Silenced

MRAs: be quiet, be more polite

Apparently, the issues addressed by the men’s rights movement are legitimate issues.

The rate of workplace death – somewhere around 93 percent male – is a real issue. The rate of male suicide – where 4 out of 5 who die by their own hand are men – that’s real, too. The overwhelming majority of the homeless who are male – real. The fact that men are sentenced more harshly in the criminal courts, and that fathers are grossly mistreated and abused by the family courts – real. And indirectly, children mistreated by those same family courts, who are denying them healthy relationships with their fathers, is a real issue as well.

These are real issues – and feminists have even deigned to acknowledge that they are real issues. I’m not being sarcastic at all.

There are also a few issues not agreed on by the self-appointed public arbiters of truth or fiction, those gender ideologues calling themselves “feminist” and claiming that all they ever wanted was equality, that most slippery of political goals.

Consider routine male infant genital mutilation – that’s not a real issue, apparently. Never mind that hundreds of children die every year from the shock and trauma of having the most sensitive part of their anatomy severed with no anaesthetic, and that the practice was normalized specifically to desensitize the sexual organs of boys by a medical quack in the 19th century. In spite of the fact that the sexual mutilation of girls is almost universally condemned – doing the exact same things to infant boys is no problem, and as an ongoing outrage and abomination – it’s not a real issue, and those objecting should sit down, shut up, and stop whining. Stop whining already.

Similarly, just as feminists and other fascists agree that mutilating male infants is routine but don’t see any particular problem with the continuation of the practice – men and boys are increasingly disenfranchised by the education system. Female graduation outcomes account for more than 65% of all graduation from institutions of higher education. This is not debated by feminists, but rather than recognizing the growing inequality produced by a systematically biased education system, they celebrate this as a positive outcome. Feminism is all about equality, and if feminist policies in education produce a growing inequality, then obviously, we need more feminism – to – ah, fix the problem.

Human rights activists who might become angry when their brothers, sons, fathers and friends are systematically marginalized by all this, ahem, equality, should pipe down, don’t get so angry, be more polite, wait your turn, and can you just be quiet, because the feminists are busy taking care of your issues, or they would be, if only you’d be silent, go away, and stop inconveniencing them by illuminating the human damage their policies produce.

The sadists informing public policy don’t like it when you point out that they are sadists.

But the fact is that the men and women in the men’s rights movement recognize human harm done directly to men and boys, and harm done indirectly to women and girls by feminist driven policies, are outraged by the decades of fucking indifference from the public when this human damage is pointed out.

Ill say that again. The human damage produced in full knowledge by feminist driven domestic policy is met with almost total indifference. It has been the case for decades, and those of us who actually give a shit about addressing these problems are just a little bit goddamn tired of that indifference.

Out of every 100 suicides, 80 are male. Oh well, yawn, who cares. Oh yeah, and in a world where men die earlier, when men kill themselves more, when men die violent deaths more than anybody else, where men comprise the majority of the homeless, and are increasingly disenfranchised by the education system – we are treated to an apparently never-ending narrative about how the whole world is a male-advantaging patriarchy in which being male means getting a cruise through life with the difficulty setting at easy.

Well, that’s not really all of it, even. There’s also rape culture. That’s a populist narrative in which it is claimed that the rape of women and girls is a central feature of our culture. It is claimed that the rape of women and girls is normalized, that we are socialized to accept rape as if it is acceptable.

However, the reality is that rape has no sex, and that if we are to throw out the politicized definition in most dictionaries and look only at violent sexual victimization – it’s men and boys who are the predominant victims across our culture. This is not to suggest that women don’t get raped, and that they are not also victimized, but we are living in a culture where the rape of men and boys, while it occurs with greater frequency, has been defined in the dictionary to not exist. It happens in the real world, but the dictionary says that’s not rape, and besides – boys raped by their teachers are lucky to get some – because they don’t get to say no, they are sex machines, not human beings, and certainly not children sexually abused by those they should have been able to trust.

Yeah, this rape culture is one where only the rape of women is treated as acceptable.

And for those of us who recognize the humanity of more human beings than just the members of our culture’s leisure caste – when faced with indifference at human harm, and sometimes the sadistic glee flaunted by abusers, sociopaths, criminals, and gender ideologues with political power – we get a little bit angry.

That’s not quite fair. We don’t get a little bit angry at the injustice, abuse, indifference, and the gleeful sadistic mockery and scorn heaped those most wounded, who are silenced by the prevailing zeitgeist – it is deserving of a deep and white hot rage which drives any real human rights movement.

But what we keep hearing is that, oh yes, the issues of this movement are real and legitimate, oh yes. But we’re too angry. In fact, if only we weren’t so angry, if only we weren’t so loud, then they – those people who have deigned to acknowledge that the concerns of the movement are real – they would have been willing to address these issues, if only we were less angry, not so loud and not so insistent. In fact, if men’s human rights advocates would just be polite, just be quiet, and just learn to shut up and sit down, feminists would be solving the problem’s we’ve been so vocal about. So seriously guys, why can’t you just be quiet and go away – because honestly, you’re really holding the whole class back.

That’s the message. It’s a bargain, isn’t it? Just be quiet and go away, and feminists will solve the problems we’ve been talking, or in some cases, shouting about. The issues are real, so say even the feminists, but doggone it, those darned MRAs are so angry and nasty – they’re the ones stopping anyone from addressing issues like 80% of suicides who are male or the fact that 90% of the homeless are men.

If only MRAs weren’t so loud, obnoxious and angry, these problems would be solved. Well, that’s the bargain being offered.

Time for a reality check.

MRAs were polite. Men’s human rights activists were polite, and did not express their anger, and played by the rules for decades. Oh yes, this movement is over a century old, and for most of that time, almost all the principal activists and writers within the movement stuck strictly to the facts, keep their tone civil, and hardly offended or upset anyone.

And you know how much notice anybody took of the issues, such as suicide, homelessness, joblessness, predatory and corrupt courts, violent death and so on?

The public took no notice whatsoever.  Oh yes, the issues addressed by the men’s rights movement are real, and we’ll get right on that – hey, look – The Real Housewives of Las Vegas is on, oooooh shiny bullshit on my TV screen.

If the violent deaths of women were treated with the same total contempt and disinterest that the deaths of men and boys earn, there would be not feminists, but actual female rights organizations executing public officials in the town square, and putting whole cities to the torch.

However, the bargain being offered now is that if only we would just politely quiet down, fold our hands in our laps and go obediently away – well, by golly, all the issues we’re so inappropriately angry about would be solved almost right away.

And like just about everything else from the propaganda machine of the cult of hate and human damage calling itself feminism, this is a fraud. What they’re really saying when they tell us we’re too loud, and too angry, is that it would be awfully nice if we would just shut up, and go back to quietly and conveniently killing ourselves, or dying on the job of keeping everything else running for the benefit of the members of the leisure caste.

Get back to work for the benefit of those who disregard the humanity of men in preference for the utility of men. Go back to quietly and conveniently absorbing and dispensing violence for the benefit of your social betters. And when you’re broken beyond your continued utility to the leisure caste of our society, kindly be so good as to quietly and uncomplainingly kill yourself, so nobody who matters is troubled by the unsightly spectacle of a human being in pain.

That is the bargain being offered by those who say, in public, or in print, that the anger demonstrated by this human rights movement is inappropriate and counter productive, and that we should all just be more polite.

Here’s the counter offer.

To those acknowledging the reality of this movement’s complaints, workplace death, infant mutilation, corrupt courts, a systematic and abusive bias in the education system: Keep telling us to be quiet and polite. We’ll come for each of you. And we’ll target you with the spotlight, and put your indifference and contempt for the suffering of human beings on public display. Because we recognize that what you’re trying to do is coerce men to go quietly to their deaths, for your own convenience. We recognize that you know your continued exploitation of the disposability of human beings other than yourself is what you fear losing. We also know that without this movement, without the public discomfort created by a loud, angry and in many cases obnoxious men’s rights movement, what you’d have instead would be the redress of these grievances in the oldest and most basic format used by upright apes through the history of the human species.

  • crydiego

    Very well put John. Feminist agree MRAs have valid issues but those issue are somehow invalid.

  • Aimee McGee

    And up the front of the angry queue of MHRAs will be Honeybadgers who know that silence and polite smiles have done nothing to protect the men we love

  • Jotty

    The amusing thing, to me, is that in any “History of Feminism,” it is always mentioned that the early feminists of the 60s were seen as “privileged, angry women” by the media and the establishment.

    So when a new movement of somewhat angry people arises, what do feminists do? Try to delegitimize it with the same rhetoric that was used to delegitimize theirs.

    • Robert St. Estephe

      Ironically they were privileged. 60s feminism was, in large part, funded by male labor: husband’s work, father’s work, trust fund or alimony. Now the whole culture is replete with zombies to believe they can identify privilege by skin color and genitalia. The zombies even resent those who work hard — because they work hard to invent, discover, build, repair that which those who don’t like to engage in industrious labor, critical thinking, risk-taking, and honest scholarship. Gimme what you made and stop telling me to turn of the TV and start reading books by dead white men (Emerson, Voltaire, Shakespeare, Kafka, Einstein, Jefferson, Montaigne, Vonnegut).

      • Jotty

        Oh; no disagreement about the privileged status of (middle class) women here. While I do believe that there were legitimate gripes about gender roles, I think that the only reason that many women were able to make these gripes were that they simply had the time on their hands to do it.

        Men simply have never had that kind of free time; free time to sit around with an echo chamber of similarly “oppressed” individuals and talk about how uniquely difficult *they* had it; free time that was almost entirely dominated by interactions with the same sex because members of the opposite sex were all out working.

        • Kimski

          It has been scientifically proven, that when you spend too much time obsessing over your ‘problems’, they grow disproportionally with your ability to solve them.
          You’re basically programming your brain to be incapable of doing anything about them, because they eventually become overwhelming.
          The same goes for bad moods and most of any other feelings, that occupies the human mind at times.
          But, of course, you need the spare time to allow you to get absorbed in that level of navel gazing.

  • Robert St. Estephe

    The solitary term “male privilege” is itself such an affront it warrants harsh condemnation of the loudest sort. “Male privilege” is a concept, a fraudulent one, only a step (or half a step, or a quarter) away from “Juden rauss.” Let us fight back with vituperative yet evidence-laden verbal condemnation of the gender authoritarians and their lies so that we need not fight the White Knight Gestapo Homeland Security Youth Corps by more corporeal means when our number finally comes up designating us for “re-education” processing.

  • JinnBottle

    For gods sake the first I’ve heard of feminists doing anything other than laughing uproariously and gesturing frantically for women-in-general to join in at the spectacle of men’s pain, has been in the past *year* – when the voice for men and boys hit some kind of a critical mass and could no longer be laughed at or simply ignored.

    And, even now, they can’t help but add “Fuckface!” when addressing men, let alone their concerns.

    • strix (David King)

      “First they ignore you [check], then they laugh at you [check], then they fight you [check].. [next step:] then, you win.”

  • pinetree

    Perfect piece — captures the underlying frustration men have been experiencing. Hopefully the revolt will come sooner than later.

  • Nightwing1029

    “The sadists informing public policy don’t like it when you point out that they are sadists.”
    My words to them: Tough fucking shit!

    “we are treated to an apparently never-ending narrative about how the whole world is a male-advantaging patriarchy in which being male means getting a cruise through life with the difficulty setting at easy.”
    Wait! This is the easy mode? O_O
    So, barely surviving paycheck to paycheck, often times going without something to eat for a meal or two a day, being forced into slum neighborhoods, and giving up (in some cases) more than 50% of what a man earns so others can continue to live at their normal lifestyle, is considered easy mode? I really don’t want to know what hard mode is.

    If these people think we are actually going to shut up, they can kiss my privileged white ass.

  • OldGeezer

    “If the violent deaths of women were treated with the same total contempt and disinterest that the deaths of men and boys earn, there would be not feminists, but actual female rights organizations executing public officials in the town square, and putting whole cities to the torch.”

    Yes. And so what is the conclusion to be drawn? Men doing likewise, on the other hand, would almost certainly be dealt with as testosterone enraged enemies of society and as obvious failures of its emascualtion efforts.

  • http://Bluedogtalking.com Bluedog

    John, I am not on the other side of the point you are making but I am sure some folks can (or can’t help but to) hear me that way. Two things. One is dignity. I wonder if this is something I can see on the outside that maybe folks at AVfM can’t see because they are on the inside, but I think you are in a sort of “upsuck” … in other words there was a vacuum in the space above you … if it could have been filled by the GOP or the National Review or the IWF or the Weekly Standard or the Ayn Rand Foundation or whatever … it hasn’t been, because you beat them to it. They are so far behind on empirical data, facts on the ground and ideology, that despite their best efforts, they can’t fill it and in a way it’s almost as if against their better wishes, some in the elite spheres are going to get out of the way and let you take the stage. If I am right, you have to hold the promotion. You are no longer in the world of manosphere blogs and vlogs … you have transcended that.

    That doesn’t mean you “become polite”, but it does mean that much of the drama that some people literally probably come to the manosphere for (like its a real-life soap opera … what did GWW say about Futrelle today?, what did Futrelle say about Elam today? what did Elam say about Chapin today?) … this needs to be put behind. Like basically: all stop. Gotta stop. Can’t do it anymore.

    Another element of it is just understanding who the adversary is, … or phrased better: who is an adversary? It is easy in the polemic to get caught on the polarity, … you basically get so accustomed to addressing the adversary or perceived adversary, you don’t realize that a lot of folks who LOOK like the adversary, aren’t. So if you accidentally direct ire their way, it becomes a nihilistic exercise in unnecessary enemy creation.

    One particular area where this will be especially acute is the center-left. The blind-spot on the right and among libertarians about the center left is such a gaping chasm that I would bet my $100 to your $0.01 that many regular readers, right now reading this, have no idea what I’m talking about. There are conservatives and libertarians, … and Marxists right? All the rest: hopeless unredeemable Marxists, right? Because that’s all that’s left if you aren’t conservative or libertarian, didn’t you read Ayn Rand don’tchya know? What you are dealing with there is overlap of MRM/MHRM with a lot of right- or libertarian-leaning thinking.

    Trouble is: it is a silo. A trench. They can’t see outside their trench to realize there are lots of people who barely tolerated so much of the garbage that you routinely wage arguments against, while they were in college, and the minute they were out of college they put it behind them. Does’t mean they don’t think the wealthy should pay less taxes when we have to wars to pay, or that free trade was a good idea, or that climate change is a myth … so they pull the Dem ticket and read the New Republic or the American Prospect … doesn’t make them likely adversaries. Many are likely sympathizers, or compatriots. Most of them are totally ignorant of this cause though, so distractions along the way including treating them as adversaries when they’re really just blinkered as all heck never having heard stuff like this before, … again unnecessary enemy making.

    People on the left are sensitive to matters of class. There is a language they can be reached with when you remind them first that most men are LMC, LC or working class … defining most men as relatively powerless men. The MHRM exists to help these powerless men. It is essential because they are so powerless.

    There you go … the last three sentences: just a few sentences from “People” to “powerless” and you’ve got people in the two sigmas left of the mean listening to you instead of recoiling and getting primed to have their thoughts policed by a Futrellian mind suppository.

    • crydiego

      My, My, here we are again with someone framing AVfM as conservative and libertarian! Well, speaking just for me, Fuck You! I’m not one of your conservatives. If you want to call yourself a republican, fine -but for me, the republicans and democrats can eat shit and howl at the moon! This huge knot that needs to be untied was made by the politicians and the only I can see to untie it is to cut through the rope. I believe this site speaks to all the people around the center. They make up the majority of Americans and, I believe they are sick of both parties, just like I am.
      The best people for this movement are those that come here through difficult reasoning, not political seduction. This isn’t about politics to me; it’s about right and wrong, truth and lies, and equality. That’s something I don’t see much of in the left or right!

      • http://theguidetounderstandingprejudice.wordpress.com/ Theaverageman

        I agree.People seem to forget that Warren Farrell was a democrat candidate. Polemicists need to be called ou5 for attempting to divide this movement.

        • crydiego

          And he was a feminist! Everyone is complex and possibly undefinable.

          • graham strouse

            Not just a feminist. Warren Farrell was elected to NOW’s governing body three times before he became disenchanted with that movement.

    • http://www.youtube.com/user/MrShadowfax42 MrShadowfax42

      Did you happen to watch any of wbb’s or (even worse) ikonographer’s videos on libertarianism?

      This happens both ways. The left prods the right and the right prods the left. I try to keep my left/right politicising to a minimum on these forums because I support equality between men and women regardless of their politics.

    • Aimee McGee

      Sorry if I laugh. I’m a liberal with very much centre left political views. I get the difference between anger and hate.
      Anger does not alienate me…and while I disagree with some of what goes here I know if you don’t participate, you have no chance of influencing the narrative.

      • Tman

        Well said Aimee…

    • Fredrik

      Men’s rights are a non-partisan issue. That doesn’t mean that all political orientations are immune to criticism; it means that none are.

      This is a bad place to argue left vs. right, but not because you would be piled on from the right. Rather, you would be attacked from all sides, and/or banned.

      For example, IIRC “blue dogs” are Democrats who describe themselves as “fiscally conservative and socially liberal,” or “pro-business and pro-choice.” (That isn’t how I would describe them, but I’m being polite.) Aside from men’s rights issues, I’m generally to their left.

      The absence of left-right arguments is not because we’re all on the same side. Not by a long shot. It’s a policy from the top, and I think it’s a wise one.

      • graham strouse

        Agreed.

    • Andy Bob

      @Bluedog

      I have read several of your blogs now and can’t help but suspect that, if you have read through AVfM’s archives at all, then it must have been a very superficial perusal.

      The points you have made have already been discussed at length in numerous posts addressing the political realities faced by the MHRM. Consensus has long been reached that it is pointless to be bogged down in polemics, and that our issues must, and indeed do (as you indicate) transcend them.

      I cannot name a single long-term contributor to AVfM who is here for the ‘drama’ of the squabbling that inevitably occurs among the key players – much of which enables participants to determine strategies for effective debate through practise and sharing of ideas. Do not mistake it for parochial mud-slinging for its own sake. Advocates need to cut their teeth somewhere.

      The “people who barely tolerated so much of the garbage…while they were in college, and the minute they were out of college they put it behind them”, retained their silence in the face of feminist demagoguery because there were no loud and effective voices of dissent to gravitate towards – which is why most of them tolerated it in the first place.

      Far from making “them likely adversaries”, strident and articulate voices, like John Hembling’s, will provide them with a rallying point, an evidence-based platform from which to confidently defend their fundamental civil rights. If his voice offends them, then, they were probably unreachable all along – and there isn’t very much more we can do for them.

      Contrary to your claim that most of these people “put it behind them” when they left college, their continued tolerance of widespread misandry in our culture indicates that they have retreated – through apathy, fear or ignorance – into the blue pill miasma that ensures the continued undermining of their fundamental rights and welfare through systemic misandry.

      Such people will never be coaxed from this miasma by soft and polite rhetoric – indeed some are perfectly content to remain there, and indeed, many profit from doing so. A wide reading of AVfM’s posts reveals that featured writers are fully cognizant of the importance of the MHRM’s image, and it’s impact on our effectiveness.

      Thoughtful ideas and opinions are always welcome, but not when they so egregiously under-estimate the range and depth of the discussion on issues, which have been well and truly covered.

      I intend no disrespect, but strongly advise that you plumb the archives more thoroughly before presenting assumptions about AVfM, and the ‘problems’ with Mr Hembling’s approach.

      • crydiego

        Yeah! Thats what I was wanting to say!

  • GQuan

    “The human damage produced in full knowledge by feminist driven domestic policy is met with almost total indifference. It has been the case for decades, and those of us who actually give a shit about addressing these problems are just a little bit goddamn tired of that indifference”.

    Oh yes. Yes indeed. Tired, and unfortunately rather bitter.

  • Jay

    Once again you speak the truth JTO.

  • OneHundredPercentCotton

    Clerk fired for helping wrongfully accused man would do it all again

    Sharon Snyder was fired from her job as a court clerk in Kansas City, Mo., after 34 years in June. Her crime?

    Giving Robert Nelson a public document that showed him how to seek a DNA test, which eventually got him released from prison 30 years after his wrongful rape conviction. (She provided Nelson’s sister with a motion seeking DNA evidence in a different case. Nelson used the motion as a model for his own.)

    In an interview with MSNBC Wednesday, she said, “Oh yes, I would do it again,” and that she was “so happy” Nelson was exonerated. Snyder, a 70-year-old great-grandmother, said she felt she was being “severely punished” and forced to retire early for her transgression.

    Over 300 innocent men exonerated by DNA and still, nobody gets mad.

    • Cam

      Right on.

      This is one terrific great lady who believed in justice and was effectively sacked from her job by helping to correct what turned out to be a gross miss carriage of justice.

      She should be give a medal but instead is treated like dirt by those in the system who believe their egos are way more important than truth and justice.

      For those wanting to read about this you will find it here………..http://jonathanturley.org/2013/08/16/dna/

      • OneHundredPercentCotton

        Actually she was treated worse than dirt:

        Five days after Nelson was released, Court Administrator Jeffrey Eisenbeis took Snyder into Byrn’s office near closing time and told her the prosecutor and defense attorney “had a problem” with her involvement in the case. She was suspended without pay, ordered to stay out of the courthouse unless she had permission to be there and scheduled to meet with a human resources investigator June 20.

        “At first I didn’t know if my pension was going to be intact, and all I could do was curl up in a fetal position and cry,” said Snyder, who had been planning to retire in March. She later found out her pension would be just fine.

        Byrn fired her June 27, telling her she had violated several court rules by providing assistance to Nelson and talking about aspects of the case, even while under seal, to attorneys not involved in the matter.

        The judge’s dismissal letter cites numerous recorded phone conversations between Dunnell and Nelson in which they discussed Snyder’s efforts, including the document she provided that Nelson used in his successful DNA motion.

        “The document you chose was, in effect, your recommendation for a Motion for DNA testing that would likely be successful in this Division,” Byrn wrote. “But it was clearly improper and a violation of Canon Seven … which warns against the risk of offering an opinion or suggested course of action.”

        Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/07/28/4373583/jackson-county-circuit-judge-fires.html#storylink=cpy

        Most of you probably aren’t aware of it, but the most common complaint about rape trials, next to too few ending in convictions, is the claim the convicted “just get a slap on the wrist”.

        How in the world is FIFTY YEARS IN PRISON a SLAP ON THE WRIST?

        ALL of these DNA exonorations are for exorbidently long prison terms, yet the howling victim chorus claims SLAP ON THE WRIST! SLAP ON THE WRIST!

  • Cam

    Interesting article JTO.

    You said:

    “Well, that’s not really all of it, even. There’s also rape culture. That’s a populist narrative in which it is claimed that the rape of women and girls is a central feature of our culture. It is claimed that the rape of women and girls is normalized, that we are socialized to accept rape as if it is acceptable.”

    This seems to be an extreme off the planet viewpoint by those concerned apart from the fact that any person with a modicum of intelligence must know it is grossly incorrect.

    Could you please elaborate on just who makes these ridiculous claims.

    I would have thought that it goes without saying that in western societies we are quite correctly brought up with the concept that rape is a most serious and abhorrent crime which is never to be tolerated or excused. It ranks right up there with premeditated murder.

    Never have I seen any indication in our western civilizations from any quarter that in any respect rape could be considered “acceptable”. (Extremest muslim males with this attitude to the rape of the infidel women I grant exists – but this is hardly our culture which is completely without tolerance of such foreign 12th century peasant attitudes to women).).

  • ali

    “These are real issues – and feminists have even deigned to acknowledge that they are real issues,”
    How about feminist lies? Do they acknowledge that’s real too? Are they pretending to work on exposing them?

  • The_Other_Steve

    This shall be my “go to” post from now on whenever confronted by those who complain that MRAs are all “too angry” and such. Excellent work!

  • utahtech

    Hello everyone. This is the first time I have posted here so please be kind if I make mistakes. If I may point out that what Feminist say make sense and let me tell you why. ALL men have power. From the lowly share cropper to the President of the United States, all men share the same power and privilege. Therefor when you talk about 4 out of 5 suicides are men or 65% degrees are going to women it’s not women’s (feminist) fault!

    Women are politically powerless, they have NO POWER. Therefor women CANNOT be responsible for the bias in the family courts because that would be like blaming your average 5 year old for being responsible!!! They CANNOT be held accountable because they have no power to enact any laws or effect any changes.

    Bias in family court: We are politically powerless so not our fault.
    Female sentencing discount: We are politically powerless, not our fault.
    Women get 65% college degrees: We are politically powerless, quite being lazy, go to school.
    Visitation not enforced: We are politically powerless, how is that our fault?
    Male DV victims ignored: We are politically powerless, so If it did happen, not our fault.
    Over 90% men on the job deaths: Not women’s fault: get off butt, get a better job.
    Men = 85% homeless: see above “Not women’s fault: get off butt, get A job”

    The point is from the feminist perspective nothing is feminist fault because women, like two year old are powerless. Not boys failing in schools, VAWA, Family court, Male DV, male rape, or false rape claims because ONLY MEN HAVE POWER SO ONLY MEN CAN CHANGE ANYTHING!!! This is the lens by which feminist see the world.

    If you wondered why when you present these concerns to feminist, they just look at you with a confused look and say “Then why haven’t you (men) fixed this?”; now you know why. They honestly and sincerely believe it can ONLY be men’s fault be

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      Oh, my!

      I see those feminists in Utah neglected to inform you women have had the right to vote for almost ONE HUNDRED YEARS already!

      Between outnumbering men now and massive MALE incarceration rates that take away MEN’S rights to vote – women have been the majority voters since the 1980′s.

      Yes. That’s right. WOMEN are the MAJORITY voters.

      So why, oh why don’t women vote for women instead of all those “war on women” mean old white men who “war” on them?

      All those mean old white men pretty much cow-tow to the whims of the helpless lady folk, or else they lose their jobs.

      I typed that real, real slow so you could grasp the meaning of what I’m saying.

      THOSE men ARE changing things – according to the whims and caprices of what women demand. Did you REALLY for for Obama over Hillary because he was so much more experienced or “intullijunt”?

      Ask yourself – what rights do men have that I don’t?

      I’ll cut to the chase: none.

      Now ask ME what rights YOU have that men don’t – we’ll start with paternity rights, forced registration for Selective Service and zero rights in family court.

      If I hadn’t lived in Utah I would actually think this post was satire.

      I know. It’s MEN’S fault they have to serve in combat wile women are paid the same and promoted ahead of them. It’s MEN’S fault they have their children taken from them. It’s MEN’S fault thousands of men are wrongly convicted and spend decades in prison on a woman’s say so.

      Feminists and their”War On Women” old white men buddies will be the first to tell men that it’s all their own fault!

      If men don’t like it – they can just commit suicide.

      • utahtech

        What you wrote was what I was trying to convey. Again I apologize for the bad way in which I presented it. I presented it. What you said so eloquently is the point I intent on presenting. Men don’t have any more or less power and women do not live on Vines and men on Mars, we are all here on earth so what hurts women hurts men, and what hurts men, hurts women. Again my apologizes.

    • scatmaster

      There is no way I can be kind.
      You just can’t fix stupid and I need add not a thing to what OHPC said.
      Obvious troll is obvious.

      • utahtech

        I apologized as coming across as stupid. I didn’t have as much time as I would have like to compose the comment which in hind sight; this being my first post on this site, maybe should have, but let me assure you I am not now nor have I ever been a feminist and do very much enjoy this and other article that are here. I haven’t see too many other sites on the internet which cover this important aspect of life so for me, at least, I fee this is a very valuable and important web site.

    • Bombay

      I assume you are a guy? You must feel very powerful since over half the people you meet are powerless. Please exert your power and take care of all the woes expressed here. Woe is us. Help us!

      • Bombay

        What? No power to help us? The AVFM Honey Badgers (women) seem to have much more power than you. What’s up with that?

        • utahtech

          Again, My apologies, It was never my intention to suggest that you or any other woman is helpless. I was simply saying that it was the feminist (male and female)I have spoken with over the years that have felt all men live in a world where if they are discriminated against they have the power to simply change it on demand when of course that is not the case.

    • Kimski

      Bla-bla-bla…not women’s fault.
      Bla-bla-bla…women has no power.
      Bla-bla-bla…women can’t be held responsible.
      Bla-bla-bla…women can’t be held accountable.

      So, besides pointing out that women are held to the same standards as children and the retarded, you still fail to realize that feminism hurts women, too?

      • utahtech

        No agree with you that feminism hurts everyone one is not, present day, a force for good for either men, women or children. I was simply trying to covey a point of view I have seem to notice over the years when talk with feminist (both men and women). Again my apologize for my post. It was never my intent to insult anyone.

        • Kimski

          No need to apologize, utahtech.

          I clearly misunderstood your comment, and was just pointing out that feminist ideologues have one agenda only.

          Making sure they still have a job and keep receiving fundings, by redefining the whole concept of human interaction.

          These ideologic leeches don’t really care who’s paying the price, and have effectively sold the most devastating lie of the century to half the demographic in the process, even though there’s more than sufficient proof to back that claim.

          It is simply a matter of willful ignorance on the part of those who still buy’s into it, and mainly because it benefits them, legally and financial.

          Feminism hurts everyone, men, women, and children. They just haven’t gotten to women to the same extend, yet, as men and children, but that’s just a matter of time.

    • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suzanne McCarley

      This is satire, right?
      Not bad, but not excellent. I’ll give you a B- on it. Thanks for your effort!

  • utahtech

    I guess this is why I have never posted here, I not very good at it so my apologize. I was in the Army for 11 years, and they beat one fact in us “know your enemy; you can’t defeat something you don’t know.” I just turn 50 and all my life I have been told men are not as good and raising children, are all potential molesters, and so on.

    What I have encountered when trying to defend me and other men is this attitude that all men are powerful and all women are powerless so when mentioning all the different issues men face, the aptitude is “then fix them because all you men are powerful and can fix them over night IF YOU WANT TO. We need to focus on women because it takes decades to fix our issues.”

    Which Is line with the subject of the story of just being quite. “You can fix it. If it’s not fixed then you DIDN’T WANT to fix it. So shut up and quite complaining!”

    I did not mean to come across as me actually believing it because I do not. As it was mentioned 54% of people voting in national elections since the 1980’s have been women.
    You will never get me to donate money to Bill Gates because this economic down turn has hurt him; I will never see him in light, “He had all that money and now he has none, whose fault is that?” which is the same as these feminist, they will never be able to see men as having issues because men have all the power.

    I truly have a lot of respect for everyone on this board and come her regularly to read the great stories. It was not my intention to offend anyone, I just wanted to make that point which clearly did I not do a very good job so I apologize again and I will leave the commenting others more adept than me.

    • Bombay

      Perhaps if you post more, people will get to know you and communication will improve. This is a good first step, hang in there.

    • crydiego

      I liked your first post and gave it an up click. When dealing with feminist it is hard to tell their rhetoric from satire. Sometimes I just can’t fathom the thing they believe.
      Anyway, I like your comments.

  • 98abaile

    So if we just shut up and go away, our issues will be resolved?
    In much the same way, if I close my eyes in the face of an oncoming truck, the issue will also be “resolved”.

  • utahtech

    This is taking too long to do this individually so again I just want to apologize and say what was interpreted was not want I meant to say. The Point I was trying to get across was more like OneHundredPercentCotton said. Again my apologies if I offend anyone it was not my intention.

  • MGTOW-man

    You want to know why almost no one (comparatively) takes note of male issues and abuses?

    It is not only the feminists that help foment a culture hell bent on ignoring men’s issues (for fear that highlighting abuses to men will shed light on the fact that women didn’t have it so terribly bad after all…and of course, would spend funds that according to them, are worthy of being spent only on females), but it is ALSO the lamestream men out there who can’t manage to think of anything else besides that of… pleasing women, helping women, screwing women, pursuing women, protecting women, staring at women, losing their bearings over women, owing women and so on…women, women, women, and oh yeah, WOMEN!!!—what ever stilts up men’s egos and helps them fit in. It is as if their wits fly out of their skulls over women and can’t be helped or stopped until they get them a woman.

    And this is conditioned and socialized into our males more than it is the result of biological hard wiring…for human brain power is more powerful than body chemistry.

    And you want to know why men are obsessed with the above behavior?

    It is because the men of today are still teaching males to obsess over women…to the point that their own male issues as people get buried and lost. Men/fathers etc, still try their best to “teach” that men must defer to women to determine their own worth and if you don’t try your darned best to “get the girl” (any ole girl…rotten teeth, bad breath, fat, selfish, loud, obnoxious, hairy, violent, bitchy, stupid, stinky, ugly, and whatever else men “should” ignore and settle on) and have kids (despite the overwhelming and increasing odds of becoming miserable eventually) then you aren’t a real man and probably are gay.

    (Not by myself, but by many men in general, being seen as gay—whether one is actually gay or not— is less than human and less than a real man…. So it is no wonder that young males will swallow fire if they had to in order to make absolutely certain that no one even thinks they might be marginally gay—God forbid!

    I am so glad this is changing because it is way passed time that average “men” out there learn that manhood has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with their penises, what is done with them and how frequent—or not; Manhood and typical maleness are not interchangeable synonyms.

    Heck, up until a few years ago, and rare now but still possible, people would ask me (forgetting or not knowing that perhaps I recently laid a woman) why am I not chasing women (for a permanent mate) instead of …playing chess with a buddy, camping with buddies, playing ball with buddies, even watching TV!!! It seems that men can relax from women-chasing ONLY when they have gotten them one. Only THEN can men do something else with their own lives, time, and dreams.

    Now, we do not hold women to this same rule but in reverse.

    Manhood is still erroneously thought to be group-owned and all and only by itself, able to determine if a male makes it into the group.

    What they do not know or refuse to realize is that the group they so desperately want to make fools out of themselves to belong to is comprised of herded cowards that do not even no longer know how to be honest with women and do not even desire the process or the true manly nobility that is inseparably reticulated with unapologetic honesty.

    Nowadays, I just flick them off like a booger. No one will take away my sense of manhood, or make me feel inadequate… simply because I do not grant them access to my internal-borne and defined, firmly positioned belief that being a man is personal and not subject to any one’s approval or rejection.

    Now, tell me if there would even have been a destructive feminist movement if men had wised up and became, early on, what I am today. Thus, we should be mass-focusing our efforts on changing men. Then, we change the world!

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      As chance would have it, there is a published article addressing that issue today:

      Empathy for Battered Animals Often Outweighs That for Human Adult Victims
      August 29, 2013 | 13,300 views

      By Dr. Mercola

      If you were to read a news story about a battered 1-year-old child, puppy, adult dog or man in his 30s, who would you feel the most sorry for?

      If you’re like most people who participated in a recent study, presented in New York City at the American Sociological Association’s 108th Annual Meeting,1 the child will win over the most empathy.

      This was followed very closely by the puppy and then the full-grown dog. In last place is the 30-year-old male, to whom the participants felt the least empathy.

      The finding confirms the depth of feeling that pet owners already know, and once again highlights the important place that companion animals have in many people’s lives.

      The Most Vulnerable Garner the Most Empathy

      As for why puppies and children (who received such similar levels of empathy that the difference was considered statistically insignificant) received more empathy than an adult human, it’s likely because the younger age, regardless of species, was seen as more vulnerable.

      The adult dogs were regarded largely in the same light as the puppies — vulnerable and dependent on others for protection. Said one of the study’s authors:2

      “Contrary to popular thinking, we are not necessarily more disturbed by animal rather than human suffering. Our results indicate a much more complex situation with respect to the age and species of victims, with age being the more important component.

      The fact that adult human crime victims receive less empathy than do child, puppy, and full grown dog victims suggests that adult dogs are regarded as dependent and vulnerable not unlike their younger canine counterparts and kids.”__________
      ____________________________________

      Not surprisingly, the comments that followed were devoted to how much people love their kitties and puppies and not a peep of concern about lack of empathy for adult males.

      I made a few comments regarding lack of empathy for males and while not down voted(so far), my concerns weren’t aknowledged either.

      I love my dog, but this is crap.