For a while there, there was an awful debate on Wikipedia on whether Thomas Ball even deserved a wiki entry. I’m glad to see it resolved, but I’m weary as to how the article will be treated from now on. Edit: then it was deleted.
The talk pages were deleted, sadly also. But you’ll see from the discussion on the Wikipedia Misandry and Men’s Rights talk pages that Wikipedia (or atleast, certain determined editors) is not all that fond of the expression of men’s right’s issues.
The language and sources used in this article feel somewhat anti-feminist. It’s a string of examples of people “identifying” misandry in feminism, and I think it reflects rather poorly as a result. People often take wikipedia at face value, so thhis kind of language is dangerous. The last thing we need to do is reinforce public bias against feminism.
One person says, and in reply:
Yet you’re happy to reinforce public bias in favour of feminism, judging by what is allowed and what you dismiss from the ‘feminist’ wiki pages. You remove legitimate references to instances where feminists have systematically demanded preferential treatment of women at the expense of men & children, you repeatedly ignore legitimate instances where feminism promotes misandry, you repeatedly put positive spins on feminist articles. So much for no bias
On the talk page for Men’s Rights, one editor states
“Men’s rights” will never be an issue of importance for the same reasons as “White Pride” has never become an issue of importance. Everyone knows that “White Pride” is a cover-up for racists. And everyone knows that “Men’s Rights” is a cover up for misogynists. You gender runs the world, yet you keep asking for more. And people know what you are really campaigning for
And when someone replies to herSantaClaus86, that is a complete abandonment of logic. If someone can say they’re proud to be black, Asian, etcetera, without being called hateful, why should you not be able to say the same for people of European descent? How come it’s fine for a woman to say “All men are assholes”—with people laughing and nodding in agreement, but if a man said “All women are whores”, he’d be sued into oblivion?
If you can say that “Men’s Rights is a cover up for misogynists”, then I can say that Women’s Rights is a cover up for misandry. In fact, I already have more supporting evidence, because of your apparent contempt for men in the comment I’m responding to. Stop being part of the problem.
One of the moderators promptly steps in.
220.127.116.11, comments like yours which speculate on the gender and the motivations of another poster are inappropriate conduct as they fail to assume good faith and are both uncivil and a personal attack alone one of these problems is very serious together they are an urgent problem further personal attacks will not be tolerated
And they only reprimand the person who was reacting to, basically, being compared to a neo nazi, rather than the person who he was defending himself, and his whole gender, from. Even more so, condeming a whole class of people as being on par with white supremacist racists is hardly assuming good faith, or being civil, and is more than a personal attack. It was an attack on a whole class of people.
So even the mods, who are supposed to make sure everything is neutral, are biased against men’s right’s issues.
It’s great Thomas Ball has his own page, now. But it won’t didn’t last.
- harmerqjp likes this