I agree. If they actually teach the full picture in an age-appropriate way (meaning don’t start to early, and tread lightly when you do start), then it could be valuable.

However, as far as I know, radical feminists dominates the gender discourse in all countries where feminism is present, to the extent that “the structural oppression of women by men” is the starting point in every discussion on gender. So every time a government funded program is launched, it is from the perspective of men being guilty and women being victims.

In addition, officials will produce new rules for teachers on tackling “sexist, sexual and transphobic bullying” in the classroom.
Nothing wrong here as long as the those lessons on gender equality and DV are all inclusive and I like the idea of new rules to deal with sexist, sexual and transphobic bullying as long as they fully inclusive.

I don’t want to think the worst case but I worry about is if this is done under the banner of feminism depending on what sources of feminism are used this could very well turn into a war on boys just as Pelle calls it. Remember there are schools of feminism that define sexist as male against female only and only talk about male against female DV to the exclusion of others.

If what we talking about is actual equality feminism then I would actually support this but if we are talking about the “empower women even at the detriment of men” feminism that is common these days then this is doomed to turn out badly.

I would be very interested in seeing the actual curriculum on how they plan to implement this.

When I first read this I was about to interpret it as you saying that it is a good thing that boys are shamed in the classroom but it does seem that you are saying its a good thing in the sense that it helps bring attention to the desparation of feminists. And with that I can agree.

Yes, that is exactly what I meant.

Not the main threat but they aren’t helping as much as they have convinced themselves they are and pat themselves on the back for.

True and very annoying and as such, dangerous in that MRAs will spend more time badmouthing feminists and less time badmouthing family court judges and other people who are doing a lot more to further the oppression of men than just talking.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s important to badmouth feminists. Their nonsense badly needs vocal opposition.

But the more immediate power being wielded against men is in the hands of other traditionalist men and women like family court judges.

When I first read this I was about to interpret it as you saying that it is a good thing that boys are shamed in the classroom but it does seem that you are saying its a good thing in the sense that it helps bring attention to the desparation of feminists. And with that I can agree.

Feminsts shrugged men off by telling us to “man up” and after all this time men are starting to do just that but there’s more to it than that. It’s not that men are finally speaking up its that they are doing so in ways not approved by feminists that are bothering them. They are all for men checking other men on their misogyny (because it puts women first) and men checking other men on misandry (because its still fits their party line of putting all the responsibility on men’s shoulders) but they don’t want us checking the misandry of women because that shows that women are not quite as innocent as they think they are in this system (which they call patriarchy when by definition puts the buck in men’s laps).

Society has been profitting from the disposability of men for so long that it will be a hard battle to break those old ways. I mean hell how can get a group of people to stop thowing their lives away when they have been convinced that throwing their lives away validates their identity?

I don’t think feminists are the enemy, or that the success of feminism is the main threat we face.
Not the main threat but they aren’t helping as much as they have convinced themselves they are and pat themselves on the back for.

And we men, collectively, seem to be dumb and passive enough to let it all happen.

I am pretty optimistic about where we are and what’s happening now.

I think by most measures (access to education, financial security, …) , men and women are both better off today than they were 20 or 30 years ago.

By some measures (fatherless children) we are both worse off.

I think one significant way in which men are better off is that a genuine debate about the disposability of men is taking shape, and the old ways in which that debate had always been shut down are not stopping it this time.

For example, I am floored by how well Glenn Sacks’s various campaigns work.

I don’t think feminists are the enemy, or that the success of feminism is the main threat we face. Men have been callously disposed of by all societies since ancient times because the pay-off for doing so is so tremendous in terms of power and wealth.

I do think the absurdities of feminism (for example, the triumphant shaming of boys in the classroom) are a symptom of the forces at work, and a positive one at that. It shows desperation on the part of the feminists involved, as Pelle pointed out.

The main threat we face is the reaction “but then who will protect us?” that will be given from all quarters (especially from traditionalists, much more so than from feminists) as the proposition that men deserve to have their safety seriously considered takes hold.

People will fight like lions to preserve the ability of society to sacrifice men in large numbers, and to indoctrinate boys at a young age that their honor demands that they put up with being sacrificed as needed.

When you think feminists care about equality between the sexes, then going to great lengths to shame little boys seems absurd. When you realize they are in a desparate fight for legitimacy, however, it makes perfect sense.

Michael Flood, one of the people pushing these policies, is a true believer. I emailed him several weeks ago regarding his website’s lack of information and resources for male victims of abuse. It never seemed to occur to him that any boys or men who came across his site would want that sort of information. For Flood, and people like him, it is not about legitimacy but “fact.” They actually believe what they are stating is true and will not give any credence to anything or anyone suggesting otherwise.

Raw. Naked. Power.

On top is BETTER than equal, after all.

And we men, collectively, seem to be dumb and passive enough to let it all happen. A shame that we seem to have been convinced that, in order to “protect” women, we must allow ourselves to be destroyed — or at least yoked, and emasculated.

My favorite sentence was this one:

The problem here is that feminists are searching for ever more far-fetched ways of
demonstrating why feminism is needed.

Whenever someone’s behavior doesn’t seem to make sense, it is usually because the problem you think they are trying to solve is not the one they are actually trying to solve.

When you think feminists care about equality between the sexes, then going to great lengths to shame little boys seems absurd. When you realize they are in a desparate fight for legitimacy, however, it makes perfect sense.

Well done.