?

Just read their website...seems like it couldn't be clearer.  

Even though it is young black men who are the largest single victim demographic of violence in the USA, and even though it almost always seems to be the death of a black man at the hands of police that prompts their activism...at their core, they advocate feminism ideas like centering the voices of women and non-binary people, and the destruction of the nuclear family.The destruction of the nuclear family has been a major problem for black men who are, for various reasons, excluded from the lives of their children...and statistically when children grow up without fathers, their outcomes tend to be worse.

Tell me if you've heard some variant of this statement before: 'it's not enough to not be racist, you have to be anti-racist.'  Just think about that for a moment: isn't this really just asking all people, if you purport to be a good person, to police the speech of others?

Ironic that it's become so popular at a time when the 'anti-racist' activists are trying to have the police defunded and disbanded, but the more I see this 'anti-racist' activism, the more I see a cult like power grab!  

Do people really believe that ratting out others up to including your loved ones and friends for making remarks that may be offensive to others will make you a good person?  

I keep hearing from people that we must say "Black Lives Matter," and that "All Lives Matter" is an affront to the suffering that black people currently live under in Western nations, but I find this view baffling.

I mean it seems to me that we are safest if EVERYONE understands that they can be a victim of aggressive over-policing because after all, if I believe that an injustice carried out against another person could happen to me, it makes me that much more likely to oppose it as if it was an infraction committed against me.

If however abuses carried out against people that look like me are ignored by the media, as they often are, and activists are highlighting the abuses carried out against people who don't look like me and demanding that I acknowledge that the lives of people who don't look like me matter, how can it be anything other than a superficial virtue signal that will ultimately fail to either create long lasting change, or will make things worse if I begin to notice that people who do look like me are being attacked by the activists?

"Black Lives Matter" says nothing about the lives of non-black people, whereas "All Lives Matter" includes black lives.  How is it not better to acknowledge that All Lives Matter?

what help do they need?

BQ: If men could count on a fair share of government funds allocated to DV shelters, do you think it would make it easier?

BQ1: How would feminists respond if it became apparent that men's shelters would receive some of the government funds which are currently allocated only to women's shelters? Do you think this has played a part in feminist attitudes towards mens DV shelters?

If there's no discernable difference between shampoos, razors, deodorants and other "gendered products," and women have a problem with paying more...why don't they just buy the stuff the men buy and pay less?

Is the difference in price the problem, or is it the need for feminists to continually whine about something that is the problem?

I recently watched a video from TL;DR on YouTube that I found almost unbelievable, and I'm curious if anyone else finds this a little interesting in a rather repulsive way.

For starters on the terms "boy" and "girl":

* Boy (unknown origin) was used to refer to a male servant.

* Girl (Low German origin) was used to refer to a child, irrespective of their sex.

With regards to the colors red and pink, red was previously a color that tended to have more masculine connotations (according to TL;DR)...and pink was a color that tended to be preferred for boys.

What does it say about us that men are conditioned to view ourselves as disposable, and we opted to use a term referring to a male servant for male children, while the term that referred to all children was at some point appropriated to refer to female children, and a color intended for male children...was appropriated by feminists?

And keep this in mind, as many feminists have indicated that they object to pink and blue clothing being used in hospitals to denote female and male children respectively.

You can watch the whole video, but I'm linking the video at the parts that related to this question.

https://youtu.be/vpoKOnSLJfk?t=15m12s

And I'm just going to leave a trigger warning here: the video contains a whiney male feminist, so if you're triggered by that, please don't watch.

When selling people on providing the HPV vaccine for all girls, advocates in Ontario, Canada touted the protection the vaccine could give from cancer, particularly cervical cancer.

Yet now, when these same advocates are trying to sell people on providing the HPV vaccine for all boys, what they're using is "it could save the health care system millions of dollars."

Does this say something about the priority we put on girls vs boys? Is it the evolution of a selling technique? Is it that they figure people associate HPV with cervical cancer? Or is it something else?

Lets say they are an MRA and you're a feminist. Or they're a feminist, and you're an MRA.

According to Rose McGowan, who ironically has doesn't mind throwing "anti-boycott" parties at a Beverly Hills hotel owned by the Sultan of Brunei (who recently enacted Sharia Law which includes provisions for death by stoning for same sex sexual acts), “gay men are as misogynistic as straight men, if not more so.”

Apparently she seems to think that our rights were gifted to us largely by women, and that we ourselves never fought for them at all. And apparently if we're not actively and vocally supporting feminist campaigns, we're more misogynistic than straight men.

Is Rose McGowan's attitude towards gay men indicative of feminists, women or both?

According to Rose McGowan, who ironically has doesn't mind throwing "anti-boycott" parties at a Beverly Hills hotel owned by the Sultan of Brunei (who recently enacted Sharia Law which includes provisions for death by stoning for same sex sexual acts), “gay men are as misogynistic as straight men, if not more so.”

Apparently she seems to think that our rights were gifted to us largely by women, and that we ourselves never fought for them at all. And apparently if we're not actively and vocally supporting feminist campaigns, we're more misogynistic than straight men.

Is Rose McGowan's attitude towards gay men indicative of feminists, women or both?

There seems to be a lot of questions that suggest that people should be more accepting of those who are obese. Many of these types of questions in this section seem to vilify men who aren't attracted to heavier women, while there have been backlashes against companies like Abercrombie & Fitch for not providing clothing that fits plus sized consumers.

I read a write up about a study on Precision Nutrition that suggested that if your partner is obese, your odds of becoming obese increase by 37%. Having a best friend who is obese increased the chances of you becoming obese by 57%. And of course while it's possible that some people can be heavy and still be relatively healthy, for most people, it does cause health problems.

So my question is this: if you were a parent, and you saw figures like these...would it change your opinion of the "fat acceptance" movement? Furthermore, would you be discouraging your children from embarking on relationships (whether friendship or romantically) with obese people based on these kinds of studies?

http://www.precisionnutrition.com/is-obesity-conta...

Which is your favorite Friday the 13th film and why?

Who is your favorite character (not counting Jason or Pamela Voorhees), in which film were they present and why are they your favorite?

And after more than 30 years, what surprises you the most about the films at this point in time?

The implication seems to be that it's a company like any other, but it's been certified so that people know that it's owner is a woman. So if someone declined to utilize the services of one of these types of companies, would you conclude that their motivations are sexist?

BQ: Would you consider it sexist if someone only opted to use a "Woman Owned Certified Business?"

If you compare the "Good Soldier Defense" with the "Battered Wife Defense," you could claim that both are defenses for perpetrators of crimes who may or may not have gone through traumatic experiences that have shaped the behavior that led to the committing of what is regarded as crime.

And yet the US Senate decides to effectively scrap the "Good Soldier Defense" in most cases, but the "Battered Wife Defense" is beyond reproach? Doesn't that seem just a little bit hypocritical?

I realize that Yahoo Answers is a free service, and that it is advertiser sponsored...so I don't as a rule have a problem with advertising. HOWEVER when you continue to show me the same two NAUSEATING advertisements concerning toe fungus OVER AND OVER AGAIN, it gets incredibly frustrating!

I mean one of the photos even looks doctored to make it appear even more repulsive...and every time I've tried to change the advertising options, nothing works!

Seriously why doesn't Yahoo save those disgusting advertisements for people who actually want to see them??? Give us the option to click on the advertisement if we want to see disgusting toe fungus and brittle, broken toe nails. I mean what's next...gruesome photos of ebola victims???

Just to clarify, I'm exploring the beauty of masculinity and aggression in sport, and this poem was inspired by the image of a young man who passed out as a result of a blood choke in a jiu jitsu match. I wrote it pretty quick, but I kinda like it, and I'm wondering what others might think of it.

'Ode to the Passed Out Fighter

He lays on the mat, staring blankly into space;

his beautiful lips parted, in awe of an embrace.

Not celestial or well meaning, neither heavenly nor damning;

the result of the sport, and his opponent's good planning.

His arms lay heavy, embraced by white cotton;

his skill on the mat so easily forgotten.

His breathing is deep, his legs without length;

his beautiful body glistens, devoid of it's strength.

In this place he does lay, the result of a choke;

a handsome reminder that these lessons are no joke.

From his dream that day he will learn quite a lot;

sometimes it's your day, and sometimes it's not.'

Again just to reiterate, this is a poem about a guy who passed out in a jiu jitsu fight...this isn't a poem glorifying male violence or anything like that. It's part of the sport, and obviously as a gay man I'm inspired to craft poems that are inspired by male beauty in all its forms...including in this case, the beauty of a defeated man who has partaken in the sport he loves.

Interested to know what others might think.

So the scenario is this: one of your male teammates is rolling with your girlfriend, and she gets hurt. There's no doubt that he was being wreck-less, and his carelessness caused her injury, though she'll be okay as the injury, though it may take some time to heal, will eventually heal.

He's been warned about being careless before, but he does seem to be filled with regret all the same.

You're in the club at the time she's injured...would you hold a grudge? Teach him a lesson by being careless with him and his well being the next time you're rolling with him? Rush him after the injury, and perhaps even take a swing at him? Demand that he be expelled from the club? Or would you choose to turn the other cheek, or even simply choose not to interact with him going forward?

How much would your girlfriend's attitude about this factor into your actions? Or if you're a girl/woman, how would you approach it if the genders were reversed?

The scenario: A woman lies to a man about being the Father of her child...and he raises the child as his own for several years. At some point, she tells him that he's not the Father, but he decides he still wants to be the child's Father.

A short time after, the woman rekindles her affair with the actual biological father of the child, and she tells the man she defrauded that she no longer wants him in the child's life, and going forward, she wants him to leave the child alone.

What do you suppose would happen if the Mother was determined to keep the man who was led to believe that he was the Father...out of the child's life? Whom do you believe the law would side with and why?

BQ: Do you believe the feminists who are criticizing men who are the victims of paternity fraud and decide to walk away for their lack of humanity...would side with the men who wanted to remain in the child's life...or would they side with a Mother's right to keep the man out of the child's life if that's what the Mother wanted?

The question is what it is...do you agree that society is more accepting of misandry than misogyny, and why do you think it is or is not that way?