Posted on 01/10/2006 1:49:22 AM PST by nickcarraway
SUSHI DAS discovers what men think about feminism.
'FEMINISM has turned women into selfish, spoiled, spiteful, powerless victims," shrieked the email. "Men are talking, can't you hear it? Marriage rates are down, birthrates are down, men are using women for their pleasure and then leaving them."
If it was only one of a handful of emails I received, I might not have given it much thought. But there were many more. "I do not think it's men or boys that need reforming. I think women are the main instigators of hate against one half of the population," wrote another man.
Then there was this: "I have healthy relationships with women and always have protected sex to avoid entrapment … why should I risk losing everything I own and having my children taken away from me?"
And this: "The modern guy is not looking for the 'services' past generations did, they often just want a nice person to share their life with, rather than someone who is going to be climbing corporate ladders, getting pregnant when she chooses and then assuming complete control of a child's life. That is not to say they are not supportive of women's careers and goals."
The emails were a response to a challenge I posed to men on this page a couple of weeks ago. Specifically, I asked them to engage in debates relating to "feminist issues" and show they understood that equality, women's rights, the work/life imbalance, the declining birthrate, sexual politics and relationships generally are important to everybody, not just women.
I received, a tsunami of emails. Many were considered arguments. A significant number were the bitter outpourings of men hurt by women. Some elucidated the frustrations of men who couldn't find Ms Right. Sadly, many were simply vitriolic or abusive.
In the hundreds of emails, anger appeared to be the underlying emotion because the writers believed the pendulum had swung too far in favour of women. There were some common threads: men were angry that women's needs took priority over theirs; they felt men constituted the majority of the unemployed, the homeless, the victims of industrial accidents and suicides, that men's health received less funding than women's, and that boys' education was poor. In relationships, they felt some women were "not very nice to men" and were often too selfish to consider their needs. These concerns are real,
but how many can really be blamed on feminism?
Essentially, men raised three broad concerns over why they did not engage in the debate on feminist issues. First, they were scared of being howled down by aggressive feminists who dismissed their views. Second, they felt they were victims too, but women didn't listen to them. Third, they were confused about what women really wanted and what constituted appropriate behaviour.
On the first issue, I agree, some women are dismissive of men's views simply because they are men. Men who speak out, wrote one man, are "smashed upon the rocks of indignation" and this made it "a very, very scary debate to engage with". Another said: "Opting out of an argument in which we cannot hope to be allowed an equal voice let alone a fair outcome is a perfectly rational response."
My response? Get over it. If you're a man and you have an opinion, speak out. Put your case. It will stand or fall on its merit. Stop being scared. There are plenty of women willing to listen. And if you get howled down, get up and say it again. That's how women got their voices heard in the 1970s.
On the issue of men as victims, some argued women too are violent, that men have few rights on abortion, that female teachers get off more lightly when they sexually abuse male students, that men are vilified as pedophiles, that affirmative action is discriminatory, that women frequently win the custody battle. Clearly these concerns require attention. Perhaps it is governments that are not listening to men, rather than women.
Finally, some men were unsure of their role in society. This is complex, and women must recognise this. But men should also let common decency be their guide to appropriate behaviour. Being a decent human being shouldn't be that hard.
Equality is a prerequisite for development. When the shouting from our respective corners is over, perhaps resentment from both sides will melt.
Many emails I received were a cry from the heart from men. But it's not just about women listening to their words, it's about men taking action to improve their own lives. This means speaking out, whatever the consequences — engaging in the debate on equality or feminism or whatever it is called these days.
With that in mind, I'll leave the last words to a man: "Damned if we do, damned if we don't. We need to speak though. We do not want our daughters growing up stunted by arguments or situations that could have been campaigned away. Equally, our sons require education. But how do we do this with integrity? That's the challenge for all involved."
you->The above sentiment is OUTRAGEOUS. It is saying that once women are physically beyond their prime, they are worthless to men and are things to be discarded. Plus, it isn't true. People of both sexes are getting married at later and later ages. And why is mature age only significant regarding women?
First JasonC's statement did not speak to the worth of anyone. It's like saying the sky is blue. What is, is. And sadly, TAdams8591, JasonC's statement is true. We've seen the reports of this for years now. Lots of studies all pretty much say the same thing. Marriage statistics drop hugely for women over a certain age. True, more and more people are getting married at older ages but as a percentage of the population the odds for any particular woman aren't good. Fortunately, I happen to believe, the odds are greatly superior for conservative women as conservative men are more the marrying type and we know what we want (conservative, traditional women). I see lots of women getting married at the churches I am familiar with but see Michael Douglas' ex-girlfriend (I can't say her name as I don't have pictures of his current girlfriend to post) and her crowd of liberal stormtrooper women going single and wondering why.
How so?
Have to disagree with you here JC. Men and women both function far better married than single. While an oldeer marriage is not likely to produce children (although many older couples adopt) it does produce two more productive members of society who stay healthy and happy longer then they would as singles.
Marriage is honorable in all.
I've got your back this time around John :~D
Story of my life ;~D Thank you, TA :~D
I disagree too! Marriage is wonderful at any age (at least it can be!). I've been married 20 years, and I'm 50; according to what Jason says, there was no reason for my husband and me to stay married after we could no longer procreate, and we should have divorced. Sorry, won't do it.
Aww. Still cranky, I see. :)
Do you people ever sleep!?!?! ;)
Those who ID with feminism and support it, have a lot to answer for, because their muscle and their blindness pushed all the crap of the activists. And they need to cut it out. Many have by now, most can see the damage it has done. By your dictionary, #2, the movement, which is organized around something quite different from that belief, is the real thing.
Do we need a new word for it? No, we don't need a word for it at all. We need the ideological movement to cease utterly, to be smashed politically, and to have no adherents. Nobody needs them, for anything. You don't need a scrap of feminism to be moral, to want nice things of any description, for yourself, your family, or others. They simply have nothing to do with it.
Feminism sold the cockamamie notion that a grand conspiracy of immoral oppressors was taking away their flowers and puppy dogs, and it was just a flat out lie. They then pretend that ordinary women must rise up and side with them in political struggle against non-existent beasts. And paints pictures of said beasts on unoffending men all over. Making all of it up. All we need to do is stop listening to them and stop believing their divisions and their peddled hatred. And then just act as ordinary, non-ideological, non-Stalinist human beings, in accordance with ordinary morality.
Sure. I wasn't on after about 6 pm eastern last evening, until about 8 am this morning. I pop in and out for a few minutes at a time during the day, but Real Life (tm) definitely comes first at home, where as a dried-up, elderly woman unfit for procreation, I have to find other ways to keep my husband happy. ;-D
Thank you John. You made excellent sense.
Accept my apology also. I have buttons that get pushed also. I hope you find what you want in life :)
Yep, it did turn out to be a good thread. :)
You should take your own advice.
"Anybody who thinks they are getting "cranky" from me on this thread, imagine getting the like not from one dismissable person on an internet bulletin board in one thread over a day or so, but everyday, everywhere, from a quarter of all people you meet, for 25 years."
Sounds like you don't get along with very many people. :)
Sure! I slept from 655 to 684. :~D
I think I did once. What's it like?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.