I was just reading over at the Daily Mail about a Rebok ad in Germany that was removed due to it’s offensive nature:
A controversial Reebok ad has been removed from display following widespread complaints.
The poster, which ran at a gym affiliated with the brand in Germany, was intended to motivate, with the slogan: ‘Cheat on your girlfriend, not on your workout.’
Instead, however, it was met with a consumer backlash, and the sportswear firm pulled the ad and acknowledged that it was ‘offensive’.
So, Rebok pulls their ad and apologizes for being offensive to women but men are punched, beaten, abused, have coffee thrown on them and portrayed as stammering morons in the media and that’s okay with consumers or even funny? Jim Macnamara, author of Media and Male Identity: The Making and Remaking of Men did a PHD Dissertation looking at men and the media and found the following:
The study involved collection of all editorial content referring to or portraying men from 650 newspaper editions (450 broadsheets and 200 tabloids), 130 magazines, 125 TV news bulletins, 147 TV current affairs programs, 125 talk show episodes, and 108 TV lifestyle program episodes from 20 of the highest circulation and rating newspapers, magazines and TV programs over a six-month period. Media articles were examined using in-depth quantitative and qualitative content analysis methodology.
The research found that, by volume, 69 per cent of mass media reporting and commentary on men was unfavourable compared with just 12 per cent favourable and 19 per cent neutral or balanced. Men were predominately reported or portrayed in mass media as villains, aggressors, perverts and philanderers, with more than 75 per cent of all mass media representations of men and male identities showing men in one of these four ways. More than 80 per cent of media mentions of men, in total, were negative, compared with 18.4 per cent of mentions which showed men in a positive role.
The overwhelmingly negative reporting and portrayals of men in mass media news, current affairs, talk shows and lifestyle media was mainly in relation to violence and aggression. Violent crime, including murder, assault, armed robberies and attacks such as bashings, accounted for almost 40 per cent of all media reporting of male violence and aggression, followed by sexual abuse (20.5 per cent), general crime (18.6 per cent) and domestic violence (7.3 per cent).
Some people think the negative portrayal is “no big deal.” But it is a big deal. This portrayal of men is dangerous to society as it causes people to stereotype men and see them as dangerous perverts. Men are reacting to this stereotype by going on strike, avoiding interactions with women and children; they no longer work with kids, volunteer as often or get married as readily for fear of a legal or cultural backlash. Many are “going Galt.” These are not positive developments for society. So, yes, negative portrayals of men are a big deal.
Update: You can listen to my interview on the topic of negative portrayals of men in the media with radio host Brian Wilson here.
With regard to the title question: The surge of gender-war feminism in the Seventies was accompanied by “a short march through the institutions:” a marshaling of approval and alliances inside academia and the major media. Thus, as militant feminist advocacy groups organized and gained political influence, their cultural allies in the universities and the media worked to invalidate any suggestion that women are capable of viciousness toward men.
Academia and the mainstream media’s power to shape perceptions and attitudes was greater then. As with the renascent tensions between the races that flowered in that era, they proved capable of slapping down voices and messages contrary to the preferred “narrative:”
– That men oppress women through a combination of political and economic mechanisms;
– That women are helpless before the power of “the patriarchy” and require special legal protection from it and assistance against it;
– That women must be held blameless a priori as regards their treatment of men, regardless of objective facts.
This also helped to suppress any possibility of “political competition” in the shape of equal-rights-for-men (“masculinist?”) organizations that could counter the militant feminists in the political arena.
Though the power of the Educracy and the Old Media have diminished greatly since then, it will be a long time before their political and attitudinal legacies can be dispelled.
Indeed, one additional line of “narrative” is:-That expression of male sexuality is by nature violent and male sexual desires are fodder for ridicule.
>>>>>>>>gender-war feminism….
…it never worked. Too much fraternization with the enemy…
this man hating has been front and center for decades, so, why just start to notice it now?
ex: hundreds of government programs for women, practically nil for men
ex: men and boys not wanted in the schools, full of women teachers. college grants for women and minorities only. white males trying to point this out are shut down.
ex: billion$ for programs like v.a.w.a, planned parenthood, etc. men = $0
ex: women sentenced to a fraction of the prison time for same crime as a man
ex: many times more more gov. $$ spent on cancer research on women’s cancers than men’s
ex: laws that count women as not culpable. child rape for women can typically get a sentence of probation.
ex: false allegations (even w/o proof) from a woman against a man (child abuse, d.v., rape) can completely ruin any man, and usually won’t get a woman even charged w/ a crime
ex: child custody laws that default to women, when stat’s actually say children are seriously abused by women more, and are a lot safer w/ dad than mom, or mom and new s.o.
ex: women still can get supported by a man for life after divorce. not so much for guys.
ex: the inequalities in divorce and child custody laws have led to men not wanting to marry, and rewarding women for divorce, as evidenced by the vast majority of divorces (and almost all involving children) being filed for by women.
i could do this all day. so, as asked before, why notice this slideshow of male abuse now? had your fill of feminism? first cousin to marxism.
As a (male) nurse, I’ve deliberately avoided pediatric work even though I love kids (and they love me), just because of the reaction I expect many parents have been trained to have. A single guy interacting with children not his own? Pervert!!!
Of course, being a guy in a 95% female profession, many people also assume I’m gay. I don’t mind that, even though I’m so straight my back hurts.
Straight male nurses are actually in considerable demand. Most female nurses would rather work under their supervision than gay male nurses. The OR Director at my wife’s hospital was just fired for general bitchiness and a long list of HR abuses. A straight male nurse + a Masters degree = Administration and $100k +
I hear you. My youngest stepson is a nurse in the Navy. The Navy is sending him to school to become a psych nurse practitioner. Last term, he did a clinical in a high school. While there, a 14 year old girl admitted to him that she’d been raped and that was the cause a of a lot of her behavior problems. Of course he reported it. One of the senior female staffers at the school confronted him, saying, “So, you’re the troublemaker.” The fact that the girl was able to tell him meant nothing.
Being a Navy nurse may help with some of the “male nurse” = gay stereotypes. Having a very pretty (lawyer) wife and two young sons doesn’t hurt, either. One of the nurses he used to work was is a former Navy SEAL.
I had an appalling male nurse the last time I was in the hospital — which, actually, thanks to him/it/whatever, was the last time I will EVER be in a hospital.
Male nurses and “nurse practioners” (of either sex) are on my “no freaking way you’re coming near me or mine” list.
Male nurses should be restricted to providing care for male patients.
Many of the people in advertising (and other professions, obviously) didn’t have a strong male in their lives. The wise, strong person was the female — mom and grandmom. In fact, this generation (both genders) probably harbors a grudge against men because they were abandoned, shunned or never even identified. (“Who’s my dad?”)
Humans develop their personalities in first grade. The bashing of white men in ads is just a manifestation of the questions that were never answered then and the lack of a good male role model throughout childhood.
I’m not a psychologist, I just play one (poorly) on the Internet.
“In fact, this generation (both genders) probably harbors a grudge against men because they were abandoned, shunned or never even identified. (“Who’s my dad?”)”
Really? That’s a pretty broad statement isn’t it? I personally am divorced, and I work my butt off to help provide for my kids, and I am involved in their lives. I know of a few single fathers, yet you never hear about deadbeat moms, nor will you ever hear anyone say anything even remotely close to your comment about women.
Stereotypes like this encourage this portrayal of me.
Yahzooman wasn’t talking about you, Khelmar. He was referring to the millions of kids whose parents never bothered to get married at all, and may not even know who their father is.
Thanks to feminism and the “sexual revolution”, that sort of thing is now considered normal. Men are unnecessary except as sperm donors and sources of money. There’s certainly no need to show them any respect . . . and the commercials don’t.
Women hold a lot of the spending power in the household, which is why a lot of advertising is aimed at flattering them.
Not that that’s any excuse.
Yes, women make a lot of the buying decisions in families. However, when a commercial says “Your husband is a dumbass,” isn’t it also saying “You’re a dumbass for marrying him.”
You’re assuming that the woman ever bothered to get married at all. Or that she stayed married to the man after she got what she wanted from him (children and a chunk of his income).
Depicting all husbands and fathers as dumbasses works just fine on the women who respond with “Well, that’s why I don’t need one.” Or “This just proves that I was right to divorce mine.”
Since the stated purpose of advertising is to influence people (normally to buy stuff), this type of advertising seems pretty dumb. First, you alienate men (half the population). Next, you alienate a lot of women, such as those married to men they actually like and mothers of sons. Seems to me that’s a pretty stupid advertising strategy.
Men commit far more violent crimes than women, so they are just being realistic. All this political correctness has got to stop.
What does the ideal media look like where nobody is a villain? Does every bad guy have to be a space alien or a robot in order not to offend anyone?
People need to remove the giant stick from betwixt their buttocks.
“People need to remove the giant stick from betwixt their buttocks.”
No, you need to remove your head from that same area.
Realize that carrying water for the Feminazis won’t get you laid, nor will it gain you any special treatment when it is your turn to go through the meat grinder.
You think of yourself as more sophisticated and open minded than the rest. In reality, you are just another useful idiot.
What garbage. 40% of all domestic violence is by women, and the vast majority of child abuse is by women.
Now, if you say that violent men are such because of single mothers selfishly ejecting the father from the boy’s life (while seizing is money), then you would be correct.
Men commit more crimes?
Then we need a Congressional study to determine why that is….
Then money for programs designed to prevent that from happening in the future.
Well, Dr. Helen, I guess the easy answer is that guys make fun of each other. Self-deferential humor, and all that. It’s all in fun.
You got two guys who do not like each other, maybe after work they’ll go down to a bar, get drunk, and then go out into the alley and punch each other. But the next day, when there is a job to do, they will work together.
Women, however, will not. If there is one thing I’ve learned from group assignments over twenty years of teaching, and from ten years of selling real estate–both professions are heavily dominated by women–it’s that when you have two girls who do not like each other, you have to keep them separate. They will not work together. The job will not get done, and you’ll have problems all around.
Anyway, yeah, this has been going on for forty-odd years, the denigration of men. Most guys take it with a grain of salt and go on about their business. But woe onto he or she who denigrates a woman.
It’s not just the media. It’s the culture, the law, the court system, the legal process, the marriage contract, all of it favors women at the expense of men. Some might call that chivalry, but what it really is is obsequiousness. Weak men will do anything to get laid, even discriminate against themselves.
Men wrote the laws. Only men can rewrite the laws. Women are certainly not going to rewrite the laws, because the laws as currently constructed give them power.
As far as going Galt goes, I wouldn’t really call it going Galt. I’d call it tuning in and dropping out. When I was 15, my girlfriend asked me, “When are we getting married?” We’re not. Why get married these days? So you can get divorced, go broke, be forced to pay child support some other guy’s bastard?
The problem here is not with women. It’s with the law. I actually like most women. Some I can do without, but for the most part I like women. I’m just not about to subsidize their bad behavior. I don’t discriminate against her. I simply ignore her.
I have an education, a job, a career; I make good money. She has an education, a job, a career; she makes good money. She wants to move in with me so we can split the bills and have sex? Fine, but in my house, which is paid for, she will respect my authority and abide by my decisions, or I’ll throw her out on the street. It’s as simple as that.
Fine, but in my house, which is paid for, she will respect my authority and abide by my decisions, or I’ll throw her out on the street.
A nice sentiment, but by law, she can take your house from you, or at least extract payments from you that may force you to liquidate your house. Even if you are not married. It is called palimony.
No, she cannot, not if it’s owned free and clear, not if it was bought through an LLC and is not under my name.
If you share property, if you share money, if she performs sweat equity, you’re married by common law, at least in Texas anyway. But if we do not share property–I provided her with a room at a modest rent. We did not share money–separate bank accounts, all bills split 50-50. I do my chores, and she does hers. Then there is no claim that she can make to any of my personal or corporate accounts.
not if it’s owned free and clear, not if it was bought through an LLC and is not under my name.
Under that condition, yes.
But how many men own a home free and clear when they are of marriageable age?
That America induces men to go through these hoops just to avoid ruination, upon entering marriage, means that America ultimately does not care about marriage (especially Social Conservatives, who are big phonies on the issue).
No, she cannot, not if it’s owned free and clear, not if it was bought through an LLC and is not under my name.
If you share property, if you share money, if she performs sweat equity, you’re married by common law, at least in Texas anyway. But if we do not share property–I provided her with a room at a modest rent. We did not share money–separate bank accounts, all bills split 50-50. I do my chores, and she does hers. Then there is no claim that she can make to any of my personal or corporate accounts.
We never got a marriage license. We never performed a ceremony. I let her move in. She paid rent, half of all bills, and did her own chores. So we had sex together, big deal. When she inevitably walks out, as she will–look at the divorce rate–she is entitled to nothing more than what she moved in with.
My money and my property are safe. If I never shared either with her, then she is entitled to neither. I know it sounds complicated, but actually it’s very simple. I paid my bills; she paid hers. We had sex together for a while, so what? She can walk out whenever she wants, but then she could walk out whenever she wants if we were married. But we’re not.
And now she doesn’t like it. Something about total equality, perhaps?
I would add that if you had a child, you would be in big trouble financially, even with the various precautions and separations you have maintained.
>>>>>And now she doesn’t like it. Something about total equality, perhaps?
Well, either that, or that you — perhaps due to a bad past experience — treat her, not like a partner in your life, but like a potential threat to be guarded against.
A favorite of mine ,is ,calling Viagara, a cure for a man’s perceived, disability. As a man, I would rather see it marketed as a cure for unattractive women. Just kidding!
“A favorite of mine ,is ,calling Viagara, a cure for a man’s perceived, disability. As a man, I would rather see it marketed as a cure for unattractive women. Just kidding!”
Great post except for the ” Just kidding!”
Don’t be afraid to speak the truth to women. They need a big dose of it. The truth is, gaining 50 lbs, cutting your hair short, not wearing make up, and dressing is sweats is massively unattractive. The idea that men should just get used to it, “because that’s a real woman looks like”, is laughable. It is time men started laughing at the BS we are expected to swallow.
I bet most Viagra users would not need it if they were in bed with an attractive slim woman who appreciated the man she was with.
The reason internet porn is so popular is exactly because it is preferable to the real women available to most men in America today.
** I bet most Viagra users would not need it if they were in bed with an attractive slim woman who appreciated the man she was with. **
That’s a stupid, snide comment. Viagra is used mostly by older men. You know, those whose equipment has aged along with the rest of their bodies, and doesn’t function that well anymore regardless of who they’re with.
** The reason internet porn is so popular is exactly because it is preferable to the real women available to most men in America today. **
Wow, you hate “real women”, huh? Have you seen the men available to women in American today? Carrying AT LEAST 50+ lbs. to begin with (not “gaining” it), bald/balding or worse yet balding with a stringy and/or greasy ponytail, take absolutely no care of themselves including lack of hygiene (little things like bathing, wearing deodorant, shaving, nail-cleaning & clipping, brushing teeth, using mouthwash …) Logically I could conclude men who’d rather be alone and whack off to porn are plain lazy, as they don’t have to make any effort at all. After all, the air-brushed slut on a computer screen doesn’t care — she doesn’t have to look at, smell, or interact. Yet THESE are the men who complain the loudest about women, and expect top models to throw themselves at their dirty feet. On the other hand, the women who spends the time, energy, & $$ to look her best gets criticized for being “high maintenance”; we all know how men shudder at them as well.
I too could go on and on, but real people of either gender realize it’s truly about what’s inside — that’s the most important. They also recognize that as we age, we just aren’t going to look like we did back when — only women are expected to, or become invisible.
All the good ones are taken, no doubt.
Men and Christians are the last groups that have to be beaten down so that we may have a better Socialist/Communist/Fascist/Nazis world order, ruled by Metrosexual men and Lesbians.
When one reads what Government can do to a man based on a rumor, or even less, it’s best to steer clear.
. . .unless you’re a public school teacher, of course.
Dr. Helen, the solution is obvious. It’s for men to do the same thing women do now: complain en masse. They won’t stop making these commercials until then.
Sorry, I’m a man and I see this as “no big deal.” Maybe the statistics are the way they are because men actually find spilling coffee as funny and aren’t so sensitive to care who it spills on. And women do care about it, so the advertisers react rationally and portray the bad stuff happening to men. If anything, this only shows that women are insecure, not that society hates men. I’m surrounded by strong women in my life, my wife, sisters or mother would just laugh at the spilled coffee and wouldn’t care much if it was spilled on a man or woman.
I guess it will be no big deal when in real life HR sees fit to fire you from your job if a woman makes a false sexual harassment complaint, the courts put you in jail for failing to make a child support payment if male (not if female, of course) and your 12 year old son is forced by the government to pay for the next 18 years for the baby that the 34 year old woman down the street had after she had sex with him (a felony, but no big deal, of course). Or maybe you will lose your job and your livelihood if you are accused of being a pervert with no due process but again, no big deal because the stereotype of men as perverts, dangers, and sexists is just in fun! Ha Ha!
I’m absolutely against legal discrimination against men. I have a friend who went through a nasty divorce and it is a sad story of gender bias . But, regarding the portrayal of men in the media, and especially in advertisements, I don’t really see a problem. If there is a bias against men, as I said before, that simply might be that men don’t care so much. My friends and I insult each other all the time it’s part of how we communicate and I find it funny. A good example, the scene in “Gran Torino” where Eastwood’s character teaches the young guy about being a man by taking him to a barber shop where Eastwood and the barber exchange insults. Watch that scene and tell me how much either man would care about how the media is portraying men. Of course, if your argument is that bias in media leads to bias in legal and business activity, than you may have a point.
Well done, Dr. Helen.
False rumors are form of workplace violence, and false rumors against a man regarding his harming of women and children (a real life event) are serious forms of violence, leading to serious charges of attempted firing, a male victims EEO compliant, agency denial, deep pain and job transfer for the falsely accused.
I relate such violence via false rumors to false images on television. How terribly detrimental to men, and how painful to developing male’s psyches, understanding and trust of society, while women will cry out that images showing them as less than powerful is wrong and offensive. How can women (and imbecile men) claim one set of false or offensive images hurts and the other does not?
I recall a few years ago two particularly offensive advertisements, what for I don’t know, however. Only the deeply offensive part was etched.
- Women cutting off the male parts of a voodoo doll to influence a man to show pain and buy or go somewhere – insurance possibly.
-Women on a beach pushing sausage through a grinder and making a attempt to relate destruction of male parts to what would happen if males did not buy some kind of merchandise.
There was a cell phone ad a few years ago: car gets stuck in the snow and woman (who I must admit looked like my last college roommate) viciously, sarcastically, points out that she had asked for a cell phone for Christmas but he got her …(something else which she then proceeded to pull out of the trunk). He just stood there silently, taking it, while I waited for him to dump her into the trunk and walk away with the keys
Guys like you are perpetuating the problem. It doesn’t matter that the women in your orbit are still sane, there are plenty of insane ones who can and possibly will ruin your life on a whim. I hope it doesn’t happen to you, but if it does, realize that your attitude empowered them to oppress you.
Our problem is as much with men like yourself as it is with the Feminazis.
Correct. For whatever reason guys like this abound. I’ve tried to figure out if the women in such men’s lives are genuinely that good (where no one notices anything amiss in the media, and all is hunky dory for men – seems extremely far-fetched), or these men have given up their potential and are living a life fooled into thinking all is well. Their women have help designed these men’s comfort zones where the men think it was their idea. The men go to color their coloring books and into ridiculous man-caves where they feel masculine, and laugh like juveniles at juvenile programming.
Wow! FINALLY someone is talking about this!!! This portrayal of men as jerks/pervs/fools has bugged me for thirty years.
The MRM and MRA are definitely catching on, hoooray! Check out the growing number of MRM websites.
The male-bashing ads make me confused. There must be many women in the advertising and marketing fields who are involved in making ads that portray men as idiots, jerks and brutes. So I wonder, do those ads reveal what women actually think about men?
Then I see ads aimed at women about products to help females attract men or enhance their relationships with boyfriends and husbands. What’s the point, if women need men like fish need bicycles?
My mother’s sister used to observe “women complain about their husbands, but after their husbands die they talk about him like he was a saint”. You know, guys would like to hear something positive once in a while.
Men, if you marry, get rid of the TV. Make her have to learn her man-hating from books. And keep control of your paycheck. It’s the consumer spending that’s 85% female controlled that’s paying for your constant denigration and disrespect on the TVs she shouldn’t be watching, men.
An old friend of mine is in advertising. Her masters thesis had something to do with Ms. Magazine. Just sayin
I agree that there is much man hatred going on these days, but there is also as much traditional woman hatred to go around as well. Men like Bill Maher, Bill Clinton, and Andrew Weiner are feminist superheroes, while conservative women get bashed. I am not so sure if it is so much man hatred as it is traditional family hatred that is prevalent.
Oops saying not sayin.
Why Do Ads that Diss Women Get Removed while Ads that Diss Men are Funny?
Because men have not established an active and potent political presence that can elect or de-elect politicians and influence the media to respect (fear) them.
Is answer question?
Men foregoing marriage goes way beyond their negative portrayal in tv shows and commercials. Until the way divorce is handled is changed, and men no longer risk losing everything simply because she got bored, or simply decides she’s not haaaaaapppy, more and more men will decide it’s not worth the risk.
Dr. Smith, thank you.
Misandry
Fred: Three men robbed the bank.
Mike: Thankfully, eight police personnel caught them.
02/26/10 – Classical Values by Eric, (video 7:35)
=== ===
[edited] “The word “misandry” was flagged in red, unknown to the spell-checker, even though it is hardly a new word. Misandry is the hatred of men.”
“Men do not exist unless they commit crimes or do bad things. Men are “people” or “personnel” when they do good things. They are “men” when they do bad things.
There is a connection between misandry and feminism. This has been slipped by me, over the years. I’m pissed off. I don’t take kindly to being manipulated.”
=== ===
I find it troubling that constant anti-male imagery in the media indicates that, in reality, most women *want* to see men degraded.
By contrast, any show that degraded women but showed men as superior and noble, would not be watched by men. Men just have no interest in such content.
The presence of misandry (and the total absence of misogyny) in the media says a lot about the characters of the two genders.
I hope no one minds too much if I bring in a fictional example.
There was an episode of That Girl wherein the title character heckled a stand up comic. No one was laughing for the comic, but they loved the girl’s heckling. The comic decides his act is better with her as a heckler, so he gets her to join the act. Obilgatory sitcom plot twist follows: The comic is unable to make it for a show. The girl knows all the comic’s jokes, and her boyfriend knows all her heckle lines. The show must go on, and it did with the girl as the comic and the guy has the heckler. Disaster follows; the girl had the audience’s sympathies, and the guy got a solid punch in the face. While treating the guy’s eye with an ice pack, an old showbiz hand in the room tells them they overlooked a rule of thumb: A girl making fun of a guy is funny; a guy making fun of a girl is not.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. I tried to think of a good counter-example, but Burns & Allen was less about a guy calling a girl stupid and more about a guy just letting a girl be herself. Maybe those ads that dis women would’ve been more acceptable if a woman was doing the dissing?
The reason that ads which poke fun at women are removed is because it is assumed — correctly — that women are more sensitive and fragile than men. It is assumed, again correctly, that men are capable of, and expected to show, greater forbearance than women. This is a tacit admission that men are inherently superior to women.
The notion that soemhow, for thousands of years, there has been a universal male conspiracy to keep women down — and that this is why women have not contributed as much to civilizational advance as men — is patently absurd on the face of it. I’m sure there’s a perfectly adequate explanation for burqhas and dunking stools, but I’ll leave that up to others to elaborate on.
Now as a man I just broke a cardinal rule of manliness by pointing this out, but have chosen to sacrifice myself for the greater good.
Well, to be flippant, I suppose it’s the popular narrative of taking it to The Man. Just off the cuff, 9 out of ten criminals are males, roughly forty percent of the violent crime is committed by black males, a rather small portion of the general population. However, the normal criminal class is really a small percentage of the general population at large and one can’t really generalize maleness from that small sample: Although, on second thought, it probably makes more sense to generalize from our other natural born criminal class in congress and its professional politicians, including community organizers. They certainly are the cream of the crop regardless of gender.
You are so wrong. All of you. Women are weak and sensitive and compassionate and morally superior, physically capable, smart, good, better and must be protected. Even if they must be protected against themselves. Wake up people, the only problem with PC is that it just doesn’t go far enough in protecting females. You know, they is just dumb bitches looking for a pimp. YO.
That was very offensive and insensitive. Why couldn’t you be compassionate and understanding like that Bozo guy at #23?
I think anybody who’s read any of my comments here at PJM knows how I feel about this issue, and how freaking HAPPY I am that it’s finally being made into a mainstream conversation.
I am so anti-PC that I might as well call myself “Mac,” just for the sake of symbolism.
Modern “feminism” is to “misandry” as “healthcare reform” is to “socialism;” it’s a slightly prettier way of saying the same d@mn thing. At least “chauvinism” (the polite speaker’s “misogyny”) is rightfully considered a BAD thing. You don’t get “Chauvinist Studies” on college campuses. You don’t have entire branches of literature devoted to “Postmodern Chauvinist Thought.” You don’t have militant chauvinists out there on the front lines protesting how they want the government to subsidize their sexual habits because they spend way too much on sexual harassment lawsuits every year, and it makes it hard for them to afford their subscriptions to Men Rule, Chicks Drool Monthly.
Feminists are delusional hypocrite imbeciles who deserve to be mocked to within an inch of their frigid little lives. I have no problem pointing at blatant male chauvinism and laughing, so why shouldn’t I do the same thing to feminism?
I’m not a feminist; I’m an egalitarian. I believe in equality in all things, including the equal right to be mocked, offended, defended, loved, hated, and appreciated.
If you don’t like it, well… Frell you.
Im a speech therapist who works with children. I have to be very careful with trips to the bathroom or fixing of clothes. I always ask for help because I know the accusations could fly and end my career. The culture of man hating is everywhere. I am divorced and know the awful way men are treated by the state. I would get threatening letters every year because my child support payments were slightly off kilter with their schedule, threats of jail, losing my professional license due to small technicalities. It was awful. I see my sons going “galt” as you say. They saw how i was treated and how men are treated in the media. All I can say to men is be careful (or act gay).
W
Because women are inherently stupid and enjoy that kind of low-brow humor.
If they didn’t, it wouldn’t sell.
Oh, wait.
Did I violate the meme?
27 years ago, in a small southern Illinois town, my brother became the first father to be granted custody of his children, 2 little girls. They were 2 and 4. Their mother was told to pay a percentage of her salary, she never did. When my brother went to child support enforcement, then housed at the women’s shelter, he wasn’t allowed beyond the fence. The director came out to see what he wanted and after hearing the story replied “you stole her children, isn’t that enough?” and walked away. I often joined him for various business social events when he needed an escort. I’ve witnessed women sneer at him when they find out he’s divorced with children and ask if he “bothered” to pay child support. When he informed them that no, he had custody and his ex never paid a dime they would shake their heads and say “poor woman.”
When has ANY of that ever happened to a woman? When has any women who has been granted custody been accused of “stealing” a man’s children? Or asked if she pay’s child support? I’ve spent the past 27 years working on behalf of fathers rights and been called a “troublemaker” and “gender traitor.” All because I think fathers are capable of loving their children every bit as much as a mother and often more. I’ve successfully campaigned to my local media outlets to NEVER used the term “Deadbeat Dads” and instead refer to “Deadbeat Parents.” The FACT is that most fathers DO pay their child support when they don’t have custody and most mothers DO NOT pay when they lose custody. Men just don’t have the same lobbying force that women do.
One final thing:
For decades I’ve wondered the exact question posed here. Why is it ok to denigrate men? Because the feminists said so. Well it’s wrong to demean ANYONE. If that makes me a “gender traitor” so be it.
My apologies for the length. This is a subject that really gets my back up. I have 2 brothers that are incredibly wonderful men, 4 outstanding nephews (including the 2 young men married to the above mentioned nieces) and a grand nephew. I can’t stand the idea that they are treated as lesser people because they are male.
Bless you, lady.
I generally lay it to false chivalry.
This is not new, of course. Back in the 60′s (I’m old enough to recall) it was widely understood that sitcoms (excepting a couple like Leave it to Beaver) treated men like one of the kids, ala Bernstein Bears. Of course, since any difference between men and women must ALWAYS be interpreted as degrading of women, these same sitcoms were later interpreted as anti-woman, because the women were too perfect!
(I actually read a sort of biography of the Bernsteins, and it turned out it wasn’t on purpose. As far as I could figure out, Stan B. just loved his wife.)
I’ve always considered “you don’t get it” to be the cry of the bully; fairness is irrelevant because we have the power on our side. (NOTE: I’m happily married, never divorced, and have not knowing been discriminated against. Nor do I expect my wife would hold me up.)
Oh one thing, the US is lucky in that at least equality is officially there. Many other countries have this witch’s brew of equality and paternalism, and don’t see the contradiction. For example, here in Israel, an opposition leader (might be the head, Tsippy Livni) actually said that they have to discriminate against men (have women retire at 62 instead of 67) in order to have equality! Women actually get an extra half a tax exemption. (On the other hand, the average female salary is half the male, but I’ve seen no analysis of the causes.)
With sex selection a major motivation for abortion, women, historically not as physically strong or as agressive as men, are swiftly becoming a world wide minority, a reverse of the natural norm, where they were the majority who lived longer. Teaching men that they should give in to the worst angels of their nature because it is ubiquitous, is not a good idea in the milieu. What is the answer? I must admit I have no idea, except to treat everyone as an individual, not as a stereotype, particularly where the stereotype is something you want to avoid while rendering it as infrequent as possible.
When I was young there were a huge number of portrayals of women as ditzes and dumb bimbos. I thought it wasn’t right, even as a child, because it didn’t match up with the reality of the women and girls I knew.
Now I think the same about the portrayals of men.