Welcome To aBlackWeb

South Korea's young men are fighting against feminism

Surprize!

Member
Won’t be long before a anti-feminist movement explodes here. It’s going to happen as more and more men’s lives are destroyed upon unproven allegations. I always believed that #MeToo was set up to bring black men and the women’s s movement down.





South Korea's young men are fighting against feminism

Seoul (CNN) — On the same street corner in Seoul where 10,000 South Korean women rallied last October to demand an end to spy cameras and sexual violence, the leader of a new activist group addressed a small group of angry young men.

"We are a group for legal justice, anti-hate, and true gender equality," Moon Sung-ho boomed into a microphone to a crowd of a few dozen men waving placards.

As feminist issues come to the fore in deeply patriarchal South Korea, there's a growing discontent among young men that they're being left behind. Moon, who leads Dang Dang We, a group "fighting for justice for men," is one of them.


Feminism is no longer about gender equality. It is gender discrimination and its manner is violent and hateful.
Moon Sung-ho, leader of Dang Dang We

He started his group last year after a 39-year-old business owner was sentenced to six months in prison for grabbing a woman's buttocks in a Korean soup restaurant. The case provoked outrage that a man could be convicted on no evidence beyond the victim's claims.

While some lashed out at the judge, 29-year-old Moon found another culprit: feminism. Moon and his group held a panel discussion at the National Assembly, Korea's top legislature, in early September, to expose what they perceive to be the alleged harms of the movement.

"Feminism is no longer about gender equality. It is gender discrimination and its manner is violent and hateful," he said to applause from his audience of about 40, mostly young, men.


"I don't support the #MeToo movement"

The emergence of mainstream feminist voices and ideas came in response to the brutal murder of a young woman near a subway station in trendy Seoul suburb, Gangnam, in 2016. The perpetratordeliberately targeted a female victim.

The woman's death triggered an examination of attitudes towards women in the country, which broadened to include campaigns against sexual harassment, like the #MeToo movement and anti-spy cam protests, dubbed #mylifeisnotyourporn.

To many, the discussion was long overdue in male orientated South Korea, which ranks well below the global average on the 2018 Global Gender Gap report, with major disparities in terms of wage equality and earned income for women.

Campaigners found support from the South Korean government and President Moon Jae-In, who vowed to "become a feminist president" before he was elected in 2017.

Since then, there have been several high-profile prosecutions relating to sexual abuse involving politicians, K-pop stars, and regular men. With each court victory, the disquiet among men, especially young men, began to build.

"I don't support the #MeToo movement," said Park, a business student in his early 20s who vehemently disagrees with the notion that young women today are disadvantaged in society. "I agree that (women) in their 40s and 50s (made sacrifices), but do not believe that women in their 20s and 30s are being discriminated against."
South Korean demonstrators hold banners during a rally to mark International Women's Day as part of the country's #MeToo movement in Seoul on March 8, 2018.

South Korean demonstrators hold banners during a rally to mark International Women's Day as part of the country's #MeToo movement in Seoul on March 8, 2018.
 
Park is not his real name. He wants to remain anonymous because he fears repercussions for his views. So does Kim, another student in his early 20s who is about to graduate from university. Kim says he sits apart from women at bars to avoid being falsely accused of sexual harassment. Although he was once supportive of feminism, he now believes it's a women's supremacy movement that aims to bring down men.

"When a woman wears revealing clothes, it's gender violence and sexual objectification. But the same critic will enjoy a similar photo of men. Feminists have a double standard," he said.

Both Park and Kim say men like them are being punished for the crimes of a previous generation. "Patriarchy and gender discrimination is the problem of the older generation, but the penance is all paid by the men in their 20s," Kim said.


Park and Kim are not alone. A Realmeter poll last year of more than 1,000 adults found that 76% of men in their 20s and 66% of men in their 30s oppose feminism, while nearly 60% of respondents in their 20s think gender issues are the most serious source of conflict in the country.

What angers Park and Kim most of all is the nation's policy ofcompulsory conscription, which forces men their age to serve in the military. At the same time, they think women are getting a leg-up from new government programs that help them enter traditionally male-dominated industries.

Rest of story @:
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/21/asia/korea-angry-young-men-intl-hnk/index.html
 
This shit is tricky because I do think there are inequalities out there for women and shit does happen to women that should be inexcusable. However, I also believe that a lot of the feminists out there aren't looking for real equality. What they are looking for is a period where society that shows favor to women in the way that it has shown favor to men in the past. For example, equality is a school picking students based on merit without regard to gender at all. However, that's not really what a lot of feminists are fighting for. Instead, in cases like with engineering, physics, and math where women are underrepresented, they expect women to make up half the students accepted. That seems like equality, but it's not because women and men don't apply to those departments at the same rate and there is nothing to say that the best applicants from year to year will perfectly fall along that percentage. What's even more revealing is that they only push that number for departments where women are outnumbered. Many of the social sciences actually have higher populations of women, but feminists aren't pushing for 50% of the students taken in to be men.
 
This shit is tricky because I do think there are inequalities out there for women and shit does happen to women that should be inexcusable. However, I also believe that a lot of the feminists out there aren't looking for real equality. What they are looking for is a period where society that shows favor to women in the way that it has shown favor to men in the past. For example, equality is a school picking students based on merit without regard to gender at all. However, that's not really what a lot of feminists are fighting for. Instead, in cases like with engineering, physics, and math where women are underrepresented, they expect women to make up half the students accepted. That seems like equality, but it's not because women and men don't apply to those departments at the same rate and there is nothing to say that the best applicants from year to year will perfectly fall along that percentage. What's even more revealing is that they only push that number for departments where women are outnumbered. Many of the social sciences actually have higher populations of women, but feminists aren't pushing for 50% of the students taken in to be men.
but feminists aren't pushing for 50% of the students taken in to be men”——-Of course not! That would be counterproductive. But also, they are not advocating for men to have no rights or say so at all, because women birth little boys and take care of their husbands and fathers. Supposedly feminists just want a level playing field and to have men not flip out when an outstanding female appears on the horizon. I don’t think women are monsters for trying to live up to their potential or to put food on the table when they have no one but themselves to rely upon.

The problem with South Korea is that they have so many people fighting over so few jobs, plus those men seem to have a backwards and infantile view of females in the first place. But I do see a similarity between men’s rights groups here and over there, regarding women being allowed to ruin people based upon nothing but accusations. The conservatives here are getting ready to seed ALL of these anti-feminist men’s groups based upon what #MeToo has been criminally allowed to get away with in America.
 
This shit is tricky because I do think there are inequalities out there for women and shit does happen to women that should be inexcusable. However, I also believe that a lot of the feminists out there aren't looking for real equality. What they are looking for is a period where society that shows favor to women in the way that it has shown favor to men in the past. For example, equality is a school picking students based on merit without regard to gender at all. However, that's not really what a lot of feminists are fighting for. Instead, in cases like with engineering, physics, and math where women are underrepresented, they expect women to make up half the students accepted. That seems like equality, but it's not because women and men don't apply to those departments at the same rate and there is nothing to say that the best applicants from year to year will perfectly fall along that percentage. What's even more revealing is that they only push that number for departments where women are outnumbered. Many of the social sciences actually have higher populations of women, but feminists aren't pushing for 50% of the students taken in to be men.

How is your example about education not verbatim the same argument that whites have been using to make the case for getting rid of affirmative action altogether?
 
While the concept of affirmative action has existed in America since the 19th century, it first appeared in its current form in President Kennedy's Executive Order 10925 (1961): "The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin."


So basically, the Affirmative Action order never required quotas of minorities. It only required that Federal government agencies, contractors receiving federal money, and academic institutions receiving federal money had disclose the actions they were taking to ensure that there was no discrimination in their hiring practices. Some companies did take a lazy way of doing that by reporting loose quotas. The idea being that if say 30% of a company was minorities then that means minorities aren't being discriminated against. Not every organization did that though, and many changed once those quotas resulted in backlash. For example, the University of Texas has a rule where they give guaranteed admission to anyone in the top 10% of their high school class. That fulfills the AA order because it effectively takes race, gender, ethnicity, etc... out of the admissions process. However, it doesn't in any way guarantee blacks or any other minority a seat at the table.

That is starkly different than saying Blacks make up about 13-20% of the population depending on where you are, so a mechanical engineering department at a certain school should be 15% black or they are discriminating against blacks.
 
Back
Top