a href=”http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/18/men-are-womens-issue/”So states Marybeth Hicks/a in the span style=”font-style:italic;”Washington Times/span (via a href=”http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/”Ed Driscoll/a):br /br /blockquoteIf Mr. Obama wanted to actually do something significant for American’s women and girls, he would have created instead a White House Council on Men and Boys.br /br /Just imagine the estrogen-induced response to something so sexist as a council chartered to address the concerns of one gender over another. Oh, wait. That’s what this is.br /br /But anyway, his is a council to address the issues of women and girls, so of course it is entirely fair.br /br /Actually, I’m the mother of three girls, and I happen to think Mr. Obama’s new council won’t win the battle of the sexes. That’s because the best thing anyone can do for American women and girls is to encourage men and boys to “man up.”br /br /A council on men and boys would promote stable marriage as the best avenue to improve the lives and living conditions of America’s women and families. A council on men and boys would address the crisis in American manhood that results in the scourge of infidelity, divorce, lack of commitment and fatherhood with multiple partners./blockquote br /br /At first, I thought this was a positive piece on men, but no, just a hit piece on how men are pigs and should support women. If Ms. Hicks wonders why men have no interest in a “stable marriage,” or commitment, she need only look as far as her own dripping disdain for men and her lack of insight into a culture that holds men responsible, portrays women as victims, and then sets up a “council” to correct a problem that women spend over 30 years in the making. A council on women is about expanding their opportunities. A council on men is about controlling them.