Are men avoiding College.
Jun 2, 2013 01:44:43 #
I came across this article and thought it was interesting.
Not so sure the opinion is accurate. What do you think...
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2013/05/why_men_are_avoiding_college.html
If women were fleeing the nation's universities and colleges, we would have a national uproar, but men are now fleeing in large numbers and society barely notices. Numbers tell the story. Men have been falling behind women for decades. By 2009 National Center for Education statistics for degree-granting institutions listed 11.658 million women enrolled and 8.769 million men. Many predict that women will soon account for 60 percent of our college grads. Public colleges like North Carolina at Chapel Hill and private ones like NYU have almost reached the 60 percent mark already. The University of Vermont in Burlington has so many women that the women jokingly call their college town Girlington. Diane Ravitch, the noted historian of education and a former assistant secretary of education asks: When will it be fair? When women are 60 percent or 75 percent of college enrollments? Perhaps it will be fair when there are no men at all."
Among minorities, the male-female balance is even more skewed. When economist Andrew Sum and his colleagues at the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University looked at gender disparities in the Boston Public Schools, they found that for the class of 2008, among blacks there were 188 females for every 100 males attending a four-year college or university. Among Hispanics the ratio was 233 female for every 100 males. The facts are incontrovertible: young women from low-income neighborhoods in Boston, Los Angeles or Washington, D.C., do much better than the young men from those same neighborhoods. There are now dozens of studies with titles like "The Vanishing Latino Male in Higher Education" and "African-American Males in Education: Endangered or Ignored?"
Males Fading Away
So where are all the men? Media accounts are short on insight and often just insult males, calling them lazy and dumb. Maybe we would be better off if the media and elites weren't so openly pleased that women are outpacing men in college. The college strike didn't happen overnight. It started years ago when the war against boys began after the feminist era. Initially, feminism was presented as being about equal rights between the sexes. Now it is often about revenge and special privileges for women and girls. Christina Hoff Sommers, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of The War Against Boys, argues that feminists and their sycophants have worked hard to turn the educational system into one that favors girls at the expense of boys. Boys are now seen as "defective girls" in need of a major overhaul. Sommers says, "Gender experts at Harvard, Wellesley, and Tufts, and in the major women's organizations, believe that boys and men in our society will remain sexist (and potentially dangerous) unless socialized away from conventional maleness. . . . The belief that boys are being wrongly 'masculinized' is inspiring a movement to 'construct boyhood' in ways that will render boys less competitive, more emotionally expressive, more nurturing--more, in short, like girls."
Girls Have an Advantage
Boys are more at risk than girls in the U.S. educational system. A MetLife study stated, "Girls appear to have an advantage over boys in terms of their future plans, teacher's expectations, everyday experiences at school and interactions in the classroom." Boys are less engaged in school, and less engagement means less success in the classroom; in fact, engagement with school is probably the single most important factor of academic success. Boys are more likely than girls to come to school without supplies and without doing their homework. Why aren't boys more engaged in school? According to Sommers, "schools today tend to be run by women for girls. Classrooms can be hostile environments for boys. They like action, competition and adventure stories. Those are not in favor. Games like tag and dodgeball are out; tug of war has become tug of peace, and male heroes have been replaced by Girl Power." Boys receive lower marks from female teachers, according to research done for the London School of Economics' Centre for Economic Performance.
Some feminist types even say it's fine that older boys and men don't get a college education because they can make it without one. Maybe so for some, but many more will fall in the cracks, getting nowhere in a career.
Let's Feminize the Boys
In an article on the Minding the Campus website, Professor Robert Weissberg explained why so many men are fleeing the campus: "Universities are increasingly becoming feminized and many men, to use the antidiscrimination vocabulary, loathe a hostile working environment. In a word, males increasingly feel emasculated in today's universities."
A commenter named Marcus weighed in on the Minding the Campus article: "As a black male I can testify that this is indeed what is happening on college campuses. White males are at the forefront of the academic sexism but they are definitely coming after all males. Believe it."
Men's activist Glenn Sacks encountered this dynamic first hand at UCLA in the late 1990s, when the hostilities against men were running deep. He summarized his thoughts in a column that highlights the question many men are asking themselves:
I thought of the feminist academics (female and male) who poured their derision upon them, knowing that their students could not effectively fight back. I thought of the timid male professors who were so content with their own careers that they were perfectly willing to allow 18 year-old boys to be beat up on rather than jeopardize their own comfort by speaking out. And I asked myself a question which hundreds of thousands of male college students often ask themselves: "What am I even doing here?"
Free College, But Not Worth It
Many other men ask themselves the same thing in today's anti-male climate. "Michael," a 28-year-old conservative, wrote to me to tell me his story. He went to the University of Florida free as a National Merit Scholar and winner of a Bright Futures Scholarship:
One of my professors was fascinated by me, in the way you might be fascinated by a bizarre animal that you don't understand; at one point, he announced (in front of the rest of the class) that I was surely socially maladjusted because my parents had spanked me when I was a child. At another point, during a dinner near the end of the semester, I made the mistake of mentioning that I planned on purchasing a firearm when I finished with college and got out on my own.
From the wide-eyed looks around the dinner table, you'd have thought I said I eat babies on a regular basis. Needless to say, the professor thought this was further evidence of my maladjustment. I couldn't walk to class without passing at least one group of surly protestors every day. Sometimes more than one. You name it: protesting Taco Bell, protesting Israel, this and that, to the point where I felt like I was besieged on all sides perpetually--and that was even before I got into class for my daily dose of propaganda. Eventually I decided that I couldn't take it anymore. Free was too much to pay for this.
Women's Studies--No Place for a Man
On my blog, I asked about college experiences-- negative or positive--and twenty-five-year-old "Andy" emailed me, saying he attended Wheelock College in Boston, and found the environment hostile: "Once at the school, interactions with the staff got strange. I realized quickly, being a male, how much of a minority at that school I truly was. Wheelock College definitely had a Men=Bad attitude, and it made [my] time there awkward and difficult at times. I only spent a year there."
"John" also emailed in response to my request to write in about his college experiences:
My fiance and I decided to take a class that would be a little less stressful, or so we thought, as an elective. We--and I can't believe I admit to this--took women's and ethnic studies. Just as an aside, I'm a white, blonde male, and she's a white, black-haired woman. The makeup of the class was 75% black, 97% female and 100% bullshit. The one other white male in the class and I learned early on that we were the target of all the animosity being discussed. I did my part and actually argued my voice and against the indoctrination, not getting that this was only digging my grave with the instructor. . . .
A running theme was the concept that since I am not part of a minority I cannot possibly understand what they've gone through, and that because of my being born a white male I was inherently in a privileged position. Another running theme was that minorities can't be racist. I said many times in that class that their theories were ridiculous and offensive. . . .
One female in particular seemed to take my viewpoints personally and began to attack me, both verbally in the classroom, then stalking me on the class's Internet discussion board. I told her and my instructor that this was unacceptable behavior. The instructor did nothing, and the female, an immigrant from Africa via Germany, saw nothing wrong with her behavior. I explained the situation to the dean of the university after months of trying to get in touch with her. I was told it wasn't her call, and that she couldn't do anything about it. When I tried to take a medical absence for something unrelated, the university slapped me with a "needs anger management" class before I was allowed to re-attend, because that same lunatic complained I made her uncomfortable. The only way not to lose is to not play. So I'm out.
Leading a Double Life
"Jeff" wrote in with an interesting observation:
It comes down to one observation. Men must live a double life on campus. To succeed, men must believe one thing but act like they believe another. Manliness wants to compete, to win, to boast, to glory, even to fail honorably against the best. This is disallowed to men on campus. Winners are picked not discovered. It was clear to me; the winners would almost always be females and occasionally males who lived the double life. I left.
Though most of the guys who wrote to me about bailing out of college seemed to go on and do well in life without a college degree, there are many guys out there who aren't doing so well. The skills they needed were not deemed important enough for the school system or culture to address. These are the consequences: when organizations like the American Association of University Women put out research and programs to help girls, they dismiss boys' needs as unimportant. Men who become uninterested or wary about school either don't go, or find that higher education is not a good fit for many males.
Do the experiences of these men represent the norm for young men arriving on campus? In an interview, Christina Hoff Sommers told me: "The moment a young man arrives on the college campus, he is treated as a member of the suspect class. One popular freshman orientation program is called "She Fears You." Next there are "Take Back the Night" marches, performances of the Vagina Monologues--accusatory posters plastered all around the school--and lots of classroom readings--all driving home the point that women are from Venus and men are from Hell. Few classes are mandatory except freshman writing seminars. Unless the student is well-organized (and what boy is?) he will be too late for the reasonable course offerings and end up in a class where he has to read chick victim lit like the Joy Luck Club or Girl Interrupted. A nightmare for many boys."
I originally thought that once educators, legislators, and parents realized that boys were in trouble academically, our schools would try to make classrooms more accommodating to them. That has not happened. Because historically women have been the second sex, and did suffer discrimination, there is now an elaborate and powerful network of private and federal agencies that protect and promote women's interests. Boys do not have a lobby to defend them. Worse, the women's lobby (especially hardline members like the American Association of University Women--AAUW) fights efforts to help boys. Women's groups follow a double standard: When women lag behind men, that is an injustice that must be aggressively targeted. But when men are lagging behind women, that is a triumph of equity to be celebrated. Many men have just decided that they don't belong in college and, consciously or unconsciously, they are going on strike.
Not so sure the opinion is accurate. What do you think...
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2013/05/why_men_are_avoiding_college.html
If women were fleeing the nation's universities and colleges, we would have a national uproar, but men are now fleeing in large numbers and society barely notices. Numbers tell the story. Men have been falling behind women for decades. By 2009 National Center for Education statistics for degree-granting institutions listed 11.658 million women enrolled and 8.769 million men. Many predict that women will soon account for 60 percent of our college grads. Public colleges like North Carolina at Chapel Hill and private ones like NYU have almost reached the 60 percent mark already. The University of Vermont in Burlington has so many women that the women jokingly call their college town Girlington. Diane Ravitch, the noted historian of education and a former assistant secretary of education asks: When will it be fair? When women are 60 percent or 75 percent of college enrollments? Perhaps it will be fair when there are no men at all."
Among minorities, the male-female balance is even more skewed. When economist Andrew Sum and his colleagues at the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University looked at gender disparities in the Boston Public Schools, they found that for the class of 2008, among blacks there were 188 females for every 100 males attending a four-year college or university. Among Hispanics the ratio was 233 female for every 100 males. The facts are incontrovertible: young women from low-income neighborhoods in Boston, Los Angeles or Washington, D.C., do much better than the young men from those same neighborhoods. There are now dozens of studies with titles like "The Vanishing Latino Male in Higher Education" and "African-American Males in Education: Endangered or Ignored?"
Males Fading Away
So where are all the men? Media accounts are short on insight and often just insult males, calling them lazy and dumb. Maybe we would be better off if the media and elites weren't so openly pleased that women are outpacing men in college. The college strike didn't happen overnight. It started years ago when the war against boys began after the feminist era. Initially, feminism was presented as being about equal rights between the sexes. Now it is often about revenge and special privileges for women and girls. Christina Hoff Sommers, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of The War Against Boys, argues that feminists and their sycophants have worked hard to turn the educational system into one that favors girls at the expense of boys. Boys are now seen as "defective girls" in need of a major overhaul. Sommers says, "Gender experts at Harvard, Wellesley, and Tufts, and in the major women's organizations, believe that boys and men in our society will remain sexist (and potentially dangerous) unless socialized away from conventional maleness. . . . The belief that boys are being wrongly 'masculinized' is inspiring a movement to 'construct boyhood' in ways that will render boys less competitive, more emotionally expressive, more nurturing--more, in short, like girls."
Girls Have an Advantage
Boys are more at risk than girls in the U.S. educational system. A MetLife study stated, "Girls appear to have an advantage over boys in terms of their future plans, teacher's expectations, everyday experiences at school and interactions in the classroom." Boys are less engaged in school, and less engagement means less success in the classroom; in fact, engagement with school is probably the single most important factor of academic success. Boys are more likely than girls to come to school without supplies and without doing their homework. Why aren't boys more engaged in school? According to Sommers, "schools today tend to be run by women for girls. Classrooms can be hostile environments for boys. They like action, competition and adventure stories. Those are not in favor. Games like tag and dodgeball are out; tug of war has become tug of peace, and male heroes have been replaced by Girl Power." Boys receive lower marks from female teachers, according to research done for the London School of Economics' Centre for Economic Performance.
Some feminist types even say it's fine that older boys and men don't get a college education because they can make it without one. Maybe so for some, but many more will fall in the cracks, getting nowhere in a career.
Let's Feminize the Boys
In an article on the Minding the Campus website, Professor Robert Weissberg explained why so many men are fleeing the campus: "Universities are increasingly becoming feminized and many men, to use the antidiscrimination vocabulary, loathe a hostile working environment. In a word, males increasingly feel emasculated in today's universities."
A commenter named Marcus weighed in on the Minding the Campus article: "As a black male I can testify that this is indeed what is happening on college campuses. White males are at the forefront of the academic sexism but they are definitely coming after all males. Believe it."
Men's activist Glenn Sacks encountered this dynamic first hand at UCLA in the late 1990s, when the hostilities against men were running deep. He summarized his thoughts in a column that highlights the question many men are asking themselves:
I thought of the feminist academics (female and male) who poured their derision upon them, knowing that their students could not effectively fight back. I thought of the timid male professors who were so content with their own careers that they were perfectly willing to allow 18 year-old boys to be beat up on rather than jeopardize their own comfort by speaking out. And I asked myself a question which hundreds of thousands of male college students often ask themselves: "What am I even doing here?"
Free College, But Not Worth It
Many other men ask themselves the same thing in today's anti-male climate. "Michael," a 28-year-old conservative, wrote to me to tell me his story. He went to the University of Florida free as a National Merit Scholar and winner of a Bright Futures Scholarship:
One of my professors was fascinated by me, in the way you might be fascinated by a bizarre animal that you don't understand; at one point, he announced (in front of the rest of the class) that I was surely socially maladjusted because my parents had spanked me when I was a child. At another point, during a dinner near the end of the semester, I made the mistake of mentioning that I planned on purchasing a firearm when I finished with college and got out on my own.
From the wide-eyed looks around the dinner table, you'd have thought I said I eat babies on a regular basis. Needless to say, the professor thought this was further evidence of my maladjustment. I couldn't walk to class without passing at least one group of surly protestors every day. Sometimes more than one. You name it: protesting Taco Bell, protesting Israel, this and that, to the point where I felt like I was besieged on all sides perpetually--and that was even before I got into class for my daily dose of propaganda. Eventually I decided that I couldn't take it anymore. Free was too much to pay for this.
Women's Studies--No Place for a Man
On my blog, I asked about college experiences-- negative or positive--and twenty-five-year-old "Andy" emailed me, saying he attended Wheelock College in Boston, and found the environment hostile: "Once at the school, interactions with the staff got strange. I realized quickly, being a male, how much of a minority at that school I truly was. Wheelock College definitely had a Men=Bad attitude, and it made [my] time there awkward and difficult at times. I only spent a year there."
"John" also emailed in response to my request to write in about his college experiences:
My fiance and I decided to take a class that would be a little less stressful, or so we thought, as an elective. We--and I can't believe I admit to this--took women's and ethnic studies. Just as an aside, I'm a white, blonde male, and she's a white, black-haired woman. The makeup of the class was 75% black, 97% female and 100% bullshit. The one other white male in the class and I learned early on that we were the target of all the animosity being discussed. I did my part and actually argued my voice and against the indoctrination, not getting that this was only digging my grave with the instructor. . . .
A running theme was the concept that since I am not part of a minority I cannot possibly understand what they've gone through, and that because of my being born a white male I was inherently in a privileged position. Another running theme was that minorities can't be racist. I said many times in that class that their theories were ridiculous and offensive. . . .
One female in particular seemed to take my viewpoints personally and began to attack me, both verbally in the classroom, then stalking me on the class's Internet discussion board. I told her and my instructor that this was unacceptable behavior. The instructor did nothing, and the female, an immigrant from Africa via Germany, saw nothing wrong with her behavior. I explained the situation to the dean of the university after months of trying to get in touch with her. I was told it wasn't her call, and that she couldn't do anything about it. When I tried to take a medical absence for something unrelated, the university slapped me with a "needs anger management" class before I was allowed to re-attend, because that same lunatic complained I made her uncomfortable. The only way not to lose is to not play. So I'm out.
Leading a Double Life
"Jeff" wrote in with an interesting observation:
It comes down to one observation. Men must live a double life on campus. To succeed, men must believe one thing but act like they believe another. Manliness wants to compete, to win, to boast, to glory, even to fail honorably against the best. This is disallowed to men on campus. Winners are picked not discovered. It was clear to me; the winners would almost always be females and occasionally males who lived the double life. I left.
Though most of the guys who wrote to me about bailing out of college seemed to go on and do well in life without a college degree, there are many guys out there who aren't doing so well. The skills they needed were not deemed important enough for the school system or culture to address. These are the consequences: when organizations like the American Association of University Women put out research and programs to help girls, they dismiss boys' needs as unimportant. Men who become uninterested or wary about school either don't go, or find that higher education is not a good fit for many males.
Do the experiences of these men represent the norm for young men arriving on campus? In an interview, Christina Hoff Sommers told me: "The moment a young man arrives on the college campus, he is treated as a member of the suspect class. One popular freshman orientation program is called "She Fears You." Next there are "Take Back the Night" marches, performances of the Vagina Monologues--accusatory posters plastered all around the school--and lots of classroom readings--all driving home the point that women are from Venus and men are from Hell. Few classes are mandatory except freshman writing seminars. Unless the student is well-organized (and what boy is?) he will be too late for the reasonable course offerings and end up in a class where he has to read chick victim lit like the Joy Luck Club or Girl Interrupted. A nightmare for many boys."
I originally thought that once educators, legislators, and parents realized that boys were in trouble academically, our schools would try to make classrooms more accommodating to them. That has not happened. Because historically women have been the second sex, and did suffer discrimination, there is now an elaborate and powerful network of private and federal agencies that protect and promote women's interests. Boys do not have a lobby to defend them. Worse, the women's lobby (especially hardline members like the American Association of University Women--AAUW) fights efforts to help boys. Women's groups follow a double standard: When women lag behind men, that is an injustice that must be aggressively targeted. But when men are lagging behind women, that is a triumph of equity to be celebrated. Many men have just decided that they don't belong in college and, consciously or unconsciously, they are going on strike.
Jun 3, 2013 08:33:15 #
What would you expect from our screwed up PC world? The truth doesn't matter anymore; all that matters is "feelings".
Jun 3, 2013 10:12:41 #
I would suggest that what goes round, comes round. Just think back to the start of the USA. Women were considered property; weren't allowed to vote, get a job(except maybe TEACHING!; couldn't divorce for any reason; could not own property, could not get out of any abusive relationship, had to bear as many children as the husband wished; died in childbirth; college educations were considered useless for them because they were expected to be only obedient wives and mothers.
It appears we have come full circle.
It appears we have come full circle.
Jun 3, 2013 11:42:25 #
DougW
Loc: SoCal
amyinsparta wrote:
I would suggest that what goes round, comes round.... (show quote)
2 wrongs don't make a "right".
Jun 3, 2013 12:32:45 #
amyinsparta wrote:
I would suggest that what goes round, comes round.... (show quote)
It does appear the tables have been turned. As with all full circles they are unbroken. The advancing male generations will soon learn that passiveness, feminism are not in their best interests and they will awaken. When men try to please women their testosterone levels are lowered. Testosterone will again become manly and higher education will have no choice but to take them seriously or be pushed aside. Till then you girls knock yourselves out...
Jun 3, 2013 12:47:16 #
NOSLEEP wrote:
It does appear the tables have been turned. As with all full circles they are unbroken. The advancing male generations will soon learn that passiveness, feminism are not in their best interests and they will awaken. When men try to please women their testosterone levels are lowered. Testosterone will again become manly and higher education will have no choice but to take them seriously or be pushed aside. Till then you girls knock yourselves out...
I would love an explanation of exactly what you mean by 'pleasing' women.
Jun 3, 2013 13:07:54 #
ohallboyz wrote:
I would love an explanation of exactly what you mean by 'pleasing' women.
pleasing present participle of please (Verb)
Verb
1.Cause to feel happy and satisfied
2.Give satisfaction.
Just a personal observation.
Todays young men are shaving their legs, arms, backs, chests. In most cases they are doing it to 'please' women. Some may be doing it to 'please' their man. Men are being encouraged in their environment by liberal progressives to be more like woman on a daily basis in their thought process, actions and demeanor. It has already become a problem. They will awaken to it.
Jun 3, 2013 13:14:24 #
DougW
Loc: SoCal
NOSLEEP wrote:
pleasing present participle of please (Verb) br ... (show quote)
This begins in preschool or sooner, as our so called academics try to turn little boys into nice well behaved " little girls". If little boys keep acting like " little boys" they are deemed "hyper active" and end up " punished" or drugged.
Jun 3, 2013 16:16:19 #
A new cartoon hoping to influence boys to want to be like girls is coming to a television near you...
http://www.torontosun.com/2013/06/03/gender-bending-canadian-australian-cartoon-sparks-controversy
http://www.torontosun.com/2013/06/03/gender-bending-canadian-australian-cartoon-sparks-controversy
Jun 4, 2013 15:25:40 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
I wish I were young again. To find a hard working women who makes enough so that I could sit home and follow my passion of taking pictures would be great.
I see no indication that boys or young men are suffering anything that they are not placing upon themselves. One makes decisions in life based on what one wants to do. Want to go to college go to college don't want to go to college don't go. No one is stopping someone from going to college because of feminism or for any other reason.
Remember, prior to WWII most did not go to college neither men or women in fact most did not finish highschool.
The above article is a bunch of horse puckey!
I see no indication that boys or young men are suffering anything that they are not placing upon themselves. One makes decisions in life based on what one wants to do. Want to go to college go to college don't want to go to college don't go. No one is stopping someone from going to college because of feminism or for any other reason.
Remember, prior to WWII most did not go to college neither men or women in fact most did not finish highschool.
The above article is a bunch of horse puckey!
Jun 4, 2013 22:44:25 #
ole sarg wrote:
I wish I were young again. To find a hard working ... (show quote)
Yes you certainly would make an outstanding young modern liberal. Excited about your chances of living off the avails of someone else, even a girl would do. You should venture out some times to have a look and see what goes on in the world today outside of your peripheral vision.
The second world war ended 68 years ago, a lot has happened since then...
Jun 7, 2013 12:29:39 #
A local article in the paper today in Calgary seems to have recognized the issue is a problem...
http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/Martinuk+hating+hits+campuses/8490626/story.html
Theres been a steady rise in the number of stories and academic studies suggesting men need help. Boys are falling behind early in the education process and are far more likely to drop out of high school than girls. Far too many boys are being raised without fathers; and gay men are bullied.
Yet Canadian campuses focus on womens studies, where courses are geared to radicalizing women and making marriage, children and men into interlopers who exist only to prevent women from attaining their goals. But while women are indoctrinated in their all-encompassing rights, legitimate academic discussions that relate to the above issues are being unfairly silenced.
Why? Because they involve men; and according to a motion before the Canadian Federation of Students, men create an environment of sexism, patriarchy and misogyny that promotes hateful views towards women and justifies sexual assault.
Of course, there is no evidence to support this irrational theory. But that didnt stop the CFS (a union for university students) from debating this non-existent, insidious evil at last weeks general meeting. Motion N16 alleges that mens rights groups promote the atmosphere described above by bringing speakers onto campus, and the CFS should therefore oppose meetings or events whose purpose is to frighten, intimidate and/or target women students on campus.
We dont know if the motion passed or not. The national and provincial CFS failed to respond to my multiple phone calls and e-mails, although several student websites suggest that this is the norm. Like a typical union, they demand transparency from others, yet rarely bother to inform the student media or the students they represent about the decisions they make.
The motion apparently stems from events at the University of Toronto, where a mens rights group (the Canadian Association for Equality) has promoted the creation of mens awareness groups on campuses and presented such dangerous speakers as Barbara Kay (National Post columnist) and well-known McGill academics who gave a scholarly presentation on moving past misogyny and misandry to intersexual dialogue. Warren Farrell, author and former member of the board for the National Organization of Women in the U.S., talked about transforming problems with young boys into opportunities for their success.
No wonder they must be silenced.
For daring to discuss such hate-filled ideas, speakers and audience members at the last two events were subjected to angry feminists who blocked doors and shouted out a litany of anti-male rhetoric to defame the speaker.
The group chanted, No hate speech on campus, while some screamed at audience members, referring to them as fg scum and repeatedly telling them to Shut the fk up.
So who is intimidating whom? And who is spewing out the hate-filled invective? Im sure that the irony of the situation was lost on these women.
It doesnt matter what the topic is, or will be. If the CFS motion passes, angry protests like these will certainly become the norm.
The problem is that the CFS and campus womens groups have provided no evidence to support their claims. Sadly, most so-called gains by women on campus have been won by making irrational claims of an environment of hate and using fear to sell the blatantly false notion that all men are misogynists and rapists.
The University of Connecticut is now being sucked into that rhetoric because it changed its Husky sports logo from a cute puppy-like figure to the realistic face of a Husky dog. But one self-described feminist has generated media waves by claiming the new logo is a menacing, pro-rape symbol that conjures up images of sexual assault, will intimidate women and empower a rape culture.
Wow. Im not even sure if its a male dog. Hard to tell by looking at the eyes. But if a picture of a dog can accomplish all that, its time for me to stop writing columns and take up doodling to effect cultural change here in Canada.
These entitled, spoiled women need to take a trip to Africa and the Middle East, where brutal civil wars have established a deadly culture that thrives on the multiple rapes/gang rapes of women. Then come back and tell us that a team logo or intelligent discussions have the power to inspire rape.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/Martinuk+hating+hits+campuses/8490626/story.html
Theres been a steady rise in the number of stories and academic studies suggesting men need help. Boys are falling behind early in the education process and are far more likely to drop out of high school than girls. Far too many boys are being raised without fathers; and gay men are bullied.
Yet Canadian campuses focus on womens studies, where courses are geared to radicalizing women and making marriage, children and men into interlopers who exist only to prevent women from attaining their goals. But while women are indoctrinated in their all-encompassing rights, legitimate academic discussions that relate to the above issues are being unfairly silenced.
Why? Because they involve men; and according to a motion before the Canadian Federation of Students, men create an environment of sexism, patriarchy and misogyny that promotes hateful views towards women and justifies sexual assault.
Of course, there is no evidence to support this irrational theory. But that didnt stop the CFS (a union for university students) from debating this non-existent, insidious evil at last weeks general meeting. Motion N16 alleges that mens rights groups promote the atmosphere described above by bringing speakers onto campus, and the CFS should therefore oppose meetings or events whose purpose is to frighten, intimidate and/or target women students on campus.
We dont know if the motion passed or not. The national and provincial CFS failed to respond to my multiple phone calls and e-mails, although several student websites suggest that this is the norm. Like a typical union, they demand transparency from others, yet rarely bother to inform the student media or the students they represent about the decisions they make.
The motion apparently stems from events at the University of Toronto, where a mens rights group (the Canadian Association for Equality) has promoted the creation of mens awareness groups on campuses and presented such dangerous speakers as Barbara Kay (National Post columnist) and well-known McGill academics who gave a scholarly presentation on moving past misogyny and misandry to intersexual dialogue. Warren Farrell, author and former member of the board for the National Organization of Women in the U.S., talked about transforming problems with young boys into opportunities for their success.
No wonder they must be silenced.
For daring to discuss such hate-filled ideas, speakers and audience members at the last two events were subjected to angry feminists who blocked doors and shouted out a litany of anti-male rhetoric to defame the speaker.
The group chanted, No hate speech on campus, while some screamed at audience members, referring to them as fg scum and repeatedly telling them to Shut the fk up.
So who is intimidating whom? And who is spewing out the hate-filled invective? Im sure that the irony of the situation was lost on these women.
It doesnt matter what the topic is, or will be. If the CFS motion passes, angry protests like these will certainly become the norm.
The problem is that the CFS and campus womens groups have provided no evidence to support their claims. Sadly, most so-called gains by women on campus have been won by making irrational claims of an environment of hate and using fear to sell the blatantly false notion that all men are misogynists and rapists.
The University of Connecticut is now being sucked into that rhetoric because it changed its Husky sports logo from a cute puppy-like figure to the realistic face of a Husky dog. But one self-described feminist has generated media waves by claiming the new logo is a menacing, pro-rape symbol that conjures up images of sexual assault, will intimidate women and empower a rape culture.
Wow. Im not even sure if its a male dog. Hard to tell by looking at the eyes. But if a picture of a dog can accomplish all that, its time for me to stop writing columns and take up doodling to effect cultural change here in Canada.
These entitled, spoiled women need to take a trip to Africa and the Middle East, where brutal civil wars have established a deadly culture that thrives on the multiple rapes/gang rapes of women. Then come back and tell us that a team logo or intelligent discussions have the power to inspire rape.
Jun 12, 2013 11:37:41 #
Making the News again...
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/06/05/barbara-kay-calling-all-male-bashers/
In alarmed response to emerging mens rights awareness groups (MRA) on a number of Canadian campuses, the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS), a union body representing some 500,000 students, seeks to amend its Sexual Assault and Violence Against Women on Campus policy.
The CFS rejects any need of formal fellowship around specifically male issues, alleging MRA groups real purpose is to promote misogynist, hateful views and to justify sexual assault. Simon Fraser Universitys recently inaugurated $30,000-funded mens centre, for example, was demonized as a place to celebrate hegemonic masculinity.
What nonsense! The actual benign nature of MRA groups, where both sexes are welcome to discuss male-centred concerns, can be seen in a publicity campaign video of a relatively new organization, which has become a lightning rod for anti-male activism, the Canadian Association for Equality (C.A.F.E.).
The video, titled Support the Mens Centre Campus Campaign, was posted to YouTube on C.A.F.E. channel, EqualityCanadaTV. In it, various young actors, male and female, calmly address the viewer, explaining their reasons for appreciating campus mens centres: genetics-inspired fears of early prostate cancer; help for gays dealing with bullying; worry over disproportionate male unemployment; troubling high school dropout rates amongst boys; the impact of fatherlessness following unfair custody decisions.
If passed, the CFS amendment would endorse official opposition to events whose purpose is to frighten, intimidate, and/or target women students on campus: as interpreted by CFS, that means any event addressing any male concerns.
Now its personal!
Beginning in January 2012, C.A.F.E. has organized several events at the University of Toronto, featuring diverse speakers, such as York University sociology prof and online journal New Male Studies editor Rob Kenedy, famous sociologue Lionel Tiger, prostate cancer survivor Aaron Bacher and me!
The first few events took place without incident. True, my Feb., 2012, talk on family court bias against dads was attended by antipathetic feminists tweeting furiously throughout (#feministbashingparty), and the Q&A was, shall we say, animated. But it did not descend into the ugliness that accompanied the three following events, when the adversarial River Bile overflowed its (left) bank.
Angry protesters tried to shut down the event by barricading entrances and exits in contravention of safety codes
.
Warren Farrell, a Financial Times Top Thought Leader and former Board member of the National Organization for Women, gave a talk at the University of Toronto last November, his innocuous topic the declining success of boys. Yet he was greeted with an inflamed mob representing the whole leftist spectrum: the Socialist Worker Canada with support from CUPE, the University of Toronto Students Unions and the Ryerson School of Social Work.
You can get the flavour of the virulence in a Nov., 2012, YouTube video titled university of toronto feminist protest 4/4/2013″, where a woman protester, apparently not the least bit frightened or intimidated, berates those attending the event. Its known as the Shut the fk up video. Youll see why.
Angry protesters tried to shut down the event by barricading entrances and exits in contravention of safety codes. Video footage has a spokeswoman asserting event organizers defend rape, they defend incest, they defend violence against children, obscene canards all.
C.A.F.E. has been scrupulous in presenting objective, non-inflammatory polemicists of impeccable civility
.
Setting themselves up as arbiters of acceptable discourse, protesters lied to incoming people, insisting the event had been cancelled. Attendees, men and women alike, who told protesters they merely sought fodder for an informed opinion, were harassed with equal venom.
The evening was a disgrace to the principle of free speech all reasonable Canadians uphold. Since then, two more C.A.F.E. events have required police intervention to handle similar shenanigans, including the ringing of fire alarms and shouting over speakers of the utmost respectability. One was Janice Fiamengo, a thoughtful, soft-spoken English Literature professor at the University of Ottawa, the others were McGill University academics and writing partners, Katherine Young and Paul Nathanson.
Fiamengo spoke from an evidence-based perspective about the inherent man-blaming premises of Womens Studies, a domain she knows intimately. Young and Nathanson gave a dignified, highbrow talk, From Misogyny and Misandry to Intersexual Dialogue. (Their exhaustively researched series of books Spreading Misandry, Legalizing Misandry and the upcoming Transcending Misandry, invaluable sources for me are nonpareils of responsible scholarship and lucidity.)
In other words, C.A.F.E. has been scrupulous in presenting objective, non-inflammatory polemicists of impeccable civility (even I behaved myself), all unequivocally committed to gender equality. None hold radical or more than mildly controversial views. By contrast, those protesting their appearance have been immature yahoos, displaying truculence, duplicity, ignorance and boorishness.
If theyd listened instead of protesting, those angry activists might have come to appreciate mens viable concerns. But acknowledging mens humanity is ideologically untenable for extremists. Its sleazier, but easier to keep screaming, Shut the fk up!
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/06/05/barbara-kay-calling-all-male-bashers/
In alarmed response to emerging mens rights awareness groups (MRA) on a number of Canadian campuses, the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS), a union body representing some 500,000 students, seeks to amend its Sexual Assault and Violence Against Women on Campus policy.
The CFS rejects any need of formal fellowship around specifically male issues, alleging MRA groups real purpose is to promote misogynist, hateful views and to justify sexual assault. Simon Fraser Universitys recently inaugurated $30,000-funded mens centre, for example, was demonized as a place to celebrate hegemonic masculinity.
What nonsense! The actual benign nature of MRA groups, where both sexes are welcome to discuss male-centred concerns, can be seen in a publicity campaign video of a relatively new organization, which has become a lightning rod for anti-male activism, the Canadian Association for Equality (C.A.F.E.).
The video, titled Support the Mens Centre Campus Campaign, was posted to YouTube on C.A.F.E. channel, EqualityCanadaTV. In it, various young actors, male and female, calmly address the viewer, explaining their reasons for appreciating campus mens centres: genetics-inspired fears of early prostate cancer; help for gays dealing with bullying; worry over disproportionate male unemployment; troubling high school dropout rates amongst boys; the impact of fatherlessness following unfair custody decisions.
If passed, the CFS amendment would endorse official opposition to events whose purpose is to frighten, intimidate, and/or target women students on campus: as interpreted by CFS, that means any event addressing any male concerns.
Now its personal!
Beginning in January 2012, C.A.F.E. has organized several events at the University of Toronto, featuring diverse speakers, such as York University sociology prof and online journal New Male Studies editor Rob Kenedy, famous sociologue Lionel Tiger, prostate cancer survivor Aaron Bacher and me!
The first few events took place without incident. True, my Feb., 2012, talk on family court bias against dads was attended by antipathetic feminists tweeting furiously throughout (#feministbashingparty), and the Q&A was, shall we say, animated. But it did not descend into the ugliness that accompanied the three following events, when the adversarial River Bile overflowed its (left) bank.
Angry protesters tried to shut down the event by barricading entrances and exits in contravention of safety codes
.
Warren Farrell, a Financial Times Top Thought Leader and former Board member of the National Organization for Women, gave a talk at the University of Toronto last November, his innocuous topic the declining success of boys. Yet he was greeted with an inflamed mob representing the whole leftist spectrum: the Socialist Worker Canada with support from CUPE, the University of Toronto Students Unions and the Ryerson School of Social Work.
You can get the flavour of the virulence in a Nov., 2012, YouTube video titled university of toronto feminist protest 4/4/2013″, where a woman protester, apparently not the least bit frightened or intimidated, berates those attending the event. Its known as the Shut the fk up video. Youll see why.
Angry protesters tried to shut down the event by barricading entrances and exits in contravention of safety codes. Video footage has a spokeswoman asserting event organizers defend rape, they defend incest, they defend violence against children, obscene canards all.
C.A.F.E. has been scrupulous in presenting objective, non-inflammatory polemicists of impeccable civility
.
Setting themselves up as arbiters of acceptable discourse, protesters lied to incoming people, insisting the event had been cancelled. Attendees, men and women alike, who told protesters they merely sought fodder for an informed opinion, were harassed with equal venom.
The evening was a disgrace to the principle of free speech all reasonable Canadians uphold. Since then, two more C.A.F.E. events have required police intervention to handle similar shenanigans, including the ringing of fire alarms and shouting over speakers of the utmost respectability. One was Janice Fiamengo, a thoughtful, soft-spoken English Literature professor at the University of Ottawa, the others were McGill University academics and writing partners, Katherine Young and Paul Nathanson.
Fiamengo spoke from an evidence-based perspective about the inherent man-blaming premises of Womens Studies, a domain she knows intimately. Young and Nathanson gave a dignified, highbrow talk, From Misogyny and Misandry to Intersexual Dialogue. (Their exhaustively researched series of books Spreading Misandry, Legalizing Misandry and the upcoming Transcending Misandry, invaluable sources for me are nonpareils of responsible scholarship and lucidity.)
In other words, C.A.F.E. has been scrupulous in presenting objective, non-inflammatory polemicists of impeccable civility (even I behaved myself), all unequivocally committed to gender equality. None hold radical or more than mildly controversial views. By contrast, those protesting their appearance have been immature yahoos, displaying truculence, duplicity, ignorance and boorishness.
If theyd listened instead of protesting, those angry activists might have come to appreciate mens viable concerns. But acknowledging mens humanity is ideologically untenable for extremists. Its sleazier, but easier to keep screaming, Shut the fk up!
Jun 12, 2013 13:10:43 #
DougW
Loc: SoCal
Those kind of " women " have been known as.
" " Ball Cutters " for millenniums.
The advent of political correctness has just prevented men from using that term.
" " Ball Cutters " for millenniums.
The advent of political correctness has just prevented men from using that term.
Jun 12, 2013 14:43:38 #
DougW wrote:
Those kind of " women " have been known as.
" " Ball Cutters " for millenniums.
The advent of political correctness has just prevented men from using that term.
" " Ball Cutters " for millenniums.
The advent of political correctness has just prevented men from using that term.
I took a moment to find the previous post's mention of a video. It is a telling snapshot of thought by the feminist movement opposed to the men's study...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxRlOEyeEF0
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.