Syndicate
Special Thanks To...
The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
Police Arrest Men for ‘Manspreading’
Submitted by Mastodon on Fri, 2015-05-29 14:49
Story here. Excerpt:
'New York police allegedly arrested two men for “manspreading” (sitting with their legs far apart) on the subway, according to a report entitled “That’s How They Get You” released by the Police Reform Organizing Project. “On a recent visit to the arraignment part in Brooklyn’s criminal court, PROP volunteers observed that police officers had arrested two Latino men on the charge of ‘man spreading’ on the subway, presumably because they were taking up more than one seat and therefore inconveniencing other riders,” the report states. Metro Transit Authority rules ban people from taking up more than one seat “in a station, platform or conveyance when to do so would interfere or tend to interfere with the operation of the Authority’s transit system or the comfort of other passengers.”
...
Now there’s no doubt that some dude taking up enough room for two people on a crowded train is annoying — but the report claims that the arrests occurred late at night, when the train probably would have been pretty empty: “Before issuing an [adjournment contemplating dismissal] for both men, the judge expressed her skepticism about the charge because of the time of the arrests: ‘12:11AM, I can’t believe there were many people on the subway.”'
- Log in to post comments
Comments
An arrest excuse
That's what this law is, nothing more. Since subway seats are only about as wide as half the typical man's backside, he can only be "manspreading" as he sits. Basically, men are outlawed from subways, and I reckon it's principally nonwhite men late at night the police are likely to arrest.
Jim Crow, version 2. Feminists are sticking well with their tradition of getting gov't to single out nonwhite men for persecution first, then white men second. Just like the 19th century, all over again.
...and it begins.
how much further will this SHIT be allowed to go, lads?
how much further are you going to let it go?
do you honestly not see the historical parallels to what is happening to your gender? do you not realise where this will all lead?
do you not see the "logical conclusion"?
are you all in denial? 'seems like you are.
seriously. i do not ask this rhetorically, and i don't care if i am banned for asking, this so often.
without the usual excuses i hear from you chaps, i ask again...;
how much further are you going to let it go?
HOW MUCH FURTHER??
do you think this will resolve itself? well it won't.
do you think "others" will do it for you? well, they won't.
do you truly NOT see the writing, on the proverbial wall?
do you know what time it is?
get mad at me if you like, for saying all this. if i were you, i'd be a bit cross, as well. and i understand that.
but i honestly do not think you blokes know what is REALLY happening.
and how soon it will be here.
because it's here now!
there's still (a little) time to act. but it depends on how much further you are all willing to let this go.
HOW MUCH FURTHER??
...
maybe this is the answer...
Sorry for the tirade, but i am frightened when i see this sort of abuse of law and disregard for the constitution and human rights.
i mean i am frightened !! literally!
i am frightened for my "brothers". and i am frightened for myself, as well.
but not so much as i am for my "brothers".
they're coming for YOU, my brothers.
it's only a matter of time, 'til they come for me and my "sisters".
all the above is why i get so upset.
however. i may have found an answer to my question.
here is the link; http://www.angryharry.com/esNoMensGroups.htm?note
again, i apologise.
but when i say this all frightens me, i mean it.
it truly does.
...
Some of us have been trying for years
A lot of us have been trying to do something about men's issues for years, but it's hard to have our concerns taken seriously or to get any traction, despite the reasonable nature of our concerns.
Banned??
You, Erika?? Hard to see when unless you went totally nuts one day and started violating what few rulez MANN does have. Unlike feminist and certain other sites, getting banned from MANN takes a lot of work. The low-down on sanctioning of commenters and why it might happen is here: http://news.mensactivism.org/?q=node/24025.
yikes!
...i would never do any of those things!
i guess, i'm okay, then.
but still i'm sorry for my tirade.
i'm not sorry for my passion behind it, but for the harsh words towards those who face enough harshness, as it is.
sorry, guys. we're all frustrated with the garbage that is happening, and it reaches a boiling point. this one, just put me over the top.
such a blatant violation of rights.
but at least i have an excuse! i'm a GIRL!!
(hey, it works for the feminists.... lol...!!)
....
sorry....
mens_issues, i'm sorry.
i know. i really do. and it is, indeed, frustrating.
that's why i get so emotional, on the issue. though i'm female, i see the violations of my fellow human beings basic human, civil and constitutional rights, and the lack of credibility and credence it is given. and it's infuriating!
what frustrates me most is that i feel very alone as a female MRA, because female voices are so scarce!
there are many male voices when it comes to being vocal for women. but so FEW female voices for the rights of men! which is rather telling, in and of itself, eh, what?
i do apologise, though. i honestly do.
...if it's any consolation, i learned this morning, that i'm being "investigated" (again) by some online feminists, for my website.
...guess i must be doing SOMETHING right! lol...!!
.
another view
I think most would agree that third wave feminism and is critique's of gender is toxic.
Second wave feminism -- initially intended only for equal right (but oddly, without equal obligations) might straddle a line: good and bad aspects.
But one thing is clear: the second wave became a tsunami as a result of "consciousness raising groups" in the 70's and 80's.
Women spoke
Women wrote
Women thought
While many men (and women) criticized it, NO ONE issued the statements "you guys are talking too much: DO SOMETHING"
Because it was generally understood that it was a consciousness raising period.
Men are now in that phase of consciousness raising.
But there are several unique obstacles that are thwarting the coalescence of the MRA into action: obstacles different from what faced women.
First, feminism itself is fighting men. Feminists control the language and any attempt to unify men is often met with: accusations of misogyny, statements that women had to "deal with it" for hundreds of years (a comment that itself is vague and does not recognize male sacrifice for women).
Second, the internet. The MRA is rising on the internet, but the internet brings a feeling of immediacy: that just because one sees the neurotic excess of feminism in sites like this one, or AVfM, that everyone should be horrified into "immediate" action. But the fact is that it is really not an immediate awareness to everyone. The delusion of the internet makes people think it is.
Third, men. I have to say I still remain shocked when men comment on reports of teacher/student sex when the teacher is male: e.g.: "I would have loved to have been raped by a teacher that looked like that."
These obstacles are very different from what confronted women. And I suppose that the period of "consciousness raising" will take longer. More so now, and perhaps this is a FOURTH reason: women censor the media in many ways. They write the editorials, the refuse to recognize the MRA and, most insidiously, I suspect that those who delete posts on media websites like CNN or abcnews, are often female (note as an aside that women now control the dept. of education and the title9 policies).
So it will take a longer time to rise beyond the consciousness raising.
The one thing we cannot do is fight each other. That is suicide.
We MUST keep talking. I do it a lot now.
I do note that accusations of too much talk are mostly leveled by feminists and represent a passive aggressive attempt to stop the discussion by alluding to the impotency of "just talk."
HOWEVER
Erika's intentions are very good and are in a different category than those of feminists who say the same thing. So it is critical to disambiguate.
As an aside...
I just saw the movie "Tomorrowland," and I made sure to point out to everyone there, that, yes, there was a female lead and that is good. But those killed -- the hamburgers -- were all men. Also at the end of the movie, images of about 20 "future citizens" were shown: not ONE SINGLE WHITE MALE.