Wiki 4 Men - User contributions [en]

Male Doctors Hate Female Patients

2022-02-09T20:43:54Z

Mad cat: Created page with "Read article here: https://avoiceformen.com/featured/male-doctors-hate-female-patients/"

Read article here: https://avoiceformen.com/featured/male-doctors-hate-female-patients/

Tickling

2020-09-25T13:12:23Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">

A recent discussion on Facebook<ref>https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/is-it-child-abuse-mums-push-to-stop-parents-tickling-kids-c-1297264</ref> states that when tickling a child, that if the child asks you to stop, you must stop. Failure to do so teaches children they don't have a right to bodily autonomy and teaches them the wrong lesson on consent. The OP also alluded to it being a form of abuse.

Other parents state that they would use tickling to distract a child so they can put on their shoes. Also, that when they would stop, the child is likely to ask for it again. The response by the OP is that even in these cases, when you're ask to stop, you stop.

A parent argued that their child are not in charge and it is the parent who should decide what is best for them, from what they eat to what they wear, and yes, whether to be tickled or not. Allowing children the right to decide, they would make poor decisions as a result.

==Men's Issues==

While on it's face not necessarily a men's issue, it has been shown that girls and women tend not to like being tickled, whereas boys and men do. If tickling were deemed abusive, then it would be boys who would be most affected by this. [citation needed]

==References==

[[Category:Draft Articles]]
[[Category:Men's Rights]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]

Tickling

2020-09-25T13:10:29Z

Mad cat: Created page with "<div style="text-align:justify;"> A recent discussion on Facebook<ref>https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/is-it-child-abuse-mums-push-to-stop-parents-tickling-kids-c-1297264</ref>..."

<div style="text-align:justify;">

A recent discussion on Facebook<ref>https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/is-it-child-abuse-mums-push-to-stop-parents-tickling-kids-c-1297264</ref> states that when tickling a child, that if the child asks you to stop, you must stop. Failure to do so teaches children they don't have a right to bodily autonomy and teaches them the wrong lesson on consent. The OP also alluded to it being a form of abuse.

Other parents state that they would use tickling to distract a child so they can put on their shoes. Also, that when they would stop, the child is likely to ask for it again. The response by the OP is that even in these cases, when you're ask to stop, you stop.

A parent argued that their child are not in charge and it is the parent who should decide what is best for them, from what they eat to what they wear, and yes, whether to be tickled or not. Allowing children the right to decide, they would make poor decisions as a result.

==References==

[[Category:Draft Articles]]
[[Category:Men's Rights]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]

Lovely Ladies of the Men's Movement

2020-04-27T20:44:11Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">
The Lovely Ladies of the Men's Movement was started by [[Modern Medusa]] and [[Chris Votey|mad_cat]]. The intended goal was to demonstrate that many women do support the Men's Movement and raise awareness for issues that men face. They created the first ever calendar for the Men's Movement, Lovely Ladies for Men's Issues.

Note: Understand at the time the calendar was made, nothing was known of the character of the models that would be later revealed after the release of the calendar. They're only mentioned here due to their involvement.

==2018 Calendar==

Starting in 2017, the Modern Medusa and mad_cat, with the help of Reading Wren set about to create the first calendar for the Men's Movement. The calendar featured 12 women who gave active support of men, with each month dedicated to a men's issue and a fact.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center; width: 200px; height: 200px; white-space:nowrap;" border="3"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Model
! scope="col" | Issue
|-
! scope="row" | January
| align="center" | [[Honey Badger Brigade|Anna Cherry]]
| align="center" | [[Education]]
|-
! scope="row" | February
| align="center" | Rachel Souza
| align="center" | [[Male Genital Mutilation]]
|-
! scope="row" | March
| align="center" | Shagrin
| align="center" | [[False Rape Accusation]]
|-
! scope="row" | April
| align="center" | [[Prim Reaper]]
| align="center" | [[Male Victim DV|Domestic Violence]]
|-
! scope="row" | May
| align="center" | [[Unvarnished Void]]
| align="center" | [[Homelessness]]
|-
! scope="row" | June
| align="center" | N/A*
| align="center" | [[Paternity Rights]]
|-
! scope="row" | July
| align="center" | Reading Wren
| align="center" | [[Mental Health (Veterans)|Veteran's Mental Health]]
|-
! scope="row" | August
| align="center" | Sassy Shelly
| align="center" | [[Paternity Rights (Custody)|Custody]] and [[Child Support]]
|-
! scope="row" | September
| align="center" | Stuttering Soliloquy
| align="center" | [[Workplace Environment]]
|-
! scope="row" | October
| align="center" | [[Modern Medusa]]
| align="center" | [[Prisoner's Rights]]
|-
! scope="row" | November
| align="center" | Based Mama
| align="center" | Other Men's Facts
|-
! scope="row" | December
| align="center" | Mercedes Carrera
| align="center" | [[Resources for Men]]
|}
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Does not want their name associated with the product any longer

===Barcroft===

Barcroft TV reached out to Modern Medusa to do a story about women in the Men's Movement. While it was great to get media attention for this and the Lovely Ladies could feature the calendar, this seemed more of a hit piece than trying to convey the good that this group was doing.

For instance, it was called "The Women Stripping Off - For Men’s Rights", strongly indicating that women were either whoring themselves off or getting naked in the name of Men's Rights (neither of which were true). No question was asked about men involved or any mention of co-founded mad_cat. They also edited footage to make Modern Medusa look ditzy, who was actually nervous due to this being her first interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnpbPH3jEB4

==2020 Calendar==

Soon to be released.

[[Category:Draft Articles]]
[[Category:Men's Rights]]
[[Category:Organisations]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]

Chris Votey

2020-04-26T23:23:28Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">

Chris Votey (aka mad_cat) is an Egalitarian Activist who does a lot of work in the Men's Movement. Chris felt that he's always been a part of the Men's Movement all of his life, but didn't know about the actual movement until 2013.

== ABOUT ==

Chris was born in Ohio but has lived most of his life in Arizona since the age of 3. He moved around a lot, having gone to 6 different elementary schools. He failed two grades and skipped one. He graduated high school in 1999 and waited until 2002 to go to college. Chris primarily worked as a phone support specialist though one year was a field engineer for supermarkets.

Prior to joining the movement he was an active participant in the BDSM scene, where upon reflection he realizes that he faced many elements of Feminism and gynocentrism, though it was below the surface.

== EDUCATION ==

Chris has a Bachelor's of Science from Collins College in Computer Networking.

== BOOKS ==

== Quotes ==

<blockquote>
Everything about Feminism is a cruel irony. They want men to share their feelings but call them crybabies once they do. They want to do things for themselves but get upset when men don't do enough to support them. They want the chance to participate in all aspects of life that men do, but then want lighter requirements to do so. And of course, they want men to keep their distance as a whole, but then chastise them for doing exactly that. It's a movement of no one having any idea of what they're about.<br /><br />
It's why it will fail, because they fail to see they have everything they want, and still complain they have nothing... because, in the end, all they want is to be victims.<br /><br />
--[[Chris Votey]], Facebook, April 24, 2020.
</blockquote>

[[Category:Biographies]]

Chris Votey

2020-04-26T20:07:46Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">

Chris Votey (aka mad_cat) is an Egalitarian Activist who does a lot of work in the Men's Movement. Chris felt that he's always been a part of the Men's Movement all of his life, but didn't know about the actual movement until 2013.

== ABOUT ==

Chris was born in Ohio but has lived most of his life in Arizona. Throughout his life he saw how boys were poorly treated but couldn't ever articulate it until later in his life.

Prior to joining the movement he was an active participant in the BDSM scene, where upon reflection he realizes that he faced many elements of Feminism and gynocentrism, though it was below the surface.

== EDUCATION ==

Chris has a Bachelor's of Science from Collins College in Computer Networking.

== BOOKS ==

== Quotes ==

<blockquote>
Everything about Feminism is a cruel irony. They want men to share their feelings but call them crybabies once they do. They want to do things for themselves but get upset when men don't do enough to support them. They want the chance to participate in all aspects of life that men do, but then want lighter requirements to do so. And of course, they want men to keep their distance as a whole, but then chastise them for doing exactly that. It's a movement of no one having any idea of what they're about.<br /><br />
It's why it will fail, because they fail to see they have everything they want, and still complain they have nothing... because, in the end, all they want is to be victims.<br /><br />
--[[Chris Votey]], Facebook, April 24, 2020.
</blockquote>

[[Category:Biographies]]

Chris Votey

2020-04-26T20:05:33Z

Mad cat:

Chris Votey (aka mad_cat) is an Egalitarian Activist who does a lot of work in the Men's Movement. Chris felt that he's always been a part of the Men's Movement all of his life, but didn't know about the actual movement until 2013.

== ABOUT ==

Chris was born in Ohio but has lived most of his life in Arizona. Throughout his life he saw how boys were poorly treated but couldn't ever articulate it until later in his life.

Prior to joining the movement he was an active participant in the BDSM scene, where upon reflection he realizes that he faced many elements of Feminism and gynocentrism, though it was below the surface.

== EDUCATION ==

Chris has a Bachelor's of Science from Collins College in Computer Networking.

== BOOKS ==

== Quotes ==

<blockquote>
Everything about Feminism is a cruel irony. They want men to share their feelings but call them crybabies once they do. They want to do things for themselves but get upset when men don't do enough to support them. They want the chance to participate in all aspects of life that men do, but then want lighter requirements to do so. And of course, they want men to keep their distance as a whole, but then chastise them for doing exactly that. It's a movement of no one having any idea of what they're about.<br /><br />
It's why it will fail, because they fail to see they have everything they want, and still complain they have nothing... because, in the end, all they want is to be victims.<br /><br />
--[[Chris Votey]], Facebook, April 24, 2020.
</blockquote>

[[Category:Biographies]]

Misandric Advertisements

2020-04-25T21:01:40Z

Mad cat: /* Windsor Smith */

===Voodoo===
[[File:Voodoo_ad_1.jpg|300px]]
[[File:Voodoo_ad_2.jpg|300px]]
[[File:Voodoo_ad_3.jpg|300px]]

Starting in 2002 (and as of late 2015), Australian based company, Voodoo released an ad marketing campaign featuring men being objectified, and to some extent, being abused. The company is known to feature women wearing their products and dressing in provocative ways, strongly hinting at nudity without actually showing it. This series of advertising differed from their normal type of advertising, showing women having power and control over men to the point of humiliation and degradation.

Voodoo's "men-on-leash" ad generated about 60 complaints to the Advertising Standards Bureau. All were dismissed. The ABS apparently appreciated the humour, reasoning: "This ad clearly intends to depict a tongue-in-cheek view of the well accepted right of a woman to be in control of her choices and her 'accessories'."[https://goat-scape.blogspot.com/2008/09/men-on-leash-reverse-sexism.html|1]

====[https://web.archive.org/web/20190313045755/http://www.womenagainstmen.com/advertising/advertising-standards-board-response-on-voodoo-complaint.html| Complaints]====
“I found the image of a woman walking along with two naked men on dog leashes on their hands and knees very offensive …sexist and derogatory …”

“It depicts men as animals and honestly puts the fight for gender equality back fifty years.”

“This ad is suggestive that men are dogs, are not worthy of wearing clothing and need to be tied to a woman who has the power. It also suggests that a woman can have more than one man. Both of these points contravene the social morays that are part of today’s society and involves discrimination of men as a lesser sex rather than as an equal.”

“This is a moral issue that degrades human value and worth, it brings humans down to the level of animals. For some of the elderly it may bring back memories of war and mistreatment as prisoners of war/slavery. This may also encourage the imagination of some in this direction/treatment of others.”

“If the advertisement was reversed and a male was ‘walking’ two females with a leash, I doubt that the advertisement would even be considered acceptable.”

“I strongly object to this ad’s being placed in the public view where my children were forced to view it today…It is clearly degrading to men to be depicted as some kind of sex slave.”

“Whether some may consider this demeaning to men or women is irrelevant I personally as an adult woman amjme with it … But I do know it has an impact on children. They are the issue.”

“Why do we seem to have one set of standards for women’s representation and another for men?”

“I genuinely feel distressed by seeing this…Such images one might expect in pornographic literature but should not be in the general viewing space.”

“I am greatly concerned of the possible impact this sign could have on impressionable persons. In my view, the sign is suggestive of a gross violation of dignity and of human rights and should not be seen in my country, Australia.”

“This kind of ultra feminism sends the totally wrong message to families where kids and young women think this is acceptable to treat men as ‘pets’ … it’s emasculating and derogatory and heel grinding.”

“I have two daughters aged 4 and 7 and I must ask them to close their eyes every time we pass it. I believe we should have the right to preserve the innocence of our children and not have this type of thing forced upon us.”

====Advertiser Response====

The Advertising Standards Board (‘the Board’) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (‘the Code’).

The Board considered that while some people clearly had different perceptions of the advertisement, it represented a satirical comment on a patriarchal world. It determined that, as such, the content of the advertisement did not contravene the Code in relation to either the portrayal of people or the portrayal of sex, sexuality and/or nudity. With the Board finding that the advertisement did not breach the Code on any other grounds, the complaint was dismissed.

===Windsor Smith===
''Displaying this here to show a contrast of what was deemed misogynistic.''

[[File:Windsor_Smith_ad_1.gif|300px]]

In 2005, an ad depicting a woman wearing very little next to a man fully clothed was believed to be depicting oral sex. The Advertising Standards Board (“Board”) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (the “Code”).

The Board noted the complainants’ concerns that the advertisement objectifies women and is sexist in its depiction of them dressed in clothing similar to swimwear while the men are fully clothed, and features inappropriate close ups of a female backside which is not suitable for '''viewing by children'''. The Board noted the complainants’ concerns that it is sexist to show women half-dressed whilst the men are fully clothed. The Board noted that the advertisement is for shoes and considered that the depiction of women wearing swimwear or dancewear is not relevant to the advertised product. The Board noted however that the Code does not require that images of women are only used in relation to relevant products.

The Board determined that the advertisement didn't breach any section of the Code, and the complaints were dismissed. However, the billboard company stepped in and took the advert down. Note that while the Voodoo Hosiery was not taken down by the Board just like Windsor Smith, the billboard company did leave the Voodoo campaign up.

====[https://ms.adstandards.com.au/cases/0331-13.pdf| Complaints]====
# I am offended by the Men being fully clothed, whilst women are only wearing small underwear. I am particularly offended by two separate shots of a woman bent over, in her underwear, and the camera zooming in on her bum and vagina. I am offended by the sexism in this advert, and am also upset that it was played in the morning in front of my young girl. An utterly horrible display of disrespect to women, and a terrible example to my daughter.
# Women portrayed as sexual objects. Element of acceptable subjugation of women. Clad in underwear while men are fully dressed. Women objectified - faces often obscured. Poor rolemodel. Women portrayed as being useful to men but not empowered.
# I believe that the advertisement is inappropriate with half naked women bending over and prancing around. Its very offencive and its not appropriate. I dont want my teenage daughter seeing that and thinking its ok to act and dress like that.

====Advertiser Response====

It should be noted that the advertiser for this campaign was led by a mostly female team.

Complaint #1 Response:
- The females are in swimwear, not underwear as well as clothing
- There is no scene where the camera zooms in on her vagina or her bottom and she is not in
underwear, she is in swimwear
- There is no intended sexism in this advert nor is there an intention to display disrespect to women
- The girls are dancers and just like ballerinas wear leotards these girls have specific dance costumes

Complaint #2 Response:
- The female models were wearing swimwear not underwear
- Shots are choreographed as a dance sequence as apposed to close up shots on bottoms to which there are none - any close up shots are to represent the mood and/or highlight the product

Complaint #3 Response:
- The mens shots are full looks of styles suggested to wear with the product
- No element of this is sexist, the group are having fun together

== See Also ==

== References ==

[[Category:Advertising]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Misandric Advertisements

2020-04-25T21:01:26Z

Mad cat: /* Windsor Smith */

===Voodoo===
[[File:Voodoo_ad_1.jpg|300px]]
[[File:Voodoo_ad_2.jpg|300px]]
[[File:Voodoo_ad_3.jpg|300px]]

Starting in 2002 (and as of late 2015), Australian based company, Voodoo released an ad marketing campaign featuring men being objectified, and to some extent, being abused. The company is known to feature women wearing their products and dressing in provocative ways, strongly hinting at nudity without actually showing it. This series of advertising differed from their normal type of advertising, showing women having power and control over men to the point of humiliation and degradation.

Voodoo's "men-on-leash" ad generated about 60 complaints to the Advertising Standards Bureau. All were dismissed. The ABS apparently appreciated the humour, reasoning: "This ad clearly intends to depict a tongue-in-cheek view of the well accepted right of a woman to be in control of her choices and her 'accessories'."[https://goat-scape.blogspot.com/2008/09/men-on-leash-reverse-sexism.html|1]

====[https://web.archive.org/web/20190313045755/http://www.womenagainstmen.com/advertising/advertising-standards-board-response-on-voodoo-complaint.html| Complaints]====
“I found the image of a woman walking along with two naked men on dog leashes on their hands and knees very offensive …sexist and derogatory …”

“It depicts men as animals and honestly puts the fight for gender equality back fifty years.”

“This ad is suggestive that men are dogs, are not worthy of wearing clothing and need to be tied to a woman who has the power. It also suggests that a woman can have more than one man. Both of these points contravene the social morays that are part of today’s society and involves discrimination of men as a lesser sex rather than as an equal.”

“This is a moral issue that degrades human value and worth, it brings humans down to the level of animals. For some of the elderly it may bring back memories of war and mistreatment as prisoners of war/slavery. This may also encourage the imagination of some in this direction/treatment of others.”

“If the advertisement was reversed and a male was ‘walking’ two females with a leash, I doubt that the advertisement would even be considered acceptable.”

“I strongly object to this ad’s being placed in the public view where my children were forced to view it today…It is clearly degrading to men to be depicted as some kind of sex slave.”

“Whether some may consider this demeaning to men or women is irrelevant I personally as an adult woman amjme with it … But I do know it has an impact on children. They are the issue.”

“Why do we seem to have one set of standards for women’s representation and another for men?”

“I genuinely feel distressed by seeing this…Such images one might expect in pornographic literature but should not be in the general viewing space.”

“I am greatly concerned of the possible impact this sign could have on impressionable persons. In my view, the sign is suggestive of a gross violation of dignity and of human rights and should not be seen in my country, Australia.”

“This kind of ultra feminism sends the totally wrong message to families where kids and young women think this is acceptable to treat men as ‘pets’ … it’s emasculating and derogatory and heel grinding.”

“I have two daughters aged 4 and 7 and I must ask them to close their eyes every time we pass it. I believe we should have the right to preserve the innocence of our children and not have this type of thing forced upon us.”

====Advertiser Response====

The Advertising Standards Board (‘the Board’) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (‘the Code’).

The Board considered that while some people clearly had different perceptions of the advertisement, it represented a satirical comment on a patriarchal world. It determined that, as such, the content of the advertisement did not contravene the Code in relation to either the portrayal of people or the portrayal of sex, sexuality and/or nudity. With the Board finding that the advertisement did not breach the Code on any other grounds, the complaint was dismissed.

===Windsor Smith===
'''Displaying this here to show a contrast of what was deemed misogynistic.'''
[[File:Windsor_Smith_ad_1.gif|300px]]

In 2005, an ad depicting a woman wearing very little next to a man fully clothed was believed to be depicting oral sex. The Advertising Standards Board (“Board”) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (the “Code”).

The Board noted the complainants’ concerns that the advertisement objectifies women and is sexist in its depiction of them dressed in clothing similar to swimwear while the men are fully clothed, and features inappropriate close ups of a female backside which is not suitable for '''viewing by children'''. The Board noted the complainants’ concerns that it is sexist to show women half-dressed whilst the men are fully clothed. The Board noted that the advertisement is for shoes and considered that the depiction of women wearing swimwear or dancewear is not relevant to the advertised product. The Board noted however that the Code does not require that images of women are only used in relation to relevant products.

The Board determined that the advertisement didn't breach any section of the Code, and the complaints were dismissed. However, the billboard company stepped in and took the advert down. Note that while the Voodoo Hosiery was not taken down by the Board just like Windsor Smith, the billboard company did leave the Voodoo campaign up.

====[https://ms.adstandards.com.au/cases/0331-13.pdf| Complaints]====
# I am offended by the Men being fully clothed, whilst women are only wearing small underwear. I am particularly offended by two separate shots of a woman bent over, in her underwear, and the camera zooming in on her bum and vagina. I am offended by the sexism in this advert, and am also upset that it was played in the morning in front of my young girl. An utterly horrible display of disrespect to women, and a terrible example to my daughter.
# Women portrayed as sexual objects. Element of acceptable subjugation of women. Clad in underwear while men are fully dressed. Women objectified - faces often obscured. Poor rolemodel. Women portrayed as being useful to men but not empowered.
# I believe that the advertisement is inappropriate with half naked women bending over and prancing around. Its very offencive and its not appropriate. I dont want my teenage daughter seeing that and thinking its ok to act and dress like that.

====Advertiser Response====

It should be noted that the advertiser for this campaign was led by a mostly female team.

Complaint #1 Response:
- The females are in swimwear, not underwear as well as clothing
- There is no scene where the camera zooms in on her vagina or her bottom and she is not in
underwear, she is in swimwear
- There is no intended sexism in this advert nor is there an intention to display disrespect to women
- The girls are dancers and just like ballerinas wear leotards these girls have specific dance costumes

Complaint #2 Response:
- The female models were wearing swimwear not underwear
- Shots are choreographed as a dance sequence as apposed to close up shots on bottoms to which there are none - any close up shots are to represent the mood and/or highlight the product

Complaint #3 Response:
- The mens shots are full looks of styles suggested to wear with the product
- No element of this is sexist, the group are having fun together

== See Also ==

== References ==

[[Category:Advertising]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Misandric Advertisements

2020-04-25T21:00:18Z

Mad cat:

===Voodoo===
[[File:Voodoo_ad_1.jpg|300px]]
[[File:Voodoo_ad_2.jpg|300px]]
[[File:Voodoo_ad_3.jpg|300px]]

Starting in 2002 (and as of late 2015), Australian based company, Voodoo released an ad marketing campaign featuring men being objectified, and to some extent, being abused. The company is known to feature women wearing their products and dressing in provocative ways, strongly hinting at nudity without actually showing it. This series of advertising differed from their normal type of advertising, showing women having power and control over men to the point of humiliation and degradation.

Voodoo's "men-on-leash" ad generated about 60 complaints to the Advertising Standards Bureau. All were dismissed. The ABS apparently appreciated the humour, reasoning: "This ad clearly intends to depict a tongue-in-cheek view of the well accepted right of a woman to be in control of her choices and her 'accessories'."[https://goat-scape.blogspot.com/2008/09/men-on-leash-reverse-sexism.html|1]

====[https://web.archive.org/web/20190313045755/http://www.womenagainstmen.com/advertising/advertising-standards-board-response-on-voodoo-complaint.html| Complaints]====
“I found the image of a woman walking along with two naked men on dog leashes on their hands and knees very offensive …sexist and derogatory …”

“It depicts men as animals and honestly puts the fight for gender equality back fifty years.”

“This ad is suggestive that men are dogs, are not worthy of wearing clothing and need to be tied to a woman who has the power. It also suggests that a woman can have more than one man. Both of these points contravene the social morays that are part of today’s society and involves discrimination of men as a lesser sex rather than as an equal.”

“This is a moral issue that degrades human value and worth, it brings humans down to the level of animals. For some of the elderly it may bring back memories of war and mistreatment as prisoners of war/slavery. This may also encourage the imagination of some in this direction/treatment of others.”

“If the advertisement was reversed and a male was ‘walking’ two females with a leash, I doubt that the advertisement would even be considered acceptable.”

“I strongly object to this ad’s being placed in the public view where my children were forced to view it today…It is clearly degrading to men to be depicted as some kind of sex slave.”

“Whether some may consider this demeaning to men or women is irrelevant I personally as an adult woman amjme with it … But I do know it has an impact on children. They are the issue.”

“Why do we seem to have one set of standards for women’s representation and another for men?”

“I genuinely feel distressed by seeing this…Such images one might expect in pornographic literature but should not be in the general viewing space.”

“I am greatly concerned of the possible impact this sign could have on impressionable persons. In my view, the sign is suggestive of a gross violation of dignity and of human rights and should not be seen in my country, Australia.”

“This kind of ultra feminism sends the totally wrong message to families where kids and young women think this is acceptable to treat men as ‘pets’ … it’s emasculating and derogatory and heel grinding.”

“I have two daughters aged 4 and 7 and I must ask them to close their eyes every time we pass it. I believe we should have the right to preserve the innocence of our children and not have this type of thing forced upon us.”

====Advertiser Response====

The Advertising Standards Board (‘the Board’) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (‘the Code’).

The Board considered that while some people clearly had different perceptions of the advertisement, it represented a satirical comment on a patriarchal world. It determined that, as such, the content of the advertisement did not contravene the Code in relation to either the portrayal of people or the portrayal of sex, sexuality and/or nudity. With the Board finding that the advertisement did not breach the Code on any other grounds, the complaint was dismissed.

===Windsor Smith===
[[File:Windsor_Smith_ad_1.gif|300px]]

In 2005, an ad depicting a woman wearing very little next to a man fully clothed was believed to be depicting oral sex. The Advertising Standards Board (“Board”) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (the “Code”).

The Board noted the complainants’ concerns that the advertisement objectifies women and is sexist in its depiction of them dressed in clothing similar to swimwear while the men are fully clothed, and features inappropriate close ups of a female backside which is not suitable for '''viewing by children'''. The Board noted the complainants’ concerns that it is sexist to show women half-dressed whilst the men are fully clothed. The Board noted that the advertisement is for shoes and considered that the depiction of women wearing swimwear or dancewear is not relevant to the advertised product. The Board noted however that the Code does not require that images of women are only used in relation to relevant products.

The Board determined that the advertisement didn't breach any section of the Code, and the complaints were dismissed. However, the billboard company stepped in and took the advert down. Note that while the Voodoo Hosiery was not taken down by the Board just like Windsor Smith, the billboard company did leave the Voodoo campaign up.

====[https://ms.adstandards.com.au/cases/0331-13.pdf| Complaints]====
# I am offended by the Men being fully clothed, whilst women are only wearing small underwear. I am particularly offended by two separate shots of a woman bent over, in her underwear, and the camera zooming in on her bum and vagina. I am offended by the sexism in this advert, and am also upset that it was played in the morning in front of my young girl. An utterly horrible display of disrespect to women, and a terrible example to my daughter.
# Women portrayed as sexual objects. Element of acceptable subjugation of women. Clad in underwear while men are fully dressed. Women objectified - faces often obscured. Poor rolemodel. Women portrayed as being useful to men but not empowered.
# I believe that the advertisement is inappropriate with half naked women bending over and prancing around. Its very offencive and its not appropriate. I dont want my teenage daughter seeing that and thinking its ok to act and dress like that.

====Advertiser Response====

It should be noted that the advertiser for this campaign was led by a mostly female team.

Complaint #1 Response:
- The females are in swimwear, not underwear as well as clothing
- There is no scene where the camera zooms in on her vagina or her bottom and she is not in
underwear, she is in swimwear
- There is no intended sexism in this advert nor is there an intention to display disrespect to women
- The girls are dancers and just like ballerinas wear leotards these girls have specific dance costumes

Complaint #2 Response:
- The female models were wearing swimwear not underwear
- Shots are choreographed as a dance sequence as apposed to close up shots on bottoms to which there are none - any close up shots are to represent the mood and/or highlight the product

Complaint #3 Response:
- The mens shots are full looks of styles suggested to wear with the product
- No element of this is sexist, the group are having fun together

== See Also ==

== References ==

[[Category:Advertising]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

Misandric Advertisements

2020-04-25T20:59:23Z

Mad cat: Created page with "Starting in 2002 (and as of late 2015), Australian based company, Voodoo released an ad marketing campaign featuring men being objectified, and to some extent, being abused. T..."

Starting in 2002 (and as of late 2015), Australian based company, Voodoo released an ad marketing campaign featuring men being objectified, and to some extent, being abused. The company is known to feature women wearing their products and dressing in provocative ways, strongly hinting at nudity without actually showing it. This series of advertising differed from their normal type of advertising, showing women having power and control over men to the point of humiliation and degradation.

==Images==
[[File:Voodoo_ad_1.jpg|300px]]
[[File:Voodoo_ad_2.jpg|300px]]
[[File:Voodoo_ad_3.jpg|300px]]

==Protest==

While men are capable of taking a joke when it is in good fun, the problem this presented was the double standard associated.

===Voodoo===
Voodoo's "men-on-leash" ad generated about 60 complaints to the Advertising Standards Bureau. All were dismissed. The ABS apparently appreciated the humour, reasoning: "This ad clearly intends to depict a tongue-in-cheek view of the well accepted right of a woman to be in control of her choices and her 'accessories'."[https://goat-scape.blogspot.com/2008/09/men-on-leash-reverse-sexism.html|1]

====[https://web.archive.org/web/20190313045755/http://www.womenagainstmen.com/advertising/advertising-standards-board-response-on-voodoo-complaint.html| Complaints]====
“I found the image of a woman walking along with two naked men on dog leashes on their hands and knees very offensive …sexist and derogatory …”

“It depicts men as animals and honestly puts the fight for gender equality back fifty years.”

“This ad is suggestive that men are dogs, are not worthy of wearing clothing and need to be tied to a woman who has the power. It also suggests that a woman can have more than one man. Both of these points contravene the social morays that are part of today’s society and involves discrimination of men as a lesser sex rather than as an equal.”

“This is a moral issue that degrades human value and worth, it brings humans down to the level of animals. For some of the elderly it may bring back memories of war and mistreatment as prisoners of war/slavery. This may also encourage the imagination of some in this direction/treatment of others.”

“If the advertisement was reversed and a male was ‘walking’ two females with a leash, I doubt that the advertisement would even be considered acceptable.”

“I strongly object to this ad’s being placed in the public view where my children were forced to view it today…It is clearly degrading to men to be depicted as some kind of sex slave.”

“Whether some may consider this demeaning to men or women is irrelevant I personally as an adult woman amjme with it … But I do know it has an impact on children. They are the issue.”

“Why do we seem to have one set of standards for women’s representation and another for men?”

“I genuinely feel distressed by seeing this…Such images one might expect in pornographic literature but should not be in the general viewing space.”

“I am greatly concerned of the possible impact this sign could have on impressionable persons. In my view, the sign is suggestive of a gross violation of dignity and of human rights and should not be seen in my country, Australia.”

“This kind of ultra feminism sends the totally wrong message to families where kids and young women think this is acceptable to treat men as ‘pets’ … it’s emasculating and derogatory and heel grinding.”

“I have two daughters aged 4 and 7 and I must ask them to close their eyes every time we pass it. I believe we should have the right to preserve the innocence of our children and not have this type of thing forced upon us.”

====Advertiser Response====

The Advertising Standards Board (‘the Board’) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (‘the Code’).

The Board considered that while some people clearly had different perceptions of the advertisement, it represented a satirical comment on a patriarchal world. It determined that, as such, the content of the advertisement did not contravene the Code in relation to either the portrayal of people or the portrayal of sex, sexuality and/or nudity. With the Board finding that the advertisement did not breach the Code on any other grounds, the complaint was dismissed.

===Windsor Smith===
[[File:Windsor_Smith_ad_1.gif|300px]]

In 2005, an ad depicting a woman wearing very little next to a man fully clothed was believed to be depicting oral sex. The Advertising Standards Board (“Board”) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (the “Code”).

The Board noted the complainants’ concerns that the advertisement objectifies women and is sexist in its depiction of them dressed in clothing similar to swimwear while the men are fully clothed, and features inappropriate close ups of a female backside which is not suitable for '''viewing by children'''. The Board noted the complainants’ concerns that it is sexist to show women half-dressed whilst the men are fully clothed. The Board noted that the advertisement is for shoes and considered that the depiction of women wearing swimwear or dancewear is not relevant to the advertised product. The Board noted however that the Code does not require that images of women are only used in relation to relevant products.

The Board determined that the advertisement didn't breach any section of the Code, and the complaints were dismissed. However, the billboard company stepped in and took the advert down. Note that while the Voodoo Hosiery was not taken down by the Board just like Windsor Smith, the billboard company did leave the Voodoo campaign up.

====[https://ms.adstandards.com.au/cases/0331-13.pdf| Complaints]====
# I am offended by the Men being fully clothed, whilst women are only wearing small underwear. I am particularly offended by two separate shots of a woman bent over, in her underwear, and the camera zooming in on her bum and vagina. I am offended by the sexism in this advert, and am also upset that it was played in the morning in front of my young girl. An utterly horrible display of disrespect to women, and a terrible example to my daughter.
# Women portrayed as sexual objects. Element of acceptable subjugation of women. Clad in underwear while men are fully dressed. Women objectified - faces often obscured. Poor rolemodel. Women portrayed as being useful to men but not empowered.
# I believe that the advertisement is inappropriate with half naked women bending over and prancing around. Its very offencive and its not appropriate. I dont want my teenage daughter seeing that and thinking its ok to act and dress like that.

====Advertiser Response====

It should be noted that the advertiser for this campaign was led by a mostly female team.

Complaint #1 Response:
- The females are in swimwear, not underwear as well as clothing
- There is no scene where the camera zooms in on her vagina or her bottom and she is not in
underwear, she is in swimwear
- There is no intended sexism in this advert nor is there an intention to display disrespect to women
- The girls are dancers and just like ballerinas wear leotards these girls have specific dance costumes

Complaint #2 Response:
- The female models were wearing swimwear not underwear
- Shots are choreographed as a dance sequence as apposed to close up shots on bottoms to which there are none - any close up shots are to represent the mood and/or highlight the product

Complaint #3 Response:
- The mens shots are full looks of styles suggested to wear with the product
- No element of this is sexist, the group are having fun together

== See Also ==

== References ==

[[Category:Advertising]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Misandry]]

File:Windsor Smith ad 1.gif

2020-04-25T20:20:45Z

Mad cat: Shoe ad believed to be depicting a blow job, which was removed for being offensive to women.

== Summary ==
Shoe ad believed to be depicting a blow job, which was removed for being offensive to women.

File:Voodoo ad 3.jpg

2020-04-25T20:07:32Z

Mad cat: Misandry ad featuring men being stepped on

== Summary ==
Misandry ad featuring men being stepped on

File:Voodoo ad 2.jpg

2020-04-25T20:06:35Z

Mad cat: Misandry ad featuring man being restrained and sat on.

== Summary ==
Misandry ad featuring man being restrained and sat on.

File:Voodoo ad 1.jpg

2020-04-25T20:04:00Z

Mad cat: Misandry ad featuring men as animals.

== Summary ==
Misandry ad featuring men as animals.

Joan-of-Arc feMRA

2020-04-20T02:40:50Z

Mad cat:

A '''Joan-of-Arc feMRA''' refers to a woman who claims to advocate for men and boys, but will only do so on the basis that she leads the charge and acts as men's official mouthpiece. Such women generally expect men to treat her with deference and big helpings of chivalry, and if needed, to act as a ready army of gophers who will do research, web design, phone calls and a myriad of other tasks that she delegates them. She does not tolerate men speaking in their own voice (i.e., not through her) unless she is interviewing them, and insists on controlling all matters related to policy and activism. Paradoxically, the Joan-of-Arc feMRA represents a mixture of gynocentrism, narcissism, and men's rights advocacy.

Joan-of-Arc feMRAs love the limelight and will take every opportunity to put a photo of themselves on prominent media pages, while declaring her self-importance in the role of 'Liberator Of Men'. Most Joan-of-Arc feMRAs will eventually fall out with the men they claim to represent when said men eventually call her out about her control issues, and she responds to the criticism like a raving termagant who spits the dummy and refuses to support men any more. A few will remain for quite some time due to the fact that they're female and men (even in the Men's Movement) will fall over backwards just for the opportunity to please her, ignoring the signs that she is more hateful than helpful. Said supporters will also attack anyone who dare suggest that she is anything less than they perceive her to be.

Fortunately, and mercifully, not all feMRAs are like that.

==References==

[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Glossary]]

Hoover

2020-04-18T02:27:24Z

Mad cat: /* Types */

''"With friends like these, who needs enemies."''

A '''Hoover''' is a person (often a woman, can be a guy) with narcissistic/behavioral personality disorder who, during (or after) a breakup, wants to get back together with their former lover.[https://shrink4men.com/2020/03/25/hoover-tactics-used-by-narcissists-and-borderlines-during-and-after-a-break-up/|1] The name Hoover is in reference to a famous vacuum cleaner brand. These narcissists are rather good at "sucking" a former lover back into a relationship.

== Causes ==

Narcissism is the pursuit of gratification from vanity or egotistic admiration of one's idealized self image and attributes.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism|2] Narcissist don't like to feel vulnerable or lonely, and the prospect of being out of a relationship scares them. Wanting to avoid feeling vulnerable, they will attempt to re-enter a relationship days or weeks after a break-up.

Hoovers can be the ones who break up the relationship, but is more likely their partner has due to it being a toxic and/or abusive relationship. They believe love to be unconditional, that their partners should love them automatically no matter what they do, or rather not hold them responsible for their actions.

===Five Fears===

The actions of a hoover ('''hoovering''') is caused by primitive psychological fears that existed long before the break-up occurred. Their fears are centered on one (or all) of five fears:

<ol>
<li>The fear of abandonment.</li>
<li>Loss of control over others.</li>
<li>Loss of resources (e.g., money, social status).</li>
<li>Feeling or appearing inferior or inadequate.</li>
<li>Public exposure.</li>
</ol>

== Symptoms ==

It is rather easy to determine a hoover. Your relationship with them is rather toxic and/or abusive. Nothing you do for them is good enough. When it they are once again single, their behavior changes and they become more agreeable. They may act more loving and kind towards their former partner, wanting another chance. They hope that by "changing", this will prove they deserve another chance. This change is short-term, and can last up to a year (at best) before they return back to their selfish ways. They will employ a series of manipulations to get their former lover back.

=== Honeymoon Phase ===

The '''Honeymoon Phase''' of a relationship is right at the beginning when things are new and exciting. It is more about lust and exploration than actual relationship building. Many relations continue on beyond this phase, but lose much of the connection experience during the Honeymoon Phase. This is also known as '''New Relationship Energy (NRE)'''.

When a Hoover manipulates their former lover in rekindling their romance, they may enter into a Honeymoon Phase once more, where the relationship is fun and exciting. During this phase, the hoover becomes the '''Nice Hoover''', and everything seems like it once was at the beginning of their relationship, improving over the negative aspects that led to the break-up to begin with. This can be seen with great sex, lavish gifts, or constant positive reinforcement.

The duration of the nice hoover is rather short, lasting a few months. Once the threat of break-up or divorce passes, they go back to their old ways by becoming their toxic selves once more. There is also a chance they become meaner as a result, resenting their partners for their need to please them for so long. Had their partner not tried to break up with them, they wouldn't have to work to keep them. They also hate being on their best behavior at all times and kissing up to anyone for any reason, even though they voluntarily did so to keep their partner.

== Types ==

=== Preemptive Hoover ===

A '''preemptive hoover''' is a narcissist who will see that the relationship is likely to end, and will do whatever they can to keep it from happening. This often results in a drastic change in personality, going from toxic to being nice. This can also be done through making promises of changing and doing extra actions to please their partner, whether it is giving a blow job or buying them gifts. Anything they can do to keep the relationship going.

A preemptive hoover might well be the first to admit that they are wrong for each other and they shouldn't continue on with their friends, but their fear of not being in a relationship outweighs all logic.

=== Delayed Hoovers ===

While most hoovers occur right before a break-up, or during; some hoovers can be a '''delayed hoover'''. A delayed hoover can return months or years after a relationship, likely that they just ended a relationship with someone (or are about to). Fearing being lonely, they go after someone they feel they can manipulate back into a relationship, indicating the time away has allowed them to change. They are likely to have done this with many of their exes until they find one that will take the bait.

=== The Personal Tragedy Hoover ===

The '''Personal Tragedy Hoover''', also known as The ''Something Bad Happened to Me'' Hoover, is one who uses some sort of tragedy to get sympathy for themselves in order to reinsert themselves into their former lover's life. This can be a legitimate tragedy, or a made up tragedy. The made-up tragedy can be form of [[Munchausen Syndrome]] as something they do themselves in order to get sympathy, or be an outright lie that they have some serious ailment. This can also be in the form of a fake pregnancy or pregnancy from a different man if they were cheating on their partner. The bad thing can also be rather mundane, such as they can't program the clock on their microwave.

This tactic is used as a fishing expedition. They may single one partner out or several, to see if any respond at all and if they show any kind of sympathy. Once there is two-way contact, the Hoover begins the sucking procedure.

=== Concerned Hoover ===

A variation on Personal Tragedy Hoover is the '''Concerned Hoover'''. The Concerned Hoover may show concern over a legitimate problem, but are just as likely to create a problem their partner has in order to show concern for them. This can be done by taking their actions to demonstrate they have a larger issue. Such as not responding to texts right away might be an indication their partner is angry with them, which could then mean they have anger issues and they want to help them get the help they need. This often employs [[Mental Gymnastics|mental gymnastics]] to go from something innocuous to grandiose, in order to show support for them that they are the caring type. If their partner disagrees, they can easily counter in anger that they were only trying to help.

The basic idea of the concerned hoover is to make one look bad either by being on the defensive or accept they have something wrong with them and need the hoover to set them right.

=== National Emergency Hoover ===

When tragedy strikes a person, their toxic ex hoovers their way back into their life. This might be from losing their job or being socially isolated due to the Coronavirus. Whatever tragedy befalls a person, the hoover does their best to try to be there for someone. Their former partner is under a lot of grief or likely depressed, and doesn't have their guard up. This allows a hoover to get back into their lives.

== See Also ==

[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Glossary]]
[[Category:Domestic Violence]]

Hoover

2020-04-18T02:24:20Z

Mad cat: /* The Something Bad Happened to Me Hoover */

Hoover

2020-04-18T02:03:41Z

Mad cat: /* Types */

Hoover

2020-04-18T02:01:24Z

Mad cat: /* Honeymoon Phase */

Hoover

2020-04-18T01:58:34Z

Mad cat: /* Causes */

Hoover

2020-04-18T01:57:05Z

Mad cat: /* Honeymoon Phase */

Hoover

2020-04-18T01:52:33Z

Mad cat:

Hoover

2020-04-18T01:19:01Z

Mad cat: /* See Also */

''"With friends like these, who needs enemies."''

A '''Hoover''' is a narcissistic person (often a woman, can be a guy) who, during (or after) a breakup and wants to get back together with their former lover.[https://shrink4men.com/2020/03/25/hoover-tactics-used-by-narcissists-and-borderlines-during-and-after-a-break-up/|1] The name Hoover is in reference to a famous vacuum cleaner brand. These narcissist are rather good at '''sucking''' a former lover back into a relationship.

== Causes ==

Narcissism is the pursuit of gratification from vanity or egotistic admiration of one's idealized self image and attributes.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism|2] Narcissist don't like to feel vulnerable or lonely, and the prospect of being out of a relationship scares them. Wanting to avoid feeling vulnerable, they will attempt to re-enter a relationship days or weeks after a break-up.

Hoovers can be the ones who break up the relationship, but is more likely their partner has.

===Five Fears===

The actions of a hoover ('''hoovering''') is caused by primitive psychological fears that existed long before the break-up occurred. Their fears are centered on one (or all) of five fears:

<ol>
<li>The fear of “abandonment.”</li>
<li>Loss of control over others.</li>
<li>Loss of resources (e.g., money, social status).</li>
<li>Feeling or appearing inferior or inadequate.</li>
<li>Public exposure.</li>
</ol>

== Symptoms ==

It is rather easy to determine a hoover. Your relationship with them is rather toxic, they are quite mean and undermine you every chance they get. Nothing you do for them is good enough. When it looks like the relationship is about to end, their behavior changes and they become more agreeable. They may act more loving and kind towards you. They want you to give them another chance, and the fact that they've changed their personality is indication they're ready to change. This change is short-term, and can last up to a year (at best) before they return back to their selfish ways.

During breakups, they are likely to try to convince you to get back together, often telling you what you want to hear or making promises to change.

== Types ==

=== Preemptive Hoover ===

A '''preemptive hoover''' is a narcissist who will see that the relationship is likely to end, and will do whatever they can to keep it from happening. This often results in a drastic change in personality, going from toxic to being nice. This can also be done through making promises of changing and doing extra actions to please their partner, whether it is giving a blow job or buying them gifts. Anything they can do to keep the relationship going.

A preemptive hoover might well be the first to admit that they are wrong for each other and they shouldn't continue on with their friends, but their fear of not being in a relationship outweighs all logic.

=== Delayed Hoovers ===

While most hoovers occur right before a break-up, or during; some hoovers can be a '''delayed hoover'''. A delayed hoover can return months or years after a relationship, likely that they just ended a relationship with someone (or are about to). Fearing being lonely, they go after someone they feel they can manipulate back into a relationship, indicating the time away has allowed them to change. They are likely to have done this with many of their exes until they find one that will take the bait.

== See Also ==

[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Glossary]]
[[Category:Domestic Violence]]

Hoover

2020-04-18T01:16:41Z

Mad cat:

Hoover

2020-04-18T01:15:57Z

Mad cat:

''"With friends like these, who needs enemies."''

A '''Hoover''' is a narcissistic person (often a woman, can be a guy) who, during (or after) a breakup and wants to get back together with their former lover.[https://shrink4men.com/2020/03/25/hoover-tactics-used-by-narcissists-and-borderlines-during-and-after-a-break-up/|1] The name Hoover is in reference to a famous vacuum cleaner brand. These narcissist are rather good at '''sucking''' a former lover back into a relationship.

=== Causes ===

Narcissism is the pursuit of gratification from vanity or egotistic admiration of one's idealized self image and attributes.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism|2] Narcissist don't like to feel vulnerable or lonely, and the prospect of being out of a relationship scares them. Wanting to avoid feeling vulnerable, they will attempt to re-enter a relationship days or weeks after a break-up.

Hoovers can be the ones who break up the relationship, but is more likely their partner has.

===Five Fears===

The actions of a hoover ('''hoovering''') is caused by primitive psychological fears that existed long before the break-up occurred. Their fears are centered on one (or all) of five fears:

<ol>
<li>The fear of “abandonment.”</li>
<li>Loss of control over others.</li>
<li>Loss of resources (e.g., money, social status).</li>
<li>Feeling or appearing inferior or inadequate.</li>
<li>Public exposure.</li>
</ol>

== Symptoms ==

It is rather easy to determine a hoover. Your relationship with them is rather toxic, they are quite mean and undermine you every chance they get. Nothing you do for them is good enough. When it looks like the relationship is about to end, their behavior changes and they become more agreeable. They may act more loving and kind towards you. They want you to give them another chance, and the fact that they've changed their personality is indication they're ready to change. This change is short-term, and can last up to a year (at best) before they return back to their selfish ways.

During breakups, they are likely to try to convince you to get back together, often telling you what you want to hear or making promises to change.

== Types ==

=== Preemptive Hoover ===

A '''preemptive hoover''' is a narcissist who will see that the relationship is likely to end, and will do whatever they can to keep it from happening. This often results in a drastic change in personality, going from toxic to being nice. This can also be done through making promises of changing and doing extra actions to please their partner, whether it is giving a blow job or buying them gifts. Anything they can do to keep the relationship going.

A preemptive hoover might well be the first to admit that they are wrong for each other and they shouldn't continue on with their friends, but their fear of not being in a relationship outweighs all logic.

=== Delayed Hoovers ===

While most hoovers occur right before a break-up, or during; some hoovers can be a '''delayed hoover'''. A delayed hoover can return months or years after a relationship, likely that they just ended a relationship with someone (or are about to). Fearing being lonely, they go after someone they feel they can manipulate back into a relationship, indicating the time away has allowed them to change. They are likely to have done this with many of their exes until they find one that will take the bait.

== See Also ==

[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Glossary]]

Hoover

2020-04-18T01:10:32Z

Mad cat:

''"With friends like these, who needs enemies."''

A '''Hoover''' is a narcissistic person (often a woman, can be a guy) who, during (or after) a breakup and wants to get back together with their former lover.[https://shrink4men.com/2020/03/25/hoover-tactics-used-by-narcissists-and-borderlines-during-and-after-a-break-up/|1] The name Hoover is in reference to a famous vacuum cleaner brand. These narcissist are rather good at '''sucking''' a former lover back into a relationship.

=== Causes ===

Narcissism is the pursuit of gratification from vanity or egotistic admiration of one's idealized self image and attributes.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism|2] Narcissist don't like to feel vulnerable or lonely, and the prospect of being out of a relationship scares them. Wanting to avoid feeling vulnerable, they will attempt to re-enter a relationship days or weeks after a break-up.

Hoovers can be the ones who break up the relationship, but is more likely their partner has.

===Five Fears===

The actions of a hoover ('''hoovering''') is caused by primitive psychological fears that existed long before the break-up occurred. Their fears are centered on one (or all) of five fears:

<ol>
<li>The fear of “abandonment.”</li>
<li>Loss of control over others.</li>
<li>Loss of resources (e.g., money, social status).</li>
<li>Feeling or appearing inferior or inadequate.</li>
<li>Public exposure.</li>
</ol>

== Symptoms ==

It is rather easy to determine a hoover. Your relationship with them is rather toxic, they are quite mean and undermine you every chance they get. Nothing you do for them is good enough. When it looks like the relationship is about to end, their behavior changes and they become more agreeable. They may act more loving and kind towards you. They want you to give them another chance, and the fact that they've changed their personality is indication they're ready to change. This change is short-term, and can last up to a year (at best) before they return back to their selfish ways.

During breakups, they are likely to try to convince you to get back together, often telling you what you want to hear or making promises to change.

== Types ==

== Preemptive Hoover ==

A '''preemptive hoover''' is a narcissist who will see that the relationship is likely to end, and will do whatever they can to keep it from happening.

A Hoover will generally do what they can to keep a relationship going, even beyond the point it should. It might even be apparent to a hoover that the relationship should end, but they will refuse to do so. If their lover does manage to end things, they will try to rekindle the relationship through a series of manipulations.

=== Delayed Hoovers ===

While most hoovers occur right before a break-up, or during; some hoovers can be a '''delayed hoover'''. A delayed hoover can return months or years after a relationship, likely that they just ended a relationship with someone (or are about to). Fearing being lonely, they go after someone they feel they can manipulate back into a relationship, indicating the time away has allowed them to change. They are likely to have done this with many of their exes until they find one that will take the bait.

== See Also ==

[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Glossary]]

Hoover

2020-04-18T00:56:38Z

Mad cat:

''"With friends like these, who needs enemies."''

A '''Hoover''' is a narcissistic person (often a woman, can be a guy) who becomes trigger during (or after) a breakup and wants to remain close to their former lover.[https://shrink4men.com/2020/03/25/hoover-tactics-used-by-narcissists-and-borderlines-during-and-after-a-break-up/|1] While it is possible to end on good terms with someone you date, a Hoover is someone that you tend to end on bad terms with.

The name Hoover is in reference to a famous vacuum cleaner brand. These narcissist are rather good at '''sucking''' a former lover back into a relationship.

=== Causes ===

Narcissism is the pursuit of gratification from vanity or egotistic admiration of one's idealized self image and attributes.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism|2] Narcissist don't like to feel vulnerable or lonely, and the prospect of being out of a relationship scares them. Wanting to avoid feeling vulnerable, they will attempt to re-enter a relationship. Often this is days or weeks after a break-up, but it can occur years after a relationship.

Hoovers can be the ones who break up the relationship, but is more likely their partner has. A Hoover will generally do what they can to keep a relationship going, even beyond the point it should. It might even be apparent to a hoover that the relationship should end, but they will refuse to do so. If their lover does manage to end things, they will try to rekindle the relationship through a series of manipulations.

===Five Fears===

The actions of a hoover ('''hoovering''') is caused by primitive psychological fears that existed long before the break-up occurred. Their fears are centered on one (or all) of five fears:

<ol>
<li>The fear of “abandonment.”</li>
<li>Loss of control over others.</li>
<li>Loss of resources (e.g., money, social status).</li>
<li>Feeling or appearing inferior or inadequate.</li>
<li>Public exposure.</li>
</ol>

== Links ==

== See Also ==

[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Glossary]]

Talk:Hoover

2020-04-17T06:11:27Z

Mad cat:

I plan on expanding this, just creating it right now.
-mad_cat

Talk:Hoover

2020-04-17T06:11:12Z

Mad cat: Created page with "I plan on expanding this, just creating it right now."

I plan on expanding this, just creating it right now.

Hoover

2020-04-17T06:10:42Z

Mad cat:

''"With friends like these, who needs enemies."''

A '''Hoover''' is a person (often a woman, can be a guy) who often after a relationship wants to remain close as friends.

== See Also ==

== References ==

[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Glossary]]

Hoover

2020-04-17T06:10:29Z

Mad cat:

"With friends like these, who needs enemies."

A '''Hoover''' is a person (often a woman, can be a guy) who often after a relationship wants to remain close as friends.

== See Also ==

== References ==

[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Glossary]]

Hoover

2020-04-17T06:05:54Z

Mad cat: Created page with ""With friends like these, who needs enemies." A [b]Hoover[/b] is a person (often a woman, can be a guy) who often after a relationship wants to remain close as friends. == S..."

"With friends like these, who needs enemies."

A [b]Hoover[/b] is a person (often a woman, can be a guy) who often after a relationship wants to remain close as friends.

== See Also ==

== References ==

[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:Glossary]]

Wiki 4 Men:Page Template

2019-10-27T04:11:40Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">

<nowiki>*</nowiki>NOTE: don't include this information in your article <br />
This page can be used as a template for page construction. Several levels of headers can be used for subtopics. Go to edit and copy the whole page and paste on your new page (saves you a lot of work).

Also use (see in edit) <ref>Things to reference</ref> which will automatically show up in References. You can also name them <ref name="ref">for easier reference</ref> so you just use the name again<ref name="ref" />, and again<ref name="ref" />, and again<ref name="ref" />.

Note the div style up top, that allows for all text to be justify, which gives a cleaner look.

Also, don't forget Category. Just follow the example below and set it to the best category you can think of. Most likely the perfect one already exists. If it doesn't, use the best one you can think of and another editor may change it if necessary. A good one for new articles is "Featured Articles".

== See Also ==

* Wikilinks go here.

== External Links ==

* Links to external sites go here:

== References ==
References will be placed here automatically. The ''References'' header above is needed or the references look odd.

[[Category:Wiki4Men]]

Wiki 4 Men:Page Template

2019-10-27T04:10:09Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">

<nowiki>*</nowiki>NOTE: don't include this information in your article <br />
This page can be used as a template for page construction. Several levels of headers can be used for subtopics. Go to edit and copy the whole page and paste on your new page (saves you a lot of work).

Also use (see in edit) <ref>Things to reference</ref> which will automatically show up in References. You can also name them <ref name="ref">for easier reference</ref> so you just use the name again<ref name="ref" />, and again<ref name="ref" />, and again<ref name="ref" />.

Note the div style up top, that allows for all text to be justify, which gives a cleaner look.

Also, don't forget Category. Just follow the example below and set it to the best category you can think of. Most likely the perfect one exists. If it doesn't, choose which one you think is best, and another editor may change it if necessary. A good one for new articles is "Featured Articles".

== See Also ==

* Wikilinks go here.

== External Links ==

* Links to external sites go here:

== References ==
References will be placed here automatically. The ''References'' header above is needed or the references look odd.

[[Category:Wiki4Men]]

Wiki 4 Men:Page Template

2019-10-27T03:55:23Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">

<nowiki>*</nowiki>NOTE: don't include this information in your article
This page can be used as a template for page construction. Several levels of headers can be used for subtopics. Go to edit and copy the whole page and paste on your new page (saves you a lot of work).

Also use (see in edit) <ref>Things to reference</ref> which will automatically show up in References. You can also name them <ref name="ref">for easier reference</ref> so you just use the name again<ref name="ref" />, and again<ref name="ref" />, and again<ref name="ref" />.

Note the div style up top, that allows for all text to be justify, which gives a cleaner look.

Also, don't forget Category. Just follow the example below and set it to the best category you can think of. Most likely the perfect one exists. If it doesn't, choose which one you think is best, and another editor may change it if necessary. A good one for new articles is "Featured Articles".

== See Also ==

* Wikilinks go here.

== External Links ==

* Links to external sites go here:

== References ==
References will be placed here automatically. The ''References'' header above is needed or the references look odd.

[[Category:Wiki4Men]]

Wiki 4 Men:Page Template

2019-10-27T03:51:40Z

Mad cat:

This page can be used as a template for page construction. Several levels of headers can be used for subtopics. Go to edit and copy the whole page and paste on your new page (saves you a lot of work).

Also use (see in edit) <ref>Things to reference</ref> which will automatically show up in References. You can also name them <ref name="ref">for easier reference</ref> so you just use the name again<ref name="ref" />, and again<ref name="ref" />, and again<ref name="ref" />.

== See Also ==

* Wikilinks go here.

== External Links ==

* Links to external sites go here:

== References ==
References will be placed here automatically. The ''References'' header above is needed or the references look odd.

[[Category:Wiki4Men]]

Wiki 4 Men:Page Template

2019-10-27T03:51:07Z

Mad cat:

This page can be used as a template for page construction. Several levels of headers can be used for subtopics. Go to edit and copy the whole page and paste on your new page (saves you a lot of work).

Also use (see in edit) <ref>Things to reference</ref> which will automatically show up in References. You can also name them <ref name="ref">for easier reference</ref> so you just use the name again<ref name="ref" />, and again<ref name="ref" />, and again<ref name="ref" />.

== See Also ==

* Wikilinks go here.

== External Links ==

* Links to external sites go here:

== References ==
{{Reflist}}
References will be placed here automatically. The ''References'' header above is needed or the references look odd.

[[Category:Wiki4Men]]

Wiki 4 Men:Policies and Guidelines

2019-10-27T03:43:50Z

Mad cat:

This wiki is managed by The [[Australian Men's Rights Association Inc]] & [[A Voice for Men]]. Decisions of management as to all aspects of the wiki, including configuration and content, are final.

Wiki4Men rejects gynocentric, misandric, and misogynistic narratives.

== See Also ==

*[[Wiki 4 Men:Privacy Policy]]

[[Category:Wiki4Men]]

Elizabeth Hobson

2019-10-27T03:10:03Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">

Elizabeth Hobson is a British anti-feminist, libertarian, and the Director of Communications for [[J4MB]]. Elizabeth is a mother of two boys, and currently studying for a BA in History and Politics at the Open University. She calls herself an anti-feminist Gender Equality Activist, and she’s worked with Trigger Warning, The Liberty Belles, and Ladies for Philip Davies, as well as being part of the organizing team for the [[March for Men]] / [[Messages for Men conference]] in London in 2017 and 2018. Her areas of particular interest include the family and [[Paternity|fathers’ rights]], [[Male genital mutilation|MGM]], [[Feminism]], and freedom. Elizabeth wants to end the Sex War – artificially constructed by feminists – and pursue a more just society based on [[Classical Liberal|classical liberal]] values such as liberty, equality, and meritocracy.

== External Links ==

=== Talks ===

*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tFKbGFBlBY Activating the Non-Feminist Sector at International Conference on Men's Issues 2018]
*[https://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/elizabeth-hobsons-speech-at-cambridge-university-video-and-transcript/ Speech at Cambridge University (video and transcript)]

== References ==

[[Category:Biographies]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:United Kingdom]]

Elizabeth Hobson

2019-10-27T03:09:38Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">

Elizabeth Hobson is a British anti-feminist, libertarian, and the Director of Communications for [[J4MB]]. Elizabeth is a mother of two boys, and currently studying for a BA in History and Politics at the Open University. She calls herself an anti-feminist Gender Equality Activist, and she’s worked with Trigger Warning, The Liberty Belles, and Ladies for Philip Davies, as well as being part of the organizing team for the [[March for Men]] / [[Messages for Men conference]] in London in 2017 and 2018. Her areas of particular interest include the family and [[Paternity|fathers’ rights]], [[Male genital mutilation|MGM]], [[Feminism]] and freedom. Elizabeth wants to end the Sex War – artificially constructed by feminists – and pursue a more just society based on [[Classical Liberal|classical liberal]] values such as liberty, equality, and meritocracy.

== External Links ==

=== Talks ===

*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tFKbGFBlBY Activating the Non-Feminist Sector at International Conference on Men's Issues 2018]
*[https://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/elizabeth-hobsons-speech-at-cambridge-university-video-and-transcript/ Speech at Cambridge University (video and transcript)]

== References ==

[[Category:Biographies]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]
[[Category:United Kingdom]]

Lovely Ladies of the Men's Movement

2019-10-27T03:04:19Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">
The Lovely Ladies of the Men's Movement was started by [[Modern Medusa]] and [[mad_cat]]. The intended goal was to demonstrate that many women do support the Men's Movement and raise awareness for issues that men face. They created the first ever calendar for the Men's Movement, Lovely Ladies for Men's Issues.

Note: Understand at the time the calendar was made, nothing was known of the character of the models that would be later revealed after the release of the calendar. They're only mentioned here due to their involvement.

==2018 Calendar==

Starting in 2017, the Modern Medusa and mad_cat, with the help of Reading Wren set about to create the first calendar for the Men's Movement. The calendar featured 12 women who gave active support of men, with each month dedicated to a men's issue and a fact.

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center; width: 200px; height: 200px; white-space:nowrap;" border="3"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Model
! scope="col" | Issue
|-
! scope="row" | January
| align="center" | [[Honey Badger Brigade|Anna Cherry]]
| align="center" | [[Education]]
|-
! scope="row" | February
| align="center" | Rachel Souza
| align="center" | [[Male Genital Mutilation]]
|-
! scope="row" | March
| align="center" | Shagrin
| align="center" | [[False Rape Accusation]]
|-
! scope="row" | April
| align="center" | [[Prim Reaper]]
| align="center" | [[Male Victim DV|Domestic Violence]]
|-
! scope="row" | May
| align="center" | [[Unvarnished Void]]
| align="center" | [[Homelessness]]
|-
! scope="row" | June
| align="center" | N/A*
| align="center" | [[Paternity Rights]]
|-
! scope="row" | July
| align="center" | Reading Wren
| align="center" | [[Mental Health (Veterans)|Veteran's Mental Health]]
|-
! scope="row" | August
| align="center" | Sassy Shelly
| align="center" | [[Paternity Rights (Custody)|Custody]] and [[Child Support]]
|-
! scope="row" | September
| align="center" | Stuttering Soliloquy
| align="center" | [[Workplace Environment]]
|-
! scope="row" | October
| align="center" | [[Modern Medusa]]
| align="center" | [[Prisoner's Rights]]
|-
! scope="row" | November
| align="center" | Based Mama
| align="center" | Other Men's Facts
|-
! scope="row" | December
| align="center" | Mercedes Carrera
| align="center" | [[Resources for Men]]
|}
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Does not want their name associated with the product any longer

===Barcroft===

Barcroft TV reached out to Modern Medusa to do a story about women in the Men's Movement. While it was great to get media attention for this and the Lovely Ladies could feature the calendar, this seemed more of a hit piece than trying to convey the good that this group was doing.

For instance, it was called "The Women Stripping Off - For Men’s Rights", strongly indicating that women were either whoring themselves off or getting naked in the name of Men's Rights (neither of which were true). No question was asked about men involved or any mention of co-founded mad_cat. They also edited footage to make Modern Medusa look ditzy, who was actually nervous due to this being her first interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnpbPH3jEB4

==2020 Calendar==

Soon to be released.

[[Category:Draft Articles]]
[[Category:Men's Rights]]
[[Category:Organisations]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]

Lovely Ladies of the Men's Movement

2019-10-26T17:25:52Z

Mad cat:

Lovely Ladies of the Men's Movement

2019-10-26T17:24:43Z

Mad cat: /* Barcroft */

<div style="text-align:justify;">
The Lovely Ladies of the Men's Movement was started by [[Modern Medusa]] and [[mad_cat]]. The intended goal was to demonstrate that many women do support the Men's Movement and raise awareness for issues that men face. They created the first ever calendar for the Men's Movement, Lovely Ladies for Men's Issues.

Note: Understand at the time the calendar was made, nothing was known of the character of the models that would be later revealed after the release of the calendar. They're only mentioned here due to their involvement.

==2018 Calendar==

Starting in 2017, the Modern Medusa and mad_cat, with the help of Reading Wren set about to create the first calendar for the Men's Movement. The calendar featured 12 women who gave active support of men, with each month dedicated to a men's issue and a fact.

===Barcroft===

Barcroft TV reached out to Modern Medusa to do a story about women in the Men's Movement. While it was great to get media attention for this and the Lovely Ladies could feature the calendar, this seemed more of a hit piece than trying to convey the good that this group was doing.

For instance, it was called "The Women Stripping Off - For Men’s Rights", strongly indicating that women were either whoring themselves off or getting naked in the name of Men's Rights (neither of which were true). No question was asked about men involved or any mention of co-founded mad_cat. They also edited footage to make Modern Medusa look ditzy, who was actually nervous due to this being her first interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnpbPH3jEB4

==Months==

{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center; width: 200px; height: 200px; white-space:nowrap;" border="3"
|-
! scope="col" |
! scope="col" | Model
! scope="col" | Issue
|-
! scope="row" | January
| align="center" | [[Honey Badger Brigade|Anna Cherry]]
| align="center" | [[Education]]
|-
! scope="row" | February
| align="center" | Rachel Souza
| align="center" | [[Male Genital Mutilation]]
|-
! scope="row" | March
| align="center" | Shagrin
| align="center" | [[False Rape Accusation]]
|-
! scope="row" | April
| align="center" | [[Prim Reaper]]
| align="center" | [[Male Victim DV|Domestic Violence]]
|-
! scope="row" | May
| align="center" | [[Unvarnished Void]]
| align="center" | [[Homelessness]]
|-
! scope="row" | June
| align="center" | N/A*
| align="center" | [[Paternity Rights]]
|-
! scope="row" | July
| align="center" | Reading Wren
| align="center" | [[Mental Health (Veterans)|Veteran's Mental Health]]
|-
! scope="row" | August
| align="center" | Sassy Shelly
| align="center" | [[Paternity Rights (Custody)|Custody]] and [[Child Support]]
|-
! scope="row" | September
| align="center" | Stuttering Soliloquy
| align="center" | [[Workplace Environment]]
|-
! scope="row" | October
| align="center" | [[Modern Medusa]]
| align="center" | [[Prisoner's Rights]]
|-
! scope="row" | November
| align="center" | Based Mama
| align="center" | Other Men's Facts
|-
! scope="row" | December
| align="center" | Mercedes Carrera
| align="center" | [[Resources for Men]]
|}
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Does not want their name associated with the product any longer

[[Category:Men's Rights Groups]]

==2020 Calendar==

Soon to be released.

Feminist Movies

2019-10-26T13:03:40Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">
{{Citation needed}}

In the past, an actual Feminist movie was few and far between, that they were more independent art films or were box office failures. Now in the woke culture, Hollywood has been trying to shoehorn Feminism in as many places as possible, whether they are sneaking it in or being overt about it. When said movie does poorly, it is often blamed on male audience for being sexist and they give no consideration that the movie is actually bad, even when women comment on how bad it is. Some have even preemptively tried to paint males as sexist before the movie comes out, likely as a means to protect themselves in the public eye. Who needs talent when you can just blame men?

What's hilarious about all of this is men have been proven to be the money behind the market in the movie industry, especially in the US. To now have movies with Feminism in them to try to appeal to women and shame men, seems as if Hollywood wants to go bankrupt. Feminists in general don't have money, and if they do they want it to go to Feminist causes. To spend money on a movie or other media is laughable at best..

==Common Themes==

===Patriarchy is Evil===
Generally these movies have some element of Patriarchy, a system designed by men for the subjugation of women. This can be seen as a military training leader telling a woman she can't be good enough or a politician demeaning a female character.

Most notably the Suffragettes movie.

===Double Standards Benefit Women===
If a man does something bad to a woman, it's proof of sexism and any number of bigotry. He's automatically evil. If a woman does the same thing to a man, she's regarded a hero, she is cheered for... or at the very least, it is easily dismissed.

For example, if a man forces himself to have sex with a woman (without consent), it is regarded as the worst thing a man can do. However, in the movie 40 Days and 40 Nights, a male character chained himself to a bed so he wouldn't have any way to have sex (which included masturbation), his ex-girlfriend manages to have sex with him while he is sleeping. Given how our culture (except the Men's Movement) doesn't consider "[[Male Rape|forced to penetrate]]" as actual rape, it makes sense why no Feminists has ever criticized this scene.

Another example is the movie My Super Ex-Girlfriend, that had a man done everything G-Girl had done, he'd be seen as the worst man ever.

===Weak Males Make Strong Females===
Very often in films, in order for a female to stand out in the film, all the other male characters automatically have to be weak, whether in actual strength or in intelligence. Only women can solve the problem of the story and no one can do what she can do.

In the 2016 Ghostbusters remake, Chris Hemsworth character (gender flip of Jeanine from original) was impossibly stupid. This was likely done to make the female ghostbusters standout more, but to show how much more evil the Big Bad Male was when the actor started to act smart.

===Men Are Expendable===
While this has been true in the entire film history, this is more true in Feminist movies. Rarely do female characters die, and if they do, it's important to all the characters. Most often when a man dies, it is often needless, and rarely does anyone reflect on it, unless they are very critical to the plot, such as Tony Stark in the MCU, a whole scene is dedicated to his funeral.

This also addresses that women automatically have the audience sympathy whereas male characters must work for [[Empathy Gap|empathy]]. Generally women are only hated by audience if they are against another female character or kills off a sympathetic male that has earned empathy, but said female character can be redeemed quickly.

===Female Abusers are Justified===
This is a trope that has always existed in film history. If a woman does something violent, it's because events have caused her to be violent. However, no matter what reason a man has (even if defending himself), a man who abuses a woman is automatically evil. This is true to life.

This can also be played that women are automatically innocent, or need to be handled gently. Such as V for Vendetta, the one woman V kills, he shows her grace and dignity that was not shown to anyone else, even though she was the scientist of the experiment.

Perhaps the most common act is a woman slapping a man.

This includes rape. A woman who rapes a male is not actually a rapist, because either
* Rape can only be done by the powerful against the weak (Men against women)
* Rape requires penetration, and thus women have no penetrating genital (though men can still be rapists for use of tongue, fingers, or other objects used for penetration)

This reasoning is bullshit is so many ways, which extends that male on male rape is not taken seriously, and forced to penetrate is not taken seriously. Moreover, a woman raping a woman (or a girl) is also not taken seriously. It simply comes down to, Men can't be victims, women can't be perpetrators.

===Males Are Flat, Females Are Round===
Regarding how men change throughout the story, females are more likely to change throughout a story and males are not. If a male does have any character development, it's generally saved for the ending and often as an embarrassment that he was wrong about everything. If a male character is allowed to be round, it's only done to bolster female characters.

===All Males Are Pervs, No Woman is a Slut===
A man who wants sex automatically makes him a pervert, despite of course that most humans desire sex. However, if a girl desires sex, she is seen as being pure in her desire. If a man has lots of sex, he's seen as a player. If a woman has lots of sex, she is seen as being empowered.

==Movies==

===Frozen (2010)===

===Jailbait (2014)===

===Suffragettes (2015)===

===Star Wars - The Force Awakens (2015)===

===Ghostbuster (2016)===

===Star Wars - The Last Jedi (2017)===

===Overboard (2018)===

===Terminator - Dark Fate (2019)===

Just like Ghostbusters (2016), this is a slap in the face to the entire franchise and its fans. Within minutes, the film kills off John Connor, who has been important to all the films. Sarah Connor survives this, but is given no time to grieve or grow as a character, he is just easily forgotten. Given the strong Feminist influence of the rest of the movie, it's like the movie is saying that we don't need strong white males at all, unless they're robots.

A hero from the future, a woman, beats up a bunch of cops and takes men's clothing. In Terminator 3, the T-X model took female clothing as a way to blend in. In DF, it's like it is telling us that a woman can do anything a man can do by taking men's clothes and thus men are not needed at all. If there wasn't strong Feminists influences in this film, this could easily be dismissed. Given this is a Feminist film, it only adds to the Feminists message.

As far as why the chosen-one-heroine is being killed, this isn't revealed until later in the film. Primarily this is done so Sarah Connor can look at her as just an incubator for a future leader, much like she was. However, Sarah's role in the franchise was more as just a mother but as a woman who trained John to be the man he grew up to be. It seems now that Sarah has problem with this and the idea that this woman can only be a womb for some man seems idiotic. Sarah herself is proof that women can still be badass and in Terminator 2 she really demonstrated that. The future heroine should have explained it right away instead of having this anti-female message in the film. In many ways, this denigrates motherhood itself and that the only way a woman can be important is to kick ass person. Most people love a female who can kickass, but most people also don't look down on motherhood either. The fact that people saw Sarah Connor as both should have said something about our culture.

Surprisingly, this movie is anti-Masculinity and anti-Femininity. Can't have male heroes, but women must act like men to save the day. This wouldn't be an issue of a female acting more masculine, such as Brienne of Tarth from Game of Thrones, so long as there is representation of masculine males and feminine females, with room of a feminine male (Samwell Tarly). However, DF over compensates on not needing males to the point that they erase what makes women... women.

You can watch David Cullen's review here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEvwz2eVbek].

===Star Wars - The Rise of Skywalker (2019)===

fsasdsfafa

[[Category: Movies]][[Category: Opinion]]

Jordan Peterson

2019-10-26T08:26:17Z

Mad cat:

<div style="text-align:justify;">

Jordan Peterson is a highly experienced professor of psychology as well as being a clinical psychologist, having spent more than 20 years as a clinical and teaching psychologist. At the time of writing (5/2019) he is a lecturer at the University of Toronto, Canada.

Peterson specialises in Psychopharmacology, Abnormal Psychology, Neurology, Social Performance, Industrial and Organisational Psychology, as well as Religious Psychology and Creativity along with, more relevantly to his current work, the psychology of Ideology, Personality and Politics.

Peterson's work has been cited in academic papers more than 8,000 times and he has written or been co-author on more than a hundred academic papers and is highly regarded in his field.

Peterson came to prominence in the media over his supposed "refusal" to use gender neutral pronouns. This was something of an inaccurate description and reporting on his stance was particularly poorly covered in general. He did not in fact refuse to use gender neutral pronouns as was widely reported but instead was protesting the fact that with bill C-16, the Canadian government was in fact compelling speech.

This first came to the attention of the media after 27/9/2016 when Peterson released the first in a series of video lectures entitled "Professor against political correctness: Part I: Fear and the Law". In that lecture, he stated that he refused to use gender neutral pronouns on the grounds that his speech was being compelled by law, something that had never before been done in any western government, nor in the entire history of English Common Law and was furthermore something that he was vehemently opposed to. Bill C-16, which proposed to add "gender identity or expression" to the list of prohibited discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act, and to similarly expand the definitions of promoting genocide and publicly inciting hatred in the Criminal Code. Bill C-16 did subsequently pass and is now law in Canada, although Professor Peterson has not (yet) been prosecuted for his views but his objections have not gone unpunished. For example In April 2017, Peterson was denied a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) grant for the first time in his career, a development which he interpreted as retaliation for his statements regarding Bill C-16.

As of the date of writing, Peterson has published 2 books. The first, "Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief " in 1999 and his latest book "12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos" in 2018. On the back of "12 Rules for Life", he has conducted speaking tours of the US, UK, and Australia, as well as several other western nations, usually to sold out audiences.

==Crying==
An interview released October 9th on RexTV had a weeping Jordan Peterson. While not a big deal unto itself, many made it a big deal citing that a man crying is a sign of weakness. Most surprising is that this didn't come just from Feminists, but many of those that criticized Feminists.

It appears that while many are anti-Feminist, they still fall back on tired tropes that men can't cry. Many speculate that it is the stress of being in the limelight and the harassment he receives. The fact that a documentry about him was protested in various cities, and the hate he receives on Twitter. More than that was his depression to anti-depressents once learning that his wife had cancer and his coming out of rehab prior to the interview.

Even if all of that wasn't on his plate, it seems that so few are willing to give men any consideration or benefit of the doubt when it comes to showing emotions. We criticize Feminists for the slogan "I Drink Male Tears" or the criticism that men talking about their problems takes away from women. This however is worse because a male icon is showing emotions, something that everyone claims they want and yet so many take the chance to hit a man when he's down.

== External Links ==

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_to_amend_the_Canadian_Human_Rights_Act_and_the_Criminal_Code Bill C-16]

[[Category:Biographies]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]

Jordan Peterson

2019-10-26T08:25:44Z

Mad cat:

Jordan Peterson is a highly experienced professor of psychology as well as being a clinical psychologist, having spent more than 20 years as a clinical and teaching phycologist. At the time of writing (5/2019) he is a lecturer at the University of Toronto, Canada.

Peterson specialises in Psychopharmacology, Abnormal Psychology, Neurology, Social Performance, Industrial and Organisational Psychology, as well as Religious Psychology and Creativity along with, more relevantly to his current work, the psychology of Ideology, Personality and Politics.

Peterson's work has been cited in academic papers more than 8,000 times and he has written or been co-author on more than a hundred academic papers and is highly regarded in his field.

Peterson came to prominence in the media over his supposed "refusal" to use gender neutral pronouns. This was something of an inaccurate description and reporting on his stance was particularly poorly covered in general. He did not in fact refuse to use gender neutral pronouns as was widely reported but instead was protesting the fact that with bill C-16, the Canadian government was in fact compelling speech.

This first came to the attention of the media after 27/9/2016 when Peterson released the first in a series of video lectures entitled "Professor against political correctness: Part I: Fear and the Law". In that lecture, he stated that he refused to use gender neutral pronouns on the grounds that his speech was being compelled by law, something that had never before been done in any western government, nor in the entire history of English Common Law and was furthermore something that he was vehemently opposed to. Bill C-16, which proposed to add "gender identity or expression" to the list of prohibited discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act, and to similarly expand the definitions of promoting genocide and publicly inciting hatred in the Criminal Code. Bill C-16 did subsequently pass and is now law in Canada, although Professor Peterson has not (yet) been prosecuted for his views but his objections have not gone unpunished. For example In April 2017, Peterson was denied a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) grant for the first time in his career, a development which he interpreted as retaliation for his statements regarding Bill C-16.

As of the date of writing, Peterson has published 2 books. The first, "Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief " in 1999 and his latest book "12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos" in 2018. On the back of "12 Rules for Life", he has conducted speaking tours of the US, UK, and Australia, as well as several other western nations, usually to sold out audiences.

==Crying==
An interview released October 9th on RexTV had a weeping Jordan Peterson. While not a big deal unto itself, many made it a big deal citing that a man crying is a sign of weakness. Most surprising is that this didn't come just from Feminists, but many of those that criticized Feminists.

It appears that while many are anti-Feminist, they still fall back on tired tropes that men can't cry. Many speculate that it is the stress of being in the limelight and the harassment he receives. The fact that a documentry about him was protested in various cities, and the hate he receives on Twitter. More than that was his depression to anti-depressents once learning that his wife had cancer and his coming out of rehab prior to the interview.

Even if all of that wasn't on his plate, it seems that so few are willing to give men any consideration or benefit of the doubt when it comes to showing emotions. We criticize Feminists for the slogan "I Drink Male Tears" or the criticism that men talking about their problems takes away from women. This however is worse because a male icon is showing emotions, something that everyone claims they want and yet so many take the chance to hit a man when he's down.

== External Links ==

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_to_amend_the_Canadian_Human_Rights_Act_and_the_Criminal_Code Bill C-16]

[[Category:Biographies]]
[[Category:Featured Articles]]

Feminist Movies

2019-10-26T00:17:54Z

Mad cat: /* Movies */

<div style="text-align:justify;">
In the past, an actual Feminist movie was few and far between, that they were more independent art films or were box office failures. Now in the woke culture, Hollywood has been trying to shoehorn Feminism in as many places as possible, whether they are sneaking it in or being overt about it. When said movie does poorly, it is often blamed on male audience for being sexist and they give no consideration that the movie is actually bad, even when women comment on how bad it is. Some have even preemptively tried to paint males as sexist before the movie comes out, likely as a means to protect themselves in the public eye. Who needs talent when you can just blame men?

What's hilarious about all of this is men have been proven to be the money behind the market in the movie industry, especially in the US. To now have movies with Feminism in them to try to appeal to women and shame men, seems as if Hollywood wants to go bankrupt. Feminists in general don't have money, and if they do they want it to go to Feminist causes. To spend money on a movie or other media is laughable at best..

==Common Themes==

===Patriarchy is Evil===
Generally these movies have some element of Patriarchy, a system designed by men for the subjugation of women. This can be seen as a military training leader telling a woman she can't be good enough or a politician demeaning a female character.

Most notably the Suffragettes movie.

===Double Standards Benefit Women===
If a man does something bad to a woman, it's proof of sexism and any number of bigotry. He's automatically evil. If a woman does the same thing to a man, she's regarded a hero, she is cheered for... or at the very least, it is easily dismissed.

For example, if a man forces himself to have sex with a woman (without consent), it is regarded as the worst thing a man can do. However, in the movie 40 Days and 40 Nights, a male character chained himself to a bed so he wouldn't have any way to have sex (which included masturbation), his ex-girlfriend manages to have sex with him while he is sleeping. Given how our culture (except the Men's Movement) doesn't consider "[[Male Rape|forced to penetrate]]" as actual rape, it makes sense why no Feminists has ever criticized this scene.

Another example is the movie My Super Ex-Girlfriend, that had a man done everything G-Girl had done, he'd be seen as the worst man ever.

===Weak Males Make Strong Females===
Very often in films, in order for a female to stand out in the film, all the other male characters automatically have to be weak, whether in actual strength or in intelligence. Only women can solve the problem of the story and no one can do what she can do.

In the 2016 Ghostbusters remake, Chris Hemsworth character (gender flip of Jeanine from original) was impossibly stupid. This was likely done to make the female ghostbusters standout more, but to show how much more evil the Big Bad Male was when the actor started to act smart.

===Men Are Expendable===
While this has been true in the entire film history, this is more true in Feminist movies. Rarely do female characters die, and if they do, it's important to all the characters. Most often when a man dies, it is often needless, and rarely does anyone reflect on it, unless they are very critical to the plot, such as Tony Stark in the MCU, a whole scene is dedicated to his funeral.

This also addresses that women automatically have the audience sympathy whereas male characters must work for [[Empathy Gap|empathy]]. Generally women are only hated by audience if they are against another female character or kills off a sympathetic male that has earned empathy, but said female character can be redeemed quickly.

===Female Abusers are Justified===
This is a trope that has always existed in film history. If a woman does something violent, it's because events have caused her to be violent. However, no matter what reason a man has (even if defending himself), a man who abuses a woman is automatically evil. This is true to life.

This can also be played that women are automatically innocent, or need to be handled gently. Such as V for Vendetta, the one woman V kills, he shows her grace and dignity that was not shown to anyone else, even though she was the scientist of the experiment.

Perhaps the most common act is a woman slapping a man.

This includes rape. A woman who rapes a male is not actually a rapist, because either
* Rape can only be done by the powerful against the weak (Men against women)
* Rape requires penetration, and thus women have no penetrating genital (though men can still be rapists for use of tongue, fingers, or other objects used for penetration)

This reasoning is bullshit is so many ways, which extends that male on male rape is not taken seriously, and forced to penetrate is not taken seriously. Moreover, a woman raping a woman (or a girl) is also not taken seriously. It simply comes down to, Men can't be victims, women can't be perpetrators.

===Males Are Flat, Females Are Round===
Regarding how men change throughout the story, females are more likely to change throughout a story and males are not. If a male does have any character development, it's generally saved for the ending and often as an embarrassment that he was wrong about everything. If a male character is allowed to be round, it's only done to bolster female characters.

===All Males Are Pervs, No Woman is a Slut===
A man who wants sex automatically makes him a pervert, despite of course that most humans desire sex. However, if a girl desires sex, she is seen as being pure in her desire. If a man has lots of sex, he's seen as a player. If a woman has lots of sex, she is seen as being empowered.

==Movies==

===Frozen (2010)===

===Jailbait (2014)===

===Suffragettes (2015)===

===Star Wars - The Force Awakens (2015)===

===Ghostbuster (2016)===

===Star Wars - The Last Jedi (2017)===

===Overboard (2018)===

===Terminator - Dark Fate (2019)===

Just like Ghostbusters (2016), this is a slap in the face to the entire franchise and its fans. Within minutes, the film kills off John Connor, who has been important to all the films. Sarah Connor survives this, but is given no time to grieve or grow as a character, he is just easily forgotten. Given the strong Feminist influence of the rest of the movie, it's like the movie is saying that we don't need strong white males at all, unless they're robots.

A hero from the future, a woman, beats up a bunch of cops and takes men's clothing. In Terminator 3, the T-X model took female clothing as a way to blend in. In DF, it's like it is telling us that a woman can do anything a man can do by taking men's clothes and thus men are not needed at all. If there wasn't strong Feminists influences in this film, this could easily be dismissed. Given this is a Feminist film, it only adds to the Feminists message.

As far as why the chosen-one-heroine is being killed, this isn't revealed until later in the film. Primarily this is done so Sarah Connor can look at her as just an incubator for a future leader, much like she was. However, Sarah's role in the franchise was more as just a mother but as a woman who trained John to be the man he grew up to be. It seems now that Sarah has problem with this and the idea that this woman can only be a womb for some man seems idiotic. Sarah herself is proof that women can still be badass and in Terminator 2 she really demonstrated that. The future heroine should have explained it right away instead of having this anti-female message in the film. In many ways, this denigrates motherhood itself and that the only way a woman can be important is to kick ass person. Most people love a female who can kickass, but most people also don't look down on motherhood either. The fact that people saw Sarah Connor as both should have said something about our culture.

Surprisingly, this movie is anti-Masculinity and anti-Femininity. Can't have male heroes, but women must act like men to save the day. This wouldn't be an issue of a female acting more masculine, such as Brienne of Tarth from Game of Thrones, so long as there is representation of masculine males and feminine females, with room of a feminine male (Samwell Tarly). However, DF over compensates on not needing males to the point that they erase what makes women... women.

You can watch David Cullen's review here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEvwz2eVbek].

===Star Wars - The Rise of Skywalker (2019)===

fsasdsfafa

Feminist Movies

2019-10-26T00:06:54Z

Mad cat: /* Terminator - Dark Fate (2019) */

Feminist Movies

2019-10-26T00:06:29Z

Mad cat: /* Movies */