Black people in America were not not-oppressed just because white people were killing each other in wars, in the streets, etc.

True, but the average black person was obviously worse off than the average white person. The slave masters were oppressing the slaves and deriving an obvious benefit from doing so. For example, a plantation owner would force a slave to work in his fields and sell the crops raised, only giving the slave food to eat and a place to sleep.

You are suggesting that the average man’s lot in life could be as bad as or worse than the average woman’s in a country, and further suppose that women as a group could be oppressed by men as a group.

If women are indeed oppressed in that sense, that would make them the only oppressed class in all of history whose oppressors went out into the fields every day and worked for them.

By making the above statement, you conveniently leave out the ENORMOUS power present in feminine sexuality and emotionality.

It is unfortunately an inevitable conclusion - whoever argues that women are victimized by men must also hold the opinion that the qualities inherent in the Feminine are not very powerful. Of course, this is the source of the widespread bias AGAINST the feminine among feminists.

That said, that very power is so awesome that entire power structures have been erected to control it - the church comes to mind. So I do agree that oppression has taken place. Defining the modern woman based on resentment for things that happened hundreds of years ago (or happens today in other parts of the world) is not very helpful.

I’m not saying you do that - don’t know you well enough - but many feminists do.

Eivind

Oppression in this case is about what men do to women, or vice versa. It is not about what men do to other men.

Black people in America were not not-oppressed just because white people were killing each other in wars, in the streets, etc.

Sure, women can sometimes have it worse, and men can sometimes have it worse. Conditions flux and flow in any given society.

However, oppression is something else… As Ken Wilber likes to say, “the only way a group can become oppressed is if it is fewer, dumber, or weaker than another”. Gays are fewer that straight men, therefore they can easily become oppressed. Blacks in the US were fewer than the whites, and could therefore be oppressed. However, women aren’t fewer than men, meaning that they need to be dumber or weaker in order to be oppressed - which is not a conclusion most women would appreciate.

As for Afghanistan, I would rather live when I’m alive and not be locked away in some man’s house my entire life. Learning how to read would be nice too.

What do you suppose men are doing when they are outside the house in afghanistan?

I would imagine, largely, manual labor under harsh conditions, with every minute of their day accounted for.

You make it sound like the hardest decision they face all day is which restaurant they are going to have lunch at.

As for reading, I’ll bet there are lots of men in afghanistan who would like to learn how to read also.

It would be interesting to know what the male vs female literacy rates are.

I tried finding it in the world economic forum’s report but they didn’t cover Afghanistan. I wonder why they omitted it? I suppose it’s too dangerous right now to gather data. I couldn’t find Iraq in their list either.

Even if being a man is far from great, there is nothing that says that being a woman can’t be worse in some places.

True, and there is nothing that says that men can’t have it worse in other places (in reality I mean, not feminist fantasy), such as their likelihood of being violently attacked (or maimed or killed) during their life. Or the likelihood of someone taking a knife to their genitals without anethesia under non-sterile conditions (a near certainty for men in Afghanistan).

men and women are part of the same gender system and are assigned roles and tasks according to what works, not according to any kind of oppression

Even if being a man is far from great, there is nothing that says that being a woman can’t be worse in some places. There are degrees in hell. Gay people and straight people are also part of the same “system” (whatever that means), but that doesn’t mean one group isn’t oppressing the other.

Also, it would be nice to know where exactly women are being educated at the expense of men and what the size of the problem is.

Given the conversation we had about the huge national fundraiser for Care recently, I thought at first that this blog entry was inspired by that conversation. But now that I see that it predates that, it just further confirms to me that something is not right with how we are looking at this 3rd world aid thing.

CARE are quite proudly announcing their stats that suggest that when women get money, 90% goes back to the family and when men get money, 40% goes to the family (the rest generally goes to drinking, gambling and other shenanigans).

I was really concerned when I saw one of Norway’s most famous male politicians comment on and confirm this. He said that when “men are given money, WE spend it on alcohol and gamling and such things”. Then he laughed somewhat shamefully. Here you have a, by most standards, powerful man, but I swear I saw his dick shrink as he said that. Talk about pounding your own gender into the dirt with pride. There is a self-destructive tendency in men these days due to the demonization at the hands of feminists that has reached to the very apex of the Norwegian power structure. Nobody seems unaffected.

I would like to see these statistics, for I assume that they are based on real research. But when Obama’s sister - herself a CARE representative, flown over to Norway for the occasion - in a talk show was asked whether she had seen real life examples of these statistics being true, she laughed somewhat embarassedly before she confessed “no”. “But don’t call me a feminist,” she shrieked.

Now, isn’t that interesting!

Yet, let’s still give them the benefit of the doubt. Let’s say that men in THIRD world countries only give 40% back to the family (I’m pretty sure that minister fares somewhat better, even though he was owning the shame as if it were his own), let’s look for reasons why? Could it be that the masculine psyche in these areas of the world has been completely broken after centuries of slavery and submission to imperialistic forces. Could it be that what is going on now - cultural imperialism, with feminism as the essential ingredient - is FURTHER DESTROYING that psyche? Are they just severely traumatized?

I’m not seeing the problem being solved in that case. I’m just seeing fifty percent of the population being thrown to the dogs because we Westerners have decided that they are unreliable, violent and not altogether useful human beings.

What a beautiful TV report they showed. The man used to be so violent. He was drinking and beating his wife every day. But the wife got money through CARE so that she could get him help and feed the family, and now everybody is happy. The wife saved the day and now the man has transcended his own base and evil ways. “I don’t beat her anymore,” he said with shame and some traces of relief.

This, of course, is how it is with all families in Africa, not to mention the world. Women being beaten and drunk men beating. Yep, that’s it. Listen to the minister. He owns that shame just fine.

Let’s stop the shaming, guys

Eivind
http://www.masculinity-movies.com

PS! I give CARE money every month.

Your statement here confirms how male issues have been made completely invisible. You think that it’s enough to even mention Afghanistan, since male issues aren’t talked about, only the female issues.

But as Chris points out, male issues include being violently killed or maimed as well as being unjustly imprisoned. Other issues include performing all the dangerous jobs (and there are lots of those in underdeveloped countries), as well as being forced into warfare against your will.

So it’s clear to you that you would be better off as a man than a woman living in Afghanistan?

I would like to know how likely men/women are to be violently killed or maimed or unjustly imprisoned. How much you want to bet for men it is far more likely?