Male problems only ever come up as a counter-argument

[Animyr]

Because when we get in a group and try to discuss our rights the group is rapidly demonized as some sort of bigot organization bent on oppressing women.

That's because much (not all) of it is.

As several other people (including the OP) have alluded to, many supposed "MRAs" only bring up men's problems in response to women's issues, and as part of an effort to silence a discussion of them.

It doesn't help that some prominent "MRAs" have admitted that their primary purpose is criticizing and "stopping" feminists, not helping other men.

It also doesn't help that many of the "rights" men lack are rights they took from themselves (child care, etc).

 

[the December King]

Pfft, do you really think trying to frame it so dishonestly will convince anyone? I was trying not to be dismissive but it's hard when you pull nonsense like that

It's sexist that you don't mind 'losing' to men but you do when it's women. So yeah when you don't try to pretend the issue is getting 'beaten up' and acknowledge your issue is the gender of who is doing it.

I'm not being dishonest.

It is, it is absolutely about being beaten up by a woman, in a physical context that has traditionally been the domain of men, and add to that the likelihood of it being a more experienced woman, instead of an equally inexperienced sparring partner who would likely be male, when I'm beginning to learn something, and am not particularly physical, and yes, maybe I do have an ego that can be damaged. I mean, which is it, should I shut up and 'grow some balls' and then get my ass kicked in a rigged fight, and get looked down on from then on, or can I at least try to explain my fears?

But, maybe you weren't following my thread of trying to explain why I think the way I do, instead of just admonishing me for thinking that way.

 

[1981]

That is a really good point, if men have historically seen all of society as 'ours', then why would seperate groups be needed? Well at least until now, I guess.

Are men allowed to start men-only venues?

I don't see why not. There are some support groups (for lack of a better term) for men around here.

I didn't make this personal, you literally did. I wouldn't bring up someone's personal issues because they don't matter for good or ill. You felt the need to bring out your personal story as a tool in a debate. It would be very hypocritical to turn that around on me, thanks.

No, what I asked was why do you single me out and tell me my input doesn't matter? So far no one's been excluded. The only thing anyone can do is share their personal experiences. Even when talking about something they've seen or heard, it's still their own experience.

 

[Aesir23]

There is a group called MRA. People don't take it serious. People call it sexist. People call it misogynystic. People make fun of it.
It fights for man's rights. It tries to point out the problems.

I think it's pretty clear. With 3rd wave feminists putting the blame of pretty much anything of white males, any attempt of fighting for men's rights will be a fast way of getting yourself labeled as worse than a genocidal maniac.

To be fair, a lot of the self-proclaimed MRAs that people likely run into are basically the male oriented equivalent of the extreme feminists that you mention. They're likely the ones that come to mind when people think about others only bringing up men's issues as a counter-argument because it's pretty clear that those particular individuals don't actually care about men's issues. The ones I've had the misfortune of running into care more about keeping or returning to rigid gender roles for men and women alike. The "de-pussification of America" as a few of those individuals have so eloquently proclaimed.

Are there good MRA people out there? I don't doubt that, just like not every feminist is a raving maniac who hates men. Unfortunately, much like extreme feminists those individuals are the loudest and the most aggravating so they get the most attention and become what people commonly think of when that group is brought up. As a result, you'll often get people jumping the gun and assuming you fall in with the worst of whatever "controversial" crowd you happen to name.

 

[Lightknight]

The term "MRA" is used as an insult despite being a generic designation referring to anyone supporting the rights of men.

It's not a generic term, it refers to someone that has self-identified as a member of the Men's Rights Movement. You have other similar groups that aren't made up of MRAs, because they identify differently.

(Not to mention feminists that support the rights of men without being MRAs)

MRA is a designation you can apply to any organization concerned with men's rights. It is a nebulous term without any unifying theme except the focus on men's rights. Unless you're reading a different Wikipedia article than I am. It's one of several groups making up men's movement but this one is far broader than the rest.

It once meant a thing but nearly no one talks about Men's Movement or Men's liberation anymore. Linguistic drift has made the term "MRA" the catch all.

It's troublesome because MRA did come out of the anti-feminist portion of the Men's Movement. But nowadays being anti-feminism isn't the same as it was back then when feminism was primarily just a call for equality.

This statement on MRA's perspective on feminism, "Men's rights activists have said that they believe that feminism has overshot its objective and harmed men." is not anti-feminism in the way people like to think. It's pro-equality with a claim that men have been harmed by the movement in some areas and they absolutely have been. We've seen the numbers and know that to be the case in some areas.

 

[wulf3n]

I would assume a feminine version of whatever Toxic Masculinity is. I'm afraid I don't know much about the term, my first and only exposure to it was when Anita Sarkeesian basically linked it to a shooting awhile ago.

I think she was the one that coined that term. People have been talking about the harms caused by rigid gender roles, arbitrary ways people are forced to be feminine or masculine, but the phrase was popularised because if you twist what she said, you can sorta make it look like feminists hate men or whatever.

It begs the question if the term refers to the rigid gender roles of both genders why toxic masculinity? Why not toxic femininity? or the non-sexist version toxic gender roles?

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

Pfft, do you really think trying to frame it so dishonestly will convince anyone? I was trying not to be dismissive but it's hard when you pull nonsense like that

It's sexist that you don't mind 'losing' to men but you do when it's women. So yeah when you don't try to pretend the issue is getting 'beaten up' and acknowledge your issue is the gender of who is doing it.

I'm not being dishonest.

When you just say it like that of course it looks bad because no one wants to get *beaten up*. But that's not the issue here now is it? That presentation, where the obvious first response is 'No' because people don't like getting beaten up when the actual issue is the gender of who is doing it is what I call dishonest.

It is, it is absolutely about being beaten up by a woman, in a physical context that has traditionally been the domain of men, and add to that the likelihood of it being a more experienced woman, instead of an equally inexperienced sparring partner who would likely be male, when I'm beginning to learn something, and am not particularly physical, and yes, maybe I do have an ego that can be damaged. I mean, which is it, should I shut up and 'grow some balls' and then get my ass kicked in a rigged fight, and get looked down on from then on, or can I at least try to explain my fears?

But, maybe you weren't following my thread of trying to explain why I think the way I do, instead of just admonishing me for thinking that way.

See, that nonsense about traditionally being the domain of men... that really just makes it more explicitly sexist. And I say nonsense not because it isn't traditional, but because tradition in no way makes it not sexist. Tradition has often been incredibly sexist and following it is just as much so.

If the problem is a rigged fight then the complaint would be about instructors pitting the inexperienced against the experienced and not about the gender of the more experienced person. If it were really about experience then you don't need a male only area to fix that. (The experience thing is still bunk anyways, you presumably go against someone more experienced to learn. It's not about winning so it's not supposed to be a fair match. A fair match is to see who is better. This is learning not competition though.) The reason it's sexist is not because you dislike going against someone more experienced, it's that you mind that it's a woman specifically

 

[the December King]

It's sexist that you don't mind 'losing' to men but you do when it's women. So yeah when you don't try to pretend the issue is getting 'beaten up' and acknowledge your issue is the gender of who is doing it.

Okay, looks like I owe Secondhand Revenant an apology.

It was a knee-jerk reaction to being called an 'ism', and you are in fact, correct.

It is sexist of me to not want to be beaten by a woman.

Your aggressive use of language made me instantly confrontational, and I leapt to, before thinking about what you said.

But it can't change on a dime, that sort of thinking. I can't just accept that sort of change just because reasons. I'll need some time to come to terms with it, if ever, because I still see the actual event, getting bested in a physical altrercation by a woman, as unacceptable.

I would like to note that it is the only way I see things like this- as an illustrator, for example, I met and worked with many brilliant artists, successful artists, men and women, many who had vastly more talent than me, and aside from perhaps a little envy, I was happy to acknowledge their skill. Perhaps this is because the area of illustration hasn't got the same gender stigma?

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

It's sexist that you don't mind 'losing' to men but you do when it's women. So yeah when you don't try to pretend the issue is getting 'beaten up' and acknowledge your issue is the gender of who is doing it.

Okay, looks like I owe Secondhand Revenant an apology.

It was a knee-jerk reaction to being called an 'ism', and you are in fact, correct.

It is sexist of me to not want to be beaten by a woman.

Your aggressive use of language made me instantly confrontational, and I leapt to, before thinking about what you said.

But it can't change on a dime, that sort of thinking. I can't just accept that sort of change just because reasons. I'll need some time to come to terms with it, if ever, because I still see the actual event, getting bested in a physical altrercation by a woman, as unacceptable.

I would like to note that it is the only way I see things like this- as an illustrator, for example, I met and worked with many brilliant artists, successful artists, men and women, many who had vastly more talent than me, and aside from perhaps a little envy, I was happy to acknowledge their skill. Perhaps this is because the area of illustration hasn't got the same gender stigma?

Well when I first said it I tried to he as non-hostile as I could. Thus the 'in all honesty' in front of it. Was a bit reluctant to say it then.

And I don't blame you for not being able to change on a dime. I'm just saying that trying to have men only spaces for that only helps to preserve that idea. An idea that I think we should work to be rid of instead by removing the stigma.

And I'd agree it's most likely due to the extra stigma that society places on it. And that's a problem I would like to see fixed.

 

[Lightknight]

Because when we get in a group and try to discuss our rights the group is rapidly demonized as some sort of bigot organization bent on oppressing women.

That's because much (not all) of it is.

As several other people (including the OP) have alluded to, many supposed "MRAs" only bring up men's problems in response to women's issues, and as part of an effort to silence a discussion of them.

It doesn't help that some prominent "MRAs" have admitted that their primary purpose is criticizing and "stopping" feminists, not helping other men.

It also doesn't help that many of the "rights" men lack are rights they took from themselves (child care, etc).

Stereotyping is fun. Seeing as MRA is the prevailing term and all you need to think to qualify as an MRA is that Feminism has overshot its goals in some areas in a way that harms men and actual equality then it isn't hard to fall into this category if you care about men's rights and equality in general. For example, why should women be hired at a 2:1 ratio in STEM related areas just because they're women? The goal should be a 1:1 ratio because that's not sexist. Why should single women under the age of 30 make more money than single men under the age of 30? Isn't that an overshooting of the wage gap to cause the same sexist problem but the other way?

Your sentiment here is exactly why it's such a problem for men to voice concern. The moment we start talking about the concept that modern feminists have overshot in certain areas then instantly we're designated as anti-feminist which carries the notion of being anti-equality and anti-women's rights which doesn't necessarily follow.

What's more is any time anyone says anything which a feminist disagrees with, then it is automatically placed in the misogyny category even though it may just be a difference of opinion, difference of philosophy, or even just plain ol' ignorance on a topic.

This means it is not safe to for this group to be able to voice their concerns openly. The idiots who are bigots run their mouths because they already don't care and the sane people stay silent. But holy hell dude, the same thing happens in other rights groups. The people we hear from are the crazies. When we hear about animal rights organizations it isn't that X group saved whales from whomever, it's that some crazy group stole a puppy from a homeless man or blew up some factory that people were in. Feminism had some great victories where we got to hear about anti-discrimination and equal access and that was great. But more recently we've instead begun to hear more and more of the fringe elements that shame the average feminist and are counter to the original principles of pursuing equality.

You forget the vast sea of people who you don't hear from unless you're engaging them in direct conversation. The person who just wants equality and thinks the agenda of established groups are currently using their prior success to press ahead beyond equality into superiority. This is something that many self proclaimed feminists would agree is an issue if it were safe to do so without putting feminism's remaining legitimate goals at risk of being grouped in with and thrown out with the dirty bath water so to speak.

It's just one big cluster fuck of posturing and slander. It's a great social study though. But the term MRA has been drifting from its inception and now it's the one associated with any men's rights organization. It is honestly already being automatically assumed that they are MRA so that's now the term regardless of their actual opinion on whether or not feminism has overshot in some areas or not.

 

[Darkmantle]

In fact, "Feminism" often stands squarely in the way of equality for men.

This is an interesting observation. While the stereotypical "MRA" only really brings up legitimate male issues as a counter-argument, I find that many feminists have the exact same attitude. When someone accuses feminism of "ignoring male issues", the common response is a reluctant acknowledgement of male issues before returning to the same aggressive shouting they were doing before. The most frustrating thing to me is that most discussions about the problems that men face ultimately end up being about women. "MRA"s make it about "feminism trying to repress masculinity", and feminists make it about "if we address the problems women face, male problems will disappear as a result".

For once I'd like a discussion about these things without mentioning women. Because let's face it, most of the problems men face are caused by other men.

I find it interesting that you consider the stereotypical MRA to be one who only brings up men's issues in the context of women's issues. I know of plenty of men's rights organizations that open support groups / support lines, hold conferences to discuss issues, and raise money for specific men's rights causes. But then again, most of those kind of people don't go on to the twitter to argue with the feminists, or generally get reported on.

Like many on this thread mentioned, it usually goes like this: MRA group forms, they get harassed and attacked by radfems, they get angry and defensive, people turn around and use the defensiveness as "proof" that said group is misogynistic and thus the original harassment was justified after the fact.

Personally, my issue is domestic violence against men. A close friend was affected, and I realized that he had nowhere to turn. I'd like to change that, but I found my efforts opposed by (to my surprise at the time)feminists. That's why you'll see me arguing with and about feminism pretty regularly.

I want more men's shelters opened, and for male victims of domestic violence (who make up about 40% of the victims this decade) to be taken seriously. It doesn't have to be about feminism, but it becomes about feminism when they stand in my way and spread misinformation about the subject.

-----------------

Just thought of this too, a lot of time when Men's issues are used "as a counter-argument", it's in situations where a gender discriminatory solution to an issue has been proposed. I find this happens a lot with rape issues. Someone will propose a solution like "make men guilty until proven innocent in rape cases" (overly simplified I know) and in an attempt to have the proposer take a step back and gain some perspective male rape victims are brought up. Now this is immediately dismissed as using male issues as a stick to prevent feminists from "solving" rape, but it's an important consideration, especially if the proposed solution (such as in this example) would further demonize men and make it even harder for male victims to be taken seriously.

 

[Phasmal]

It is sexist of me to not want to be beaten by a woman.

Your aggressive use of language made me instantly confrontational, and I leapt to, before thinking about what you said.

But it can't change on a dime, that sort of thinking. I can't just accept that sort of change just because reasons. I'll need some time to come to terms with it, if ever, because I still see the actual event, getting bested in a physical altrercation by a woman, as unacceptable.

I would like to note that it is the only way I see things like this- as an illustrator, for example, I met and worked with many brilliant artists, successful artists, men and women, many who had vastly more talent than me, and aside from perhaps a little envy, I was happy to acknowledge their skill. Perhaps this is because the area of illustration hasn't got the same gender stigma?

See, this is something that has always, always confused me.
I'm not trying to put you on the spot or be an asshole, but why should it matter?

Personally, I have a lot of male friends. And I have had more than one occasion where I have done something better than one of them (beaten them in a poker game, won a game of MtG when it seemed certain I would lose), and they honestly had to go away for five minutes and have a little strop because I `emasculated` them.
It's really very insulting.

Now I'm not saying you're trying to be insulting, at all, but being on the receiving end of someone being not okay with you besting them because you're the wrong kind of person is really pretty crappy.

I don't get `emasculation`. Traditional masculinity seems far too invested in outside forces. If I carry a heavy shopping bag, that doesn't make my boyfriend less of a man. If he cooked a meal, it doesn't make me less of a woman.

Now, as I said I'm not targeting you personally, it's just something I don't get at all.

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

It is sexist of me to not want to be beaten by a woman.

Your aggressive use of language made me instantly confrontational, and I leapt to, before thinking about what you said.

But it can't change on a dime, that sort of thinking. I can't just accept that sort of change just because reasons. I'll need some time to come to terms with it, if ever, because I still see the actual event, getting bested in a physical altrercation by a woman, as unacceptable.

I would like to note that it is the only way I see things like this- as an illustrator, for example, I met and worked with many brilliant artists, successful artists, men and women, many who had vastly more talent than me, and aside from perhaps a little envy, I was happy to acknowledge their skill. Perhaps this is because the area of illustration hasn't got the same gender stigma?

See, this is something that has always, always confused me.
I'm not trying to put you on the spot or be an asshole, but why should it matter?

Personally, I have a lot of male friends. And I have had more than one occasion where I have done something better than one of them (beaten them in a poker game, won a game of MtG when it seemed certain I would lose), and they honestly had to go away for five minutes and have a little strop because I `emasculated` them.
It's really very insulting.

Now I'm not saying you're trying to be insulting, at all, but being on the receiving end of someone being not okay with you besting them because you're the wrong kind of person is really pretty crappy.

I don't get `emasculation`. Traditional masculinity seems far too invested in outside forces. If I carry a heavy shopping bag, that doesn't make my boyfriend less of a man. If he cooked a meal, it doesn't make me less of a woman.

Now, as I said I'm not targeting you personally, it's just something I don't get at all.

Now can't speak for him and I'm kind of hypothesizing here in general, but I think it's the same kind of thing as any sort of learned shame. Society says X is something to be ashamed of and you just kind of learn that to be true, even if there's no other real reason to it.

 

[Phasmal]

Now can't speak for him and I'm kind of hypothesizing here in general, but I think it's the same kind of thing as any sort of learned shame. Society says X is something to be ashamed of and you just kind of learn that to be true, even if there's no other real reason to it.

I suppose. I find it very hard to relate to. There isn't really an equivalent if you're a girl, or at least I can't think of one. I can't say I ever felt shame for a guy beating me at a traditionally female thing.

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

Now can't speak for him and I'm kind of hypothesizing here in general, but I think it's the same kind of thing as any sort of learned shame. Society says X is something to be ashamed of and you just kind of learn that to be true, even if there's no other real reason to it.

I suppose. I find it very hard to relate to. There isn't really an equivalent if you're a girl, or at least I can't think of one. I can't say I ever felt shame for a guy beating me at a traditionally female thing.

Well I mean I can't really either. I'm a guy but don't feel any shame if I lose to a woman. I just figured it would be the same as any other kind of shame that boils down to 'Society says this is bad'. People will feel negatively judged for it because they learn that others judge it negatively.

 

[Thaluikhain]

The term "MRA" is used as an insult despite being a generic designation referring to anyone supporting the rights of men.

It's not a generic term, it refers to someone that has self-identified as a member of the Men's Rights Movement. You have other similar groups that aren't made up of MRAs, because they identify differently.

(Not to mention feminists that support the rights of men without being MRAs)

MRA is a designation you can apply to any organization concerned with men's rights. It is a nebulous term without any unifying theme except the focus on men's rights. Unless you're reading a different Wikipedia article than I am. It's one of several groups making up men's movement but this one is far broader than the rest.

What of those groups that expressly state they aren't part of the MRM, though?

I would assume a feminine version of whatever Toxic Masculinity is. I'm afraid I don't know much about the term, my first and only exposure to it was when Anita Sarkeesian basically linked it to a shooting awhile ago.

I think she was the one that coined that term. People have been talking about the harms caused by rigid gender roles, arbitrary ways people are forced to be feminine or masculine, but the phrase was popularised because if you twist what she said, you can sorta make it look like feminists hate men or whatever.

It begs the question if the term refers to the rigid gender roles of both genders why toxic masculinity? Why not toxic femininity? or the non-sexist version toxic gender roles?

Er, it doesn't, it refers specifically to those gender roles dealing with men.

 

[the December King]

It is sexist of me to not want to be beaten by a woman.

Your aggressive use of language made me instantly confrontational, and I leapt to, before thinking about what you said.

But it can't change on a dime, that sort of thinking. I can't just accept that sort of change just because reasons. I'll need some time to come to terms with it, if ever, because I still see the actual event, getting bested in a physical altrercation by a woman, as unacceptable.

I would like to note that it is the only way I see things like this- as an illustrator, for example, I met and worked with many brilliant artists, successful artists, men and women, many who had vastly more talent than me, and aside from perhaps a little envy, I was happy to acknowledge their skill. Perhaps this is because the area of illustration hasn't got the same gender stigma?

See, this is something that has always, always confused me.
I'm not trying to put you on the spot or be an asshole, but why should it matter?

Personally, I have a lot of male friends. And I have had more than one occasion where I have done something better than one of them (beaten them in a poker game, won a game of MtG when it seemed certain I would lose), and they honestly had to go away for five minutes and have a little strop because I `emasculated` them.
It's really very insulting.

Now I'm not saying you're trying to be insulting, at all, but being on the receiving end of someone being not okay with you besting them because you're the wrong kind of person is really pretty crappy.

I don't get `emasculation`. Traditional masculinity seems far too invested in outside forces. If I carry a heavy shopping bag, that doesn't make my boyfriend less of a man. If he cooked a meal, it doesn't make me less of a woman.

Now, as I said I'm not targeting you personally, it's just something I don't get at all.

I think you are a very open- minded person, to be sure, but I suspect that there are some women who would feel humiliated or frustrated( ... well, some sort of equivalent term to emasculated... interesting, I can't think of one... is there one? defeminized? again, I suspect that this is part of the problem) that there were men outperforming them in certain areas that were traditionally thought of as women's, though I'm suspecting that those cases don't crop up as often, not because men aren't necessarily as capable, but because again of societal constraints on the directions men can look to.

With the contests of physical prowess, it has the added edge of having been defined that "men are stronger and more physically able", and that is what society has set as a bar. I believe that this is even technically true, that men on average are stronger than women. But the key term there is the 'average', and that is often ignored in favor of an absolute, I think. Thus, if a man is beaten in that sort of arena, then he has the added burden of having not been stronger or more physically able, ie: not measured up to what is defined as a man. Thus the sense of failure that is compounded by a denial of one's own, perhaps imposed, nevertheless acknowledged, set of male gender defining characteristics (emasculation).

See, I can rationalize my inherent fear of being 'emasculated' in a physical altercation with a woman, but talking about it and experiencing it I suspect would be two different things.

Thanks for posting, Phasmal.

EDIT: Aaaaand you and Secondhand have already hashed it all out- damn my sausage-fingered, slow ass typing!

 

[Something Amyss]

I suppose. I find it very hard to relate to. There isn't really an equivalent if you're a girl, or at least I can't think of one. I can't say I ever felt shame for a guy beating me at a traditionally female thing.

Well, no, but guys are supposed to be better[footnote]within these cultural parameters[/footnote], so you wouldn't necessarily be expected to feel shame because you lost out to the superior sex. Culture doesn't necessarily dictate that you should be better at something even if it does fit in your supposed gender role.

Not that women aren't free from being "shamed" in one sense or another. Sexuality, body image, even on grounds of assertiveness. And not every woman absorbs those things, but neither does every man absorb this attitude that they can't be beat by a girl. I will say, however, that even being treated like a boy, I absorbed a lot of those messages.

...god, I'm depressed now.

Anyway, boys are supposed to be dominant and successful. Girls are supposed to be supportive and nurturing. The latter traits are often non-competitive in the first place, and that's sort of where I think the disparity comes in. Competitive women? Might as well talk about women wearing pants!

<..>

Yeah, sorry, this topic has been depressing me of late, and it's also particularly frustrating because the people who need to be onboard with it are virtually unapproachable.

Well I mean I can't really either. I'm a guy but don't feel any shame if I lose to a woman. I just figured it would be the same as any other kind of shame that boils down to 'Society says this is bad'. People will feel negatively judged for it because they learn that others judge it negatively.

Yeah, but I mean, you can actually watch the difference between guys who get pissed off over losing and guys who get pissed off over losing to a girl! And that's sort of the question of the day/issue with this in the first place. That someone's whole sense of self can be so tied up in being, effectively, better than women. But again, like I said, we're talking about cultures which say that men are empirically better.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

The general mindset is that men- especially white men- have it so easy in almost every facet of life that complaining about any difficulty they might face is akin to complaining about a hangnail in an amputee ward.

 

[Nailzzz]

I think it comes back to men having a certain stoic tendency when it comes to our own problems, regardless how bad they really are. That and we have a certain amount of self-awareness in regards to the possibility that as bad as things can be for us, there is probably someone out there who does have it worse, that is in the back of our heads. So we tend to keep our problems, our problems. We often learn to maintain pretty low standards when it comes to what we expect life will grant us, and just consider ourselves lucky to be alive.

Then feminists enter the room and tell us all about their first world problems. How they are entitled to have everyone else take their complaints seriously. It is usually at about that point where they create resentment with us for expecting things from us that the world has never granted us as a matter of course.

No one gave a damn when I was raped. I had to deal with that on my own, and I did. No one cared how long I was in prison, I had to deal with that on my own, and I did. No one cared when I was homeless, I had to deal with that on my own, and I did. No one cared when I was suicidal, I had to work myself out of that, and I did. No one cared when I was being beaten by my parents regularly because my upkeep was costing them drug money.

But somehow I'm supposed to care about some guy on the subway taking up too much room on the subway. I can't imagine why people react the way they do to feminists.