Cheers Romany, celivia et al.

Antiseptic - although I've disagreed with many of your posts particularly in relation to the allegedly toxic nature of feminism, it's pretty clear to me that you're one of the more intelligent analytical posters who inhabit these threads - so ask yourself whether you believe this thread was begun to honestly discuss these issues, or if it is an attempt at baiting.

You say the 'thought police' are trying to 'shut down' this thread, perhaps in some effort to silence debate. Evidently I'd be classed among these 'thought police' you mention.
I dispute your assertion. I say that the premise of the thread is being ridiculed, and deservedly so.

I specifically mentioned in my post, that the aspects of these issues are worth discussing.
What's more, I would argue that there are many, many threads which deal with aspects of these issues. I happen to think most of them degenerate into pointless rounds of abuse, however occasionally some gems spring forth.

The reason why I ridicule this thread, was that it's utter lack of focus appears chosen to simply attract vitriol. It's almost certain to become one of the worthless threads.
When one of these topics is chosen without some kind of context, it's merely an invitation for verbal sprays. So when not one but two are chosen? Hell, it's ridiculous.

Lets say the thread originator was more specific, and outlined the differences between feminism and cultural diversity as you have. Perhaps then, we'd have a more focused discussion.

Lets say somebody has an issue with cultural diversity or feminism, and they outline their issue, the reasons why it's a problem and can give examples. If they genuinely listen to other viewpoints then yes, I'd say it's valid.

But antiseptic, regardless of your feelings in relation to feminism - do you really honestly believe this thread was really begun to discuss these issues in an intelligent, analytical manner? Do you really think it was an attempt at anything constructive?

In a civilised society family as a unit is essential. Upbringing of children is the most important duty of parents.If both parents are employed, children's interest certainly suffers.Children from such families do not get the love and affection they should get for normal development and they become dehumanised individuals as grown ups.For such children money is the only factor of importance in their life.Human consideration and such other human qualities will be absent in those children.Mostly they become cut throat competitors in life.Most of the problems faced by the western societies may be traced to this phenomenon.Good food and high standard of life alone is not enough for normal development.Parental bonding is very vital for children to imbibe humanism.If feminisn will come in the way of normal development of children it must be denounced in the strongest possible terms.

TRTL:"You say the 'thought police' are trying to 'shut down' this thread"

I think that's quite clear from the chorus of "me toos" when you suggested the OP was trolling. Let me ask you then, why does his/her motivation matter if the topic is sufficiently interesting to obtain sensible responses?

The crow's chorus has simply tried to shut the discussion down because they don't like it: a fairly common practise on sites such as this.

So far, there have been no "verbal sprays" or vitriol and the cackles of "me too" seem to have quieted, so how about discussing the topic, instead of this meta-discussion about the "worthiness" of the thread?

Antiseptic - both these topics have been done to death many times over. As for 'thought police' well, I personally think that's a weak moniker that you can apply to anyone who disagrees with you. I can just as easily call you the 'thought police' for trying to shut down the jibes directed at the thread.

But it doesn't get us anywhere now does it?

As for the topic, frankly I think it's been done to death and I prefer a little more by way of focused discussion.
But if you want to continue, there are no 'thought police' stopping you, so feel free to go nuts.

This issue has been done to death but there is always a glimmer of hope that the diehard anti-feminists might have softened there stance based on getting to know some of the feminists on this thread.

Contrary to what some men think feminists don't hate men nor do they want to everything to be feminised nor are they oblivious to the pressures or inequities faced by men.

There are still some sectors in society where women face discrimination though there have been great inroads into fields once closed to women. Men have also faced discrimination in the family law courts and there is some movement at the station in improving the situation for men particularly in relation to child custody. Perfection is not achievable in any form of society because you can never please everyone all of the time but we can always do better.

Like all movements and 'isms' there is always a cost I think until some sort of equilibrium or balance is achieved. A settling-in period if you like.

Looking to the future it would be more useful to talk about how we can achieve an all-important work-life balance and justice for men and women. This can only be achieved in unison and in encouraging systems that allow for flexibility and more choice according to individual or joint needs. Families or singles of myriad shapes and sizes.

I do think children are the most discriminated against in what we accept as our modern-lifesytles. Their needs are not very often taken into account and they take low priority against the perceived needs of adults at times. There is a lot of lip service about caring for our children but not much in the way of honest debate in critiquing some of the accepted norms. Children are vulnerable and resilient at the same time but greatly ignored in these sorts of arguments.

Pelican,Antiseptic,trtl
These issues have been done to death much like leaving the toilet seat up, lots of yelling for little real discussion
Oddly the basic principal is agreed ….Equality for both males and females is undisputed by most thinking people.

The difference seems to lie in the nature and manner of the method of equalization.
Paraphrasing Antiseptic; Feminism is an elitist exclusive construct whose underlying logic is to replace one unfair cultural consequence with another equally unfair set of circumstances.

Nature tends never to eliminate anything really merely add to it. Our genetic still has the genes of our ancient biological antecedents.
Much of our cultural and religious conflicts to stem from and/or is inflamed by these biological imperatives (self preservation, reproduction, Fear, Power over others etc).
In reality scapegoating males as the primary CAUSE (rather than just the vector) of female inequalities is like blaming the nose for running when one has a cold. Yet we leave the evolved cultural religious power structures (the real causes) unchanged.
Rather than creating power structure that compensate for our base instincts we ignore them creating “ isms” which are simply mechanisms of a different powerbase….complicate and exacerbate the original injustices by creating additional ones. It is for this reason I assert inequality is a matter of human rights not gender.

PS who ever used the term “thought police” in this context is wrong the correct assessment is that a majority of vocal opponents on this topic/site disagreed with your proposition. The term implies some level conspiracy paranoia in the mind user or sheer emotive petulance at not having their opinion accepted.