Do We Need a Men’s Movement?

March 23rd, 2009 by Pelle Billing

Regardless of what our personal opinion might be about gender issues, women’s rights and men’s rights, the one undeniable truth that remains is that feminism is an established movement, while there is no equivalent established movement advocating men’s rights.

If you believe, like I do, that the male and female gender roles are more or less equally constricted, then it might seem unavoidable to lobby for a masculist movement, in order to award men’s liberation the same political status as women’s liberation. So is this what I’m actually advocating?

Yes and no. It’s evident that we need a much greater focus on the situation of men and the male gender role than we currently have, however, we need to make sure that those issues are approached in the most constructive manner possible – and without turning an ambition for pragmatic reforms into an ideology or religion.

Before digging into the complex question of how to put men’s issues on the political agenda, let’s have a look at the male groups, institutions and support systems that we definitely need to create, or drastically increase in number:

Men’s groups

  • For men to access their true voices, without any women around to impress
  • To discuss fatherhood
  • For men to voice their pain, this includes personal pain as well as collective pain around the male gender role
  • For men to explore what it means to be a man in a postmodern world
  • To discuss how to be able to focus on one’s career while still being a father and husband

Male support groups

  • For victims of domestic violence
  • For sexual abuse survivors
  • For ex-cons. Since society is unable to decrease criminality, the least we can do is to offer support groups for those who are looking for a fresh start.

Men’s shelters

  • For the 70-80% of homeless who are men
  • For male victims of domestic violence who are currently turned away from women’s shelters

Men’s psychology

  • Do we need different therapeutic approaches for men? Is talking about your emotions the best way for men to develop psychologically?
  • Gender specific psychological research would benefit both sexes

Male bonding 

  • Research shows that men have fewer close friends than women
  • It’s important to reintroduce camaraderie between men, and to transcend homophobia. What’s wrong with a man comforting another man who’s lost his wife, child or friend?
  • Evolving male friendship to mean something more than only doing or watching sports together.

As far as I’m concerned, introducing these resources for men have little to do with politics, and far from all of them will depend on government grants for their existence. I’m also hard pressed to find any arguments against the creation or expansion of these resources, since they address real and pressing concerns among men.

Masculism vs Gender Liberation

But what about the actual political dimension of men’s rights? What is the best way forward there?

A masculist movement may be needed as a temporary measure, in order to put men’s issues on the political agenda, and to raise public awareness around men’s issues. At the moment, most people probably believe that there are no real problems with the male gender role, and that men are nothing but the privileged sex.

The very real risk of establishing a masculist movement is that it could fairly easily become polarized and bigoted the same way that feminism has. Creating a war between an increasingly unhealthy feminist movement, and a burgeoning masculist movement that is quickly becoming polarized, will serve no one.

However, we do need to map out how the male gender role is hurting men, and how feminism is adding insult to injury by making men feel guilty for problems that were created by humanity, and not at all by men alone. Trying to bypass this step, and trying to avoid facing these male issues, will lead to a backlash in the long run.

There is sometimes a tendency amongst men and women alike, to advocate a path for men that exclusively stresses that men need to evolve more, perform more, and so on. As important as it is for men to continue evolving and demand more of themselves, this cannot be done at the expense of society facing the male problems that have existed for thousands of years, and those that have been added more recently by feminism. Men cannot be denied this process, even though we need to keep the process clean and avoid villifying women.

The early work of putting men’s issues on the political agenda may therefore involve a masculist movement, but I’m a firm believer that the end goal needs to be a gender liberation movement that describes all gender issues accurately and doesn’t privilege the pain and experiences of either gender. Such a movement will inherently be balanced and able to resist becoming an ideology. 

Tags: ,

137 Responses to “Do We Need a Men’s Movement?”

  1. Bj0rnborg Says:

    As I see it the genderrolls are an interdependant system. They rely on eachother, you need to change both at the same time to achieve any lasting results. Thats why I dont believe in a maskulinist movement. Its like doing the mistake of feminism all over again. Equality should have remained as a part of the liberal agenda, not disconnected and formed into a gynocentric womens-issue-movement.

    Equality concerns everyone, and thust should involve everyone.

  2. Jim Says:

    BjOrn is right. A phallocentric movement and a gynocentric movement are just going to talk past each other and the only reason anyone will listen to that conversation is for amusement. Maybe possibly eventually the masculinists can sound extreme and silly enough to make the feminists look extreme and silly enough that they end up discrediting both movements. Maybe. what is lilelier instead is that mst people will just lose interest.

    In the meantime we could have a movement that focuses on humanistic Enlightenment values, insisting on full and real equality. People from all sides would join in on that.

  3. Luc Says:

    Off course eventually we have to seek what’s good for all, and I believe we should make that explicit in a Man’s movement. But different groups have different needs and fighting for the rights of one group can definitely contribute a lot. For instance the gay rights movement definitely has a lot to say to us, although the movement is primarily occupied with what’s good for this one section of society. Assertiveness, by a group and/or by individuals, I believe is a necessity in human communication, because I, or we men know what we need, and therefore only we can tell the rest.

  4. Pelle Billing Says:

    Interesting discussion. Bj0rnborg and Jim seem to have a similar opinion, whereas Luc disagrees. However, what I find interesting is that whatever the solution is, be it a political men’s movement or a neutral gender liberation movement, the new thing on the agenda will be men’s issues – and lots of people will be surprised that those issues have been suppressed for so long.

  5. MarkD Says:

    If we follow historical precedents, it appears more likely that a “masculinist” stage – even if not “ideal” – would precede a more inclusive and evolved gender neutral stage.

    Although Martin Luther King did eloquently speak of a color blind “dream” after the struggle for racial equality had been won, U.S. Blacks could hardly be expected to have been overly concerned about the rights of the white oppressor.

    Could we have expected more of women vis-a-vis men? Can we realistically expect more of ourseves vis-a-vis “them” at this point in history?

    I doubt that it would be healthy to omit this in-between stage. If we don’t submerge ourselves deeply into it, I suspect that it will return to bite us as a chunk of undigested history.

  6. Bj0rnborg Says:

    Jim:
    Dont use phallocentric please, its a demeaning word. Use androcentric instead.

    Luc:
    The gaymovement and the feminist movement did one thing very diffrently from eachother; the gaymovement went with pride and positivity, feminism went blame and shame. (until queerfeminism that is, now the gaymovement is becoming increasingly more blame and shame).

    I agree that the gaymovement would be a great rolemodel. But I dont believe that men as a collective will be able to distance ourselves enough from feministic attacks, and be the better man. I think too many men would be lured into a shoutingmatch with feminists.

    MarkD:
    Can we expect more? Yes we can. If we ever want to make any meaningful change we must be able to meet in a dialogue of respect and humbleness. I fear that a maskulinist movement would just be a carboncopy of feminism, and thus dialogue would be impossible. History is good for one thing, and one thing only; to learn and avoid misstakes that have been done before us.

    The MOST important thing to remember is; even though some feminists are FUBAR most women are sensible (even though trained into a gynocentric perspective). THESE are the women that matters, these are the women we can talk to and collaborate with to create an equal society, for everyone, in the future.

  7. Jim Says:

    BjOrn, there is noting whatsoever demeaning in the use of any form of the word phallus. I don’t know what man-hater told you it was, but she is full of shit and is not an authority on the matter. The word does not belong to them and they don’t get to dictate whether its use is acceptable or not.

    In this case androcentric is more analogous to gynocentric, you are right; although in my defense “gynocentric” is etymologically derived from an ancestral word for the organ; thus the analogy with “phallocentric”.

    Your comment to me is a perfect example of feminist brainwashing. Phallophobes are not the arbiters of what is acceptable for men.

    Oh, and as a side note, be careful of assuming that a word in someone else’s language carries all the same meanings and social implications as the apparently identical word in your own language does, if in fact that si the case here. There have been some who have used “phallocentric” in a derogatory sense in English, but that does not mean that it properly carries that sense.

    Onward – that blame and shame aspect of the gay movement is well established. It is a tool that is always a real temptation in any uphill social movement, to get “slackers” to pull their weight. In the gay movement there was a big debate over the ethics of “outing” closeted gays, specifically ones that were judged by self-appointed judges to be harming “the gay community”. That was a reverse shaming tactic; really a form of blackmail. How progressive – blackmailing gay men – except it’s for a good cause, so that makes it all right. Yeah, right.

    What really blew new life into it was the development of “queer theory”. Trust a bunch of parasites in academia to invent some msichief like this to justify their own existence.

    Last comment – there is noting wrong with women being gynocentric, just as long as they mature to a point where they can also see things from an androcentric or even phallocentric point of view. The same is true for men too; it is hugely valuable to be able to switch and see things from a woman’s perspective, and I consider it a mark of a mature man.

  8. MarkD Says:

    Can we raise the tone a bit please?

    Sure I’m phallocentric. As a man it’s the very LEAST that I can be. But I do hope I left that very narrow, in my opinion, way of describing myself behind some time ago.

    I don’t find it demeaning, just very restrictive.

    Can we please not use terms that seem pretty certain to arouse objections? Let’s try to speak from as generous and inclusive points of view as we are able. And can we keep Pelle’s scope and purpose in mind as we learn to talk civilly to one another.

  9. Pelle Billing Says:

    Mark:
    “I doubt that it would be healthy to omit this in-between stage. If we don’t submerge ourselves deeply into it, I suspect that it will return to bite us as a chunk of undigested history.”

    I agree completely. We cannot bypass the stage where men uncover the pain and restrictions that come with the male gender role. Many people advocate bypassing that stage, since it’s easy to feel unsafe if men start questioning their expendability (who will protect us then?).

    But submerging needn’t mean becoming polarized. I hope that this blog is a good example of that. I write about important perspectives for men that are usually left out in gender debates, but I do so without becoming polarized or bitter. I think this is the balancing act we need to do.

    Let’s voice the male issues clearly and calmly, whether they are male gender role issues or feminist induced issues. And we can still stay in touch with the female perspective, taking the role of women and the problems that they face around the world.

    There are still many problems that women face, such as rape and raising children without getting any financial compensation. Occasionally checking in with ourselves to see whether we can feel compassionate for these female issues or not, is a good exercice IMO. Obviously I think that women should do the same; I find it alarming that many women lack compassion for what it means to be a man.

  10. unomi Says:

    For men to access their true voices, without any women around to impress

    Yes, because real men are never gay or bisexual.

    Is talking about your emotions the best way for men to develop psychologically?

    Yes?

  11. unomi Says:

    Phallophobes are not the arbiters of what is acceptable for men.

    I love this blog.

  12. Pelle Billing Says:

    Unomi,

    There are many different kinds of therapeutic modalities, some of which focus on talking and others that emphasize working with the body or working with specific behaviors. I think it would be interesting to do research on whether certain therapies are more effective for men than others, and the same for women of course. Since many men are reluctant to talk about their emotions (due to culture/biology/both – pick your poison), it would be interesting to see whether combining talk and body therapy for example, would be more effective for men.

    Regarding having women around to impress, this is a real issue for straight men. It’s not much of an issue for gay men of course, so it may be hard for gay men to understand how much of the male gender role depends on the female gender role, and wanting to be attractive to women and the female gender role. The same can be said of course for straight men not getting what it’s like to be gay in a world that discriminates against and ostracizes gays.

  13. Pelle Billing Says:

    “Phallophobes are not the arbiters of what is acceptable for men.”

    “I love this blog.”

    Please, let’s keep this space civil. The discussions we are having are far too important to be sidetracked by sarcasms or insults.

  14. unomi Says:

    It’s not much of an issue for gay men of course, so it may be hard for gay men to understand how much of the male gender role depends on the female gender role, and wanting to be attractive to women and the female gender role.

    Gay men also want to impress the people they are attracted to. Presumably they will have to attend these men’s group and deal with the fact that some of the other people there might be attractive. Which makes the whole argument of shielding straight men from attractive women seem a bit silly.

    More importantly, assuming that “men” without a prefix refers to straight men is outdated and something that a lot of people would find offensive.

  15. Pelle Billing Says:

    Unomi,

    I fully get that it’s different for gay men, which is why we have a GLBT movement that addresses the situation of gays at a personal and at a political level. I discuss gender roles and gender issues, and since gender roles have been significantly influenced by heterosexual dynamics, I sometimes talk about these dynamics without referring to how things are different for gays. Gays haven’t impacted the male gender role to the same extent, and they have also been able to break out of the male gender role much more efficiently than straight guys, probably because there are no women that need to be impressed or supported financially.

    The fact that gay men wouldn’t be shielded from attractive individuals in a men’s group, doesn’t negate the fact that it could be very valuable for straight men.

    Gay men have a set of unique challenges to face, and those challenges are beyond the scope of this blog, they deserve a whole blog of their own. I do however mention gay men or lesbian women when it’s relevant to the topic at hand, and I encourage people to bring up perspectives right here in the comments section that I may have overlooked.

  16. unomi Says:

    Gay men have a set of unique challenges to face, and those challenges are beyond the scope of this blog

    You want to talk about “gender liberation beyond feminism”, but only for straight people?! I’m not sure what to say. Even feminism has been quite good at incorporating the lesbian perspective.

  17. Pelle Billing Says:

    You want to talk about “gender liberation beyond feminism”, but only for straight people?!

    That’s not what I said. I said that I mention GLBT perspectives/issues when it’s relevant to the topic at hand. However, the details of the GLBT perspectives/issues are beyond the scope of this blog, as are the details of the issues that poor inner city kids face, or survivors of sexual abuse. I may refer to all those groups at times, when it’s relevant to the topic of gender liberation, but it’s beyond the scope of this blog to delve into the details.

    Gender Liberation Beyond Feminism is a great thing for GLBT people. For example, women being abused by women in their intimate relationships may struggle to make sense of their own situation, since feminism states that it’s men who abuse women and this is because of patriarchal power structures. A more neutral movement for gender equality will point out that academic research shows that men and women are just as likely to instigate violence in the home, thereby validating the experiences of abused lesbian women.

  18. MarkD Says:

    Hang onto your blog, pelle!

    Yes, keep the scope of this blog narrow enough to allow depth. It can’t be all things to all people like, uh, Marxism. Wrong century.

  19. Paddan Says:

    While unomi’s comments are important, I think it’s necessary to remember that Pelle is one person.. and he can’t do everything and please everyone at once. Once you focus on one thing, another thing gets blurry.

    The perpectives offered in this blog is important and we have to have an open and hones dialogue. It will not help to say “you’ve not mentioned the gay community” if the purspose is just to be negative. On the other hand, if one mentions the same comment but the purpose is to contribute something or mention a perspective that is overlooked, then that’s fine.

    Pelle’s blog is not the whole thing, only one important part of the whole picture.
    But his blog + our comments and CONSTRUCTIVE contributions = the whole picture (hopefully).

    Keep up the good work you people!

  20. Jim Says:

    “It’s not much of an issue for gay men of course, so it may be hard for gay men to understand how much of the male gender role depends on the female gender role, ”

    It certainly is not as much of an issue for us gay men, but it certainly is easy for us to understand becuause we grow up watching it every day and generally spend the early years of our lives trying to warp ourselves into that mentality. So we understand it pretty thoroughly.

    We learn during adolescence that the need to cater to females is always going to color the actions of any straight male friends we have, and will always take precedence over those and any other friendships between males, or else risk all kinds of retribution from both men and women – gay-shaming, whines about “neglect”, etc.

    And that makes it important for even us gay guys to get this man-woman stuff sorted out. First because it would improve the role we try to distort ourselves into, and then second because of the way it affects so many relationships in the society we live in, the straight people we live among.

    And it’s quite enough if Pelle and other straight people attend to that task and leave us to deal with our own gay stuff. It really is not about whether a straight guy wants or doesn’t want to deal with “gender liberation beyond feminism” for gay people. it has more to do just the common sense insight that it’s better to deal with the matters you are equipped to deal with.

  21. Bj0rnborg Says:

    Jim:
    You are right ofcourse, and I apologize. I now understand that that was a very subjective relation to the word phallocentric, and as you say, a consequence of me listening to much to feminists. It creeps in, sometimes undetected. So thank you for making me aware I had been corrupted by feministic slandertactics, though I will still continue to use the word androcentric over phallocentric.

    Mark:
    I agree. I dont believe that there are many androcentric men left in the westen world, the success of the feminist movement have forced men to view things from the female perspective. If only women would start do the same, that would be a beutiful beginning of something greater than feminism; true equality.

    Unomi:
    It took 80 years for feminism to incorporate the gay perspective, so if you think that is pretty good than I think you should give a newly (not yet?) born movement some slack in that regard. Most of the subjects on this blog have been equally true to most men, no matter if they are gay or straight.

  22. Pelle Billing Says:

    Jim:
    “It certainly is not as much of an issue for us gay men, but it certainly is easy for us to understand becuause we grow up watching it every day and generally spend the early years of our lives trying to warp ourselves into that mentality. So we understand it pretty thoroughly.”

    Good point. I guess many gay men spend a lot of time learning to appear straight, before coming out, and in that process you learn the patterns of how the male and female gender role interact.

  23. Jim Says:

    BjOrn,

    I also think that “androcentric” fit better in that context.

    ” Most of the subjects on this blog have been equally true to most men, no matter if they are gay or straight.”

    YES.

    1. The divide and destroy tactic of splitting gay men off form gay men isn’t going to work. Feminsts and women in general have exactly nothing to say to or about gay men and our experiences.

    2. gay and straight men have a lot of the same isues :

  24. Jim Says:

    Complete version:

    BjOrn,

    I also think that “androcentric” fit better in that context.

    ” Most of the subjects on this blog have been equally true to most men, no matter if they are gay or straight.”

    YES.

    1. The divide and destroy tactic of splitting gay men off form gay men isn’t going to work. Feminsts and women in general have exactly nothing to say to or about gay men and our experiences.

    2.Gay and straight men have a lot of the same issues :

    a. Fatherhood – Gay men get their kids taken away in divorces form women just as much if not more than straight men do, suffer the same Parental Alienation Syndrome where that occurs, suffer the same injustices in visitation, abuse of Child Support money and so on.

    b. False rape accusations – - A gay man can be thrown into jail and rot there with his future in ruins over a false rape charge just as easily as a straight man. He can suffer the same vigilante violence because of a false rape accusation as a straight man. Like a straight man, he is far more likely to be demonized and registered as a sex offender than a woman will be for exactly the same offense.

    c. Gay men are in all the same lines of work as straight men that have the high rates of industrial injuries and deaths.

    Feminst rhetoric on this has been supportive of gay men, but I can’t see how any of the actual progress that has been made is due to their efforts, and it certainly hasn’t changed anythng when it comes to the issues listed above.

  25. Pelle Billing Says:

    Jim,

    I heartily agree with you. I don’t feel either that there’s a divide between gay and straight men when it comes to these issues.

    It’s good to hear it directly from you, because intuitively I don’t feel that gay men have been left out in my writing, I feel that they have been automatically included. After all, gay men are 100 percent men.

  26. Jim Says:

    I feel included in your coverage of issues.

  27. thebigmanfred Says:

    Bjornborg:

    As I see it the genderrolls are an interdependant system.

    I agree. I think we see too many activists though that don’t see that relationship. Men and women don’t act in a vacuum. Men act in part because of the expectations of other women and men. The same is true for women. A woman puts pressure on a man to be a man. The choices women make also influence a man’s choices. Men and women act to reinforce gender rolls. True equality can not be achieved without looking at both. We’ve got to change both sides of the equation.

  28. unomi Says:

    @Pelle

    I don’t feel that gay men have been left out in my writing

    That’s funny, seeing as how you just said that gay men were about as relevant to this blog as “poor inner city kids…or survivors of sexual abuse”.

    After all, gay men are 100 percent men.

    Which is why your definition of a “man” is a “straight man”, and pointing that out wasn’t even necessary?

    Separately:

    it would be interesting to see whether combining talk and body therapy for example, would be more effective for men.

    Is there any evidence to suggest that existing forms of therapy are less effective for men than they are for women, or are you just jumping on the “men are physical creatures” bandwagon here?

  29. Paddan Says:

    “Is there any evidence to suggest that existing forms of therapy are less effective for men than they are for women, or are you just jumping on the “men are physical creatures” bandwagon here?”

    Just using common sence I’d have to agree that it could be beneficial for men to combine body and talk therapy (as for women). The mind/body is connected and it’s probably more effective if we work on both. I’m pretty sure there’s not a lot of people commenting on this blog who seriously believes that “men are physical creatures” anymore than women are physical creatures.

    The problem is that a lot of people think that they are a small person inside their head controlling all the other stuff below the neck, and it’s common not to be in touch with ones whole body.

  30. Bj0rnborg Says:

    Unomi:
    Which is why your definition of a “man” is a “straight man”, and pointing that out wasn’t even necessary?

    Pointing that out in this context was not necessary, no, since he is answering to your implicit statement that gay-men are not covered by male-issues.

    men are physical creatures

    I think I have missed this discourse. How is this used in a equality context? Who is stating this and to what purpose? Do they claim men differs from women in this regard?

    My initial reaction is, ofcourse, everyone is physical, but thats not ALL we are. In the genderroll society men have been reduced to only beeing valued for their physical provess, their emotional needs beeing disregarded, this is one of the harmful parts for men that a genderliberationmovement would need to adress.

  31. Pelle Billing Says:

    Unomi,

    “That’s funny, seeing as how you just said that gay men were about as relevant to this blog as “poor inner city kids…or survivors of sexual abuse”.”

    I never made that comparison. Please don’t accuse me of saying things that I’ve never said.

    “Which is why your definition of a “man” is a “straight man”, and pointing that out wasn’t even necessary?”

    My definition of a man is not a straight man. Again, please don’t say things that are blatantly untrue.

    “Is there any evidence to suggest that existing forms of therapy are less effective for men than they are for women, or are you just jumping on the “men are physical creatures” bandwagon here?”

    There is ample evidence that men have a harder time expressing their emotions. So the conclusion that additional therapeutic modalities may be beneficial is not very far-fetched. I haven’t speculated about why men have a harder time expressing their emotions, though I may do so in a future post. What is the “men are physical creatures” bandwagon??

  32. Jim Says:

    “Which is why your definition of a “man” is a “straight man”, and pointing that out wasn’t even necessary?”

    Where has he said that? You seem to be inferring that that is his definition, which says more about you than about him. His definiton of “man” appears to this gay man as “man”, and that includes me, as I said above.

    And I am putting you on notice: I see exactly what you are doing. I will be quite explicit. Gay men are not available for you or any other women to use as a club the beat straight men with. Your attempt is insultingly and transparently exploitive.

    Pose as our defenders if you like. You’re not fooling anyone. The same woman who will chastise straight en for homophobia one minute will turn around and sic her thumbhead boyfriend and his pack of freinds on a real-live gay man the next minute. It’s the same misandry in a different mask – blatant hypocrisy.

  33. Jim Says:

    “Is there any evidence to suggest that existing forms of therapy are less effective for men than they are for women, or are you just jumping on the “men are physical creatures” bandwagon here?”

    No, not evidence. It is however suggestive that men have developed the Body Electric form of group therapy. I man not aware of anything similar that women have developed ofr themselves, thugh it certainly may exist.

    And unomi, I am not accusing you of being a hypocrite, conscious or otherwise, for merely repeating a common argument or accusation. I am saying the argument/accusation is hypocritical.

  34. unomi Says:

    @Pelle

    I never made that comparison.

    amnesia: Partial or total loss of memory, usually resulting from shock, psychological disturbance, brain injury, or illness.

    “the details of the GLBT perspectives/issues are beyond the scope of this blog, as are the details of the issues that poor inner city kids face, or survivors of sexual abuse.”

    My definition of a man is not a straight man.

    Ah yes, those gay and the women they want to “impress”. Can’t keep their eyes off them!

    @Bj0rnborg et al

    Re. “men are physical creatures”: In the UK there has been a lot of talk about why boys aren’t performing as well as they used to in school. A popular explanation has been that the curriculum has been “feminised” and that “masculising” it would include adding much more physical education, among other things. These people generally forget that boys used to do much better in school without sports taking up any more (and possibly less) of their time.

    @Jim

    I see exactly what you are doing.

    Blurred vision? I’m a gay man.

  35. Paddan Says:

    LOL at this thread… :-p

    Just want to make a comment here, the definition of a “man” might change with regards to the context. If I speak of a “typical guy” in one context, that “typical guy” might be very different in an entirely different context.

    Sometimes the words are pointers, unomi, and you can’t make 100% judgements about another person based on how she/he uses that word at one instance.

    If we do, however, we might commit the deconstructivist fallacy. (= reading everything as a text, and then inserting our own ego/values to make the other person sound like a jerk).

    Yeah, I made that last part up… :-P

  36. Pelle Billing Says:

    Unomi,

    Sarcasm, insults and intentional misrepresentation are not wanted on this blog. Please stop that kind of behavior immediately.

    Pelle

  37. Jim Says:

    “Blurred vision? I’m a gay man.”

    No vision! I’m a blind man! Now aren’t you all now embarrassed at your insensitivity! :P +

    You might want to rethink defending women against men. Gay men have very few real allies in women’s groups, nothing beyond tactically advantageous arrangements. That has become glaringly obvious in the US in the marriage fihgt – for years gay greoups gave women’s groups what litle support thy could and in return women’s groups have been MIA when it comes to marriage equality.

    Gay men are men, with all the same issues as straight men, the ones I listed above. Women’s groups have been less than helpful, they have been actively resistant to actions that would benefit men and boys.

    I mistook you for a woman because you were copying their methods.

  38. unomi Says:

    @Pelle

    No sarcasm? Are you targeting the German market?

  39. Danny Says:

    unomi:
    A popular explanation has been that the curriculum has been “feminised” and that “masculising” it would include adding much more physical education, among other things. These people generally forget that boys used to do much better in school without sports taking up any more (and possibly less) of their time.
    I’m not sure how it is in the UK but in the state people tend to forget that girls have improved in school because extra attention was focused on them over boys. Women’s advocate like to say that boys got extra attention in school over girls and during those times they did better. I wonder why is it that women’s advocates are saying that now that the extra attention has shifted from boys to girls the scales are balanced.

  40. unomi Says:

    Girls have improved in school and because boys have been taught that they have to be bigger, better and smarter than girls, a lot of them don’t know what to do. Some boys solve this problem by saying that school is “uncool”, choosing instead to focus on more important things, such as sports and obnoxious rappers.

  41. Pelle Billing Says:

    So what you’re saying Unomi is that boys are hurt by society’s current attitude towards boys to the extent that they become destructive instead of constructively focusing on their own future?

    I totally agree, though I suspect we may disagree on the solutions.

    Experiments in the UK have demonstrated that boys’ performance in school improves radically by reintroducing competition, teachers actually teaching instead of doing group work, and even having boys only classes helps.

    I’m not attached to what the best solution is, I’m simply interested in finding our what works for boys.

  42. Pelle Billing Says:

    Danny,

    Yeah, the US has actually had feminism influence schools more than one would think. Girls trailing boys in maths and physics has been combatted vehemently while nobody has cared about the fact that boys trail girls in reading and writing.

  43. Bj0rnborg Says:

    Unomi:

    Are you saying that boys have been taught recently that they need to be “bigger, better and smarter than girls” since this phenomena of declining schoolresults for boys is a modern one? It dosent add up.

    Most people tend to think we have advanced towards a more equal society since the 50s say, but from you reasoning you seem to think that the genderroll pressure for boys have increased since then. I find that very interesting.

    Dont you find it interesting that boys grades have lowered since a feministic agenda for education have been introduced? You do not think this is correlated?

    To me it sounds like you are proposing just another unsupported feministic dogma as if it where facts; that boys grades are related to some need to be “”bigger, better and smarter than girls”. Or as you might have phrased it, jumping on the bandwagon of bashing boys/men.

    Yet another case of blaming boys for their genderrols, wereas girls alwas are victims to theirs. Beeing a man yourself, and once a boy, I would be interested in learning who taught you that you needed to be better than the girls around you. I dont recognise that at all from my own experience.

    The only thing I remember from school related to this subject is how we boys where thaught that we could not play with the girls like we did with other boys. Girls where apparantly superfragile. Instead we where taught to take special care of the girls, even at the expense of other boys for instance. Inspired by the other thread of reversed feminism, Its obvious that If I used feministic rhetorics I would say that we boys where thaught right from the start that the girls where worth more than us.

  44. Jim Says:

    “Its obvious that If I used feministic rhetorics I would say that we boys where thaught right from the start that the girls where worth more than us.”

    In any society where men have to leave home for economic reasons with a reasonable risk that they won’t return – war and raiding, fishing, long-range commerce, coal-mining, logging, some kinds of mill work – the culture has to develop gender roles that fit this – boys must grow up to feel expendable, girls must grow up to feel that they are irreplaceable, because the survival of the home depends on thier physical survival.

    So it is incoherent to say both that patriarchy makes for warllike cultures and also that patriarchy under-values women’s lives. Patriarchy may well make for warlike cultures, but then it must also over-value women’s lives. And gues what we actually see – feminists got it half right!

    Well, no, because they conveniently elide women’s roles in fomenting wars. So maybe partiarchy is a system women put into place, since women suffer less than men in war and survive to benefit the most from winning.

  45. unomi Says:

    unomi talks = 500% more comments on a post.

    @Pelle

    Yes, those “findings” have been around in the UK for quite a while. They do not explain why British students are routinely hammered by their Finnish counterparts in international surveys, despite the Finnish school system being significantly more “feminised” than the British.

    The “boys only” theory is even stranger, since boys’ performance began to deteriorate long after mixed schools became the norm.

    Boys are not hurt by “society’s current attitude” towards them, but they are certainly being hurt by their age old gender role. They are expected to be smarter and more academic than girls are, and when they aren’t, they feel as if they have failed.

    @ Bj0rnborg

    Are you saying that boys have been taught recently that they need to be “bigger, better and smarter than girls” since this phenomena of declining schoolresults for boys is a modern one?

    No, the more recent phenomenon is obviously girls becoming more competitive in school. The expectation of boys to be bigger, better and smarter than girls are is an old one.

  46. Lövet Says:

    umomi or what’s its(sic) name is obviously getting its(sic) out of twisting words for no constructive meaning whatsover.

    I think the relevant term is “Internet troll”…

  47. unomi Says:

    I’m not sure I know what you’re talking about?

  48. Pelle Billing Says:

    Unomi,

    You still haven’t been able to explain why boys problems started after the introduction of feminism, and why no problems existed when boys simply followed the traditional male gender role.

    You’re dodging the question, which doesn’t look good…

  49. Pelle Billing Says:

    Internet troll = someone who only participates in an internet discussion in order to derail it

    I appreciate your concern Lövet, and I’m always vigilant about trolls (I used to moderate a large internet forum), but I don’t think that Unomi is behaving like a troll. Having a resident feminist among the rest of us may actually keep the discussion vibrant…

  50. Jim Says:

    “Boys are not hurt by “society’s current attitude” towards them, but they are certainly being hurt by their age old gender role.”

    This is the assertion you have yet to prove. Repetition of an assertion is not proof. The problem with the statement is that if the gender role is age-old, then the academic problems of boys should also be age-old. Pretty basic.

    “The “boys only” theory is even stranger, since boys’ performance began to deteriorate long after mixed schools became the norm.”

    Right. So it is not simply putting boys into mixed schools. What could it be then?

    Here’s a possiblity: From the beginning of the Civil Rghts Movement institutional racism in schools was identified as a major barrier to black students’ academic achievment. This racism came in the form of systemic indoctrination to believe that they were inferior and institutionalized inequality of funding for their education. Are there any parallels in the elementary and seconfdary education of boys in the US , the UK, and other European countries? That is the question.

    Unomi is not a troll. He probably could be a pretty effective one if he wanted.

  51. unomi Says:

    @Pelle

    What is “the introduction of feminism” and when did it take place? Feminism has been around for quite a while but it is only in the last 10 or 15 years that boys’ grades have dropped in British schools, as far as I know.

    Does teaching children how to work in groups (which is how the real world works) and how to discuss and think critically about what they are learning mean that boys are suddenly at a disadvantage vis a vis girls?

    Even if all boys were told by their teachers that all men are violent, nasty people, etc (which they are not being told, but let’s just say that), why would that impact their grades? Gay students have been told all kinds of horrible things for generations, but I really don’t think it has hit their grades to any great extent.

    And why would schools suddenly be biased against boys when in the workplace it is often the other way round? Most people in Britain think that feminism is something that came with the Spice Girls, young people use it as a derogatory term and the most famous feminist would probably be Germaine Greer (an Australian hippie who writes for The Guardian and who is more annoying than she is influential). How did these people manage to change how every single science teacher in the country interacts with boys and girls?

    Finally, it would be interesting to see some evidence of the anti-boy bias that you are talking about. When I was active in the gay rights movement, it was usually quite easy to find examples of teachers, professors and literature that was prejudiced against gay people. It is only fair that a men’s movement does the same thing, before accusing feminism of being responsible for all sorts of things.

    @Jim

    This is the assertion you have yet to prove.

    Right back atcha.

    @Lövet

    I still don’t understand what the first line means, but I think the relevant term for it is “spam”?

  52. Bj0rnborg Says:

    Unomi:
    Feminism have been around for quite a while, but the areas of attention have shifted often. School came into focus in the 90′s, and in sweden atleast, we had a feministic reform in pedagogy wich basically meant to punish boys who took “to much” room, and reward girls who took “to much” room. Im absolutely certain that these teachers did not first question the sexuality of the boys to exclude gay-men from this discriminating pedagogy.

    Not long ago there was a study made in sweden about all this, wich found that the knowledgebase of girls and boys are the same (standardized test etc) but boys get lower grades because they dont know the “schoolcode”. In otherwords, school is based on a female norm and this affects boys grades, even though they are as good in the subjects as the girls they get punished because they “behave like boys”. (wich in sweden atlest is not a factor that should affect the grades, only the understanding of the subjects)

    This too ofcourse includes GAY-men. There is just no reason to separate gay-men from male-issues, gaymen are just as affected by discrimination vs men as are all other men .

    “Even if all boys were told by their teachers that all men are violent, nasty people, etc (which they are not being told, but let’s just say that), why would that impact their grades?”

    Because its the teachers that gives the grades, not the other way around. Standardized tests show that in sweden boys and girls have the same knowledgebase in most subjects, yet boys get much lower grades.

    Btw; I once had a radicalfeminist-teacher who stated right of the bat that she would give higher grades to the girls because “they needed it more”. This is just another example of how feminism use victim-mentality, not to reach equality, but to create privileges and discriminate men.

    And you still havent explained how the competetiveness you claim boys feel towards girls affects there grade negatively? Shouldnt this motivate boys to do better in school? And Ive heard that dogma before, but Ive never heard anyone explain why this is the most probable explanation, or even make it add up in any way at all. I hope you would care to enlighten me here.

  53. Pelle Billing Says:

    Unomi,

    It’s probably wise to be humble when you are not an expert on a subject. The correct term for someone actively disturbing an internet forum as a participant is a “troll”. Spam would be posting links to your own site, for example, and that is a different kind of disruption.

    Regarding schools and how they treat boys, you seem to be quite unaware of what has happened in the US, Sweden and elsewhere in the past 10-15 years. Feminist ideas have changed how boys are treated in school, and this is the only known factor that can explain boys deteriorating results. Christina Hoff-Sommers has diligently outlined how this has happened in the US, and in Sweden it’s actually part of the curriculum itself.

    No other big changes have been introduced! If you want to question that feminist ideas are responsible, then please present another factor that has changed how many teachers and schools function. As of yet, you have presented no alternative, and you therefore cannot expect us to take your “explanations” seriously.

    I believe that boys’ only classes function well because they reintroduce male pride and positive expectations on the boys. It is a well known fact that what you expect of a student will have a huge impact on how that student actually performs.

    Reintroducing male pride and positive expectations can be done in co-ed classes too of course, so the jury is still out on whether boys only classes will be needed in the future.

  54. John Rowan Says:

    Just discovered this thread. There has been an active men’s movement, and it published a good magazine called Achilles Heel. I think there is still a website with some information about this, although the magazine has ceased publication. I myself brought out a book entitled Healing the Male Psyche (Routledge 1997) which embodied much of the thinking from this group. I think there is still a men’s group in Norway, and in the UK there are a couple of groups doing useful work with men.

  55. unomi Says:

    Pelle,

    And it is probably best to be humble if you don’t always understand other people’s sense of humour. What Lovet wrote made no sense whatsoever, which is why I compared it to spam, not because I don’t know what spam is.

    Actually, a lot of things have happened in the last 15 years, one of them being that girls are now much more competitive in school and, later in life, more career oriented. Since the male gender role stipulates that a real man is smarter than a woman, that has certainly contributed to the “shaming” of boys.

    Finally, Christina Hoff-Sommers needs to stop being this blog’s only reference. I was interested to read the following comment about her work: “Sommers relies heavily on a handful of oft-repeated anti-feminist anecdotes–or folktales.”

    Interesting because I would say the same thing about this blog. How about criticising some real, actual people instead of just “the feminists”, to whom you can ascribe any actions and opinions you want.

  56. Paddan Says:

    “How about criticising some real, actual people instead of just “the feminists”, to whom you can ascribe any actions and opinions you want.”

    I thought that was already happening, unless you’re not a real, actual person unomi. :-P

    “Since the male gender role stipulates that a real man is smarter than a woman, that has certainly contributed to the “shaming” of boys.”

    Yeah, that’s highly likely that we’ve got a lot of young male children who feel inferior to girls because the gender role says that they ought to be smarter than girls. It couldn’t possibly have anything to do with the shaming of boys? I for one can remember how some of my teachers always managed to show how bad the men/boys were because they we’re more violent etc. I’m not saying all my teachers said that, but some did, others just hinted at it. Now, being the sensitive guy, I felt I had to do something about this violent guy attititude and “help” the girls… but not because I actually wanted to, but because I secretly felt ashamed. That’s a bad motivation.

    Today I feel it’s my responsibility as a human being to work for equality, not because of shame, but because of love for other human beings. That’s way better. But my point is that I never felt that I was supposed to be better than girls. What I did feel was that if I sided with the teachers who used this bad feminist retorich, then I was on the winning team. And I remember feeling shame, for being born a male.

    My story is my own personal story, but I’m sure it’s not one of a kind. And still, I’m not saying that all who call themselves feminists are guilty of shaming boys, but I am saying that you, unomi, perhaps could take my personal view into account and just respect different opinions.

  57. Pelle Billing Says:

    “Finally, Christina Hoff-Sommers needs to stop being this blog’s only reference. I was interested to read the following comment about her work: “Sommers relies heavily on a handful of oft-repeated anti-feminist anecdotes–or folktales.””

    She is far from the only reference, but when it comes to shaming boys in school, she’s an excellent reference. If we had more work being done on men and boys, then perhaps there would be other people to cite.

    Sommers does not rely on anecdotes, that is pure slander, and for a person who’s always looking for references I don’t understand how you can report such hearsay. Read her book, read her references, and then comment on the quality of her work.

  58. Bj0rnborg Says:

    Unomi:
    Speaking about references, how about some kind of reference to that;

    a: boys are thaugt they need to be “bigger, better and smarter than girls””
    b: how this effects their grade negatively

    Its not something I have experienced, and its a view that does not seem to hold much support here. Also, it is the fundament of your malebashing view, you need more substance to support that than just your personal opinion if you want any kind of dialogue.

  59. unomi Says:

    @Paddan

    I thought that was already happening, unless you’re not a real, actual person unomi.

    I am not a real, actual feminist.

    @Pelle

    Again, you need to start criticising the opinions of some self identified feminists or organisations and not just “the feminists”. Quoting a person who supposedly quotes feminists in her book is not enough.

  60. Pelle Billing Says:

    Unomi,

    You did not respond to Bj0rnborg’s request for sources, which means that you are simply voicing your personal opinion. I and others on this blog has given several sources to back up various claims.

    When you say that I need to quote feminists, exactly what kind of quotes are you looking for? What are the feminists opinions that I refer to that you do not believe exist?

  61. unomi Says:

    I have not taken a group of people (“masculists” in my case, or something to that effect), attributed all sorts of opinions to them, and then shot them down.

    I may have an opinion about what you, Paddan or anybody else is saying here, but that is different.

    If you wrote a blog about the impact Muslims, Jews or bird watchers are having on politics, education, etc (esp. if the impact is negative) you would be expected to back up your statements with the odd reference to what those people, or the organisations representing them, have actually said or done.

    @Bj0rnborg

    You’re missing the point. The views I express are my own, just like Pelle’s views are his own. However, if I attribute an opinion to someone else (“Bj0rnborg has said XYZ and is responsible for ABC”) I need to prove that you actually did say XYZ.

  62. Pelle Billing Says:

    @unomi

    I have offered references by linking to a feminist pamphlet approved by the US Department of Education, by referring to a book which has a ton of references, and by linking to anecdotal observations by feminists themselves. So I’m not merrily stating my own opinion here.

    Here are some other references:

    http://www.ed.gov/programs/equity/index.html
    (only girls and women get grants, and women’s equity and gender equity are used interchangeably)
    http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg86.html
    (legislation has incorporated feminist ideology, even though this ideology does not correspond to how boys and girls are actually performing in schools)
    http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/equity/Section3.asp
    (girls are doing better than boys in school)
    http://www.aauw.org/education/ngcp/
    (there are special programs to help girls with science, but there is no similar effort to help boys with reading and writing)
    Handbook for Achieving Gender Equity Through Education
    (this feminist book actively excludes boys’ issues in schools)
    http://www2.edc.org/WomensEquity/pubs/digests/digest-gbviolence.html
    (feminists myths are used as the basis for educating against violence)
    http://www2.edc.org/WomensEquity/pubs/digests/digest-tprep.html
    (shows how feminism is entering classrooms, disguised as “gender equity”)

  63. Pelle Billing Says:

    @unomi

    Your own opinion, or anybody else’s for that matter, is only mildly interesting if you cannot back it up by research, or by a coherent manner of reasoning that uses well-known and/or verifiable facts.

    Can you prove or back up any of your opinions?

    Simply asking others to provide more facts and references is not very original or creative, nor does it bring the discussion forward. Why not bring your own facts and references to the table?

    Do you even have the guts to state what you believe to be true, and thereby expose yourself to being proved wrong by others providing pertinent facts? What you are currently doing strikes me as being cowardly. You try to shoot others down, but you don’t state your own position, which would expose *you* to criticism.

    Feminism is not right until proved wrong. Having an opinion in the gender field is not a feminist prerogative. It is feminism that needs to prove that the huge influence it has had, and is still having (see my links above), can be proved by correct facts and solid logical reasoning.

  64. Bj0rnborg Says:

    Unomi:
    Pelle Billing is stating a claim that he is backing up with rereferences. You refuse this claim, and his references, based solely on your opinion.

    While your subjective truth reflects your subjective reality, it tells us nothing more about the world than what glasses you wear when you gaze upon it. In other words, your personal opinion weighs in farily light when met with facts provided by scientific research (which also could be described as the synthezis of many individuals subjective truths).

    An opinion, in addition, wich seems to be illogical AND demeaning to boys. That in itself seems do demand some kind of factual back up, since neither helps the credibility of your statement. If this cant be provided, it would seem to me that the glasses you wear are prejudice and gynocentric/misandric wich is not a place to be for someone that truly wants equality. Im not saying that this is what you want, im trying not to be presumptious. But it is what the blog is about after all.

  65. Ann Ekman Says:

    Dear All!

    I don´t know if I,as a woman, should be chilled or thrilled by your thoughts about a maskulinist movement. I can´t know how it is to be a man, what it feels like, and what problems there are connected to it. As a woman I can experience only the effects maskulinity have on my life. But the question is: what of your gender role/biology do you want to ceep and what do you feel that you would be better without. For a woman to suggest changes on the maskuline culture is mostly seen as misandry. I do also want to know what problems with maskulinity that you mean is “constructed by humanity”, by women also, that is. And how have women contributed do you think? A mens movement to try to improve life for themselves and life with the women part of humanity sounds like a good idea. But why make it a war, as i can see every now and then. There was one maskulinist talking about “war with arms” against the womens movement. That does not sound very promising! What are your ideas about how to stop violence, unjust legislation towards women (like in the arab countries for example), rape and so on? Is that a part of the maskulinist movement as well? Would really like to hear from you on this! Good luck with your new enterprise and hope it will lea to a new better world!

  66. Pelle Billing Says:

    What are your ideas about how to stop violence, unjust legislation towards women (like in the arab countries for example), rape and so on? Is that a part of the maskulinist movement as well?

    Dear Ann,

    Stopping violence is a complex process. First we need to be clear on what kind of violence is actually going on. Outside the home men hit men, inside the home men and women hit each other with the same frequency, and when it comes to relational aggression women do it more than men. One of the major problems at this point is that we don’t acknowledge what research tells us about violence; the statistics I listed are ignored, as well as the reasons for people being violenct. People aren’t violent due to some kind of patriarchal power structure in society, people are violent due to psychological issues, drug addictions, poverty, etc

    Legislation should be gender neutral. In modern countries legislation usually discriminates against men (such as the draft or military service). I’d be interested in hearing specific example of how legislation is discriminatory in pre-modern countries.

    Rape is a serious issue, that I’ve written about on this blog; check the archive. I don’t have the final answer on how to decrease rape, but again, if we dare to look at the available research and what it tells us about rapists – then we’ve got a good starting point.

    I don’t know what a masculist movement would look like. I do know that the missing perspective of men must become part of the gender discourse. My goal is to bring forward that perspective as constructively as possible, while simultaneously acknowledging the issues that women still need to deal with.

    There’s no point in creating a gender war. If we can reach a point where we see women’s issues and men’s issues with equal clarity, then we’ve got a starting point to make constructive changes.

    Unfortunately the feminist movement is in the way of that kind of development, since most feminists don’t acknowledge that men face problems of equal magnitude.

  67. Ann Ekman Says:

    Dear Pelle!

    Thank you for your rapid response! When you say that men and women face problems of equal magnitude, do you mean sweden or do you mean globally? I really hope that you don´t mean the latter, because then I won´t understand at all. I would be very interested in the statistics you have on domestic violence as you say that women and men hit eachother with the same frequency, because I had no Idea that womens violence on men had that proportions!!!! Please, give me information on where I can find that information. I still would like to know some more about what men find problematic in life in relation to women. I do care about it but, as I said, I don´t know as I´m not a man. I have heard many men talk about it in the media, but it have been a bit aggressive and as such hard to take to heart.

  68. Pelle Billing Says:

    Dear Ann,

    I know that it’s hard to believe something that you’ve never heard of before. It was a long process for me too, to change my views on gender issues.

    If you want to learn more about my views on gender issues, and why I don’t agree with feminism, then please read some more blog posts (for example here, here, and here).

    Regarding domestic violence you can find more information in this blog post.

    Learning the truth about gender issues is a shocking experience for many, but there’s no way back once you’ve realized that what you’ve learnt so far is incomplete at best.

  69. RFM Says:

    Currently the Women’s groups are the ones that voice their perceptions of the truth to the press and thus men are usually at the mercy of these groups to be accurate. Culturally, men are being vilified, someone need to speak for us and balance the propaganda.

  70. bbor005 Says:

    Pelle said: “Outside the home men hit men, inside the home men and women hit each other with the same frequency, and when it comes to relational aggression women do it more than men.”

    Arguments about gender symmetry amongst domestic violence victims have long been discredited. For each of the studies you cite there are 100 others with diametrically opposed findings.

    Michael Kimmel had written a paper analysing such ‘gender symmetry’ claims back in 2001 – http://www.xyonline.net/downloads/malevictims.pdf but he’s by no means the only person to discredit such hypotheses.

    I came across this blog by chance – I agree with you that men’s voices need to be included in the gender debate, and I also agree that certain strands of feminism verge on the histronic and do more harm than good. But having read your (and some of your regular posters’) comments on this blog, I’d be tempted to mention stones and glass houses!

    Best of luck in the future. Regards,

    Bert

  71. Pelle Billing Says:

    Thank you for your comment Bert. My current view on intimate partner violence are:

    1) The incidence during the previous year is the same for both sexes (4-5%)
    2) Lifetime incidence tends to be 25% for women and 20% for men
    3) Women are chronic victims twice as often
    4) Women get hurt 2-3 times more often than men
    5) Women are much more scared, and therefore suffer more emotionally

    So no, there is no symmetry, but men’s situation is chronically neglected.

  72. Chris Marshall Says:

    Pelle, your article is very well articulated and fascinating. I wish I had found it back when it was active.

    >I agree completely. We cannot bypass the stage where men uncover the pain and restrictions that come with the male gender role. Many people advocate bypassing that stage, since it’s easy to feel unsafe if men start questioning their expendability (who will protect us then?).

    I’ve often wondered at how hard it is to get a discussion going about the ways in which society takes callous advantage of men. If you do manage to get one started, it seems like the easiest thing in the world is to shut it down.

    I have also had the thought that unconsciously, everyone realizes how much society depends on its ability, at a moments notice, to sacrifice men in large numbers, so when someone starts to seriously raise the issue of male disposibility, most people get nervous and try to change the subject or shame the speaker into silence.

  73. Danny Says:

    >I agree completely. We cannot bypass the stage where men uncover the pain and restrictions that come with the male gender role. Many people advocate bypassing that stage, since it’s easy to feel unsafe if men start questioning their expendability (who will protect us then?).

    I’ve often wondered at how hard it is to get a discussion going about the ways in which society takes callous advantage of men. If you do manage to get one started, it seems like the easiest thing in the world is to shut it down.

    I have also had the thought that unconsciously, everyone realizes how much society depends on its ability, at a moments notice, to sacrifice men in large numbers, so when someone starts to seriously raise the issue of male disposibility, most people get nervous and try to change the subject or shame the speaker into silence.

    And the almost sad part about that Chris is that this is true for nearly every other movement/revolution in history. I’m sure the French monarchy would have loved to have prevented or at least ended the Revolution before it ended them. Silencing those who oppose disposability is why the South rose to arms in the 1860s. Hell I’m sure there were plenty of men and woman that would have loved to stopped the first wave of feminists back in the 60s. The men who are realizing their own disposability now are facing the same thing.

    I’ve often wondered at how hard it is to get a discussion going about the ways in which society takes callous advantage of men.
    Yes and just as feminsits say the very fact that people are trying to keep men down is evidence that don’t want men to recognize who they are being treated and certainly don’t want them to do something about it.

  74. Pelle Billing Says:

    I have also had the thought that unconsciously, everyone realizes how much society depends on its ability, at a moments notice, to sacrifice men in large numbers, so when someone starts to seriously raise the issue of male disposibility, most people get nervous and try to change the subject or shame the speaker into silence.

    This is one of the key issues that the men’s movement will face and is facing. In many ways male liberation is more scary for society than female liberation – at least on the surface.

  75. Chris Marshall Says:

    Danny wrote:
    >Silencing those who oppose disposability is why the South rose to arms in the 1860s.

    I’d be curious to know more about this connection.

  76. Danny Says:

    Chris:
    I’d be curious to know more about this connection.

    Here goes.

    During slavery people, living breathing people, were reduced to farm equipment, sex objects, and other forms of dehumanizing labor. That is disposability at its worst. Well obviously the people who were enslaved were trying to speak out against it or try to escape. What happened to those who tried to revolt, speak out, or escape? (There’s a reason the Underground Railroad was a network of secret and hidden tunnels.) And when it came to states rights the states in the South wanted to maintain that disposability so badly that it ceded from the US and were willing to kill fellow Americans in an effort to keep it.

    Yeah if you’re killing the people you’re treating as disposable in order to keep them from rising up and and kill your own countrymen in order to maintain said “right” then you are silencing people.

  77. amfortas Says:

    The earlier discussion about ‘words’ was interesting; Gyno-, phallo, even ‘gay’ got in there.

    The feminists and Marxists were and are adept at destroying the meaning of words, first by capturing them and holding them prisoner (as with ‘Peace’ in the 60′s), then killing them off altogether with misuse.

    To fight feminism we have to take back the words.

    Words in Passing

    We were not ready.
    We were distracted.
    Exhausted.
    Battle had taken its toll
    But the Family survived.
    The children played.

    Malevolent Smile.
    She was Ready.
    Definite. Ordered.
    The Blue Pencil, poised.
    Poisoned.
    Flooding in, the swamp re-defined the land,
    The familiar, the family, the Form.

    The first was FAIR, our childhood’s most cherished friend:
    Resolver of squabbles, distributor, sharer,
    Fair cared for all:
    a string of rubies around her doomed, pale and lovely neck.
    It was so sad.
    They said it was consumption.
    All used up, in tatters, shrouded,
    she just faded away.

    Next to go was that sturdy, quarrelsome EQUALITY,
    which surprised us all as he was so in demand,
    they said,
    by all,
    especially some;
    aye, and relied upon.
    For so many years a staunch friend and fighter.

    His burial dressage, a white cheesecloth, yoked neck.
    Naked beneath,
    his scarred skin a testament.
    Parchment.
    Burned Beyond Recognition.

    TRUTH tried hard.
    Was Tried. Hard.
    Derided, Derrida-ed,
    denied existence;
    perjured,
    Falsely accused,
    she struggled
    as she was garrotted.

    Died hard.

    Soon after that, JUSTICE
    suicided off a nearby cliff.
    Lover’s Leap, a place then
    from which many a couple had gazed out,
    seeking the broader vista.
    Now has Disabled Access.

    Was it in despair?
    Perhaps sympathy with the others.

    No-one saw her silent fall.
    Was she pushed?
    Who could gain?
    Her handmaids will argue for a time and time,
    billing Innocence by the hour,
    Kept in chains, for gain.

    The old, wise man, HONOUR, lost his marbles, they said.
    He languished as the village idiot for a while,
    The butt of jokes and calumnies.
    Taunted.

    His body was found in a ditch one day.
    Starvation.
    They left it there.

    The loss of these good companions all
    has been followed now
    by LIBERTY and FREEDOM,
    two noble and leathery old soldiers.

    They put on their dress uniforms, immaculate,
    faced each other squarely and
    blew each other’s brains out.
    Such fine shots, both.

    They left a note. Signed as written together.
    They could no longer support the malignancy of the vile regime,
    the note said.
    They felt duty-bound to remove themselves
    from further abuse,
    the note said.

    They took DUTY with them.

    An Altar was discovered in the woods
    On which the charred bones of hermaphrodite TRUST
    Were found,
    Sacrificed to Narcissus, elevated to the Pantheon.
    Tears flowed down Olympus’ stony sides.

    Even God cries.

    After, there was Laughter, Music, Whine.
    High pitched.
    So much fun.
    The departed were only words
    After all.

    Oppressive words.
    Now dead.
    Like Fathers.
    Dead, white males.

    What, three were maids?

    So? Whatever, said the wenches.

    No one noticed LOVE fall to her knees.
    Her calls for help were drowned by song.
    Trampled to death under dancing feet.
    The last to succumb.

    Four.

    The surging mob, with popular will,
    Tied DEMOCRACY’s hands, and,
    fattened and degraded on suet foie gras
    trotted it to the abattoir.

    The Impostor was on the scene quickly.
    Ready, Definite.
    Re-defined.
    By Order. She said.
    Scripted.

    The Princess of Lies rides
    over barren lands.
    Long hair her spider-silk, chain-mail
    down her back.
    Across her breast,
    Over her steed’s flank.
    Hooves on skulls.

    The children gabble and cry.
    No words
    describe
    their pain.

    They were
    FORBIDDEN

  78. Danny Says:

    True on feminists taking over and redefining words to their liking. Just look at what they have done to the word sexism. Not content with the way it was defined already they have added institutional power to the mix so that they can say that sexism only works one way. Why do that? Simple because while they may not intend for people to think so calling something sexist sounds more serious than gender discrimination (which is what they call female against male sexism). Some claim that by calling them both sexism the systematic nature of male against female sexism is lost even as they totally dismiss (whether that is intentional or not I think varies from person to person) the individual (mind you I do think that some female against male sexism is systematic like the way mothers and fathers are treated in court in custody hearings).

    In short they say that male against female sexism fits the patriarchy it is indeed sexism but since female agasinst male sexism isn’t systematic (mind you they, advocates that put women first, decided that on their own) its gender discrimination.

    In really short a bunch of bullsh!t.

  79. Nehal Says:

    Pelle,
    An excellent blog. I 100% agree with you that men need to have a movement. Feminism has done some good things, but overall has been a negative for families. The divorce rates have sky rocketed, abortion rates have sky rocketed, number of children growing up without their fathers has sky rocketed. The society seems to have been fractured. A male’s movement will hopefully help us bring about some healing.

    unomi has shifted the focus from the original idea. As for her contention that girls are better academically, it is like comparing Apples to oranges. Biology takes a very different development route. Girls develop faster and then suddenly their growth stops. Boys grow slower (including their brain development). By 15 years of age, boys catch up to girls. So comparing boys and girls within same grade is not appropriate. Since, girls develop faster, for initial stages of life they will have many advantages over boys. Slowly boys catch up and most cases surpass the girls. On SAT scores, boys have 30 points lead over girls in quantitative section. This lead has remained constant for more than a decade.

    Nehal

  80. Duncan Says:

    Pelle,
    I love the blog and i agree whole heartedly with you on most of these issues.
    Especially how we need a balance in gender liberation and how feminism, is flawed in its most basic form ( the fact that it is only for females). I feel like for our society to improve and to take that step, we need each individual to be judged on its own actions, regardless of gender, race or culture. And we need to except that men and women are different but equal and we always have been and always will be. I hope that we can help this generation of male children balance this rapidly feminizing society and in doing so female children will also benefit, rather than vice versa. I liked your description of how we are in a system where we all rely on one another and for this system to succeed we need both men and women to be empowered.
    Im loving this blog even if I am several years late, I didn’t really get hit with a lot of mainstream feminism till I came to Canada last year and I am currently learning and changing my beliefs about gender liberation.
    Thanks Dunc

  81. Pelle Billing Says:

    Thanks Duncan. You’re welcome to the party, even if you’re a bit late ;)

  82. ellie Says:

    Hey Guys, I came across this page by accident but I was *very* interested in what you guys are talking about. I especially thought Nehal’s recent comment was an interesting concept.

    Well let me tell you my perspective. I’m a woman and I have always hated the feminist movement. Mainly this is because it has divided people. My mother was a trial attorney and wanted to stay home with her kids but these feminist ladied were very angry with her. My mother told them then “I thought feminism was about being free and having choices”. Feminism has done some great things of course but my experience in the world has dimmed my view even farther from people telling me I “should” be more feminist. This is beyond ironic! But I’ve also noticed things – things that are patently unfair to men. And it disturbs me greatly that the outcome of feminism is (in part) that women are able to take a superior attitude toward men because men are the “oppressors”. I live in San Francisco and it is wonderful here but this city embodies some of the main things that I find apalling and – frankly – sexist. If you are a man, your opinion counts less and of course it is assumed that men are reaping these huge societal benefits at women’s expense. In San Francisco! Its completely preposterous – we are a very liberal city! I have two stories for you.

    One, I was having my hair done by a single mother of two young sons. She told me that one of her sons suddenly became very interested in his penis and brought it in to show her. She told him to put it away and that no woman wants to see one of those things even if she says she does. I was horrified. I know that boy children are held as being “normal” and girl children as needing special care. Of course girl children do need special care but what about boy children? They need special care too. You can’t just go around telling them their bodies are disgusting. Its wrong. But we are not shocked by this – these are boy, they’ll be fine! We say.

    The second example of a thing that horrifies me about our culture is the fact that we take baby boys and cut off part of their penis (usually with no pain control to boot). If we did this to baby girls it would stop right away. Its disgusting but since its boys and boys are tough (even one day old boys apparently), then it’s acceptable. All these people protesting female genital mutilation (a horrible horrible practice) and not saying a word while we mutilate boys in this very country.

    I’m pretty mad about these things. I guess because they are unjust. And I like men. I like straight men (of course) and gay men – all men. And I don’t think they take anything away from me? Why should it be that in order for a woman to be “liberated” or whatever that we have to bring men down? I don’t like these divisive tactics.

    That said, respectfully I must say that some of the comments I’ve read bothered me a little and I’d like to touch on these.

    First, I understand your need for a safe place without women around but I don’t think you can make a distinction between gay men and straight men. A man is a man for these issues – the gay man is as apt to have injustice done him as a straight one. Mens rights, not straight men’s rights.

    Second, when someone has a strange idea, I have an issue that some of the writers on this page automatically assume the person is being brainwashed by a woman. We as a culture are sexist. You and me, too. I really hope you’ll consider how you might relate to this sexism in our culture without vilifying a woman or women. It’s ugly when feminists do it to men and its the same when the tables are turned.

    Third there was discussion about war. This is a deep topic that I am barely able to comment about in its whole but I will say this: the gentleman’s assertion that men suffer more from war while women benefit from it is – iMO -totally wrong. I do see it from your point of view – you’re asked to put your life on the line while the women stay home. But let me put this *very* common scenario up for consideration – one of many scenarios that happens constantly: its africa, riders on horseback come into the village and rape all the women in the absence of their husbands, fathers, and brothers. When the men return, the husband cannot “forgive” his wife and he divorces her. She is not allowed to earn her own money on her own. She may or may not be pregnant with some baby her trible will reject. Her daughters will never move out because they were raped as well and no one will marry a non-virgin. This scenario iis all over africa and eastern europe. So altogether, do women suffer hardships from war? Yes, they do. Can it be determined if its worse for them? No one can say. And even in the US, I was never sent a draft card so I was never able to rip the f-ing thing up and send it back to the government. That wasn’t fair either – I wanted my say and to be able to protest war in this way but I could not because I was female. Sirs, I submit to you that none of us will have our rights as long as the other is oppressed.

    Sincerely,
    Ellie

  83. Pelle Billing Says:

    Ellie,

    Every individual – like yourself – who is able to see both sides of the gender debate, will be part of the solution instead of being part of the problem.

    And yes, everyone is included: men, women, gay, straight. Problems that affect men affect gay men just as much, and the same for women.

    Thanks for you long and thoughtful comment.

  84. Jim Says:

    “…the gentleman’s assertion that men suffer more from war while women benefit from it is – iMO -totally wrong.”

    Ellie, your point is basuically right, but there are ways in which women benfit ofrm war, and ways in which they suffer horribly. The example you give is one wya women suffer drirectly – it’s just that when it comes to raw numbers it tends to be the men who do the dying. But who is to say what is and isn’t direct suffering -my son happens to be deployed right now, and in a fairly safe place, but let’s say soemthing were to happen to him – I am quite sure his mother would take it as hard as I would – death is better than that kind of grief. When my uncle died in WWII it nearly destroyed my grandparents and it changed my mother’s life forever. It all happened years before I was even born, but it was if it had happened last week, the whole time I was growing up.

    “That wasn’t fair either – I wanted my say and to be able to protest war in this way but I could not because I was female.”

    You are right that that was an injustice, but there’s an even bigger injustice there. What is it?

  85. Chris Marshall Says:

    Elle:

    I really liked your post.

    I especially liked that you made this point:

    And it disturbs me greatly that the outcome of feminism is (in part) that women are able to take a superior attitude toward men because men are the “oppressors”.

    I have noticed that attitude for a long time coming from most of the women around me including my wife, and I can not get them to admit it.

    The best I can force them to admit is that some extreme feminists think that way, but since feminism is, by definiton, about equality of the sexes, or course feminism doesn’t hold that men are inferior.

    In other words, I am accused of attacking straw feminism.

    I am amazed at how hard it is go get anyone (that considers themselves a feminist) to admit the truth of your observation. It’s as if they sense that a lot of other assertions, they they don’t want challenged, would fall apart if the anti-male bias of feminism were admitted, so they fight like lions to avoid admitting it.

    I also like that, of all the issues you could have also included in your post, you chose to complain about male circumcision. I can not believe the hypocrisy of the Americans who circumcise their male children without a second thought. It may not be the most important issue American society faces today, but I don’t think you could find a clearer demonstration of the disposability of men and how their safety doesn’t count as much as the safety of women. I think the fact that society can double-think its way around the issue is very conspicuous and deserving of analysis and discussion. If you can get parents to take a knife to their son’s penis for no good reason, then in principle, you can get them to do anything. It positively sends a chill down my spine just thinking about it.

    Thanks again for your comments and your willingness to speak up in defense of men. They are greatly appreciated.

    I hope to trade comments with you again here at Pelle’s site.

  86. Danny Says:

    ellie:
    One, I was having my hair done by a single mother of two young sons. She told me that one of her sons suddenly became very interested in his penis and brought it in to show her. She told him to put it away and that no woman wants to see one of those things even if she says she does. I was horrified. I know that boy children are held as being “normal” and girl children as needing special care. Of course girl children do need special care but what about boy children? They need special care too. You can’t just go around telling them their bodies are disgusting. Its wrong. But we are not shocked by this – these are boy, they’ll be fine! We say.

    I just had a thought here. Let’s say in the future that son grows up into a man that resents his penis because women don’t want to see it (this would likely depend on him being heterosexual). Could this result in misogynist behavior that is actually a manner of lashing out over internalized hatred of his penis? After getting it drilled into his head that women want nothing to do with his penis he may decide that he needs to “make” them like it. And the worst part is if such a thing were to happen and he became a rapist no one would bother to look into his past to figure out why he became that way, he would chalked up as another woman hating rapist.

  87. Ann Ekman Says:

    Ellie and Danny!

    This negative penis-attitude must be an american thing. We don´t have that here in sweden. I have never heard a mother, woman or girl say she “doesn´t want to se it” and that he should put it away. I believe the situation described by you is a remnant from an old idea where a decent woman is one who show as little interest in sex as possible. An attitude that we have gotten rid of here. At least most of it. A girl who likes sex to much might still be called a nymfomaniac or a whore, but she won´t have the attitude like your hairdresser´s. I think there is a lot of work to be done concerning sex to make it less problematic for both men and women. Our history of sexuality is not a good one and have done a lot of harm to many people and still do. And this is a problem for both genders. I don´t think it´s right to tell a little boy to put his “thing away” and it´s not right to only blame women for such (bad) attitudes either, as it is probably a result of hundreds of years of a sexually restricting system in order to control womens sexuality.

  88. Ann Ekman Says:

    Dear all maskulinists!

    Now it seems that the gender equality debate has got one more movement to balance the gender discussion. Or has it? Men have since Aristotle critisized women and spread misogynistic ideas. Strindberg in the 19th century talked about the oppressed man in society, just as you do. So this part of the men´s movement thing is not new at all! What IS new though, is that we might have come, at least in Sweden, to a point, where it would be a good idea to meet from both sides and discuss what in our society we want to change to make it a good place for all of us. Your men´s movement have put light on a few of those issues which might be as hard for women to see without anyone telling us as, it seems for men to se that women still might have a few objections concerning our so called equal society. What I really object to is that maskulinists accuse feminists of ideas that we don´t favour at all. One of those is concerning paternity. A vast majority of feminists have ALLWAYS worked for the idea that mothers and fathers should SHARE the caretaking of children, and many of us work for individualising “föräldrapenningen”, the economic support you get on parentleave in Sweden. Those who object most loudly are men. How come?? And still we are accused of wanting to deny men their rights to fatherhood. I think your rhetoric is just like the faction of feminists that you critisize; it´s polarizing and does not lead to a dialogue. You turn your accusations toward FEMINISTS for unjust rape trials, for men suffering in war, for men having shorter life, for not dealing with prostate cancer and you name it. Why is it feminists that should be responsible for solving all this, when men take no interest in working for just rape-trials for real rape victims, for breast cancer, for female war victims? It´s not the feminists that judge in court, it is not feminists that oppose more money to prostate cancer etc. As I said before – there are really quite a few things that concerns men that we should work out together. And there are women and feminists that would like to do this. But as long as you men don´t engage in womens issues, and mostly deny our right to feel bad about some phenomenons concerning the relation between men and women, and instead keep on being hostile, then it will be hard to make us want to cooperate with you. Women have been angry and unhappy about things, and have the right to be so, and we are still entitled to disapprove of things that are not right. If you maskulinists go on denying the problems we see in our relation to men, then you won´t get anywhere with your men´s movement, more than getting out some of your frustration among other initiates, and widen the gap between men and women. Is that what you want? There are many feminists, and women in general who recognise your issues, and so do I. It´s up to you though to show cooperativeness after all negative propaganda that´s been going on. Comparing feminism with Nazism is one example. Reach out a hand instead.
    Sorry about the harsh tone, but I really feel that we are getting nowhere when we actually could do a lot of good together.

  89. Jim Says:

    “This negative penis-attitude must be an american thing. We don´t have that here in sweden.”

    That’s good to hear. So that business about discouraging men from standing to pee was a al an urban myth? It sounded like one.

    “What I really object to is that maskulinists accuse feminists of ideas that we don´t favour at all. One of those is concerning paternity. A vast majority of feminists have ALLWAYS worked for the idea that mothers and fathers should SHARE the caretaking of children, and many of us work for individualising “föräldrapenningen”, the economic support you get on parentleave in Sweden. ”

    You may have heard that you can’t generalize about feminism; this is one of those cases. There are large and influential feminist organizations in the US that actively oppose equal parenting. In fact their position is quite traditionalist in line with several of our cultures that don’t agree on much of anthing else. The position agrees with our Anglo traditions that are basically gynocentric: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.military.retired/msg/b5b9584cd31c66ae ,
    or else with traditional Italian or similarcultures that consider care of children to be a uniquely preroragtive. These people consider themselves perfectly good feminists.

  90. Ann Ekman Says:

    Dear Jim!

    I haven´t heard of an actual debate on men and peeing here. But I do actually have an opinion on this; I do really like it when men sit and pee (outdoors it doesn´t matter ofcourse). And do you know why? It´s because then it´s not so likely that I have to smell, stand or sit in their urine afterwards. And if it´s in our house, there is less chance that I (or my husband as he use to sit) will have to clean it up. Despite this opinion of mine, I don´t rescent anyones penis.

    As to this about feminist movements that whant to deny men paternity; I do believe you when you say there are factions of feminism in US that says this, and that they are concervative. We do have concervative women with that idea here to, but they make an issue of NOT calling themselves feminists! So there´s a difference. Sometimes when I read your opinions I get the impression that, you don´t oppose feminism as such, but oppose different issues concerning women. Jou label it “feminist” because you don´t want yor maskulinist movement to be labeled “womenhating” or misogynist. But this about fake rape accusations, and loss of custody of children, are good examples of that can´t really be connected with feminism. Of course there might be a feminist individual who fake rape or win a custody trial, but it´s much more likely that when this occurs, it´s just women involved, women of different politic opinions. I do think that it should be a more honest debate if you talked about what´s bothering you without pointing out people who actually try to make things better. Even if it´s not allways on issues that you want to be solved your way. It might surprise you to know that many feminists here in sweden oppose male circumsicion, which men here in Sweden accuse feminists not to care about while we oppose of female genital mutilation. There are a lot of things to discuss. :-)

  91. Danny Says:

    Ok Ann I’m going to get blunt here.

    This little exchange you just had with Jim above is a shining example what feminists do.

    1. Accuse critics of unfairly blaming feminists for X.
    2. Someone shows an exact example of feminists doing X.
    3. Deflect the example with something to the effect of, “That’s not MY feminism.” or “Oh they are on the fringe and not of importance.”

    Feminists are certainly not to blame for everything that harms men (mind you that sure as hell does not stop feminists from just using blanket terms when blaming men for what harms women) but they are not helping as much as they pat themselves on the back for.

    You turn your accusations toward FEMINISTS for unjust rape trials, for men suffering in war, for men having shorter life, for not dealing with prostate cancer and you name it.
    That is a result of feminists misdirecting on those issues. According to them the problem with unjust rape trials is that women are shortchanged and will often dig for the lowest number on false rape accusations they can find. For years their number was the standard 2% myth but it seems that number is finally falling out of favor with them (I guess they finally realized that it took too much bullsh!t to maintain that one) and some are now using about 8%-10%. And it doesn’t help that they accused those who call out false allegations of trying to pass off mistaken identity for false accusation. Feminists aren’t to blame for false accusations themselves but some of them are most certainly to blame for trying to obscure them and try to make the “real” problem the issue of women being raped. Yes women being raped is a major problem but why do they have to downplay men who are falsely accused in order to get it addressed?

    When it comes to suffering in war the feminist standpoint seems to be that civilian women and children (and it must be nice to be lumped in with children to project an image of total innocence) are the real victims. Nevermind the men that do the majority of the defending (i.e. dying) and to the devil with civilian men. (As a side note here in the States the top line of most college applications reads something to the effect of, “If you are a male over the age of 18 have you registered for Selective Service? Failure to do so could result in automatic rejection of application, fine of up to $_______, and prison term of up to ___ years.”) But women and the children are the real victims of war right?

    On health care its real easy for a mathemagician to work them out to look like whatever they want. Check this out.

    So maybe if feminists would stop trying to sweep the things that harm men under the rug they would not get blamed so much.

  92. Ann Ekman Says:

    Well mr Danny Blunt. Thank you for your interesting response. Maybee I will be able to get some straight answers from you as well! But before that, I want to make a few things clear; no woman I know, feminist or no feminist, want to make light of mens suffering in war. What we do want, is to throw light on the women and get some understanding from men on positions to do something about it, positions that few women are in, I dare say! We do appreciate the protection our own county´s army can give to our country when threathened. On the same time many of us which there were no wars at all, but we don´t feel that we are in the right forums to be able to influence any of that. Well, now to my questions to you: Concerning statistics; among the rapetrials every year, what is most common, men being falsely accused of rape and convicted, or women being raped and the offender going free? I also wonder how many rapes you think are reported at all? The majority? I really agree with you that it´s dishonest to use wrong statistics to make a point. I don´t approve of that at all. But I do really think that most maskulinists on this site, and many men in general, decline to see that there still are things that are unjust to women and instead you seem to demand of us to solve problems for you. I think we would be able to help out and discuss what to do. But it´s hard to summon the motivation when the feeling is that you guys think it´s a womans world out there. Which it is not.

  93. Pelle Billing Says:

    Just a short note on vocabulary: it’s better to use the word masculist as a corresponding word to feminist. Masculinist means something else.

    Also, I don’t self-identify as a masculist, I self-identify as a person who’s working for men’s rights and toward gender liberation for everyone.

    Feminism has been disastrous in many ways, and I see no point in creating a body of theory called masculism. In my book it’s much better to be specific, and talk about men’s issues and women’s issues. When I wrote the post above I hadn’t become as specific in my thinking as I am now.

    I also must say that I find the the very term feminism to be discriminatory and degrading towards men, because it implies that men are to blame for gender roles and that men have oppressed women.

  94. Jim Says:

    “You turn your accusations toward FEMINISTS for unjust rape trials, for men suffering in war, for men having shorter life, for not dealing with prostate cancer and you name it.
    That is a result of feminists misdirecting on those issues. ”

    This goes back to the issue of misrepresentation that ann touches on. There are many traditional-minded women who consider themsleves feminsts, and it is an easy confusion to fall into. In the 80′s feminism in the Us bgan morphing inot a women’s advocay movement – this was the beginning of rape hysteria and “Take back the Night” and a lot of other such hobby horses. In the case of this culture, there already was a women’s advocacy movement called chivlary, and the tow have become indistinguishable for many American and British feminists. Although they still condemn chivalry in name.

    “no woman I know, feminist or no feminist, want to make light of mens suffering in war.’

    In fact they do, Ann. When they make statements to the effect that war harms women more – Hillary Clinton, surely a feminist, made such a statement last year, then they are erasing the men who suffer the ultimate harm in war, in vastly greater than women. Every war. Vastly greater. They most certainly do make light of men’s suffering. They contiunue to make light of men’s suffering when they blame war on men, although women are far and away the greatest beneficiaries of wars their socieities win. This is later used to counter claims that men sufer moere – “Well, they deserve it because they make all these damn wars that we women denounce (and then sit and await for all the tribute form the new colonies to start rolling in). you are probably unfalimilar with this dynamic because Sweden hasn’t ben involved in any wars for a long time, let alone won any, and because even in Stormaktstiden, those poor liitle areas on the continent you controlled were hardly worth the gunpowder it took to win them, so there wasn’t much tribute to enjoy.

    It is the same with circumcision, with domestic violence, with rape of minors, on and on and on. It realy has become pointless to engage with such dishonest interlocutors. And yet there are still feminsts like you, egalitarians, who carry on. Word of warning to you though – ther eis a ver good chance that soemone like you woudl eb denounced as an anti-feminist in the US. Not that that should really matter to you where you are.

  95. Jim Says:

    “Concerning statistics; among the rapetrials every year, what is most common, men being falsely accused of rape and convicted, or women being raped and the offender going free? I also wonder how many rapes you think are reported at all? The majority? I really agree with you that it´s dishonest to use wrong statistics to make a point.”

    Then stop asking about statistics – they are all based on nothing that pertains to the issue of false accusations and unreported rapes.

    “But I do really think that most maskulinists on this site, and many men in general, decline to see that there still are things that are unjust to women ‘

    Name them. The injustices that are usually named in these forums are either:

    1) The fault of women themsleves – the fashion industry comes immediately to mind. another one – and this is really stupid is that women think there should be a disproportionate number of public restrooms for women, even though the reason that women can’t get in as quickly is that other womenn are taking so long ahead of them, and for no apparent reason other than intricate clothing.

    2) Advantages that women hold over men who are in the same circumstances – prostitution for survival is one example.

    3) Whiny nonsense – the complaints about the amount housework men do in house that they are paying the rent on and the owmen isn’t. She can’t manage to bring home hal;f the icome, but he’s suppsoed to do half the housework?

    4) Outright lies – the enumeration fo household task referred in the previous whining complaint is one – these lists somehow never include car repair or simialr activities. And the Pay Gap referred to in the complaint above is another.

    Legal inequalities have elimnated in most developed countries. There may eb some residual ones, but they pale in comparison for false imprisonment on rape charges of being denied the chance to raise your own children.

    “and instead you seem to demand of us to solve problems for you. ”

    Mostly the probelms that women either create of that feminists create. Or better yet, just stay out of our problems and stop commenting one them. Stop commenting on male circumcision – MGM really, stop saying that it is a trivial compared to FGM. That shit is all over feminist blogs. Stop commenting on false rape accusations. Stop commenting on domestic violence aginst men. stop ciommenting on discussions of women raping boys, and saying, wel, it isn’t really rape. That would be a real big first step.

  96. Ann Ekman Says:

    Jees, Jim. You are really so full of hate! And Pelle, do I read you correctly “…degrading to men because it implies that men are to blame for gender roles and that men have opressed women…” . Do you actually say that men are NOT to blame for gender roles and that men have NOT opressed women? Please reply on this, because that would be really interesting. But I do hope I´ve got you all wrong.

  97. Chris Marshall Says:

    Ann:

    If you are interested, I can give you my take on Pelle’s basic theory of gender relations (what I’ve gathered since I’ve been reading and commenting here):

    1. Women have traditionally been protected from harm and assigned the task of raising children. This has limited their access to education, the production of wealth and the development of their ambitions. Until recently, it was not a big deal if a woman wasn’t able to get an education or run a business.

    2. Men have traditionally been encouraged to take great risks with their lives and discouraged from taking an active role in raising their children. It is not nearly as big a deal if a man is killed than if a woman is. For example, men are over 90% of workplace fatalities, and constitute 4 out of 5 suicides. Society treats men as disposable relative to women.

    Men and women together (i.e. society) enforce these rules with their behavior in numerous ways.

    The reason that all modern societies tend to have this same setup was not that, some thousands of years ago, all the men got together and decided to conspire as one against women.

    Any society that deviated from these rules would have been overrun by its neighbors over time for two main reasons:

    1) A society can lose half of its men and still recover numerically in a single generation. A society that loses half of its women is finished.

    2) A society that encourages it’s men to take risks reaps great rewards in power and wealth.

    Thus all of the (major, powerful) societies left in the world have adopted this division of labor/power.

  98. Mark Davenport Says:

    @ Ann,

    I won’t speak for Pelle but I can respond to your incredulousness.

    Yes, men are NOT to blame for gender roles. Each period of history with its concomitant social development generates its own distribution of gender roles, based upon living conditions during those respective times. Oppression is an “equal opportunity” reality in each period with men and women both being restricted to fractions of their potential personal expression.

    In this century much of the world still experiences these traditional inequalities. But the peculiar situation now in advanced western societies is that in many respects women now seem to effectively have the upper hand. This semblance of relative superiority, however, is just an illusion of the age, a reaction to the aggressive feminism of the last half of the previous century – just as the apparent domination of women by men in earlier times was also just a semblance. We seem to remain victims of history still.

    Nonetheless, men are understandably reeling under this current reversal of gender fortunes. Of course neither the historical nor the current imbalances are ideal. The focus of this movement, if I understand Pelle’s point of view, is to promote the reduced victimhood of both sexes as these historical processes of development come to be recognized. Thus the insistence on absolute gender neutrality in every legal regard makes perfect sense for today in advanced western society.

  99. Chris Marshall Says:

    Ann, you wrote:

    I think we would be able to help out and discuss what to do. But it´s hard to summon the motivation when the feeling is that you guys think it´s a womans world out there.

    and you also wrote:

    Do you actually say that men are NOT to blame for gender roles and that men have NOT opressed women?

    When you take for granted that the average man oppresses the average woman, you are saying that the problems men face are not worth talking about next to the problems women face.

    Yes, most of the really powerful people in the world are men. That doesn’t do the average man any more good than it does the average woman, nor does it imply that the average man has any more power than the average woman does. If powerful men cared about men-as-a-group more than women-as-a-group, do you think the Cheneys and Rumsfelds of the world would be so quick to send soldiers to die for no good reason?

    I don’t think feminism created these problems, and I don’t expect feminists to solve them (although I do think men and women should both care about the issues that affect either of them). But I do resent the many ways in which feminists try to minimize the problems men face as if they simply weren’t worth talking about next to what women face.

  100. Pelle Billing Says:

    @Ann
    “Do you actually say that men are NOT to blame for gender roles and that men have NOT opressed women?”

    Men and women have created the gender roles together. However, this has not been a conscious process from either gender’s side, it’s mostly been an adaptation to the circumstances at hand.

    Men and women alike have been oppressed and restricted by their gender roles. You could make the case that women have used men, and that men have used women, but the greater truth is that men and women have simply done what they needed to do for humanity to survive and thrive.

    Chris summarizes my work nicely in his post at 9.52 pm. Mark also adds an interesting thought that the relative fortunes of men and women can vary to some extent through different historical eras. However, once again we need to remember that this is due to the circumstances at hand, not because of an intrinsic urge to oppress either gender.

  101. Danny Says:

    Ann:
    But I do really think that most maskulinists on this site, and many men in general, decline to see that there still are things that are unjust to women and instead you seem to demand of us to solve problems for you.
    You’re free to think it all you want but
    1. I’m not a maskulinist.
    2. At first I thought that “k” instead of “c” was an honest mistake but it appears to be an intentional spelling. May I ask why?
    3. I am aware of the fact that there are things that harm women.
    4. Please point me to where I’ve said women should solve the things that harm us for us. As I have said if women/feminists choose to speak on the lives of men is up to them but if they choose to the very least they can do is speak on them honestly or at least own up to it when they are wrong. Frankly a lot of them can’t even do that. It would be silly to expect women to fix the things that harm men when they can’t even acknowledge them.

    But it´s hard to summon the motivation when the feeling is that you guys think it´s a womans world out there. Which it is not.
    Perhaps its not but women have more power than they admit and men don’t have as much power as women/feminists want everyone to think.

    Pelle:
    I also must say that I find the the very term feminism to be discriminatory and degrading towards men, because it implies that men are to blame for gender roles and that men have oppressed women.
    Not only to men but, at least in the States, feminism seems to be a club for middle to upper class white women. Pretty small group that is.

  102. John R Says:

    A lot of this discussion seems to ignore the basics of gender research, as for example the work of Bob Connell. Feminism made the basic point that we are living in a patriarchal society. Unless we all get that, we can’t talk factually. My book ‘Healing the Male Psyche’ goes into all this in detail.

  103. Ann Ekman Says:

    Danny!

    I think you are leading a dishonest discussion now as you just bypass the fact that I have before written that I both recognise and am positive to work for solving men´s issues. In fact I do allready in two different projects. One concerning male circumsision and honouor-related opression, and in one concerning boys grades in shool (we have a problem with boys getting bad grades in Sweden).
    About my spelling of “masculinist”, aren´t you a little paranoid to try to read a meaning in putting in a “k” instead of an “c”? Sorry, I can´t explain any interessting, maleopressing meaning into that, because it´s just my spelling it wrong in the haste. English is not my mother tongue you see.

  104. Ann Ekman Says:

    Pelle!

    Than you for your answer of one of my questions concerning the creation of gender roles. I have been researching this topic for 3 years and I can agree with you partly, which is that women have participated in creating and maintaining the gender roles through history. BUT, I do have important indications (an understatement) that shows that men have cooperated to create conditions that enables men to gain control over women. Creating laws being one way of doing this. Both old mesopotamian law (the hammurabi code), and the roman law to the laws regulating which professions that women were aloud to work in and not in the 19th century, are good examples. And I doubt that women where in the forums that decided this. You did not answer my second question, which was if you really mean that men have not opressed women. I would like to get an answer on that one too, if possible.

  105. Mark Davenport Says:

    @ Ann,

    Again, not to speak for Pelle, but MEN have oppressed men as much as they have oppressed women. Oppression is the common theme here and I maintain that it is manifested by the conditions of the historical period.

    My draft dodging during the Vietnam war colored my pursuit of a career for years afterward and other “failures” on my part to perform according to the norms of other males has led me to withdraw from ordinary kinds of social interaction with those who have “performed their duty.” And yes, I know that anecdotes are not conclusive but they can be illustrative.

    Men, without the help of a “movement” are all too prone to blame themselves for the limitations of their social context. It really stinks, Ann, to see how blindly we have been pushed around by such impersonal forces. And that “we” is meant to include women as well. Emancipation cannot be an “us” and “them” affair.

  106. Chris Marshall Says:

    Ann, you wrote:

    And I doubt that women where in the forums that decided this

    You think the number of men in those forums divided by the total number of men alive at the time was a much larger fraction for men than for women? And that those forums didn’t also have a lot to say about encouraging the disposability of men?

    Really?

    It is pretty obvious that, historically, only a small number of men were able to make conscious choices to shape society, that the vast majority of men and women were callously used to expand the power base of society, and that those choices were not made for the benefit of the average man over the average woman.

    I think you need to explain what you mean by men oppressing women historically. How do you figure they did that? How do you think that took place?

  107. Ann Ekman Says:

    Pelle!

    I think that I got an answer from you, even though you cant seem to answer with a simple “yes” or “no”. I take your answer as “yes”, you mean that men have not opressed women. You answer with giving me new questions. I could write a lot about that, but I don´t have time for it just now. For a short answer I suggest you looka at contemporary societies like Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan, for the most obvious examples. I define opression as being when somenone have not got the right to decide for him or herself, have not got the right to choose to work, go out of the house, are forbidden to leave the country without her fathers, brothers or husbands permission, are not able to divorce, are not able to decide about to whom she will marry, are not alloud to get an education, when it´s accepted to fysically abuse and rape a woman within marriage, she is not alloud to vote or own property. It´s structural opression when this is supported by law. Please give me an example where there is a society like this but reverse!!!! My answer to you is to look at coutries with legislations like this (partly or with all criterias) and you have the answer on how men can opress women today and could do it in the past.

  108. Pelle Billing Says:

    @Ann

    If men are so powerful, why have men always sent themselves to war?
    If men are so powerful, why are all dangerous jobs considered male jobs?
    If men are so powerful, how come women live several years longer?
    If men are so powerful, how come most of the suicides are committed by men?
    If men are so powerful, how come most of the homeless are men?
    If men are so powerful, how come women almost always get custody of the children?
    If men are so powerful, how come that the only group discriminated against in Swedish law is men?

    I go could on for much longer…

    I have model of gender roles that explains how men and women alike have had to face hardships due to their gender. Do you have a model of gender roles that explains my questions above?

    You call women oppressed. What would you call men given my questions above?

  109. Pelle Billing Says:

    BTW Ann, I’ve just added a section called “Important Posts” in the right hand column. Perhaps that can be a quick way for you to understand where I’m coming from. I understand that many people are not familiar with my work, so it may be hard initially to grasp where I’m coming from.

  110. Danny Says:

    Ann:
    I think you are leading a dishonest discussion now as you just bypass the fact that I have before written that I both recognise and am positive to work for solving men´s issues.
    Just because you don’t do the things that I have pointed out that a lot of feminists do does not magically nullify what I say. Yet you started off accusing us of ignoring the things that harm women with no actual proof. So who is being dishonest here?

    About my spelling of “masculinist”, aren´t you a little paranoid to try to read a meaning in putting in a “k” instead of an “c”? Sorry, I can´t explain any interessting, maleopressing meaning into that, because it´s just my spelling it wrong in the haste. English is not my mother tongue you see.
    No not oppressing. If anything MAYBE insulting but I didn’t have enough evidence to just flatly accused you of such a thing which is why I asked. And now that you have explained that English is not your first language it makes sense. Paranoid eh? Nah.

    For a short answer I suggest you looka at contemporary societies like Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan, for the most obvious examples. I define opression as being when somenone have not got the right to decide for him or herself, have not got the right to choose to work, go out of the house, are forbidden to leave the country without her fathers, brothers or husbands permission, are not able to divorce, are not able to decide about to whom she will marry, are not alloud to get an education, when it´s accepted to fysically abuse and rape a woman within marriage, she is not alloud to vote or own property. It´s structural opression when this is supported by law.
    While that is certainly an example of oppression it is not the definition (and I find it interesting that you define oppression as something men do to women). And based on that definition that cuts down the portion of women in this world that are oppressed to a much smaller amount that what even some feminists say.

  111. Ann Ekman Says:

    Dear Pelle!

    I have looked att your Important… to find out “where you come from” as you call it. Didn´t find anything about that though. But got enlightened on your opinion on a few things, though. What I don´t understand is what “where you come from” has to do with our discussion. Maybee your problem to answer my questions straightforward has to do with you needing to know where I come from, but I can´t see why. I don´t need that about you to see what kind of angle you are trying to establish when it concerns the relation between the sexes, and I think that is the reason why you try to avoid my quiestions all the time.

  112. Ann Ekman Says:

    Dear all!

    I want to thank you for an very enlightning discussion, which have given me a lot of input to work with. Both good and bad. I think I´ve got a better picture of what issues are concerning men and that have to be solved. And thats the good part. I have also seen that there is no way that guys with your way of thinking can be a part of trying to do this. At least not together with women as you are so full of anger towards us. Just like the feminist movement in the beginning, and in some factions of it still. And that´s really sad. Unfortunately your rethorics are very scaring, as well. You contradict youselves all the time. And your dicussion techniques are strange – it is as if you deliberately want to misunderstand just to keep up the quarrel. I which you a very good christmas and hope to see you sometime again in a more reasonable forum.

  113. Mark Davenport Says:

    @ Ann,

    Don’t go! These exchanges have been extremely stimulating and many of us welcome your perspective. Your statement that our movement reminds you in some ways of the early days of the feminist movemnt is very enlightening – and to the point. I hope you don’t feel too beat up by us and I for one certainly have benefited from even your misunderstandings.

    You can help us learn to talk to one another and that matters!

  114. Pelle Billing Says:

    Ann,

    You are the one who cannot answer my questions. I have answered yours.

    So now you are leaving, which is understandable. Your opinions fall apart in the face of facts and logical reasoning.

    I wish you all the best, but your opinions-which are considered normal nowadays-will start to crumble in the coming decade. I take it that a “more reasonable forum” is one where everyone is a feminist and no one is pointing out the inconsistencies?

    I recommend this thesis:
    http://www.didaktikakademin.oru.se/oru-upload/Administrationen/Campusservice/Evenemangsservice/Dokument/Kalendarium/Helen%20Lindberg.pdf
    (I know you speak Swedish)

  115. Chris Marshall Says:

    Ann:

    I think I´ve got a better picture of what issues are concerning men and that have to be solved.

    Really? If you were to list some of the more important ones, what would it look like? Or were you just saying that to appear fair minded?

    I have also seen that there is no way that guys with your way of thinking can be a part of trying to do this. At least not together with women as you are so full of anger towards us.

    Some of us are full of anger and some not. I notice that you have not been responding to my answers to your questions. Is that because I don’t come off as angry, so you can’t wave my points away by wondering aloud why I am so angry?

    For the record, I think women have been fighting for men’s rights for a long time. Marilyn Milos (a nurse who blew the whistle on how cruel and unnecessary circumcision of male infants was), for example, who started NOCIRC, is close to the top of my personal list of people that have made a difference for men. She may consider herself a feminist for all I know.

    I don’t see feminism as any sort of enemy. I do think vast areas of it are shot through with misandry, but then feminism is not alone in that (traditionalist thought is also shot through with misandry), and certainly not to blame for inventing it.

    I do find it interesting that you call us such haters of women, but want to cling to the idea that throughout history men-as-a-group have oppressed women-as-a-group. In other words, you want to blame men-as-a-group. There’s a word for that sort of attitude.

    It’s called hate.

  116. Jim Says:

    “Jees, Jim. You are really so full of hate!”

    Jees, Ann, you are so full of deceit! You use standard dishonest Female Shaming Language. In fact you use the very first form, Code Red. http://theghostnation.com/category/feminist-shaming-language/ They call it feminst shaming langugae, but in fact it’s much older and more traditional than feminism.

    Remember when you said:
    “you just bypass the fact that I have before written that I both recognise and am positive to work for solving men´s issues. In fact I do allready in two different projects. One concerning male circumsision and honouor-related opression, and in one concerning boys grades in shool (we have a problem with boys getting bad grades in Sweden).”

    Good. I believe you really believe you want to help with men’s issues, and the work you are doing outweighs a lot – but here is an example of a conceptual impediment you have that hinders any real effectiveness you will have. Until you address you own internalized misandy, you can’t be truly useful or worthwhile.

  117. monty Says:

    From what I have been able to dig up, historically speaking, the biggest thrust of the misandry in America came in the late 1800s. One particularly sinister aspect of that was the Christian Muscular Movement. One of the results of this tortured “Romantic” thinking (all related to the god awful concept of feminine VIrtue) went like this: girls were punished for participating in any sports, and boys were punished for NOT participating in sports. This also lead to corporal school punishment for boys, but not for girls. This pernicious thinking remains today in our movies, media, schools and legal systems.
    Immediately Americans hopped on the bandwagon with this movement. That is when Kellogg and Graham concocted their famous cereal and cracker for one purpose only: to stifle male sexual urges, the “thinking” being that all male sexuality was a threat to Virtuous women. In fact, the word masculine, at that time, was considered a term to denote “psychological aberration in males”. In other words a masculine male was someone who needed to be “fixed”. Until 1930, boys who were caught masturbating were fitted with an assortment of torture devices that would lacerate the penis. These men lived through the torture, though it was a life of severe pain and humiliation. Eager mothers ordered the torture device from Sears.

  118. AlexNY Says:

    I have been able to find only ONE example of any movement or organization that self-terminated after its mission was accomplished.

    On December 7, 1941, the America First Committee voted to dissolve itself, four days after Pearl Harbour. This was Charles Lindbergh’s movement to keep the United States out of World War II.

    Every other movement that I have been able to find persisted long after it was no longer needed, turning into a tumour that served no interest other than its own preservation.

    This is why Feminism has become a movement of hate, dedicated to the denigration and vilification of men.

    The masculism movement will be no different. It will grow from hope, triumph over the myriad injustices that currently plague men, and then perpetuate itself by parasitically feeding on fear, hate, resentment, etc.

  119. Pelle Billing Says:

    Yes Alex. Movements have their dark side.

    Hopefully the men’s movement can be successful, while the women’s movement is still around. That way there will be some balance of power, and we can then minimize the dark sides of the men’s movement.

    It also helps if many of us are aware of these tendencies.

  120. Robert Says:

    yes we need…
    equality
    womans moviment yes
    men moviment yes

  121. Danny Says:

    Actually Alex I don’t think its a matter that feminism is no longer needed. I think the problem is that its image has been twisted by hate. I personally laugh every time I see a feminist throw their hands in the air whining and asking why does feminism have such a nasty image. And the reason I laugh is because that feminist is more than likely willfully ignoring some of the very vile and nastiness that causes people to have such a negative outlook on their movement. Its like the crazed stalker asking why their “boyfriend/girlfriend” doesn’t want to be around them anymore, in the 10th voicemail they’ve left on their phone in the last hour.

    Does feminism have good positions? Yes Does feminism has less than favorable positions? Yes. Has feminism been poisoned? Yes. Is feminism damaged beyond repair? I really hope not. If you look hard enough you’ll find some good ones and I’d hate for the things they are trying to do to be spoiled because of some loudmouths that can’t get past blaming men for everything bad that’s ever happened.

  122. Tweets that mention Do We Need a Men’s Movement? -- Topsy.com Says:

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Kelly, TO Molefe. TO Molefe said: Really? There's such a thing as a "men's movement"? And quelle surprise, it's not what we men do on the bog. http://bit.ly/gBtHp9 [...]

  123. Ben Says:

    You guys have been reading my mind.

  124. Ben Says:

    Well, mostly you have.

  125. Ben Says:

    On the question of other methods of psychotherapy for men – yes, I agree that men’s therapeutic needs differ from women’s.

    I produced a documentary on the science of love for the Discovery Channel Europe and interviewed a number of research scientists. One thing that they pointed out – and this is in no way new, experimental or hypothetical but long-known fact amongst brain researchers – is that the brains of men and women have over 100 anatomical differences. Also, as a trained psychotherapist in humanistic psychotherapy, it was obvious to all of us, women and men alike, that working with men and women in therapy is different. But both sexes do have the need to work through their feelings. The emotional center of the brain – the hypothalamus – has about twice the number of cells in the male brain. I personally believe this results in a reservoir effect – we can hold back more but also release more when the floodgates open. I realize this is a very unscientific generalization, but with those kinds of differences in anatomy, there is obviously a difference in our emotional worlds.

    I’m a little surprised to read a Swedish man writing about the distance between men and homophobia. I experience it a lot in America, but I lived in Germany and Austria for many years and enjoyed a lot of emotional closeness to other men – including hugs, comfort, compliments on my looks and flirtatious jokes. Maybe men there are more Romanesque than I thought.

  126. Pelle Billing Says:

    Thank you for you input Ben! Very interesting all around.

  127. Charliee Says:

    I dislike both feminism and Masculism!! I have come to terms with being gender blind, although it seems that neither side is willing to let go of their pasts and move on or to create an environment that is altruistic.

    One subject in particular really sets me off and that is child rearing/parenting. Most women have this thought that they are the only ones capable of parenting, when in reality, children need both parents who will not use them as Chess pieces. As a woman I am genuinely sick of the complaints I hear, for example…. Single mom says ” Oh its so hard, I can’t do this on my own.” Problem is … she just doesn’t want to relinquish any time she has with that child but will blame her frustrations on others.

    As for the issue with Shelters..

    I dont understand how in my city we have 3 women shelters but non for men, seriously, do we believe that men are the only ones who abuse others? What about all that manipulations and mental abuse some dudes girlfriend put him through. Now I don’t want to knock any female who has genuinely been abused but you have to understand that women are not the only sex who are abused, in some same sex relationships, women are abused by other women or vice-versa for gay males.

    Here is my proposition….

    Joint custody be provided to both parents (except in cases, of alcholism, drug abuse or proven abuse.) or unless both parents made other arrangements! On the other hand I also know some men who completely drop their responsibility(child) on other people and then get ticked off when asked for money.

    I believe we should petition the city to make more shelters available to men and to upkeep the current ones we have for females.

    As for psychotherapy for men ..

    Well unfortunatly each person is different, having gone into Psychology in School, I understand that you cannot treat everyone the same way, there may be some difference but what we need to look at is the outcome and is it sustained.

    Lets say we go onto meds/therapy.. Joe has adhd and takes Ritalin but Dan has an adverse reactionto the same medication, then basing therapy on sex is a joke. Or for example Joe comes from an abusive family and Dan is rebelling because his family is over-protective, can you treat these two males the same?

  128. Pelle Billing Says:

    Charliee,

    You are aware of both men’s issues and women’s issues which is what the world needs…

  129. fabrizzo Says:

    we should have a men’s movement that speaks solely for men,till the feminists see reason to work with us to better the community as a whole instead.in other words,we should balance the disparity caused.

  130. bing Says:

    I believe in all the movements. be it men. women, gay or les. It is needed for all to speak up for the balance. Now the women movements seem to have more voice.

  131. fabrizzo Says:

    either the women speak less,since theyve what they came for,or the men should speak more.and can i beseech the sponsors to be more fair while distributing support for various causes?im sure a fair company will gain more support from the public.

  132. Ramon Says:

    Jim:” The same is true for men too; it is hugely valuable to be able to switch and see things from a woman’s perspective, and I consider it a mark of a mature man.”
    All’s well with everything else that you said except that through TV and all other media, we are fed nothing but the woman’s perspective and that seems to be all we get to see now – the whole continuum of it. Our boys are being feminized and brainwashed by feminism from day one. We are being marginalized – made almost irrelevant. Yet we sit here and argue about seeing things the woman’s way. The men’s movement – and I say that in its full sense – must see that the social issues that the author speaks of are dealt with AND at the same time see that the political issues are dealt with as well. We are being hurt in both areas =. I see no need to shun one side of the coin in favor of the other. The women’s movement would not have gotten too far if it hadn’t been politicized. Right now, men are too busy in-fighting for any movement to be taken seriously and for any real gains to be effected.

  133. Ramon Says:

    Jim:” The same is true for men too; it is hugely valuable to be able to switch and see things from a woman’s perspective, and I consider it a mark of a mature man.”
    All’s well with everything else that you said except that through TV and all other media, we are fed nothing but the woman’s perspective and that seems to be all we get to see now – the whole continuum of it. Our boys are being feminized and brainwashed by feminism from day one. We are being marginalized – made almost irrelevant. Yet we sit here and argue about seeing things the woman’s way. The men’s movement – and I say that in its full sense – must see that the social issues that the author speaks of are dealt with AND at the same time see that the political issues are dealt with as well. We are being hurt in both areas =. I se no need to shun one side of the coin in favor of the other. The women’s movement would not have gotten too far if it hadn’t been politicized. Right now, men are too busy in-fighting for any movement to be taken seriously and for any real gains to be effected.

  134. Jose Says:

    Pelle Belling: “However, the details of the GLBT perspectives/issues are beyond the scope of this blog, as are the details of the issues that poor inner city kids face, or survivors of sexual abuse.”

    I know this is a little bit late, but “survivors of sexual abuse” shouldn’t be beyond the scope of this blog, since male victims are (almost) always excluded from help with sexual abuse, like male victims of domestic violence.

  135. Pelle Billing Says:

    Jose,

    “I know this is a little bit late, but “survivors of sexual abuse” shouldn’t be beyond the scope of this blog, since male victims are (almost) always excluded from help with sexual abuse, like male victims of domestic violence.”

    I agree. That’s why I wrote “the details of…”.
    The general issues that male victims of sexual abuse face, are within the scope of this blog.

  136. Jose Says:

    Oh, ok, thank you for your clarification.

  137. Anastasia Says:

    There most certainly does have to be a Mens Movement. All the points mentioned above affect men of all ages, religions, sexuality, ethnicity, etc and they need to be dealt with. Unfortunately our society right now doesn’t WANT to hear that men may need special help, that they are victiims too, that men can be raped by EITHER sex, that boy children are doing worse in schools…the list goes on. It seems to me that despite women having more power now than ever before, Fems still want me to believe that I am a second class citizen. Well, I HAVE been abused and I HAVE been taken advantage of by the work system…hell, I’ve even been paid less for a higher position than a new male coworker. But I’m not about to color all men with the same brush, just as I hate being classified with other women.

    One thing I must point out though:
    Men don’t seem to take well to giving help to other men, nor asking for it.
    This issue needs to be taken care of before a true MRM can be made.


Google