Democrats are the pushers of VAWA and are therefore responsible for its excesses. Some of the excesses are a tolerance for false accusations, must arrest, no-drop prosecution. VAWA hurts woman as well; like Elena Mirkarimi.

Title IX is going to be used to reduce the number of male STEMS (science technology engineering math). Despite decades of encouragement, female participation is still low in stems so the number of males will be brought down to match female participation. Title IX would never be used in this manner to bring up male participation in nursing or education.

I don't think Democrats are responsible for VAWA's excesses. We do have a problem with believing domestic violence can happen to men; hence the name VAWA. That needs to be addressed.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/06/24/bringing-title-ix-classrooms-and-labs

To say we have don't have enough women in STEMS is another way of saying we have too many engineers that are male and white or asian. It's unfair to those that choose this path regardless of sex. Women are actively recruited and even bribed into these schools. I have personally seen how women get a huge hiring preference already. Women are well represented in the life sciences anyway. But to mandate a minimum 40% will absolutely mean young men will have to be turned away from engineering schools and that is unfair.

Women dominate college by a 3:2 ratio, yet the only place disproportionate gender enrollment is unacceptable is in science and engineering - the only disciplines where men slightly outnumber women.

I think that colleges should turn applicants away from women's studies class until men represent a minimum of 40% of the enrollment in them.

It is a huge disservice to both men and progressivism.

Its easy to hate. It's harder to identify problems and fix them.

At some point humanism needs to take over, in which domestic violence is not tolerated against anyone, sexual harassment is not tolerated in any case, rape victims of either gender can speak out against perpetrators of either gender, sentencing is uniformly handed down without regard for race or gender, and wages are based on seniority, performance and skill, not gender, race, height or who you golf with. And I can understand selling the sizzle with the steak, but at some point we've got to get over the sexist BS ads, too. And while I'm at it I'd also like to see the end of those racist ones that make fun of East Indians (like in that MetroPCS ad).

Men and women will always have different experiences that can best be discussed among those who share similar ones.

Even if all gender-based injustice were done away with, men will still have shared frustrations and commonalities with other men... and vice versa.

Men and women A R E different.
We have different biological drives and needs. Our caloric and dietary needs, while similar, are still different in subtle ways.

We are both good at different aspects. That doesn't mean that we can't do the same jobs (men and women) and it doesnt meant that both shouldnt get paid the same (I meant seriously WTF is with paying women less?!) But it does mean that we NEED to accept each other's differences.

I have a penis, I can pee standing up.
A female doesn't and generally can't.

Woman bleed every 28 days (in general. my exwife had... problems) which makes them... unhappy
Men don't. We're pretty much like this 365.25 days a year

Women give birth and can die anywhere in the process.
Men shoot and can walk away after sex.

There ARE differences between the gender and wanting to disregard that is really... short sighted.

Women experience life differently than men. No matter how much you try to neuter men, we still look at the female form. Eyes, noses, tits, ass, hands, feet... every man is different to what attracts them. Even Gay men looks at women in similar ways. Some times to emulate, sometimes just to admire.

Men generally don't receive such attention. We are not the one's who are seen as needed for breeded. We are genetically driven to breed.

It may sound sexist to tell the truth, but that's life.
Women have the right to have their own group to bitch about men, the unfairness of the world (all valid points I might add) the economy, parenting from their perspective, divorce, et al.

as do men.

Each gender needs it's release valve.

The GOP war on women is also a war on men's reproductive freedom.

I mean that the GOP lead war on drugs is putting men in prison by the millions. We have 5% of the world population yet 25% of the worlds prisoners. I'm a little disappointed that Obama has not addressed this problem but it has been mostly GOP led inniatives that has brought us to this carcereal society. About 80% percent of offenders are there for not violent offenses.

In what way is men's reproductive freedom at risk? Maybe I'm asking for a definition and a few examples of our reproductive freedom at work.

If my partner has her reproductive rights curtailed, it affects me to. Someday there may be an effective male contraceptive. I fully expect the GOP to block and stifle that as well.

But I'm having a hard time defending that as part of a struggle for men's reproductive freedom.

Some things are justifiable simply because they are the right thing to do. I hope that some day men have some meaningful degree of reproductive freedom, but that day is not yet here.