War on Men has reached a whole new front. Not content with her article last year Suzanne Venker is back with another article to claim that the world is so much more terrible for men.
In November of last year, I wrote an article for Fox News called The War on Men (which I subsequently expanded to an eBook). To keep it pithy, in the piece I focused on one effect of this war: the lack of marriageable men. But there’s so much more to it. The truth is, men have become second-class citizens.
You would have to live in a literal black hole of ignorance to reality in order to believe this. Like seriously? Texas just ruled to make it harder for women to access basic vital healthcare and we are still discussing whether women have it better or not?
Oh right! Only sluts need birth control and abortions! We are discussing ladies.
The most obvious proof is male bashing in the media. It is rampant and irrefutable. From sit-coms and commercials that portray dad as an idiot to biased news reports about the state of American men, males are pounced on left and right. And that’s just the beginning.
If the biggest problem in your life is sit-coms making fun of you then your problems are awesome.
There are also plenty of good father figures on TV. Let’s take the much maligned Homer Simpson.
I have made this argument before. You may think that Homer is an incompetent bumbling oaf but that doesn’t mean he is a bad father. In fact he is an excellent father when the line is drawn. He is a flawed man, and a man who’s flaws knock him down and he STILL does his best for his family.
There are plenty of these characters here.
As for Sitcoms? Without comedy characters a sitcom would be boring. You watch 30 Rock for the weird neurotics! You watch Red Dwarf for everyman Lister and his uptight compatriot Rimmer. You watch Friends because you know they will get up to zany bullshit. Because Zany Bullshit is FUNNY.
The war on men actually begins in grade school, where boys are at a distinct disadvantage. Not only are curriculums centered on girls’, rather than boys,’ interests, the emphasis in these grades is on sitting still at a desk.
Except boys from asian groups seem to do as well as girls mainly because they are expected to study before they play.
We don’t treat boys the same as we treat girls when it comes to “studying”.
Plus, many schools have eliminated recess. Such an environment is unhealthy for boys, for they are active by nature and need to run around. And when they can’t sit still teachers and administrators often wrongly attribute their restlessness to ADD or ADHD. The message is clear: boys are just unruly girls.
Girls don’t need exercise?
I agree with this. You need a recess period to promote health for children. Obesity is rife in the USA and kids should play. This is not rocket science.
This isn’t bias against boys, this is a sick education system that places more emphasis on test results rather than education.
The truth is, men have become second-class citizens.
No. Men have just seen a variety of prior benefits get eroded till both genders are “equal”. So a lot of the prior benefits being lost were just things we take for granted.
And honestly? We just had a rape in the USA where football was more important than victims, so we are in a place where men are not second-class citizens.
Hell, we still live in a world where women are not given proper healthcare in places like Texas. The fact of the matter is that women are not first class citizens yet.
White, Straight and Male is Easy Mode in the Game of Life.
Things are no better in college. There, young men face the perils of Title IX, the 1972 law designed to ban sex discrimination in all educational programs.
Yes. Because sex discrimination is such a bad thing.
Under Title IX, the ratio of female athletes is supposed to match the ratio of female students. So if not enough women sign up for, say, wrestling and ice hockey, well then: no more wrestling and ice hockey.
No. Not really.
- Whether the selection of sports and levels of competition effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of members of both sexes;
- The provision of equipment and supplies;
- Scheduling of games and practice time;
- Travel and per diem allowance;
- Opportunity to receive coaching and academic tutoring on mathematics only;
- Assignment and compensation of coaches and tutors;
- Provision of locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities;
- Provision of medical and training facilities and services;
- Provision of housing and dining facilities and services;
AKA women should get facilities that were always available to men. That we took for granted. So far it doesn’t seem to be some death of American Football or Wrestling or what have you. It just means that women atheletes get the same stuff.
What was once viewed equal opportunity for women has become something else altogether: a demand for equal outcomes. Those are not the same thing at all.
Equal outcomes in sensible things. We aren’t expecting female loosehead props to play for England, we are expecting a female rugby team.
Title IX is also abused when it comes to sex. In 1977, a group of women at Yale used Title IX to claim sexual harassment and violence constitute discrimination against women.
Genuine harassment and violence should be punishable offenses, obviously. But the college campus is a breeding ground for sexual activity, which makes determining wrongdoing (and using Title IX to prove it) extremely difficult. Sexual misconduct does not necessarily constitute harassment—and women have as much of a role to play as men do.
Because sexual violence and harassment are bad?
The argument can be summed up as this. Women and men are having sex, how can we determine if it’s sexual harassment or violence if women are having sex. Why is grabbing a woman’s arse in the context of a bedroom different from grabbing it in the middle of a lecture?
Which is precisely how stupid this sounds. CONTEXT and CONSENT determine sexual harassment and violence (because S&M is a thing).
Here again men are in an impossible situation, for there’s an unspoken commandment when it comes to sex in America: thou shalt never blame the woman. If you’re a man who’s sexually involved with a woman and something goes wrong, it’s your fault. Simple as that.
Except we routinely blame women for getting raped. Except for the pro-life laws being brought into place that specifically PUNISH women and force them to either take on a massive financial responsibility affecting their careers and life in general or have unsafe medical practices. (AKA Forced to have a baby or unsafe abortion).
We regularly blame women for being out too late or not leaving their deadbeat boyfriend or wearing those clothes. More than we do for men.
I am afraid you are assuming that men and women rape each other equally. That is simply not the case. Most rapists are men, most victims are women. As for violence? While female on male domestic violence exists the severity of male on female domestic violence is much much higher. One in Five victims of violence are men, it is still a female dominated demographic.
This is just reality.
Judith E. Grossman shed light on this phenomenon in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed. A former feminist, Grossman concedes that in the past she would have expressed “unqualified support” for policies such as Title IX. But that was before her son was charged with “nonconsensual sex” by a former girlfriend.
Why! If we didn’t illegalise rape then we would not have any rape!
“Title IX has obliterated the presumption of innocence that is so foundational to our traditions of justice. On today’s college campuses, neither “beyond a reasonable doubt,” nor even the lesser “by clear and convincing evidence” standard of proof, is required to establish guilt of sexual misconduct,” she writes.
Actually, in order to get a rape conviction you have to provide evidence of rape (and we can tell) and the problem with rape convictions is that they are hard to get.
Firstly? Victims are terrified.
Secondly? There is a forensic time limit for both victim and perpetrator. IF you exceed this then there is no “evidence”.
Thirdly? Beyond a reasonable doubt doesn’t work in this case because the average rapist doesn’t randomly attack women in broad daylight.
Fourthly? Most of the victims know the rapist personally and so find it difficult to oppose them.
Here is the thing.
Paedophiles also fulfil the same four points as above but we aren’t seeing Suzanne here defend them because there is often little physical evidence in a paedophile case. The victims are scared, there is often little evidence unless the child was picked up by forensics immediately after, there is always a reasonable doubt that the person isn’t a paedophile and most paedophiles attack kids near them and so make it hard for the kid to complain.
Yet Suzanne isn’t claiming that the law harms all men because we can easily be accused of paedophilia.
When men become husbands and fathers, things get really bad. In family courts throughout America, men are routinely stripped of their rights and due process. The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is easily used against them since its definition of violence is so broad that virtually any conflict between partners can be considered abuse.
Domestic Violence, Date Violence, Rape, Sexual Assault and Stalking.
It’s very very specific on what it considers abuse.
Suzanne just chooses to be vague. Don’t hit your partner, don’t rape your partner, don’t insert objects into them against their will and don’t follow them around.
“If a woman gets angry for any reason, she can simply accuse a man and men are just assumed guilty in our society,” notes Dr. Helen Smith, author of the new book, “Men on Strike.” This is particularly heinous since, as Smith adds, violence in domestic relations “is almost 50% from men and 50% from women.”
Yes. It is.
The severity of domestic violence however is massively different. Now the problem here is we assume domestic violence is a one way street. In some cases, it’s a fight. Both of the individuals are pushing and grabbing each other. These count too. In most domestic violence situations that start such things occur.
This is not the case. Many women do fight back. The 50% domestic violence stat seems to be from the “have you been violent to each other”. In addition? Women are more likely to remember instances like pushing and consider them to be violence while men don’t. There is no proper classification of domestic violence by style or methodology.
And finally we must look at severity. In the studies where women and men were asked as to what actions they did that were considered violent and the same for victims the startling revelation was that women considered pushing to be violence. Many women who pushed and showed the initial stages of a fight considered that as aggression Possibly because it’s not a socially accepted thing for women to do. Pushing a guy in a pub and grabbing him is a Mancunian Friday. Women doing the same would be rather novel. Pushing, Grabbing and Holds were considered violence by women. Not by men.
In addition? Severity. Men are more likely to use a weapon to threaten a woman. Men are more likely to use a weapon on a woman. Men are more likely to use a closed fist or cause injuries.
Pure incidence is not a good indicator as much as severity. A man pushed against a wall is abused just as a man who was beaten up, but the severity varies. One is mainly fear, the other is pain. BOTH are abuse but one is much more serious.
Shocked? If so, that’s in part because the media don’t believe men can be victims of domestic violence—so they don’t report it. They would rather feed off stories that paint women as victims. And in so doing, they’ve convinced America there’s a war on women.
VAWA includes men and specifically mentions protections for men.
And the biggest group of people putting a kibosh on men coming forward are not feminists but the Men’s Rights movement. It’s the men who mock other men who were raped or who were attacked. In fact many feminists would want proper universal laws that apply to both genders.
Yet it is males who suffer in our society. From boyhood through adulthood, the White American Male must fight his way through a litany of taunts, assumptions and grievances about his very existence. His oppression is unlike anything American women have faced. Unlike women, however, men don’t organize and form groups when they’ve been persecuted. They just bow out of the game.
As I said. White, Male and Straight in western society is easy mode in the game of life..
A litany of taunts? You mean like the socially acceptable notions about various races? Or the unconscious racism? Or the homophobia?
I am sorry? Are they stopping American Men from voting? Are they refusing to educate him? Are they forcing him to stay at home and raise kids? No? I am afraid your gripe is “WHITE AMERICAN MEN HAVE TOO MUCH FREEDOM AND ARE NOW JEALOUS OF THE CAGES WOMEN USED TO SIT IN”. Metaphorical cages.
While Male Privilege has fallen and while White Privilege has fallen over the years it is still there. The gripe is that the once unassailable “Ivory Phallic Symbol” is no longer as unassailable and people who would have had that leg up are now facing a world where they aren’t getting as many leg ups as they once did. They are being forced to compete with uppity coloured people and women and now they can’t even blame the gays.
And there are “Men’s Groups”. The problem is this. Men’s Rights Movement is less about the rights of men and more about bashing women and “The Game”. There are no Men’s Rights groups trying to run a men’s shelter but there are ones trying to defend Afghan culture and it’s treatment of women.
America needs to wake up. We have swung the pendulum too far in the other direction—from a man’s world to a woman’s world.
That’s not equality. That’s revenge.
It’s still a man’s world. You just don’t quite realise it because Suzanne is specifically in a position of privilege where the things that affect women negatively either don’t affect her or don’t affect the things that she is interested in.