from participation: all you have to do is believe that people are equal regardless of gender.
You have a point though, both men and women can be guilty of "laughing off" men's issues. I think the OP was refferring to men who feel their masculinity is threatened by "unmasculine" men, and thus cling to their view of traditional gender dynamics which dismiss the possibility that men can be victims of women.
People like to pretend the worst fringe feminists speak for every feminist
@@noahkarpinski1824 sadly
18:22 the reason why domestic violence shelters only help women is cuz they were built by and for women who have been abused. We as men need to build battered men’s shelters so that men have a place to go. But MRA’s don’t fight for that. Women fought for YEARS and YEARS to build battered women’s shelters and many women still have to face their abusers within those shelters. If MRA’s are so concerned over the lack of resources for abused men, then they need to fight for those resources, just like women did. I support anyone’s fight to build shelters and provide resources to those in need.
Sebastian Sean Crow we do. But they can't get funded. In canada a man Named Earl Silverman killed himself because he was unable to get the funding for the shelter he established.
Earl Silverman's shelter was open for 20 years before it closed due to funding problems.
I'm not disputing that there's an issue with the availability of domestic violence resources for men, but I wouldn't call it impossible to open a men's shelter if the place ran for two decades. Plus, there are handful of other shelters across Canada for male victims of domestic abuse. So as much as I think it's shit that Silverman's shelter closed down, it's evidently very possible to open and run a shelter for men in Canada.
You say there's sexual discrimination happening here. Where, precisely? Was it sexual discrimination when feminists built female abuse shelters? If not, then I can't really identify a place where it's happening.
It's a bit hard to see how. There was a problem, women being abused. Feminists recognized that problem, and built shelters. A group doesn't have to be responsible for every issue in the world. In a sense, yeah, it is discriminatory, but in the way that just about every group is inevitably discriminatory in how they invest their time and energy.
To add to my point, I dunno why the difference in numbers between male and female abuse shelters is all that relevant. The important thing should be the absolute number of male abuse shelters, and how low it is. Obviously, feminists building female abuse shelters are not responsible for that.
“At least women have a choice” _oh boy_ that didn’t age well
Lol. At all.
"If men were in control we would make these rules"
1) women would have sex with us whenever we wanted. *A common rule in very traditional religious settings, it's in the bible that women have to be submissive to men. Also this still happens in fundamentalist christian groups and other countries, an extreme example is the FLDS where women are sealed to older men and are expected to have sex with him whenever he wants to have as many children as possible.*
2) 13-14 year old would be very interested in us. *Arranged marriages were very common in history where 13-14 year old girls were arranged to marry someone who is twice their age who they have never met. This is still common in some countries, also happens in the FLDS.*
Has this guy ever read a history book?
_1) women would have sex with us whenever we wanted. A common rule in very traditional religious settings, it's in the bible that women have to be submissive to men._
Well, _that's_ a lie. Firstly, it's in Ephesians that a husband and a wife must submit _to each other._ Secondly, while it says that a wife must submit to her husband 'as the church submits itself to Christ,' the husband must love his wife 'as Christ loved the church and gave his life for it.' In other words, he should be willing to die for her. This is the part that always gets left out but in any case, this has absolutely nothing to do with sex unless you think the church was required to let Jesus fuck it.
_Also this still happens in fundamentalist christian groups and other countries, an extreme example is the FLDS where women are sealed to older men and are expected to have sex with him whenever he wants to have as many children as possible._
According to Unicef figures published last year, 115m men were married underage, 23m of those under 15. They are expected to leave school and get a job as soon as possible to provide for their wives and, yes, children, a working father just as they've started shaving.
_2) 13-14 year old would be very interested in us. Arranged marriages were very common in history where 13-14 year old girls were arranged to marry someone who is twice their age who they have never met. This is still common in some countries, also happens in the FLDS._
Geoffrey of Anjou was married at the age of 15 to the 26-year-old Empress Matilda. I'm guessing she was still the victim of that marriage, yes?
_Has this guy ever read a history book?_
Some of us have read more than one, and are therefore able to comprehend _histories._
@Glenna Smith
_ God is a man, however you twist it and turn it,_
Traditionally, the devil is a man as well, but I'm guessing yo have no problem with men being portrayed as the Great Deceiver, the Author of Evil, the Prince of Darkness and a host of other really cool metal names.
_...religion is patriarchal..._
Despite the honkin' great mother figure sitting at the center of it? It's not patriarchal, it's familial with authority figures of both sexes.
_....a woman can't listen to god,..._
Funny, I thought it was the Virgin Mary listening to God and becoming his vessel on Earth that began the New Testament. It'd be a shame if she made that up off the top of her head.
_...she listens to him through her husband._
You seem to have skipped over the part where her husband is also required to sacrifice his life for her as Jesus did for the church. In other words, if God (that is, the father) should speak through the church to order men (that is, the son) to lay down their lives, they must in the name of protecting women (that is, the mother). It's almost as if _both_ sexes were being screwed, isn't it?
_I like how you point out one case as if it contradicts the argument anyhow._
Because it does. Families from gentry used their children, male and female, to make power matches. This is not news just because you discovered it.
_Don't worry about Geoffrey, he had mistresses...
_
So did every king (and more than a few queens). I don't see what that has to do with it.
_Yes, we don't think you really know history, or biology or common sense or....whatever, we agree to disagree_
I didn't agree to that. !P
“Well, that's a lie. Firstly, it's in that a husband and a wife must submit to each other. Secondly, while it says that a wife must submit to her husband 'as the church submits itself to Christ,' the husband must love his wife 'as Christ loved the church and gave his life for it.' In other words, he should be willing to die for her. This is the part that always gets left out but in any case, this has absolutely nothing to do with sex unless you think the church was required to let Jesus fuck it”
It wasn’t until very recently marital-rape has been classified as a thing.
Like literally in the last few dcades in respect to the US.
“ Geoffrey of Anjou was married at the age of 15 to the 26-year-old Empress Matilda. I'm guessing she was still the victim of that marriage, yes?”
Older, more powerful men, having buying a younger, dependent, bride, typically was/is the format.
“Traditionally, the devil is a man as well, but I'm guessing yo have no problem with men being portrayed as the Great Deceiver, the Author of Evil, the Prince of Darkness and a host of other really cool metal names.”
And the first woman was made to give Adam company, and someone who basically enticed Adam into dooming humanity.
“ Despite the honkin' great mother figure sitting at the center of it? It's not patriarchal, it's familial with authority figures of both sexes”
Meh, depends on the religion.
Christianity based on its texts seems patriarchal.
Leaders, rulers, are to be men.
Women has her place as a follower, servant.
"Funny, I thought it was the Virgin Mary listening to God and becoming his vessel on Earth that began the New Testament. It'd be a shame if she made that up off the top of her head."
“You seem to have skipped over the part where her husband is also required to sacrifice his life for her as Jesus did for the church. In other words, if God (that is, the father) should speak through the church to order men (that is, the son) to lay down their lives, they must in the name of protecting women (that is, the mother). It's almost as if both sexes were being screwed, isn't it?”
This doesn’t really show Christianity not being patriarchal.
It basically shows men being bequeathed to be benevolent masters.
Oh in-the old testament if you raped an unwed woman, you were expected to marry her as punishment.
Basically “you broke it, you buy it” logic
You're only allowed to rape the women you own-in
You're not allowed to fuck up another man's property lol
@@servoaugusta513
_It wasn’t until very recently marital-rape has been classified as a thing.
_
_Like literally in the last few dcades in respect to the US._
It wasn't until recently wife-beating was classed as a thing. That doesn't mean women weren't still protected from their husbands by already existing laws. Incidentally, husband-beating and sexual abuse _still_ isn't a thing, so we can assume wives are free to legally rape and batter the living shit out of their spouses, correct?
_Older, more powerful men, having buying a younger, dependent, bride, typically was/is the format._
No, old, powerful _families_ marrying off their children for advantage typically was/is the format.
It's strange that the movie never considers the following: A lot of the societal expectations and gendered beliefs centered around the negative aspects of being a man...were created by men.
-Men decided that child-rearing is something that women needed to do.-Men have greater expectations to be the money-maker and that women doing so is emasculating.
-Men in positions of power believed women didn't have the physical/mental fortitude to go into war.
-Men pressure other men into suppressing their emotions and not talking about their feelings.
Unless you believe that some type of shadowy female cabal has been influencing these evils of men since the beginning of civilization, you kinda have to realize that a lot of the biggest threats towards men is other men who are willing to abuse them.
Oh wow, aparently male-female interactions have only started happening in the last few decades and before then the only people who had influence in men's behaviour in society were other men! And they still somehow managed to influence women even though they only met for sexual purposes a few times in life!
Its great to see all the citations for these claims about history you made...
V Heller If you need a citation for all these easily verifiable historical ideologies then you might need to go rest your head because I can only assume you have a severe concussion that is affecting your brain.
@@kenised Shots Fired! And people only do that when there's nothing they can say
Pedro Silva Araujo There's not a whole lot to discuss when you seem to depend on feelings rather than facts.
wrong blood? Many biological children can have different blood type from their parents, different blood type means nothing in terms of paternity
Parents not being able to donate blood to their children is really not even that improbable.
It depends on the blood types in question and you don’t know them. Maybe the parents are both O and the kid is A or B, which would mean the kid is not theirs. Same if one of the parent is AB and the kid is O.
Eli, I think nromk and I are both aware of that. The problem is that the guy's argument is not a good one, because there are lots of ways a father would be unable to donate blood to his child. But his argument is meant to _sound persuasive_ to anyone who doesn't know how blood matching works, which I would venture to guess is a lot of people. And that's what this guy is counting on, people who hear his anecdote and think, "Why wouldn't the biological father be able to donate blood to his own son? He must not be the real father." Which is just wrong.
That's what nromk and I are pointing out. It's a bad argument, and bad arguments need to be pointed out.
Dorian sapiens the way I understood this segment was that he didn’t tell the whole story just a simplified version of it. Maybe the parents have blood-types that can’t produce their kid’s blood type and it rose the father’s suspicions and then they made more tests and found out he in fact wasn’t the father. I thought it was pretty obvious.
You're giving more credence than seems warranted to me. You're right, *_maybe_* it's fine. But, without the extra information necessary to know whether the anecdote means what he implies it means (i.e., the father's and child's blood types), I don't think belief is justified. Giving people the benefit of the doubt is a good way to end up being misled. But you do you.
The man whose daughter was adopted out without his consent wasn’t just a ~random accident~, it was part of systemic racism. Not misandry, racism.
This, very much this.
Yeah I was like," Really? That's what you took out of that?" smh
Ever heard of intersectionality? Why does that concept no longer aply in your eyes when the victim is a man?
@@alexbaribeault because,women,dont,believe,in,misandry
Yes misandry systematic racism is not a thing systematic misandry is
The problem I have with Men's Activism is the same I have with the Blue or All Lives Matter group, they happened as a response to other activists. They weren't fighting for 'men's rights' until women wanted more choices. They didn't want to change anything, they just wanted to say 'well, it sucks for us too' without actually changing anything. They just point to male dominated industries made that way by men and go 'see, look at all the work men do.' Without even acknowledging that, women want to work.
This!!
Thank you! Jeez, I'd get a construction job if I could but they won't hire me.
So because the men’s rights movement didn’t start before feminism it doesn’t have good points?
You know that’s a stupid position right?
_The problem I have with Men's Activism is the same I have with the Blue or All Lives Matter group,..._
Boy, this did _not_ age well, did it? 😆
_...they happened as a response to other activists._
No, the modern movement happened in the Sixties as a response to men being alienated from the entire civil rights movement when femmunists appropriated the whole shebang through academia, student activism and truly _atrocious_ literature.
_They weren't fighting for 'men's rights' until women wanted more choices._
No, they were fighting for men's rights since the industrial era and the Chartists, but they kept getting gatecrashed by suffragettes.
_They didn't want to change anything, they just wanted to say 'well, it sucks for us too' without actually changing anything._
If you were anymore full of crap, you'd have to wear noseplugs. Just because you're only hearing it now that it affects you, that doesn't mean nobody was talking before now.
_They just point to male dominated industries made that way by men and go 'see, look at all the work men do.' Without even acknowledging that, women want to work._
I was wondering when we were going to get around to the 'women's problems are men's responsibility, men's problems are men's fault' garbage. I always equate it with the songbird bitching at the canary who mined the gold for its cage.
@@The_Mighty_Fiction "femmunists"
Two birds with one stone ?
And yeah, poor guys, their wives got some rights, it's so monstrous.
That's not even how blood types work. Not being able to give blood to your kids or vice versa is pretty common.
From both parents?
@@EnjoyCocaColaLight For example: Mother: A0
Father: B0
Child: e.g. 00
So the parents cannot donate blood. Its not that difficult.
@@EnjoyCocaColaLight Yep. Both of my parents have A blood type (not sure if plus or minus) while I'm 0-
@@lookatthiscutekittyc2903 DAMN!
@@lookatthiscutekittyc2903 O blood types are recessive, if both your parents have and A blood type (the plus and minus doesn't really affect the alleles just the RH factor but that's a different thing) then they'd be heterozygous A. If you took high school biology and know how to do a punnet square then you'd know there's a 25% chance their child would have O type blood if Ai x Ai (i representing the recessive O allele) were crossed.
Hope this helps!
I’m a social work major and almost all domestic violence shelters don’t allow men since the vast majority of the people they work with are women and want them to feel as safe as possible since seeing male figures in their supposedly safe space can be frightening. BUT all the ones I’ve heard of will also provide male victims with free transportation to a safe area and will give out discount vouchers for local hotels (who have multiple locks on their doors and sometimes will even make the staff aware of what their abuser looks like as to not allow them to walk around the premises). Because when you work in this area, the reality of male victims is undeniable.
Couldn't we just have seperate shelters for men? I mean supposedly the shelters do provide more than just a safe place? Like emotional and psychological support?
Paul Olsen it's ptsd. It's illogical. The women in those shelters need to remove ALL of the possible offenders, they need to remove even the idea that they exist. It allows them to cope and to go out into the world again and meet men. It's like a cocoon. It has to be like that, or it won't work. It's the same when people fear loud sudden sounds after they've been in a shoot out or in a war zone. They are even afraid of fireworks.
imuni55 thank you. PTSD is exactly what it is, and you can’t expect someone with an extremely traumatic past (and present really) to be able to rationalize their fear and anxiety when that fight or flight response has helped them survive the situation they just came out of. But not allowing men is a difficult position to defend without the context of understanding how trauma and the threat of abuse affects the psyche.
Men absolutely should have a safe space available for them if they find themselves in an abusive relationship (either with a man or a woman), but unfortunately they are in a small minority of the domestically abused population so more resources go to protecting women since they are the majority, and many abused women with post traumatic stress need a male-free area so they can feel safe.
+Anna S
They are not in a small minority at all. In fact recent studies indicate that when psychological abuse is taken into account it's a 35%-65% to 40%-60% split. And there was a study in the UK which stated about 36% of all reported victims were male. So I wouldn't call men a small minority of victims. The resource distribution is enourmously unbalanced in regards to these statistics as well. It is true that women receive most of the physical abuse whilst we often forget that men face most of the psychological abuse, which is just as bad.
It may be largely invisible to the general population but it's still there, and in greater numbers than your comment suggested.
I feel that I am defending the MRA's here, which I don't like, but they do have a point in this regard. Simply because the numbers don't work out in a fair manner.
Poly Liker
We do. The only one is in Arkansas though.
The Red Pill--a masculinity movement named after a concept introduced by two trans women. It practically writes itself.
give them some time, the wachowskis come back around.
Same is the deal with Fight Club. So many dudes herald it as their battlecry to retain masculinity and leave "feminine" aspects of their personality "thrust" upon them by society behind! When its source material is a novel by a gay man who was trying to satirize how destructive gender norms of masculinity can be.
I have to laugh.
wow you must be really sad. I hope you get can get help and actually talk to people in your life.
Angelo Stevens The point is that most male hardcore fans of fight club glorify the main character and the hyper masculine teachings of the fight club, never realizing the book/movie is a critique on toxic masculinity...
@Angelo Stevens lmao the Wachowskis have literally said that the red/blue pill segment was an allegory for being trans.
Neo sees reality for the first time by taking a red pill because estrogen pills were red when they were writing the Matrix.
Basically it sucks to be a not rich person in Capitalism that would be a great documentary
This irks me with MRA's. On so some issues they are so close removed from understanding it, but at the last moment the point flies woooosh over their heads.
This feels like class reductionism
@@digaddog6099 To an extent. Some of the points that they make in the film are attributable to class, definitely
more in the first part. But yeah, removing class wouldn't exactly solve all issues, and gender roles need to also be dealt with.
Squid Game
@@digaddog6099 Man, life feels like class reductionism
maybe I missed it but women are also physically in danger during childbirth, that's why the mother needs so much choice
lalaciour physically *and* mentally. Don’t forget about postpartum depression
And heck, let's not forget that there's stuff going on during pregnancy. Turning a couple of half-cells into a tiny human puts a lot of restrictions on someone's life. The dad's contribution during that time isn't even comparable.
Fair enough, but if they want to be able to exclusively decide whether the thing clinging to the wall of their uterus will become an actual living person or just a cell culture to be scraped out, then they get to take the sole responsibility for it. I think that's a fair price for women appointing themselves the literal gatekeepers of life and death.
@@The_Mighty_Fiction ...you'll need to explain what "responsibility" you're talking about. Ideally in less-melodramatic prose.
@@timothymclean Then you'll need to explain _exactly_ what is meant by 'choice' first. And as far as my prose goes, deal with it or don't. I don't write for your 'ideal' benefit.
That last sound bite from the film broke my brain, because of how disgusting it was and him being so casual about it just made it extra creepy.
Paul Olsen I'm only interested in people my age, as you should be. pedophilla isn't normal, it's a fixable illness.
Sean Urbik
Last time I checked pedophilia isn't a fixable illness. There is no cure as of yet.
It wasn’t in the documentary though.
Eli N.S Are you sure about that?
Sean Urbik yep i watched the documentary a punch of times and it wasn’t in there. Watch for yourself if you don’t believe me. I heard some people say it was in some addition videos that didn’t make it into the final project.
Honestly that last clip makes me wonder if they ever took history
If they did, they just want to go back to those days
Just because you went to public school and took a history class based on a book some corporation published, doesn’t necessarily mean you know history.
@@ndnrb_ You realize I could say the same thing, at minimum, about the homeschooling curricula written by various ministries and religious movements that aren't necessarily tied to any corporation, right?
I have personal experience with injustice in the legal system against fathers. “The children should be with the mother” is what the judge in Arkansas said in the third year of custody battles, throughout which I testified as a 15-17 year old girl. Photos of our house being in poor condition, broken windows, animals fur and damage, broken plumbing were all ignored, and I had been forced to frantically clean for several hours before the photos were taken because they gave my mom notice. My sister and I chose three years in a row to live with our father and cried with our dad every time he lost in court. I found out later my mom had accused my dad of rape. Not of her, but of me. Was I evaluated or asked at all? No. I didn’t used to consider myself a feminist because of this experience, but I do now. It’s the skewed vision of conservative white men that declared my mom the only person worthy of taking care of us, in the face of evidence. It is the perpetuated gender roles that allowed my mom to abuse and take advantage of my dad.
Cheating does not sound like a men’s right issue....
Eowyn Gordon custody court is basically their only legit point in this entire “movement”, every other issue they have to either completely reverse the dynamic of male versus female experience, or take something that effects everyone and concentrate exclusively on the male sufferers
^^^^^^^^^^
@Lifted Why is it literally never talked about by feminism then? We have children being abused but we then see the most mundane things argued against in feminism, even ones that are hardly, if not an issue at all.
@Liz Lee Are you actually making your argument on that basis? Seriously? You said nothing except generalized assertions.
@@nathanielmathews2617, just because feminists aren't discussing with with YOU doesn't mean it's "literally never talked about in feminism."
It varies from court to court, but when courts favor mothers, it's based on patriarchal ideas that women are natural caregivers. The idea that women always get custody is decades out of date.
Since Cassie Jaye indulges in anecdata, I'll do the same; of the eight divorced couples I know with children, TWO of them have approximately 50/50 custody. ALL of them planned close to 50/50, but the other dads realized that caring for kids for hours or days on end without backup is hard. They had never done it for more than a couple of hours, usually with the moms packing snacks and essentials and helping with plans for those times dad had to "babysit."
THAT ENDING OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Yeahhhh and the sad part is that around 50 years ago or so what he described wasn’t that far from reality so I feel like he’s really undermining himself. I don’t even really identify as a feminist but the point he made just made me side with radical feminists lol.
For a moment I thought you meant the ending of the video, where Joel credited the artist that did his channel art, and was very confused.
I read your comment at the start of the video and thought: 'how bad can the ending really be?' Welp.
You mean the quote taken completely out of context and used to smear him in an intellectually dishonest way?
Omg how was it taken out of context.
Producers of the Red Pill: Make a film about MRAs which raises some points worth discussing in an attempt to increase sympathy towards Men's Rights Activism.
Also producers of the Red Pill: Leave in the scene of the old man saying he'd be a paedophile if he made the laws
It's a valuable point of view and the backlash proves its importance.
You're missing the point. Farrell takes feminist ideology to its logical and ludicrous endgame, i.e, if you believe men are sociopaths and created a society that makes slaves of their own mothers, wives, sisters, daughters , then why stop there? Feminists think men are wife beaters, murderers, thieves, misogynists, rapists, ...but not child abusers? _That's_ where this trashfire patriarchy theory suddenly gets absurd?
@@The_Mighty_Fiction your reading comprehension is shit bro
@@The_Mighty_Fiction women can give the baby up for adoption
@@osmosisjones4912 I'm not sure what you mean.
I've sort of dated a MRA, who was very serious about the paternity fraud and so on, and I remember him saying also that abortion is a way for "whoring" women to escape responsibility, so I asked him if he would want that responsibility, if he got me knocked up. He said it would be my responsibility to get rid of the child, for he had stated very clearly he doesn't want a child and won't pay for my carelessness.
I don't know if these guys think 'stating clearly' their wishes is a 100% effective birth control thing, but that made me realise how fucked up this relationship was.
Yikes
@@pikachuuprising637 came here to say the exact same thing.
Big yikes.
Well, i came here to say I don't believe a single fucking word. Anecdotes from random-ass strangers on the Internet are very poor evidence as far as I'm concerned.
@@The_Mighty_Fiction Two big yikes in one thread? That's the last square I needed for MRA bingo
@@ms.aelanwyr.ilaicos I take it you're buying this sight unseen, then? Have you learned _nothing_ from Nigerian bodybuilders in MAGA hats?
Also I feel that video ignores that most violence including sexual assault against men is actually perpetrated by other men. Which makes the video even more reductive.
It focuses on the victims, not the perpetrators.
@@EnjoyCocaColaLight lot sperm jacking sounds like rape
@@osmosisjones4912 I don't see a difference.
sexual assault is actually relatively equal at this point in time according to the research
@@claynorth964 no, it isn't. 91% of men who are forced upon is done by other men, 93% of women being forced upon are men.
Provide sources, which I doubt you'll find. It's just a fantasy you want to live in. Those statistics I showed are very real and easily looked up (as RUclips does not allow me posting links).
I think it's also telling that a lot of the "problems" that men face are due to gender stereotyping anyway. Like, women win court cases because they are "supposed" to be caretakers. Men don't get taken seriously in abuse cases because they're supposed to be "strong". Men dying more in dangerous jobs and wars is mostly because these fields are seen as too dangerous for "delicate" and "weak" women. If women were allowed to join the Army for most of society, I'm sure they'd have died too.
Don't forget that toxic notions of being "hard" and "cool" also peer-pressure some men into not adhering to work safety rules or taking unnecessary risks. That probably also adds to the higher mortality rate. Inside and outside of the work place.
@99 Bottles of Bleach That's rubbish.
I am a feminist and I was an apprentice for mechatronics technician. I couldn't work in some sections of my company, because toilets and changing rooms for women just didn't exist.
I ended up working in the power plant and I liked it. Was anything but air-conditioned and office. (We had 37°C in the boiler house in winter.)
@99 Bottles of Bleach We call for women to get the chance to do these jobs without being discriminated. We call for raising girls in a way that makes them consider doing such jobs. That includes presenting them with role models in media and real life, and it also includes encouraging them to try out sciences and crafts.
We also call for boys being raised in a way that makes them consider doing care-work for a living later in live.
But being a movement that's about freedom and personal choice, we cannot force anybody to take these jobs. Society needs to change in a way that breaks up old gender stereotypes.
"They think equality is a buffet they can pick and choose from."
You either didn't meet many feminists yet or you are either stupid or lying on purpose.
@99 Bottles of Bleach Unfortunately I cannot aducate somebody who lives in their own fantasy world as much as you do.
But one thing that feminism leaves out is the role women play in reinforcing gender roles. It's talked about I terms of male power and privilige that is kind of telling in its own. These gender roles are heavily mediated by women for the benefit of women. Instead of addressing this, I've seen the argument made that women have stockholm syndrome and are conditoned to act this way just to survive. The exact same argument can be made about men.
Her flowchart made me furious. She completely missed the option of "father does not want child" that then sprouts off into physical abuse or coercion.
When I turned 16 I became afraid that I was already too old for a lot of men, like I was concerned men weren't attracted to my still developing body because it was now more developed. I'm 18 now and still feel ashamed but still scared of aging and not having ever had a boyfriend. This is one of the most messed up things when it comes to growing up for women. That last line he said hit the bottom of my stomach, how many men think 13 to 14 year old girls are the best to court? It's shoved down our throats that men aren't attracted to older women or even really 'women' they like hot sexy barely legal teens (or so pornhub would suggest). I realize that it's a minority, hopefully, of men who like women who are significantly younger. But it's so normalized.
I recently had a discussion about this actually! I find it bizarre that so many men are attracted to young teenagers and yet paedophillia is seen as the worst crime possible. I can totally understand where you're coming from though and I imagine it's something common across a lot of women.
@Some Weeb no, not nearly to the same extent.
@Some Weeb .... I didn't say anything about that. That's irrelevant to the conversation. You look dumb.
Take your time. I had my first boyfriend at 21 and my first time, as i wanted it to be. And for me, i was always reflective, what i felt or wanted, and that time was perfect for me.
I am more active on the sexuell side with 28, but if you don't want to, it's OK.
Take exactly the time you want. And you can have the time😊
@@radschele1815 ended up meeting my boyfriend a month after writing this. It wasn't too fast or anything since we took our time. So glad I met him, he's an amazing man and I love him to death.
--- No one is talking about our issues ----
And yet the paternity stories are from local news coverage.
Exactly. The vast majority of people do care about men's issues, and it is possible to talk about men's problems (or problems both genders face from a purely male narrative and presume it's only a male issue) and no one will have a problem with it, people see you as some kind of hero if you show sympathy towards men or their issues.
Yet if you dare talk about female oppression, prepare yourself for a barrage of "but what about men?" and "men too!".
@@marinatebbenham4011
Becouse women are not opressed and never have been. And nor are men opressed in the west. Men are surely opressed by women in islamic nations, not in the modern west.
@@marinatebbenham4011
Becouse women are not opressed and never have been. And nor are men opressed in the west. Men are surely opressed by women in islamic nations, not in the modern west.
@@rtg5881 Women literally only got the vote in the 20th century. They didn't even always have the right to own property. In fact, they were treated as property. It wasn't even illegal to rape your wife until extremely recently in many Western countries. Are you fucking insane?
G P it scares me that there are legitimately people who think like you
Thing I wish you had mentioned that touches on both part 1 and part 2: the risks and costs of pregnancy and childbirth. The risk of death or serious injury, not to mention all the pain and consequences for health and career, are expected to be borne entirely by women. This doesn't get factored into the mortality rates from being in the military or whatever, and it is a major part of the unique role women play in reproduction.
This this this. I mean giving birth is literally called labor.
Its not expected from women tho, only women can go through the process of pregnancy. Yes it’s painful and all that, however its a bit of a moot point when only women can exclusively be impregnated
@@Ffffffffff366 You don't seem to realize how many people get condescending toward you, especially if you're a woman but regardless of gender, if you express disinterest in ever having children. There's a lot of social pressure in favor of it.
+Drew Spencer Penrose
_The risk of death or serious injury, not to mention all the pain and consequences for health and career, are expected to be borne entirely by women._
Well, let's concede the truth of that for a minute and pretend maternity leave and anti-discrimination laws don't exist. I'd like to remind you of four words that are often bandied around on this point; 'Her body, her choice.' When it comes to the male perspective, here are four more; 'No uterus, no opinion.' Women have spent decades campaigning for the exclusive right to declare whether the cell culture clinging to the wall of their uterus is a person to be nurtured or a tumor to be scraped out and flushed down the toilet. Unless or until you want to concede that yes, men _should_ have rights concerning their fatherhood, then women _should_ be bearing the consequences of that choice alone. That seems to me a more than fair price for declaring yourselves the _literal_ gatekeepers of life and death.
_This doesn't get factored into the mortality rates from being in the military or whatever, and it is a major part of the unique role women play in reproduction._
Firstly, women are not drafted into baby-making 'or whatever', I don't care what hysterical 'The Handmaids Tale is becoming reality' garbage is getting thrown around lately. Secondly and by extension, enlisted soldiers who die in combat know the risks of the life they chose. Men and women both play unique roles in reproduction, and it's set in motion by a (hopefully) mutual choice to have sex. The only advice given to men who don't want to be daddies is to 'keep it in (their) pants,' so I'd offer the same to a woman who doesn't want to risk death or injury from childbirth, the most surefire way to avoid it still being not to 'enlist.'
+blarg2429
_You don't seem to realize how many people get condescending toward you, especially if you're a woman but regardless of gender, if you express disinterest in ever having children. There's a lot of social pressure in favor of it._
Yes, I remember in history class being told about the Bad Egg Brigade of the war years, legions of young men handing women rotten eggs in the street to publicly shame them for not being mothers. God knows how many lives that cost.
[paraphrased] "we would make all women (including those as young as 13) sexually available to us"
hoo man. hooooo doggie.
wow! wow wow wow. never cringed so hard in my life.
I might be interpreting it badly but isn't it in the context of what men would do if they were to benefit at the expense of women, not what he would actually do himself?
jesus fucking christ THIS IS. THE. WORST.
@@Frankly7 Indeed, yeah, meaning that if men (including him) actually had that much power, they would do that. I find that extremely insulting to men, and people in general.
"How dare you say Men have all the power! If we had all the power, you would've been sucking dick since middle school! No man would vote against a law like that! Men are depraved horndogs!"
Radfems have this illusion that *the patriarchy* is a grand conspiracy to give men more power and money just for being men. And then comes this fucking guy, with the worst counterargument I have ever seen!
@@SalahEddineH The quote is "If men made the rules to benefit men at the expense of women, here are some of the ways..."
Notice he doesn't say "If men made the rules," *period*. His argument is that since women don't tend to be sexually available to men whenever men feel like it, men do not have much of an unfair advantage over women, and since there are many advantages that women are taking over men, women do have an unfair advantage over men. I don't really care for this argument one way or another, especially since the debate about "who has it the worst" is mostly pointless, but it is important not to misinterpret what people are saying here, since it only makes the problem worse.
@Claire Baker Do you think he *wants* children to be sexually available to him? That's a very uncharitable interpretation imo.
This movie is basically "My Wife Left Me: On Ice"
As in "She killed me and threw my body in the freezer" or "look at this amazing ice skating musical about my wife leaving me" ;P
The happy sequel would be
"I Found My Husband: On Ice"
The "81% of cases decide in favour of the mother" thing is a pretty (and deliberately?) unhelpful statistic. Why? Because only 4% of custody arrangements actually go to court. In the majority of cases (51%), both parents agree that for the mother to take the child, without any involvement of a third party. (Source huffpo)
To answer your deliberately obtuse query: The 81% stat is used to make the argument "men as a whole are unfairly disadvantaged in terms of child custody". In reality, their statistic is only a small number of cases, and the majority of cases both parents decide that women are primary care givers (meaning that most men are voluntarily giving up children in these cases).
brb, busy laughing at this guy who sees fit to directly compare himself with Socrates, father of Western thought...
Paul Olsen, it seems like you are the offended one, my good bitch
" In the majority of cases (51%), both parents agree that for the mother to take the child, without any involvement of a third party. " Don't you think that maybe, sexist attitudes and internalized oppression, could have something to do with that outcome?
Paul Olsen Hey, I get what you're going for. :)
Wow that ending was super Handmaid's Tale
What? :D
@@arunkeshavadas7171 Unless that guy said, do you know what a disgusting thing to say would be...?
@@arunkeshavadas7171 hahaha WOW
Even thinking context could help that is deeply fucked up just
WOOOOW
Farell is reasonable guy!
that statement was taken out of context to unfairly demonize & vilify.
@@arunkeshavadas7171 Oh my god, just blindly screeching at people that they're ignorant for observing reality and not dismissing it baselessly. Imagine drinking this much koolaid.
That last guy, and the man nodding with him, that was disgusting
12:53 why is it stated that abortion is a universally bad option for the woman ? that point is entirely subjective to the individual woman's own feelings towards the procedure.
Most of restrictions aren't till late and back in 70s. There were abortion survivors. Weekend by the fetuscide attempt
That's like saying infanticide isn't a universally bad option. It's entirely subjective to the individual parent's own feelings towards the action.
Like seriously?? Since when is killing a human being a subjective decision?
@@thelemurofmadagascar9183 When it comes down to property rights and self defense? I hear a lot of people speaking positively when someone manages to defend their home from a would-be robber and/or murderer. Why do women not have property rights to defend their own body from being robbed and/or murdered?
And yes, that makes the distinction between a wanted pregnancy and a not wanted pregnancy. When a pregnancy is unwanted the baby is a robber and is a threat to the life of the woman. When the pregnancy is wanted but the baby is threatening the life of the woman then it becomes complicated but ultimately still comes down to personal decision to self defense if an abortion is called for. When the pregnancy is wanted and healthy then the woman is freely sharing resources and accepting risk of harm.
You could make the argument the baby doesn't mean to rob or threaten the health of the woman because it doesn't have the mental capacity to understand. But would you make the same argument about someone wielding a knife about to kill you who has severe mental disability? Someone who is on drugs? Or a 12 year old? And we aren't talking about a case where the person wielding a knife is in custody - because that wouldn't be analogous - I'm talking imminent harm situation, no one else is there to save you and this person unaware of their actions is wildly swinging a blade around with a chance to hit you and you can't run or call the police, because that's what it is being pregnant. At all times something COULD go wrong, it should be a woman's CHOICE to take that risk. This is also why broad access to a broad range of birth control is a good thing, it more or less avoids that risk altogether for those not wanting to take that risk.
This analysis of mine will remain true until medicine advances enough to make overall survivability of pregnancy higher than survivability of an abortion. Which abortion is safer than giving birth by ALOT unfortunately.
@@anastasiacline6159 First off, over 90% of abortions are elective. Meaning that the vast majority of abortions are not performed in the name of self defence, and therefore your argument really only applies to a tiny fraction of abortions.
But putting that aside, even if your argument somehow applied to all abortions, you're still forgetting an incredibly important factor that comes into play when talking about killing in self defence. The fact that the victim must have a *genuinely good reason* to believe that their life is in *genuine* and *immediate danger* . Without the existence of this factor, killing in "self defence" could never be reasonably accepted in court.
Here's an example of what I mean. Let's say a notorious and dangerous gang member has threatened to murder me. And I have reason to believe that the only way I can stop him is to sneak into his house and kill him first before he can get to me. If I went ahead and murdered him for the sake of protecting myself before he even did anything to me, do you honestly think a fair and just jury would let me off the hook for his murder because of "self defence"? Of course not. You can't go around killing people just because they *might* pose a threat to your life. In a similar fashion, pregnancy is incredibly unlikely to actually kill the average pregnant mother. In Canada for instance, the highest maternal mortality rate in recent years has been 8.7 deaths per 100,000 live births, which is only 0.0087%. And although those deaths are a tragedy, there is no reasonable way you can use them to justify killing an innocent human being simply because of a less than 1% chance that the mother may die.
Now on the other hand let's say a pregnant woman was told by her doctor that due to her current medical condition, she will almost certainly not be able to survive a birth or even a C-section. If that were the case, then virtually all pro-lifers including myself agree that abortion in this specific scenario should be allowed, since the pregnant woman has a genuine reason to believe that her life is in legitimate danger. Only in this exact scenario could you reasonably compare an unborn infant to a gun wielding robberer.
In conclusion, my point still remains. Unless the mother's life is in legitimate and genuine danger due to the pregnancy, there is no justifiable reasoning for taking the life of an innocent and defenceless human being.
No, she said it's bad for the _father_ (assuming he wants the child) if the woman wants an abortion, because there's nothing he can do about it. It's basically Pro-Life Lite - they're not entirely against abortion, but they think a woman shouldn't be allowed to get an abortion against the guy's will.
It shouldn't be a competition about who's more opressed or abused.
People's problems should be adressed whether they are in the majority or not.
It's not, Joel's framing it as one because he views men's rights as detrimental to women's rights.
Lol so men’s rights hurts women’s? Just a zero sum game huh?
@@wisemage0 Elam is portraying men's rights as the only desirable one, Joel is apparently portraying men's rights as inherently cutting into women's rights, but what's your idea of rights for both sexes? How would it manifest?
Where is Joel saying that men’s rights are detrimental to women’s? He keeps saying he agrees with the legitimate problems of labor dangers and sexual assault victims. Joel is just pointing out how the documentary is misleading, not nuanced, and paints feminism as the enemy.
Facts
I remember a year ago I was near the end of the "skeptical anti-feminist" part of my life and finding a video from Shoeonhead talking about this and saying "ITS REALLY GOOD" (i regret everything from that portion of my life) and so watching this is kind of like a satisfying viewing of seeing my skeptic phase being utterly destroyed
Magus the Outrageous she is so astonished filled with hot air, it’s appalling how she manages to maintain a fan base and live on top of a mountain made of sarcastic smugness
The Haruhi avatar fits your comment very well.
She's full of hate, treats her peers like they're inferior, and never takes responsibility for her abusive behavior.
How does regretting somethings I believed at some point make me "Hateful, treats my peers like they're infefior and never takes responsibility for my abusive behavior" I don't even know Shoeonhead, I couldn't even call her a peer.
Shoe and Armored are gonna have some basic babies lol. They deserve each other.
I think they were talking about shoe, and I disagree. She's much better about a lot of issues than she used to be, check her vid on TERFS.
Ughhh. As someone who has been involved in family court issues for 15 years, I can assure you that any instances of men being less favored than women are the exception, not the rule. Women are far and away more discriminated against by judges and lawyers, who use sexist condescending language towards them, and even in the case of men who wrongly lost custody, they aren't treated the way women are. As usual, MRAs should actually band together with feminists to fix the horribly flawed family legal system, but instead they cherry pick instances where men have been treated unfairly, and conflate it with the fact that women usually get custody, even though that's usually a case of women wanting custody more often than men, and say that women are oppressing them. It makes my blood boil, because I've seen how women are treated in court, and it is abysmal
Thank you for this comment, I feel like people just look at the statistics, don't give it anymore thought, then draw their own misinformed conclusions
@@AkatsukiHostClub Whereas you can be far more informed by uncorroborated anecdotes on the Internet. Cool story.
Feminists FIGHT against equal custody laws.
@@The_Mighty_Fiction i saw you cherry picking in another comment section. leave it alone, yeesh.
Almost everything about the docu screams "intellectual laziness", but it's good that you brought up the finer points. Many people, myself included, were too lazy to do it. I've been rattling my brain trying to figure out how addressing men's issues demands completely abandoning feminism, or how the two are antithetical to each other. I just don't see it.
Hrishabh Singh They aren't antithetical. It's a matter of people on both sides not wanting to listen to each other. That and the reactionary nature of male rights activism.
Hrishabh Singh Wow. You went through watching the film? That's commitment on your part, kudos to you. I am so terrified by the horror stories I hear about Reddit's Red Pill community and the tired and repetitive "shut your hole, you feminazi" of youtube commenters, that I never thought of looking into what Men's Right Activism is and whether it had any merit. Big fault on my part. This is about American statistics, sure, but I had no clue that men faced about as much emotional and intimate partner abuse as women or how easy employment does not always mean good or safe employment for them. Atleast I got to know this much from this two parter. Tho I am glad (am I?) that my intuition about Red Pill being nuts was correct.
Sinister Sweet Not all types of feminism, not even the mainstream kind, closes its eyes to suffering of men. I thought that is what this video was about? No?
What exactly is a MRA claim that feminists don't want to listen to, other than "feminism is bullshit and women are the problem with society"? Name one.
Arunima Tiwari I never said that. There are feminists who are interested (myself included). But online there's a lot of "MRAs are a joke" retoric from feminists, which ignores genuine issues we should ALL face. Also, back in the 70s male rights activism was shut down by feminist academia because it wasn't worthy of women's studies. Look it up. Needless to say it had a trickle down effect.
your voice is so calming..
He sounds like NileRed
Does not make him right. Use your intellect rather than your feelings.
He should be the official voice for soy boy rights groups.
@@proudguy Take your own advice
It is youre right
I love how the quote that you included at the end pretty literally reflects how ancient male-centric cultures treated women.
Also will they talk about how workplace misogyny is a major factor in why women quit blue collar jobs that they are physically capable of doing?
We live in a society.
Where over 90% of men have masculine traits.
lmao uhh no we don't. society is fake news idiot. you're all just extras in the universal movie that i'm the star of.
sorry just thought I'd give you a glimpse into the shower thoughts of the POTUS for a moment
Gamers are the real opressed gender.
BOTTOM TEXT
a cat your concepts of masculinity and femininity are shaped by the society you live in, and therefore yes obviously the groups and traits established into those concepts will have large conformity within those groups. This is not a new idea or concept. It also does nothing to address the idea that those groups might be flawed or dangerous.
I remember watching a video of one of the honey badgers talking about why woman shouldn't vote
So I think you were too nice with this shit show
I’m kinda of two minds abt it. On one hand, I think it’s interesting to let a movement put its best foot forward and see what happens. On the other, it would have been interesting to talk abt all the awful things MRAs say.
Feel free to link that video. Or are you misrepresenting a discussion on how the vote wasn't an egalitarian act since it created two classes of citizen, one with obligations to the state, one without as "why women shouldn't vote."
Then let me extend an invitation to talk to us sometime on a Fireside chat.
I smell a Rantzerker
“A child’s the perfect weapon”? That’s Hayward’s concern about his wife’s violent temper, using their child as a weapon against him? What about her hurting the CHILD? Am I misunderstanding what that comment is trying to say?
@Archbound1121 I think what she is getting at is that the child's safety should be the biggest concern, not how she would use the kid against him.
You're not wrong. I had that reaction, too, but then I realized that he didn't get to edit the final cut. We don't really know the context of anything that anyone said, so I prefer to focus on the film as a whole.
I took it literally and found myself arguing: no, the perfect weapon would be a gun. It's take fucking ages to kill someone with a toddler.
Maybe that sounds more dismissive than I mean it to. It's a legit issue, I'd just say it's more an issue with the film than with that dude.
If I had to defend him (and I don't, there is no one holding a gun to my back, no need to look into this weird bit I'm doing) I'd say that using a child to hurt others in an emotional way is usually very harmful to the child. Maybe he thought that she wouldn't get angry at the child nearly as often as she'd get angry at him and both would hurt the child
I'm not done watching yet, but the damn blood type thing pisses me off. My bio dad has a different blood type and cannot donate to me blood, I have O type blood and he has type A.
You get one blood from your dad and one from your mum, there are multiple types of situations where the kid cannot get blood from parents.
If you have a parent with A and a parent with B but both have an O gene which is recessive you can have an O blood type and not be able to get blood from etiher parent. This is not conclusive on parentage.
Donation of blood and organs and all that isn't simple, and just because you share half of your DNA doesn't make donation a guarentee. I understand that in the case mentioned there was later confirmation that the man was not the father, but I want to be really clear that not being able to donate someone blood does not mean that you are not related. And I'm suspicious with that story because A) why is the hospital asking the dad and not have blood on stock for this stuff. B) what was the blood type tested that made them think it was not possible for him to be the father, cause as far as I know, they don't test the DNA they just type it and the only type his could be to both not be donatable and prove lack of parentage is the kid to be O and him to be AB so like what the hell is going on with that story?
Are you sure the father of that story didn't demand a paternity test following this? Also, if the mother's blood type was the one to work, why would the hospital have called for the father?
Seems like both parents were unusable as blood donors, leading to mistrust, leading to a paternity test, leading to the discovery that these children were not the fathers'.
But that's just me guessing and talking out my ass. If you look it up you'll come to learn I'm right, but please just continue deducting nothing from the information you're given.
EnjoyCocaColaLight but that’s also kinda the point? That blood type is not necessarily proof of parenthood. Obviously if the father is O and the child is AB they aren’t the father. But if the father was told that above scenario then yeah, it’s reasonable. It’s also reasonable that due to his lack of understanding of how blood types work he could be the father and wouldn’t know unless he did a paternity test. What if the child had O and he was BO or AO? Obviously I’d want a paternity test but just because blood types aren’t compatible does not mean infidelity is the only conclusion
@@EnjoyCocaColaLight They only had the father on hand, the mother was not reachable according to the story, also again it is entirely possible for both parents to be unusable blood donors, and still be biological parents. Actually, because my mother is anemic many cases requiring blood donation her blood wouldn't help, so I wouldn't be able to get blood from either of my parents. In fact my elder half brother is the only one who could donate to me because he got an O from both parents as well.
The story ends with a paternity test, and I don't dispute that the children were not his, I dispute that discovery because in the video the man says "Whoops Can't do it wrong blood. What?" and acts as if this is itself conclusive and completely unheard of when it is in fact pretty damn common to have incompatible blood type with your children.
It is a common trope in fictional stories for parents to be revealed as non-biological because of blood type incompatibility, but it is not rooted in science. In science, in medicine, it is incredibly common to not be able to donate organs, tissues, and blood to your own biological children. Which is why I take issue not with the story itself of infidelity, but with the framing that incompatible blood type means you're not related.
@@natebackwell5735 Thanks yeah, it's true if the father is O and the child is AB they (very very likely) aren't the father, but also they would be able to donate because O is a lack of proteins and can donate to any blood type and AB has both proteins and can recieve any blood type, (ignoring rh factors here, but they are also able to be incompatible with the parent, and can cause problems during pregnancy when the mother and child don't have the same rh factor), so the only case where it's proof / strong evidence of a lack of parentage and the child cannot recieve the father's blood is if the father is type AB and the child is type O.
Also I say very very likely, because biology isn't maths, and there can be rare instances where these things are possible because of rare genetic disorders like chimerism, but it's definitely way more likely that it would be infidelity in that case.
Chronically Me oh yeah, I’m majoring in microbiology and the amount of rare and unlikely occurrences is astounding! That said, I’m glad science has progressed enough to allow us to understand these are rare occurrences that should be accounted for, but the data you see is correct barring improper procedures. EDIT: also I was more going on the angle that O blood lacks the identifying proteins so anyone who has a child with AB blood would *most* likely need to have a very hard discussion. Completely forgot that’s what I was saying lol, clearly got a little stop stuck in my head
so a guy found out his kids weren't his kids because he had a different blood type? thaaat's not how that works
Rob Mckennie I'm glad I'm not the only one who fixated on that. I assume it's either an oversimplification from the film or the way it's edited here, because I think there are ways to exclude paternity via blood type, but it's definitely not as simple as "oh no, he's got the wrong blood, how is that possible!!" 🤣🤣
I expect you could do exactly that by analyzing the phenotypes of the parents and the child (punnett squares anyone?) but even if it's over-simplified I don't see the route from "different blood type" to suspecting your kid isn't your kid. Like, why would that lead to anything other than "your blood doesn't match, oh well that happens sometimes, let's find us some stranger blood". Even if it only happens 1% of cases, you would still see it all the time
Rob Mckennie I'm assuming either the "father" or the hospital knew his wife's blood type too, so they were able to make the determination based on that? But it still kinda sounds more like a subplot from an episode of House than a Real Thing that Definitely Happened (TM)
I guess it would have to be something like that, if it was actually based on the blood type, but even if the hospital staff noticed it, i'm a little skeptical they would tell him, but idk. And I believe it even did happen on House, not with blood type but with eye colour. God I miss that show.
Rob Mckennie haha yep, they did a couple things like that on House. With the eye thing, they felt an ethical obligation to tell the couple because they were half siblings. A few other times House figured out if someone was adopted or not based on weird genetic traits. But in real life I just don't see the path from different blood type to excluding paternity being so uh...linear. It's possible the father gleaned enough info to Google it himself, but the way the story's presented here doesn't do a whole lot for its credibility.
I just love your tone and style so much. Your voice just has this way of defusing tension that may come from the content. Like, I imagine that if opposition watches you, that they see it fit to have a discussion, and not to feel attacked.
Aron puma I think that’s really important, too. So many times Ive seen reasonable discussion (of any issue) shot down because somebody decided to be snarky.
Snark is far easier on the internet than sincerity. I suspect it is easier without it as well. That just makes Big Joel's work all the more commendable for me.
Actually that would be the documentary. This video is a needleworking of divisiveness which makes my neurons ache.
That's just simply not the case and those articles are ugly in their misconception. Here's a particularly ignorant example...
"Men account for more than 95% of all workplace fatalities:
One important reason for this discrepancy is that men are inclined to select work that is dangerous in order to prove their masculinity to women, to other men, and to themselves."
If you can't find something wrong with that then we are on separate planets.
Who did I insult? Am I being trolled by one of those Russian Divisiveness Bots?
Great points! when i watched the movie I was telling the tv, 'feminists do care about these things!" I don't want our young men to go to war, i dont want our men to kill each other! I remember being a kid and learning about the YMCA and other mens shelters, and it seems like a thing of the past. homelessness is terrible whatever gender you are. i care you guys!
That last sound clip,
But spousal rape wasn't illegal in all 50 states until 1993, and as of 2018 there are legal loopholes in 48 states that allow children to marry, only 14 % of those marriages are between 2 children, the rest of the time it's between a girl and a man, mostly.
This argument also WRONGLY supposes that all men believe they are entitled to sex and want to fuck children, and because the gen pop frowns on that, at least in a social sense, that men can't possibly be the ones in charge, that's gross, you're gross.
Right and they complain abt false allegations😂😂😂😂
Yet again, a well balanced nuanced coverage of the film, it's hard to find videos like this, great work!
Did you watch the film? It is actually well balanced and nuanced while indulging both sides of this issue fairly. I feel like this is something that the age of the internet can not understand. They only accept social issues when they are presented divisively and with the sides drawn so that one can be cleanly demonized. It's difficult to look into the wider scope and make your own opinions. It is far easier to stay within these domes of ideology where every phrase is neatly put into the context of how you already feel.
Salokin stop saying nuanced.
The only thing you'd consider neutral is an advertisement for feminism.
At least you got what you wanted.
@factotum, Ironic thing to say, considering that's very applicable to the alt right and what it already does.
These days "alt-right" has become something of a catch-all phrase for anybody who doesn't follow the intersectional feminist orthodoxy. And it also means "Nazi," so in other words, anybody who disagrees with them is a Nazi! :D
The dude making the final sound bite should be put on some kind of list.
It really bothers me how the guys in this film just assume women never where willing to take the hard jobs. I’ve known many women who wanted to be soldiers, firemen, politicians, and cops. Sure, nobody’s life goal is to be a truck driver or fisherman who stays at sea for months on end (2 of the most deadly jobs) but that’s not an exclusively female sentiment (I reiterate that nobody (including men) is particularly excited to be a truck driver). We’d like to be given the chance to hold some power in society and help humanity alongside men. We are no less ambitious just because we are women. Most of us are also advocating for men to be allowed into nurturing roles in society. We want everybody to have an equal say. We do want sexual assault claims made by men to be taken seriously because we A: don’t like seeing people suffer and B: are tired of women being assumed to be innocent because we’re too “delicate”.
"Wrong blood" is the most telling phrase in this whole thing to me. Parents are not necessarily able to donate to their kids, that's not how blood donor compatibility works. What he says is more in line with how *fascism* works, and that he thinks it's an adequate explanation for how they knew a kid wasn't his is just so damn telling.
Yeah I was confused when that flaw wasn't highlighted by the video here. Parents don't necessarily have the same blood type as their child, that makes no sense - obviously people can reproduce without having the same blood type, so obviously that would mean in such a case that it's likely that one parent or the other won't be a fitting donor for tlany child they have together. That dude actually just sounds ignorant, like a fool even, and yeah, it seems based in fascist nonsense, not in science
@@chompythebeast Yeah, my (biological) father not my (biological) mother could be a blood donor to me. That’s just how blood works, not parentage lol.
A child is a perfect weapon??? That sounds like the plot of a Mexican novela, when the female villain tries to conceive a child with the male lead.
pedro, estoy embarazada y el hijo es tuyo (?) "dramatic sound"
[grabs popcorn in spanish]
Plot twist: she actually stole a used condom, froze it, and latter used it to get pregnant. Happened in a Brazilian telenovela.
Great video! I'd also be interested to see the generally cited "men lose custody cases" statistic investigated. I've actually heard that those stats are skewed because men really just don't try to get custody that often, and when they do it's much more equal.
BUT that's just something I heard, I don't really have anything to back that up. Anyway! Very solid stuff, as always.
I agree, those stats are something that ought to be investigated. I just wasn’t too invested in it one way or the other haha
Idk if that’s a completely correct stat I can only talk from my personal experience, but my parents are divorced. Both my brother and I ended up with my mom even though my mom is undoubtably the worse parent. She’s manipulative and at one point when I was really young she actually tried to convince me that this man I went to see every weekend wasn’t actually my dad. Idk if I am the outlier but in this case even though she is the worse parent the mom still got custody. Most of my friends that have divorced parents are also with their mom but these people have two good parents so it isn’t the same situation. That is the only statistic from this documentary I have even a little reason to believe the rest seem strange to me.
I have investigated those statistics. The statistics that feminists cite indicating men receive more custody actually shows the reverse. The men who were seeking sole custody were from a self-selected group often encouraged by child protective services to seek custody against a woman who was a lethal danger to her children. Even though these men were often supported by CPS and were seeking custody of children that were in manifest danger from their mothers, they only got custody a small margin more than the women who sought custody who were not doing so for reasons of protecting their children from violence.
@@BigJoel as if rape statistics shouldn't be Investigated. How do they know rape is the most under reported crime if it's under reported. And don't they Start out with how we should Believe.
. Bill Cosby was Convicted dispight striking innconcistencies . Because feminist say innconcistencies in stories are normal victim behavior 🤨 . Yeah of the women the experts studied and got their statistics 😒. And these are the sources that say false accusations are rare 😩.
And. Just saying dad's don't try
. To get custody
I once got into a discussion with a guy on reddit about that. I said men get custody less because they seek it less, he said it’s because women use their children as an emotional weapon against the father, like making the kid say he likes mom more or something. I said that men can do that as well, and he said no because women are more emotionally coercive and manipulative than men, and then I blocked him.
In short: We have a bunch of issues for a bunch of different groups and instead of focusing on "Who has it worse" we should focus on "What to do". Many of those issues have the same root anyway I think.
i am a trans woman, and i'm attracted to women, so i've experienced some kinds of fears that are addressed in this documentary. in addition to my crippling gender dysphoria, which caused aversion to sxual intercourse with cis women, i also had this fear that if i had a biological child, somehow it could be taken from me, if my partner just decided that she didn't love me anymore. i experienced parental abandonment by my father, but i always tried to see the situation from both angles, and if it was me in a similar situation, that'd be extemelly terrifying. of course, my father never really cared about not raising me, i was deluded to think he had any sort of emotion to begin with.
but when i looked from the side of my mom, who actually raised me, i saw how much she suffered by being a single mother. and just by observing her becoming more and more depressed and unstable as time went by was very distressful. so, on one hand, i didn't want to have a biological child if that child didn't grow in my own body, because i didn't want to be a mere 'accessory' to pregnancy. but on the other hand i would also be terrified of being abandoned by my ex-partner with a child in my womb, or in my hands. not to say the horrifying possibility of being rped by my partner, a relative or a stranger, and getting pregnant.
since i transitioned to female, had srs, and have only homosexual relationships, i get to feel a bit less involved with these kinds of situations. but everytime i'm reminded that my body wasn't born female, i feel a chill go through my spine, and this is one of the reasons. yesterday i talked with a friend, and he said that he'll get his first baby soon. instead of feeling happy, i felt dysphoric. could i be happy in that situation? what if i lost my child? how could i have a child if i'm not the biological mother? what if i was denied custody because being transsexual is, in some places, still considered a mental illness?
when i see men making this kind of argument, sometimes if feels kinda fake. because i don't think they're actually worried about losing their child, they're most likely worried about being 'cuckd'. they're worried that they don't have control over their wives, and that threatens their masculinity. what makes me upset is the idea of being seen as the 'less important parent', 'less competent', 'less nurturing', 'less naturally endowed' to raise a child. but that's all sexist nonsense. not just sexist but also cissexist, because that's what people actually mean when they call a trans woman a 'man'. the 'biological reality' that they want to allude to, is that they don't think trans women are capable of being real mothers, real wives or real daughters. they think we are crazy people who castrate themselves, and who are incapable of taking care of either partners or children. that's what the word 'man' means when it's used by bigots to address trans women.
I'm really sorry to hear that. I hope you're doing okay
That final end quote from the red pill was unpleasant and unsettling.
ikr. why would they WANT 13-14 year old girls interested in them?
Paul Olsen you are disgusting
Paul Olsen No, you're not, Not by a long shot.
Paul Olsen You realize you're talking about _children_, right??? 0_0
I mean, I'm a straight woman, and I teach high school seniors. And I've had some objectively good-looking male students in my classes before. But even just thinking to myself that they're good-looking makes me feel weird and skeezy, because they are high schoolers and I'm in my 30s. And here you are talking about MIDDLE SCHOOL GIRLS. Gross gross gross.
Some urges are best suppressed, my friend. It's gross to poop in public. It's gross to want to bang 13 year olds. Don't be gross.
Is that quote taken out of context? Is he saying "this is what we would like or this is what men would do if feminist beliefs about men's sexuality were true?"
Ugh, thank you for this video. It gets frustrating though. I'm a feminist, and nothing I do is vindictive towards men. I think the main difference between feminists and MRA is that when we say that there is patriarchy and that it's harmful, were talking about all of society, the phenomenon that historically placed men in charge. I in no way think that men are bad or wicked. It hurts them, too. And it's not anyone's fault. We can change it together. Red-pillers seem to attack women's character on the whole rather than looking at the sociological problems that got us to this point. It just seems so counterproductive and mysoginistic. Ugh
J Girl
My personal issue is that some feminists DO make it personal by claiming that man X they don't like got his position/career through patriarchy, indirectly insulting his intelligence and capabilities. That's additionally weak because someone can have very well earned his stuff but still be an *******.
Saying that a man got a position due to the patriarchy isn't saying that he isn't great for the position or talented. It means that he may have had some different socializations that impacted his interests/confidence, some educational advantages, or his boss may have been somewhat biased or may have a desire for a certain work place culture. That doesn't mean that those possibilities apply to all men. Its a generalization. Maybe none of it applies to him. Maybe all of it applies to him, but he's also the best person for the job, so no one notices. But it's worth looking into potential reasons for disparities between success between men and women
"we say that there is patriarchy and that it's harmful, were talking about all of society, the phenomenon that historically placed men in charge. I in no way think that men are bad or wicked. It hurts them, too."
So when men benefit it is patriarchy, and when men suffer it is also patriarchy?
Why would a patriarchy make men suffer? It almost sounds like you are completely failing to identify the real issue(s).
Patriarchy has both positive and negative effects on men AND women. In simplest terms under patriarchy, women are considered valuable, but are given less freedoms. And men are given power/opportunity, but are considered disposable. There's nothing contradictory about an idea being both good and bad. I just think the cons outweigh the pros for everyone
I think you are attributing issues to "patriarchy" that are not necessarily related at all. It also seems the idea of men being in charge is considered a bad thing, why? I think it is because you are attributing issues the "patriarchy" that are not necessarily linked at all.
A whole lot of supposition and blanket statements with questionable logic/reason.
NOT ALL KIDS HAVE THE SAME BLOOD TYPE AS BOTH THEIR PARENTS WHAT
omg that final soundbite. "if men made the rules we'd want any woman to be sexual with is whenever we wanted, and 13 or 14 year old 'women' would be VERY interested" [vomits forever]
I know you don't challenge the numbers on custody but you should have. MRAs love to use the raw numbers of fathers who get custody vs mothers who get custody during divorce. But if you look at cases that went to court (i.e. did not use a mutually agreed upon arbitrator), in which the father and mother were both seeking custody, the number is roughly even. Mothers try to get custody more often than fathers do and fathers are more likely to give up custody so it skews the raw numbers. but not for reasons that signal an injustice against fathers.
Most importantly, though, is that the court tries to make decisions that are best for the child, not either of the parents involved.
If you look at those cases, you'll find that the men who get granted slightly more custody were a self selected sample, many of whom were supported by Child protective services in fighting for sole custody or dealing with an otherwise sub par female parent. Not so with the female sample who were just an average cross-section of society. Actually one of the female parents had the CPS against her petition for sole custody from what I remember.
It doesn't support your assertion to say that men seeking custody from women who are sub-par parents get it as often as women just seeking custody.
@@HoneyBadgerRadio curious how you almost never get responses to your points
Look at the study yourself. www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/Full%20report.pdf
They were looking at vastly different populations. A group of men, many of whom were trying to get full custody of children with the help of CPS from women who were a danger to their children, compared to women who... were just trying to consolidate their control over their children.
Zack Dean, were you referring to a different study than what HBR provided?
@sinwithagrin It really says something about this channel's target audience when this guy's comments have so many likes despite all of them clearly showing them as a deranged person who hopefully doesn't own firearms. The video itself wasn't bad, but this... holy shit.
What i find really interesting is that the film talks about the concept of oppression due to society and pressure but never calls it "Toxic Masculinity." Toxic Masculinity is the name feminism gave that very same issue, and to call it the colloquial name would be to acknowledge that feminism recognizes and seeks to remedy that problem.
This points to a larger problem with the MRM; that it poses itself as generally antagonistic towards feminism, when in fact many of the issues MRAs claim to be concerned with are issues that feminists are addressing and have been for decades. Toxic masculinity is of course extremely pertinent to men's issues, yet MRAs and other anti-feminist types willfully misunderstand/propagate willful misunderstandings of the term; that rather than articulating the narrow and harmful ways in which it is socially acceptable to masculinity, it means that any expression of masculinity is toxic. These willful misunderstandings are not bugs, but rather features, since the MRM, in its current incarnation at least, seems to be far more of a niche industry profiting off of male aggrievement than an actual movement seeking solutions to social problems.
Toxic masculinity and feminism clearly show this whole damn divide in the first place. Those words give some clear sense of who the good side is (Women) and who the bad side is (men). That terminology regardless of intent just shows the whole treatment of men in that movement where we are seen to be entirely the issue, be it explicitly or done via subtext, can you really blame them for seeing it that way when that is the terminology used?
@@nathanielmathews2617 Yes. I can blame them. People who want to be scholars and activists should invest at least a little effort in learning what the relevant words mean.
But besides that, they're not *even* responding to the words or the way they're used. implies >
Like, if you hear someone mention "vanilla ice cream" do you think to yourself "Hah, that idiot thinks all ice cream is vanilla flavoured!"? No, you don't, because you are a fluent speaker of English and so you understand how common constructions like this work in that language.
The notion that the term "toxic masculinity" is an attack on men or masculinity in general is just another example of the willfull determination to be offended at all costs that the alt-right projections on to everyone else.
@@nathanielmathews2617 I've got to agree with this to an extent. Toxic masculinity is an important issue but using that term is as stupid as hell. It sounds sexist on the face of it. Come up with a better term that doesn't sound like an overt attack on men if you ever what them to listen.
@@nathanielmathews2617 In the first video, dude talks about the MRA's examples of deaths to war and dangerous jobs. 3rd wave Feminists would describe the propaganda necessary to encourage the expendability of male bodies as being a result of "toxic masculinity." And yes, you can blame them for being mad at a term they don't understand which is definitionally the problem of "toxic masculinity." As a straight, white, male myself, I consider myself to be a feminist because i understand that Feminists care about all the issues that the MRA's are bringing up in this documentary, they are just not idiotic about it. They understand that more "toxic masculinity," and telling women some gender-version of "the white man's burden," isn't going to change anything. But Feminists DO care about Male domestic abuse, discrimination of fathers, male suicide rates, etc. etc....BUT they also acknowledge that women are oppressed because of the roles that society forces upon them, completely unlike the MRM. Men are not the issues the are the victims of history: "The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living." --Karl Marx
I love the last quote of the movie from that guy, talking about how women would basically be slaves in a true anti-woman society. As though that’s not exactly the case in 99% of the world for 99% of history, And progress has come due to women fighting tooth and nail and men being dragged out of such prehistoric power structures kicking and screaming
Thats the problem with these movies, there is no room for nuance, these films appeal to emotionality to manipulate people. When you apply context like this man does in this video the argument of men being more oppressed than women is just false.
Doesn't hold water
it's nice to see a guy tear apart stuff like this. so many men just immediately are opposed to feminism without knowing anything about it.
What do you think about the issues raised?
You shouldn't listen to Men's Rights Advocates if you want to hear what they have to say.
Yo Joe, this Kaine guy's been harassing a group of women on behalf of feminism for hours on end. You gonna say anything to dissuade him/her? No? Instead you're gonna favorite a lie someone wrote about HoneyBadgerRadio with no links provided?
F A I R A N D N U A N C E D
Emily McLuskie
My experience seems to be the opposite. Mine is more of the line of the more I read the worse my perception of feminism.
Khaine's Lair Can you give me an example of his series of lies?
Thank you so much for continually producing great content. It is refreshing to see someone who puts time and effort into their craft on a platform that promotes content like reaction videos and let's plays.
Nevan Twenty-Four Agreed!
12:55
lowkey the same philosophy as Jigsaw to say "i'm not murderer, tHeY hAvE a ChOicE"
I think that last soundbite says it all really.
I always call bs on the family court thing. Here if a man impregnates his underage stepdaughter and wants custody of the resulting child he can force her to carry via parental consent laws.
Just most men really don't care to even try.
Not an example I came up with actually.
It's also weird how people complain that non pregnant people don't get to say what pregnant people do with their bodies. Even web that isn't even always true
One issue I have is labeling her getting pregnant abusive. She said she wanted a kid. He didn't. So its her responsibility to stay on medication she doesn't want?
Or did she ruin his condoms?
If he was so against reproducing especially knowing she wasn't, he should abstain or take responsibility and use the condoms and onow it would still be a (decreased but still existing) risk.
I don't want to reproduce. My partner agrees. My iud could fail. And I would abort. Not claim abuse. He could leave or w/e. I can't even access safe abortion. I just know I'd rather be dead than pregnant, so I have to pony up and take that risk when I make my choices.
It's abusrd to me to claim that's abuse just because she didn't conform to what he wanted with no effort on his part for the outcome he wanted
Fox A sister of one of my friends was in an unhappy marriage. They already had two kids, and the husband made it clear that he did *not* want any more. But the wife wanted another kid, for whatever reason. So she went off her birth control and didn't tell the husband she was doing so, in hopes of getting pregnant again (which she did, btw). To me, that's a form of emotional abuse. I mean, yeah, the guy was pretty dumb for not taking more precautions on his end, if he was that set against another kid. But the fact that she made him believe she was on birth control when she wasn't, all while knowing that he didn't want another kid, was the abusive part. It's basically an issue of consent and emotional manipulation.
And she can't get a rape exemption?
Oh look it's the pot calling the kettle black.
MRA smacking the golf ball of "men's problems with patriarchy and toxic masculinity" into the hole of "all of it is feminism's fault."
3:46
Uhh
Buddy
That ain't how blood donations work. It's totally possible to not be able to give blood to your biological child.
My mother was 0 negative, I'm 0 positive. By that guy's reasoning, she isn't my biological mother...
@@anniethenonnymouse its possible that the children had a blood type which is not biologically possible considering the parents. E.G. Mom had B, Dad had B, child has A. Not possible, unless the dad isnt the real dad, and the real biological dad has type A. Mom with B and bio dad with type A can produce child with type A.
Are we not going to talk about how it’s mostly men in government putting into place policies that oppress men and women?
"I Got Cucked And It's Feminism's Fault" The Movement
Great video btw. You are a really underrated youtuber and I can't wait to see your channel blow up. A little criticism though, if you don't mind, would be that I think your delivery sounds a little uninterested.
Stale Meme I find it soothing, on the other hand. The average youtuber's over-enthusiasm gives me a headache at times (already 80 at 22, wow).
Arunima Tiwari Yeah that's fair.
i also like his soothing voice delivery. he has a nice pace and structure to his speech. a little more intonation would go a long way. he sounds disinterested because his voice is so flat. a little bit more pitch dynamic is all that is needed.
I love the soothing tone.
that was the dumbest thing Joel said in this video
"Of all these laws made by white men, a few are not in my advantage. And of all customs in our patriarchal society, a few are not in my advantage. This is why feminism is bad."
I don't know how what it looks like in the US, but where I'm from, MRAs also talk a lot about discrimination that men face in family courts all the time. What's weird is that here, in Poland, men get custody more often than women, percentage-wise. They just apply for custody less often.
Either this point makes sense in the US and just got imported into our discourse without any thought given to it, or it's also bullshit in the US. Both possibilities would be very interesting, and both would kind of show that MRAs don't even care about men's problems that much, they just use them as ammo.
The difference between online men taking the red pill and Neo taking the red pill is that one wakes up a badass the other wakes up a sadass
She says that one of the golden rules of documentary direction is "don't interrupt" (source: her TED Talk...), even though that wouldn't forbid a follow-up question, geez. I think the more important half of that golden rule is "don't make it about you." Unless it's... an autobiography?
She seems to be the subject of roughly half the footage, or more, not only through narration, but actually making herself the subject for the camera. It would be a cringe-worthy design decision if people weren't chomping at the bit to hear a feminist tell them why they should take the red pill. It's like the Mary Sue of documentary direction.
The purpose of this Mary Sue? She's probably a stand-in for feminism. "If most feminists were open-minded and listened, they'd come to the same conclusion I did. Therefore, feminists aren't open-minded, and they don't listen." I mean, while not verbatim, that's what she's saying. As the one who breaks down and comes to espouse the MRA narrative, she turns her documentary into a profile of a straw feminist, not a profile of the Men's Rights Activists.
Also, fun fact I hope most people here know: the Red Pillers are a specific faction of anti-feminists whose highest-profile mouthpiece is a pickup artist named Roosh V. And he literally. LITERALLY advocates for the legalization of rape. So, yep.
God, I know they have to put out allot of content but it seems like almost everyone has a TED Talk at this point.
I'm glad you brought up her function in this movie as just another tool to try to make their movement seem more legitimate and delegitimize feminism. I was really surprised the person who made this video didn't discuss that.
I really loved this two-parter. A very interesting and important topic that sadly appears to have been mishandled, but it wouldn't have been nearly as good without your great commentary and critique, Joel. Love your vids, looking forward to the next one.
Isn't he great? I've never heard someone so able to maintain their composure and objectivity while critiquing some truly disturbing stuff. He's got a lot of compassion to show that much restraint.
@Humble Roots -
Did you actually see the film?
His two-part response (and yes, I actually spent a whole hour to watch both of them in full), while detailed, and generally narrated in a calm demeanor, is chock full of inaccuracies, straw-manning, and other such fallacies and intellectual dishonesty.
"Objective" is the last word I'd use to describe this.
BikeLion didn't watch the second half basing it on the other vids of his I've seen as well.
BikeLion also if you are a red-piller you probably have a low threshold for those things from the opposition.
@Humble Roots -
Re: "low threshold for those things from the opposition."
I personally haven't seen a lot of MRAs disrupting and trying to shout down or otherwise prevent feminist events from taking place. Seen a lot of the reverse though.
Like I said, I watched both half hour videos of Joel's in full. Still waiting for an answer about whether or not you actually watched Cassie Jaye's film, but I know most of the people here praising these videos haven't actually seen the film....
If the film were really such a poorly done film though, as Joel here claims, then why were so many feminist groups petitioning theaters to cancel screenings of it?
Wouldn't they actually *want* more people to see the film, so they could see for themselves just how weak the MRA arguments were?
As a feminist I believe abuse of men is wrong and men deserve support. As a feminist I believe abuse of women is wrong and women deserve support. As a feminist I don’t hate men. As a feminist I think both genders should be treated as human beings, as equals, because we are living feeling human beings. Toxic masculinity is bad, men have feelings and that does not make them less of a man, it makes them human. Women being belittled by showing emotion is bad, showing feelings does not mean you are in capable of thought, it means you are human. Being anti-feminist is being
us vs them where no one wins.
what about toxic feminity?
Then you're an Equalist.
Why did NOW lobby against presumption of joint custody? Are they not feminists?
@@teramedia7333 as a feminist I am not part of a hive mind that knows exactly how and what other people who are also feminist are thinking and doing. It would be lovely to be that organized we would really get things done. In my case my ex(husband) was an abusive acholic that had previously and then afterward been in jail for sexually abusing minors(stuff I didn't know beforehand). He had visitation (he didn't express interest in until my daughter was hitting puberty) he was court ordered to pay child support, he didn't. My case I was frustrated the court would let such a person be around my children with no way to do anything until damage was done. I have met toxic moms who should not be allowed to have any power over children. I think we should as a society support the raising of children to lessen the stress on parents and give parents and children access to help when needed. Men need payed time off work when their child is born too. Children are a benefit to society not a burden and should be treated that way. Sorry if your point was a "gotcha lefty" I'm not offended. I'm also an atheist but am okay with belief in God if it comforts you just not if it is a vehicle of fascism. I think men as a whole is great. I think women and everyone else as a whole are great. I think as a society we are improving. I think love and kindness is a best practice and philosophy.
@@supergastonh I think toxic feminity is toxic
"I want male approval": The movie
Your sources aren't in proper MLA. F- see me after class.
:-(
but he did have well argued points so -5 point for not MLA formatting
45/50
do better Joel:)
If it were up to me, I would say APA or Chicago style
Blue book is the way to go.
@@mathematics117 I'm against the Chicago style because they omit the Oxford comma. The Oxford comma will _not_ be omitted.
3:25 that guy who’s wife had 5 kids “with” another guy... it doesn’t make the husband any less of a dad. He loved them, cared for them, supported them, sheltered them, RUSHED TO THE HOSPITAL TO SAVE ONES LIFE. He’s their father. Biology doesn’t matter. Yeah, it would have been nice if their blood types matched but that’s why they ask O- typed people to donate blood. If it wasn’t something the couple had talked about before, I can see how it can be stressful, but it doesn’t negate the love and time and hard work put into raising 5 children.
Sebastian Sean Crow its not about the children however, well it somewhat is. Imagine finding a woman you love and raising five children with her, you love the woman and those kids whom you’re under the assumption is yours. Then you have an incident like this and realize that it was all a lie, the woman had been cheating on you and ALL FIVE of the kids are the neighbors down the street, he hadn’t been taking care of those kids, the guy was fucking your wife and you had to take care of his kids and pay for everything. He may have loved and cared for the kids but that kinda emotional damage, plus the moral dilemma of what you should do in that situation. I’m pretty sure it would demolish someone emotionally and mentally
If biology doesn't matter, I'm pretty sure that you would find absolutely no objection if nurses were to exchange babies in the hospitals after birth.
There is absolutely no reason, after all, to care about raising your biological children.
I guess also that it has no impact at all that the guy was cheated from the opportunity to perpetuate his own genetic line. Being a genetic dead end is not important after all.
It probably doesn't matter either that he thought he was in a loving relationship but was in fact made a fool of and financially exploited by someone who didn't care about him enough to be honest with him. No reason to object to having poured a huge amount of money and time in a lie. In fact, we should completely remove the laws around con artistry. People getting ripped off based on a lie doesn't really matter.
If biology really doesn't matter, she could totally have told him at the get go that the kids weren't his, allowing for him to make the conscious choice about raising someone else's kids. Some people do. I really don't see the risk she would have faced by being honest, since it's completely inconsequential.
To the other replies: it’s not that biology doesn’t matter at all, it that biology doesn’t make that guy less of a father to the kids. It still sucks for the guy, but it sucks mainly because his wife cheated on him, the biological aspect matters a lot less.
Ever heard of stepfathers? These guys aren’t the biological fathers of the child and are still often seen as the real father figure of the child, often even more then the biological father. So yeah, being not the biological father doesn’t disqualify you from being a good dad
You know... theway the story was told made it very hard for me to suspend disbelief and engage emotionally.
"...rushed the kid to the hospital, the mother was nowhere to be found, so the dad rushed the kid to the hospital..." mhm.
The father who was “tricked” into having a child with a woman whose temper was out of control: the fact that he saw the child as a weapon and himself as the victim rather than saw his future child as a potential victim of the mother’s temper is very unsettling; this makes me want to watch this documentary with a maturity lense on. How many of these men are looking at things from the perspective of a teenager or kid? How many have more mature outlooks?
Okay you were raped and are pregnant. Wouldn't you want an abortion? So why don't men get the same privilege?
@@Nimish204 what would you propose is the solution in this situation, genuinely? I want to know what you think should be done. Forced abortion on the woman? Sterilization of the woman? Or the less extreme and more realistic 'don't force the raped man to pay child support'? I agree that if a man is raped, he shouldn't have to pay that child support and that woman should reap what she sowed, raising that child on her own.
Though, what privileges, if not these, are you actually wanting to afford raped men otherwise? Is this based on genuine concern for raped men, or based on the fact you just want a whataboutism? Have you thought this far on the issue, if it's not a whataboutism?
Besides, the original comment had NOTHING to do with abortion, it was about the fact that the man thought of himself as a victim [rightfully so] and his child as a weapon used to victimize him.... not that his son (a living breathing, live person) would also be a victim to his abusive, predatory wife in the same manners as he would be in the abusive and gross dynamic she would be creating/did create. [the actual issue being brought up in this comment]
I noticed that too. That guy was worried about himself, and not another tiny human possibly being abused. It was all about him
The MRAs have ONLY a few arguments, and they fall back on the exact complaints made by the men in The Red Pill. But the leader started the movement following a long, bitter divorce, and after his ex-wife got a No Contact court order because he was stalking and threatening her. And I had a male friend who fell under the MRA spell, and would spout the exact arguments we saw here. My friend had a mother with a personality disorder, and she had divorced his father and damaged my friend plenty. What I have seen in MRA men are men who have had a single, terrible woman in their life who hurt and angered them. But then, these men (either by their own faulty judgment, or the influence of the MRA) extend the negative traits of that single woman to their beliefs about ALL women. All women are bad and will hurt and lie to men. Feminists are especially bad. Men suffer so much more than society recognizes, and that is because of women. But the "movement" is utterly flawed. And the woman in The Red Pill was absolutely not a feminist.
Thank you for acknowledging the ways in which laws and societal norms harm men while questioning blame placed on those working for gender equality.
How are you working for gender equality?
So, when an issue is observably caused by feminists (e.g. the Duluth Model) and they are proudly taking the credit because in their eyes that horrible issue is a great achievement... then according to you feminists, the direct cause, should not be named as the cause?
I dont see how denying reality helps anyone.
V Heller www.theduluthmodel.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CounteringConfusion.pdf
God you're channel is so profusely underrated. Please keep doing what you're doing
Ewww did that old guy seriously say men are not in control because they are not allowed to be pedophiles? They actually put it in the movie like it's making some good point.... wtf...
"Men are suffering just as much as women, so we should stop feminism and keep everyone be miserable!" -Cassie.
Edit: Also, that asshole at the end described the situation the world was not that long ago, there are even parts of the world where that's the case! Women aren't just fancier sex dolls and reproductive tools because feminism and similar movements that predated it managed to convince enough people that women should be treated like people.
"We can do two things at once and that's cool" - Big Joel, 2018
If this movie and it’s creator weren’t so disingenuous then i feel it could be engaged on a more serious level. It’s so ridiculous on its face though.
I like that you took it on to explain why it’s this way, though.
What it ultimately points out is that Cassie Jay is at worst, a fraud and at best someone who thinks feminism means being a woman.
Also, slight thing but miscegenation is pronounced mis-sen-gen-ayshun.
Oh shit I had no idea it was pronounced that way! Thank you!!
@alexandra galici
1. There's no MRA position on gun control, or on other issues outside of the realm of gender relations. I personally know mens rights activists with all different positions on the gun control debate.
2. Assuming that gun control reduces overall suicide rates, it's still a *red herring* when discussing the topic at hand, which is the *gender disparity* in suicide rates, and what societal factors are contributing to this disparity.
3. In most European countries, where gun control laws are significantly stricter than in the US, the male/female disparity is actually higher than it is in the US.
@ Ving Rhames - Have you actually seen the film?
@alexandra galici -
1. Re: "Pretty sure most MRAs oppose gun control." I wouldn't be so sure, and it also depends on how you're defining "oppose gun control," and even "MRA" for that matter!
2. I'm not here to talk about gun control one way or the other, but let's go ahead and assume, for the sake of argument, that tighter gun control, in line with European norms, would significantly reduce overall suicide rates in the US....I still maintain that this is a *separate issue* from the gender disparity with regards to suicide.
....This would be sort of like if an advocate of racial justice were talking about racial bias in the criminal justice system, and a libertarian responded with something like "well, I oppose the drug war, and ending the drug war would reduce incarceration across the board!" All well and good, but it doesn't really address the issue of racial bias in the criminal justice system, does it???
So this is why, when Big Joel talked about guns in response to the gender disparity in suicide rates, it was intellectually dishonest and really just a big red herring to avoid actually addressing the issue at hand.
3. In the latter third of your comment above, you are addressing the issue in a substantive way though, and your analysis actually closely resembles that of a lot of MRAs on this topic. (Not sure though why you write "outside from the west," as the male role in providing resources is *still* well ingrained in Western culture to this day!)....One key difference though being that these social norms, which feminists regard as "patriarchy affects men too," are actually manifestations of social systems which *both men and women* have played a role in building and which both play an active role in maintaining.
....Why is it so important for so many men to be making lots of money? Because that's still a top priority for most (yes, #NotAll, but most) women when it comes to sexual selection - at least for more serious long term relationships.
And while one might think that this would be more prevalent among poor women who needed more financial help, what studies have actually shown is the opposite. As women earn more money, it becomes *more* important for them to find partners who earn at least as much, if not more, money than they do. And yes, again, #NotAll. There are obviously exceptions, but these are the prevailing trends. We don't see a lot of wealthy or upper middle class women getting married to "starving artist" types.
@alexandra galici -
Wow, a lot to break down in your comments above...
So first, regarding racial bias in the criminal justice system - I was only bringing that up as an *analogy.*
I was saying to imagine if you were trying to talk about racial injustice in the criminal courts, but some libertarian, who wanted to avoid talking about racial justice issues, responded to you by saying something like "oh, well, whatever!....I want to end the drug war anyway, and the drug war leads to a lot of incarceration, so that'll help things."
....My point was that *even assuming that their proposal was a good idea,* in and of itself, which would help reduce incarceration across the board, even assuming that, the person would still be *failing to address the specific topic at hand* - namely the *racial* bias in the criminal courts.
So likewise, with Joel's treatment of the male suicide issue, sure, gun control might reduce suicides overall by say 20%, but this wouldn't fix the underlying *societal* issues which cause this disparity in the first place. Joel's treatment of this entire issue in his video was basically just a big blow-off, in order to avoid talking about a *gender issue in our society which harms men,* similar to the hypothetical libertarian in my analogy, who was blowing off the idea of racial injustice in the criminal court system by simply changing the topic!
Feminism doesn’t say “men oppress women” rather “patriarchy is a oppressive system” and all arguments that film showed just stated that man can be oppressed by this system as well.
@@Dimitris_Half the patriarchy is a social structure Which basically values masculinity over femininity. This obviously means that it oppresses women. But it also leads to feminin connoted things being devalued. So whilst woman who break their gendernorm can sometimes even profit from their adoption of maskulin notions, man who do so are almost everytime dealing with negative effects. This phenomenon can be called psychological patriachy or toxic masculinity (which is kind of a misleading expression, in my opinion).
The patriachy isn't just old men hating on woman, it's a social construct, that most of the society holds up, regardless to their gender. We are all socialized in it. So getting rid of it is pretty hard to do, but hey maybe in decades 🙈
@@Dimitris_Half sry if some of my sentences don't make much sense I try to sound clever but English is not my strongest language 😅
@@Dimitris_Half thank you so much 🥰 have a nice day
You missed something, having a different blood type doesn't mean a child isn't yours. You aren't automatically able to donate blood to a child/parent. 😂
This is really top notch. I forgot about the first one being part of a two-parter for a little while there and was so pleased to watch this right now. I know there must be a bunch of people who would hesitate to launch into long form videos like this on this platform, but this is exactly what we are currently missing from entertainment: the educational aspect of it. I know this is really opinion based, but you’ve done a ton of research and it’s really great to walk away from a video like this having learned about both sides, about what people think, and seeing the critical side of it as well. I can’t wait for more insight like this from you! Thank you so much for doing this!
Edit: just wanted to add, I feel like I wouldn’t have clicked on the original film and watched it because I would end up feeling so frustrated and mad and not even listen to them. That’s the issue with propaganda that is solely aimed at directing people to one direction, especially in this day and age. Viewing this film through your lens is like being able to visit this topic in a critical way, like one would in a lecture or a great college presentation/class about critical thought and argument. These are not really things we have for us every day, and so it’s really great to be able to watch it and just let my mind remain open and listen to everything instead of scoffing at every clip and word. Again, thank you. I got so gushy. But you deserve to know!
I have known a couple of fathers who haven't been present in their child's life because the mother and they separated...and usually the father isn't really in a good financial situation and the girl's parents end up helping take care of the child....then years later when they have things more steady , they are actually able to be a part of their kid's life...But I also see fathers who don't really try that hard to be a part of the kid's life either. Some of them seem to just 'let it go' .If the girl runs off , they just let her...And I know the legal system is hard...but that's kind of confusing to me that they let it happen. I think the prospect of going to court when you can barely make ends meet is maybe too much , and we probably need better legal support for low-income people.
My dad is still kinda, there? But uh...
He didn't want custody, even though my mom was like; "we can totally do 50/50! We can split our time with the kids!"
But then he didn't do anything to even try and be in our lives, but that changed last year. After he got in a car crash, got some brain damage and lost memories of our childhood...
I honestly am just glad he is alive, but yeah. He just never really wanted to persue wanting to have us in his life.
I don't blame him for wanting to distance himself from us either, my mom even forgave him.
To end this ramble, I think more men should be given the reigns of parenthood by courts. Especially if his wife/girlfriend/whatever is the type of woman who doesn't have her life together (drugs, alcohol. Etc. I'd definitely say the same thing if both parents are like that).
It's a logical choice
I've been in a Similar situation myself, My Father has Bipolar and can hardly take care of himself yet alone himself and two girls, so my Mom has custody and Father has visitation rights, however I have a friend who's custody should have been given to her Father as her Mother actively helped enable her Rapist to rape her again and nearly murder her, luckily after that situation her Mother lost all Custody and Visitation rights and she was given to her Father (Her Rapist is dead now).
Every feminist space I have ever been part of recognize that many issues surrounding intimate partner violence are an outgrowth of misogyny -- regardless of the gender of its victims/survivors. That is evident in my experience; the overwhelming majority of instances where I have witnessed someone invalidating the experiences of men who are abused by a partner, it has been done by other men. And in the few cases where I have seen women do this, it has been by people who express internalized misogyny in a number of other aspects of their life.
The Red pill is not even a good references. The movie show the red pill as a way to see society is the enemy who force people to being machine, and people who rebels against it are manly ethnic minorities, women, and even sex minorities like androgynes or lesbians as we see in the sequels. There is only 3 white male in the crew of the "awaken", one have enormous difficulty to accept this true because he was too dependant of this system, the second is a kid who just want to have fun with the fakeness of this society, and the last one is a traitor who do not accept the truth and prefered a confortable lie... and also want to control the main woman of the crew and make her his bitch... remind you of something or someone ?
Also, the movie was made by two transgender woman who previously made a movie about 2 lesbian rebelling against a violent man.
If they wanted a better references that goes with their saying, it would have been the glasses in "They Lives", the movie about a Withe male worker who can't have the life he deserve because of a conspiracy who exploit people like him and is betrayed by a woman. It would'nt work either, because the movie show that the problem is more the 1% than feminism, but it would have been more appropriate than "Red Pill"
I was an MRA (well 75% there) for a while, but in so much a way as being a feminist that advocates for more mainstream attention to some of the issues that more adversely effect men. I think for a lot of these guys the feeling/frustration lies in pop feminism giving some minor recognition to these issues, but never really giving as much attention to the issues in favor of discussing the more mainstream arguments like income equality, reproductive rights, etc. I think of it like when you were young and maybe you got pretty seriously hurt, but when you go to your parents, they're like "Oh your fine" because they were distracted by something else. It's a feeling of being rejected during a state of vulnerability.
My point in making this comment is that there really isn't a venue for men to discuss issues of vulnerability that isn't dismissed or treated as being chauvinistic. I left the MRM and now reconciled my thoughts into the feminist framework, because the movement has grown more hateful, and was corrupted (maybe by design) into being antifeminism or misogyny. Honestly, feminism is a better institution or movement to enact any meaningful change.
Do you watch our stuff?
@Douglas Vine
So you heard some salty language from men (likely severely damaged by women) that offended your fragile sensibilities and 'reconciled your thoughts' back to feminism. I wonder if you've ever registered all those 'walking abortions' or 'rapists-in-waiting' comments made by feminists and 'reconciled your thoughts' to them. But of course, in that case, they're not real feminists, are they? Even though their books are still being read and taught in places of learning. Quick question; if I believe in equal rights and opportunities for women, yet think patriarchy is a pile of burning garbage, can I call myself a feminist?
That was a rhetorical question; no, of course I can't. Conversely, you can holler any kind of crazy hateful ignorance about men you want at the top of your voice and as long as you subscribe to patriarchy theory, you can still call yourself a feminist.
With that in mind, why in the dankest overflowing shithouse of Hell would I want to call myself a feminist if I know perfectly well I can support these things independent of an ideology I find despicable right to the very germ of its creation? It's like saying if you believe in racial equality, you must be a Black Panther. No, thanks. I don't need feminism and I certainly don't want it.
Hey Joel! Just want to say that I appreciate these videos and your thoughtful commentary!
I like that unlike many other commentators, you aren’t a vindictive or mean-spirited person.
Unless that paternity fraud suit happened in a very rural area, it's a lie. Functioning emergency rooms do not ask people in the waiting room to donate blood for an emergency transfusion; they transfuse O negative (universal donor) blood at first, and if more is needed, they learn the patient's blood type via a scientific test and then continue with typed blood from their own supply. Questions about blood type and compatibility are exactly why no one would ask the apparent father to give blood in the first place.
It's possible that it happened, but I'd guess the real story wasn't as dramatic or sympathetic to the man.
Thank you Big Joel for walking me thru a film I wouldn’t /couldn’t get through alone and I didn’t
One thing I didn't get when I watched this video and read MRA articles about abortion, is that they act like all women everywhere have 100% access to abortion on demand. Like they like their anecdotes, but have they asked a woman what it's like to actually exercise your right to an abortion in countries/U.S. states where it's legal? Have they heard about all the places where fake "health professionals" lie to women about abortion as their whole damn job?