A UK Member of Parliament recently suggested that there should be a Government minister for men which would presumably do similar things to the existsing minister for Women.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/reactions-pour-in-as-mp-renews-calls-for-official-minister-for-men-356501/

This has thrown up a series of heated discussions on social media about whether this is part of the ‘backlash’ against feminsm, or whether there is a legitimate need for wider support of men’s issues.

As a man who believes that there are legitimate issues disproportionately affecting men which should be addressed, what I really want help in understanding is the opinion that men don’t need any targetted support.

I don’t want to start a big argument, but I do want to understand this perspective, because I have struggled to understand it before and I don’t like feeling like I’m missing something.

  • Melllvar@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not British, but it would seem reasonable to me to have both. Men have issues too; and one of them is the social stigma attached to even acknowledging that fact or seeking help. People who pooh-pooh the idea might be doing so because of that stigma.

    • Kichae@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Here’s the thing, though: Whenever you have a position like “Person for Group”, that Group is being singled out for a reason.

      And that reason is lack of representation.

      To put it another way, so have a Minister for Women is a tacit acknowledgement that the others operate as if men are the default person. All of the other ministers are Ministers for Men.

        • Big P@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it’s arguing that the rest of the ministers are either consciously or subconsciously making policies that gear more towards men and this role is supposed to be a way to ensure that a woman’s perspective is included. Kind of like having a security engineer at a software company

          • Melllvar@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That still is basically saying that men don’t need or deserve any help. But stats like suicide, homelessness, and incarceration rates suggest otherwise.

            In the UK, according to my extensive 3 seconds on google, men are nearly 3 times more likely to commit suicide; 5 times more likely to become homeless; and almost 24 times more likely to be incarcerated.

            • Big P@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              No not really. You’re assuming that the ministers role is to help women and not help men when in reality it’s to, as I said, try to ensure the perspective of women is included

      • 520@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not just about lack of identity representation though. The lack of representation of men’s gendered issues is very much apparent in our society, and it is through holes like this that people like Andrew Tate gain significance, which also harms women.

    • Freeman@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because if there is then the calls for a

      • minister for non-binary and intersex
      • minister for the jewish
      • minister for seniors
      • minister for POC
      • minister for car-lovers

      And so on.

      The only solution would be a minister for gender equality. Or social equality. And then there has to be a check, what issues this minister is working on improving.

  • JoBo@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The official position is Minister for Women and Equalities.

    And the easy answer to this Tory troll is that (middle-class, white) men already dominate political, economic and social life. Everything is filtered through the eyes of people like them, they don’t need a special platform to get their viewpoint across.

    But, this is a lot like March 8th (International Women’s Day) being full of plaintive cries of “why isn’t there an International Men’s Day?”. There is an International Men’s Day and it is a very good thing. It makes sense in a way that “why isn’t there a white history month?” does not.

    There are many points of similarity and difference between the various forms of prejudice. And one of the things that makes sexism unique is that prejudice against women inevitably creates a mirror prejudice about (if not intentionally against) men. If being feminine means having emotions other than rage, men are allowed to experience only rage. If being feminine means caring for others, men are not allowed to care for (or about) others.

    While there are certainly forms of feminism which are anti-men (most notably the transphobic strain currently getting more attention than it deserves), feminism is fundamentally as important for men as it is for women and the issues facing men exist precisely because of the history of subjugating women. Women’s rights are not in tension with men’s rights (unless you mean the demands of damaged and damaging men who insist that they should have the right to rape women and keep one at home as a sex doll, housekeeper, incubator and child minder).

    This article is not perfect but it does make the broader point well: If I Admit That ‘Hating Men’ Is a Thing, Will You Stop Turning It Into a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy?:

    Part Four: A List of “Men’s Rights” Issues That Feminism Is Already Working On

    Feminists do not want you to lose custody of your children. The assumption that women are naturally better caregivers is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not like commercials in which bumbling dads mess up the laundry and competent wives have to bustle in and fix it. The assumption that women are naturally better housekeepers is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not want you to have to make alimony payments. Alimony is set up to combat the fact that women have been historically expected to prioritize domestic duties over professional goals, thus minimizing their earning potential if their “traditional” marriages end. The assumption that wives should make babies instead of money is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not want anyone to get raped in prison. Permissiveness and jokes about prison rape are part of rape culture, which is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not want anyone to be falsely accused of rape. False rape accusations discredit rape victims, which reinforces rape culture, which is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not want you to be lonely and we do not hate “nice guys.” The idea that certain people are inherently more valuable than other people because of superficial physical attributes is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not want you to have to pay for dinner. We want the opportunity to achieve financial success on par with men in any field we choose (and are qualified for), and the fact that we currently don’t is part of patriarchy. The idea that men should coddle and provide for women, and/or purchase their affections in romantic contexts, is condescending and damaging and part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not want you to be maimed or killed in industrial accidents, or toil in coal mines while we do cushy secretarial work and various yarn-themed activities. The fact that women have long been shut out of dangerous industrial jobs (by men, by the way) is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not want you to commit suicide. Any pressures and expectations that lower the quality of life of any gender are part of patriarchy. The fact that depression is characterized as an effeminate weakness, making men less likely to seek treatment, is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not want you to be viewed with suspicion when you take your child to the park (men frequently insist that this is a serious issue, so I will take them at their word). The assumption that men are insatiable sexual animals, combined with the idea that it’s unnatural for men to care for children, is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not want you to be drafted and then die in a war while we stay home and iron stuff. The idea that women are too weak to fight or too delicate to function in a military setting is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists do not want women to escape prosecution on legitimate domestic violence charges, nor do we want men to be ridiculed for being raped or abused. The idea that women are naturally gentle and compliant and that victimhood is inherently feminine is part of patriarchy.

    Feminists hate patriarchy. We do not hate you.

    If you really care about those issues as passionately as you say you do, you should be thanking feminists, because feminism is a social movement actively dedicated to dismantling every single one of them. The fact that you blame feminists—your allies—for problems against which they have been struggling for decades suggests that supporting men isn’t nearly as important to you as resenting women. We care about your problems a lot. Could you try caring about ours?

    • Freeman@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I have never heard of a feminist…

      • …pushing for more equality/fairness in custody-cases
      • …being against showing men in a stereotypical bad light in ads.
      • …being against alimony payments or fairer judge decisions
      • …being against prison-rape jokes
      • …speaking up for falsely accused men (Till Lindemann, Jonny Depp and so on)
      • …being against dangerous work emvironnments or bad work conditions or bad jobs in general
      • …pushing for more mental health support for men
      • …being against men-only military draft.

      It all being part of the patriarchy is maybe true if you want to look at it in this perspective. But I am of the opinion that most of those points would not majorly improve even if feminists would have total political control for the next 10 years.

      Because feminists stand up for the rights of women. Which is totally important and good. But will not automatically improve the lifes of men, because its not the aim of most feminists.

      • sexy_peach@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have never heard of a feminist…

        …pushing for more equality/fairness in custody-cases
        …being against showing men in a stereotypical bad light in ads.
        …being against alimony payments or fairer judge decisions
        …being against prison-rape jokes
        …speaking up for falsely accused men (Till Lindemann, Jonny Depp and so on)
        …being against dangerous work emvironnments or bad work conditions or bad jobs in general
        …pushing for more mental health support for men
        …being against men-only military draft.
        

        Literally every feminist advocates for all of these.

      • JoBo@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Then you haven’t been paying attention. I just posted a years old article, which went viral at the time, pushing for all these things.

        Toxic men do have the loudest megaphones. But you can wise up and find better things to listen to.

        • Freeman@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean that may well be that I havent heard of “those” feminists, altho I hear about many things feminists here (in Switzerland) push for. I read the demands of every feministic protest for example and never was there one of the points I mentioned.

          I think your comment sounded like victim blaming to me. For example:

          Men die (more) in suicides. Feminists (mostly women) fight against the patriarchy, which is a product by men. If the higher suicide numbers is because of the patriarchy, then “its their own fault”.

          Thats why I see things like “the patriarchy” or categories like “the men” or “the feminists” very critically as it generalizes too much.

          And back to the OP: I dont think that a dedicated “minister for women” can or will help in men-issues, because I don’t believe the logical detour via the patriarchy makes sense. One would have to fight the misandrist laws like the army draft (here in switzerland its mandatory for men but voluntary for women) directly and not shadow-box ““the patriarchy””.

      • Devi@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is so untrue that it’s clear you’re speaking in bad faith. The only people I know against prison rape are feminists, the ‘anti feminists’ are all about “lets hope he drops the soap” jokes.

        It’s women who have fought for equal rights in the military, not men, and they’ve taken frontline roles by force.

        “Falsely accused men” is not the same as not convicted men. Jonny Depp admitted being physical in court, Till Lindemans case was dropped for lack of evidence, this is super normal in cases of sexual assault because unless it was filmed, evidence is a really tricky thing.

  • Trebuchet@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s a disingenuous argument. The MP is from the Conservative Party, i.e., the right wing arsehole party.

    You may have noticed how the Right Wing Playbook has been imported from America. Increasingly, when things aren’t going politically well, they’ll have a look at the Playbook and pick a Culture Wars trope. This is one such instance, intended only to divide.

    • soviettaters@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      How is supporting men’s mental health and advocating for them in ways they are often overlooked (such as in single fatherhood) bad?

      • Trebuchet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is the same difference between Black Lives Matter and All Lives Matter. Nobody is saying that men should not be advocated for, but elevating the issue of men’s rights to ministerial level does not help resolve the larger issue of the systemic disadvantage of women in society.

          • Trebuchet@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Who’s responsibility includes reducing the disparity between men and women. Having a minister for men introduces parity in this regard, which therefore does nothing to advance the interest of women in a male dominated system

              • Trebuchet@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The ultimate goal is equality, but it takes targeted support of women to attain that.

                I’m not saying that men’s issues should remain unresolved, but the intent of the Tory MP is not to support men. It is to divide and conquer.

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This entire gender discussion is just to engage people and make them care about politics.

    No different than social media algorithms designed to make people angry so they engage.

    Keeps the peasants fighting and arguing about pointless things. My advice to people in this thread is to ask yourself if the rich owners actually cares about your gender and what they can do to make you feel better.

    • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Strictly speaking, the existing role is the Minister for Women and Equalities, covering more than just equity for women. They should just drop the “women” part and continue under the more general auspices of Equalities.

    • johnthedoe@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly. It’s the same with any diversity and inclusion push at any level. It exists because the current system favours a specific group of people. If we can put down any prejudice and hire people for their work and passion and account for people with less privilege. It exist still because we still do it. But also it exist now to try and right a wrong.

      A minister for men is to do what? We had our time in the sun for the entirety of human existence while pushing women down. Men are at risk of losing anything. The shit men are I hope.

  • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Seems like a smart idea. Minister of women focusing on issues specifically women face and miniter of men for specifically male issues. Seems like an alright idea

    • BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, there are most certainly issues that seem to be more man specific in the world today, higher suicide rate/male mental health (not saying women don’t have mental health issues or minimising them, it just seems to be an issue more significantly impacting men ATM), toxic masculinity, even dealing with a perceived lack of power/impotence in society and obviously men’s health issues.

      Just so long as it doesn’t become one of those weird “mens rights” women bashing things.

    • redballooon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know about UK. In Germany, unmarried fathers are systematically discriminated against. Custody, alimony and financial support from the state are setup all with the mindset that the mother takes care of the children and the father makes financial support. There’s no equal rights there, this is the assumed default. Deviations have to be explained again and again for taxes, child allowance, retirement subsidies and and and. In cases of doubt the money goes to the mother, and there is no arbitration other than going to the courts.

      The other thing that comes to mind is the dealing of the police with domestic violence. Whenever anyone calls the police for domestic violence, the police automatically assumes the man is the offender. Even if the man was the caller, it’s he who is taken into custody. This is systematic discrimination.

  • ThePenitentOne@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Right wing politician claiming to care about men’s rights and sexism? Sure. This is just another attempt to distract people from the real problems within the government. There should be a single social equalities minister, which is what the role already is, really. It just so happens that misogyny is literally everywhere in the world and that men (as a man myself) are advantaged in numerous ways. Imagine being a woman in Pakistan.

    There are some social stigmas and problems from cultural beliefs, such as the idea ‘men don’t feel’ and other bs, but in truth anyone with a brain realises how invalid these arguments are. What we actually need is better education and access to information, so people don’t fall into this shit in the first place and can see through the flaws of people around them and not follow into conformism blindly. If anything, the idea of having a male counterpart is just serving to further the divide by continuing to separate people based on superficial qualities. If you really want to end sexism, you need to treat people as equals regardless of sex, and to get others to do the same. It will require lots of activism to do so because far too many people hold discriminatory beliefs towards both sexes that they are taught from a young age and hold emotionally rather than logically.

    From what I have observed, so many people claiming to care or talking about ‘men’s rights’ really just have a victim-complex and are very emotionally immature. It’s all too often the same people who cry about women being bitches or being shameless onlyfans models. For all the problems women face, it’s barely even comparable. That isn’t to invalidate sexism against men, but just to mean that they are not even nearly close in terms of discrimination experienced.

  • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’d say theoretically yes. But don’t make it two, make it three or you’ll again exclude people.

    But that minister then has do do their job properly and not just hate on feminism and try to make their lives difficult and do some culture/gender war.

    If you want to do it properly find out first how many things there are to do regarding gender. And if maybe one person can work on gender issues. It seems unlikely to me that you need so many people for one topic. Only have many people if it’s impossible for them to simultaneously work for men and women.

  • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Men are a serious fucking problem, and it’s time an elected official took ownership of the issue and dealt with it decisively.

  • Susaga@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Women have a minister to support women’s issues in the government. Men get to walk the streets of major cities at night without fear, and get respect and good pay in their careers. As a man, I feel like I’m getting the better end of the stick, even without ministerial support.

    Women have been systematically pushed down for thousands of years, and now they have systems to help bring them back up. It’s like being upset someone else gets crutches, because you’d like support too. I mean, sure, wear comfortable shoes, but you don’t need support as much as they do. I look forward to the day nobody need crutches.

    • Unquote0270@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      When you look at support for things such as physical/emotional/financial abuse against men then it’s painfully lacking which can be devastating. This alone is a lot more widespread than you may think. Whether this warrants a minister is another question but there are areas which desperately need attention and it’s unfair to say just because women get the shitty end of the stick in general that men are not in need to support too.