What’s a Guy to Do?


Major media has done it again. The New York Times Magazine today has a piece entitled: “Lean In, Dad” in which a young-sounding female writer, CATHERINE RAMPELL, bemoans the fact that her last two romantic relationships ended because the men in question wanted her to quit her job (if they got married) to stay home.

From those two questionable relationships, the “greatest” newspaper in the world jumps to the generalization that the problem for all of us isn’t really about women leaning in at all, as argued by Facebook COO sheryl sandberg. It’s about men doing their part at home. If only we had paternal leave and men would change more diapers the world would be a better and safer place for women.

I hope you don’t mind if I take a moment to puke.

So much has been written, and rightly so, about what women should do in the 21st century economy and society. Feminism, it seems, has had resurgence as women strive reach to finally reach the top of the power food chain and also struggle to wrestle work/family balance to the ground for all time.

The question I am often asked is: where does that leave men?  From my limited data set, we are pretty much screwed. Not that we aren’t still the leaders of the free world and dominate in the positions of economic power. But in terms of the thought leadership on gender, which is what I have spent the last three years thinking and writing about, we are getting a raw deal.

Recently a blogger on our site was so brazen as to admit that this yoga pants thing for women was kind of problematic for him as a man because it made him horny when he really didn’t want to objectify the women in said pants. The response was swift and lethal: get over yourself. Women wear yoga pants for comfort and if your male sex-crazed brain can’t comprehend that go find some porn to look at already.

The guy was being honest, saying what most every guy I know thinks, and he was made to feel that he is a leper as a result.

A man gets up at the Academy Awards and has the guts to parody the way in which women’s breasts are used by Hollywood to sell their wares. You can’t watch a hit drama without seeing a pair in the first five minutes (House of Cards, the Americans anyone?). For goodness sakes, half the women had fake breasts falling out of their gowns. The point of the parody was that the whole system by which we objectify women’s breasts is crazy. But does anyone talk about that? No, in a nanosecond the New York Times, the New Yorker, and every other major media out is reporting (like it is some kind of obvious fact) that Seth MacFarlane is a Neanderthal.

Over the holidays, I was stupid enough to write a blog for the Room For Debate about women and make-up. In it I said that I thought my wife looks beautiful first thing in the morning. I was quick to point out that every women—every human being in fact since one example I used was a buddy who plays hockey and has ink from head to toe—is the only one who gets to decide whether to wear make-up, whether to have plastic surgery, and what they feel like to doing to themselves in the name of beauty, or not.

Feminist bloggers went nuts. Amanda Marcotte complained on the front page of Slate that I was a sexist pig because by saying that my wife looks beautiful first thing in the morning, I was implying that all women should look naturally beautiful. 1,500 comments followed violently agreeing with Amanda’s takedown. Others followed here and here and here.

Christina Huffington, Arianna’s daughter, read the Slate piece and piled on, never taking the time to read my original 300 words in the NYT. Ultimately Huffington Post decided it would be good theater to have Christina and me on their live program, which I reluctantly agreed to. I asked her what she could possibly be talking about since I made no comment about whether or not she should wear make-up, only that my wife is beautiful to me first thing in the morning. She apologized graciously. But her attack based on Amanda’s attack just goes to show how out of whack things have gotten.

The men I know are struggling. Struggling to figure out what’s important to them in the strange new world of a 21st century economy where women are better educated and increasingly more employable; in a world in which they increasingly want to be stay-at-home dads but are looked down upon for that desire; a world where any attempt to break out of the two-dimensional box of men as knuckle draggers who pursue Bud Light and the NFL above intimacy, emotion, and self-reflection gets blown to bits.

So what do I answer when asked the male equivalent of, “Lean In”?

Tell the Truth, I say. Lay yourself open to what it is like to be a man no matter what the reprisals. The only way we as men are going to get anywhere is by proving that we are not cavemen. We want, in the end, to be good fathers and husbands. And that gender is not a zero sum game. Our advancement as human beings is good for women. Just like women’s liberation is a fundamentally good thing for us as men.

And when you read stuff like Rampell’s stereotyped attack on dads at-large, go in the corner and empty your stomach, and then come back and continue to make breakfast, bring your wife coffee, and clean the house. That’s what I did this morning.


image by author of my buddy Dave with his twins

About Tom Matlack

Thomas Matlack is a venture capitalist.


  1. Tom M, ive just read youve left this place (i was so busy this past week, i didnt have time to read gender blogs.)
    quite a shock to hear. best wishes in what you decide to do next

    • Tom Brechlin says:

      Holy crap. Tom M, I hope you surface somwhere soon … would love to blow this pop stand. You’re one of the reasons I stayed here. God bless ya and best wishes.

      I’m gonna try the twitter thing …

  2. “It’s about men doing their part at home. If only we had paternal leave and men would change more diapers the world would be a better and safer place for women.”

    Not sure where you got this? I got the opinion that everyone helping out at home and everyone having a balanced work-life with a career that allows them to have children could be a great thing?

    “The question I am often asked is: where does that leave men? From my limited data set, we are pretty much screwed. Not that we aren’t still the leaders of the free world and dominate in the positions of economic power. But in terms of the thought leadership on gender, which is what I have spent the last three years thinking and writing about, we are getting a raw deal.”

    Screwed how though?

    “Feminist bloggers went nuts. Amanda Marcotte complained on the front page of Slate that I was a sexist pig because by saying that my wife looks beautiful first thing in the morning, I was implying that all women should look naturally beautiful.”

    Amanda Marcotte has no right lecturing anyone over sexism after her misandrist comments not to mention rape apologia regarding a male who was raped in his sleep. Disregard her insults.

    From one of hte articles re:Makeup
    “Guess what dudes who say stuff like this, including you, Tom Matlack? What you think is “no makeup” actually is makeup. When men say they like the natural look, what they’re really saying is “I’m glad you’re conventionally pretty enough to look like you don’t need to wear makeup even though you’re totally wearing makeup right now.””
    So the author throws in a misandrist generalization and assumes men do not know what is and isn’t a natural look. She does not have the right to tell you what you know and don’t know, you are married to your wife, you’ve most likely see her straight after a shower or during where the makeup is no where to be seen, I am sure you can easily spot when she wears 0.00% makeup.

    “The men I know are struggling. Struggling to figure out what’s important to them in the strange new world of a 21st century economy where women are better educated and increasingly more employable; in a world in which they increasingly want to be stay-at-home dads but are looked down upon for that desire; a world where any attempt to break out of the two-dimensional box of men as knuckle draggers who pursue Bud Light and the NFL above intimacy, emotion, and self-reflection gets blown to bits.”

    It’s up to men and women to all come together and decide as a society what is acceptable. Men have an equal n powerful voice in this, do NOT let internet bloggers n what not beat that out of you, do NOT let them get to you. There will be critics who will say all kinds of shit, misandrists, bigots, etc, but stay true to yourself and fuck what they think. I am paying far less attention to this snarky angsty articles tearing someone apart over a strawman. Let them rattle off n have their 1000 comments echoing the same bigotry because there are more than 1001 people in this world and there are plenty who will probably agree with you, and plenty who will disagree. I read their articles, I spot the bigotry, I comment here n there but largely I just ignore the bigots now or call it out without getting too indepth into the bullshit. So much anger seems to be online, it’s the cool thing to do, be angry, aggressive, especially with the Jezebel style crowd with the fuck you MRA style hatred (and some of those doing the same in reverse)….how the hell does real debate happen with so much hostility n anger?

  3. Hi Anonymous

    As a marginalized man you will have even less power and influence. How to create social change is complicated.

    Since I live overseas I see the US from outside only. I does not look good what I see. And the hate I see on this website is emotionally upsetting.

    Have you though of emigration? Trust me,life is so nice many other places on this earth. But Americans seems to forget us that live and thrive in countries outside the US. Even this polarized debate about feminism you will be free from.

    • Anonymous says:


      Thanks for giving me an idea for change. I’m sure I would like another environment. At present, however, I have a 9 yr. old daughter who lives with me most of the time and elderly parents who need my care so leaving the U.S., or even my locale, is not an option for several more years. Since I have very little family closely related to me except my parents and their generation who are in their 70s and above, I would love to meet someone and be able to take another stab at more traditional family life in a different environment. Perhaps in another decade or so I can try this, assuming I still feel young enough at that time.

  4. Anonymous says:

    What feminism has done for me:

    As a man, I hate our society, our country, our 21st century world and everything about it. My rules to live by: take care of your family and friends, but otherwise, don’t lift a finger for anything else. Don’t volunteer to serve in the military and discourage any of your family and friends from that either. Let all-feminist brigades go over to Afghanistan instead of us. Second, quit being involved in your community, church or local society. Don’t give a dime to anyone unless you must to keep from going to jail. Don’t work any harder than you have to to get by. Encourage anyone who can to get on disability or other government assistance so we can bleed dry the country. Quit getting married, period. Be as prefunctory to women as you can be in day to day life. Most of them don’t respect you or even hate you anyway. If all (or even most) men would “drop out” of society like this, society might start to listen to us. Or, alternatively, we will hasten general societal collapse, and whatever replaces the culture we have now will be a major improvement.

    • Oh, come now, it happens to the best of us – no matter how respectful, enlightened, and fair-minded you might be, inevitably we will all be called a sexist at some point, men and women alike. I’m a woman, and a feminist, and I strive to empower other women and instill confidence in them through martial arts and self-defense, and I consider myself a role model and mentor to the young female students who work in our office – they often send me lovely cards and notes thanking me for inspiring them to be strong, confident women who make their own decisions. And I get called a sexist ALL THE TIME by other women. I recall one time at in a social setting, I idly mentioned that I was reading the Bernard Cornwell Sharpe novels – historical fiction about the Napoleonic Wars. “Those are sexist books,” another woman said. “There aren’t any women in them who aren’t girlfriends, wives, or prostitutes.” “That does describe the armies of 18th-century Europe,” I agreed, but it was too late. Everyone in the room looked at me in accusation , or at least it felt that way. Even if had wanted to, there was no way for me to pretend that I don’t like the books, since I had just announced that I did, but because another woman declared that reading the Sharpe novels is sexist behaviour, there was no way to deny my own sexism. More recently, while having drinks with fellow martial arts students after practice, I idly mentioned that I’m reading the George R.R. Martin Game of Thrones series and the exact same thing happened – another woman declared the books to be offensively sexist, and there was no way I could pretend that I found the books offensive, since I had just stated that I enjoyed the first two in the series, therefore, once again, everything else I’ve done to promote feminism and strong women is completely invalidated because I enjoyed a fantasy novel that someone else finds sexist.

      There is absolutely no way for me, an actual woman who is also an advocate of women’s self-defense and a role model for young women, to avoid being called a sexist by other women, therefore, I don’t see any way for anyone, male or female, to escape this label, no matter what we do. I am sorry, it’d be nice if there was something we – the very people who respect and value women for their intellect and capabilites – could do to ensure this hurtful accusation of sexism is never directed at us, but there isn’t, so we just have to live with it.

      • Tom Brechlin says:

        And you still refer to yourself as a feminist? These women were obviously feminist women who put you down yet you stay with that label “feminist.” It’s obvious that no matter how much people want to believe that feminism today is a different breed, the reality is that the original play book is still in use. In 2013 women put other women down for something as simple as a novel. That, in and of itself, says to me that feminism as it “was” known is still here and not going away. When are women going to break away from the oppression that feminism has placed on them? When are women going to start to be okay with being free and not have to rely on an antiquated belief that was incorrect in the first place?

        • Goodness, this is a silly reply to a good post.

          It seems that men such as you are so bent on the idea that feminists *must* fit one bill. Like any movement, there are different kinds of extremists, different levels of involvement, and unfortunately, there are also ignorant “members.”

          You can’t convince women like Rachel – or me – that we can’t and shouldn’t be feminist. Just as you argue against unfair stereotypes that alleged feminists give innocent men, do not be a perpetrator of unfair stereotypes on women and/or feminists. A reply like this only brings to mind something my dad would tell me as a child when I gave a silly, half-ass rebuttal: Think! Don’t just talk!

        • Robin (Female) says:

          We do need a new word for ‘feminist’, as many women have become just as judgmental and repressive as men.

          If you are always looking to be offended, you will not be disappointed.

      • I got called a sexist and an MRA as an insult simply for quoting actual statistics on the high level of rape perpetration by females. I posted the full data, stats, but still I was a sexist for it?? If it’s sexist to point out that more than one gender causes a huge amount of abuse then the term sexist has lost it’s meaning. These days disagreeing with someone will get you called a sexist.

    • I like some of what feminism has brought but dislike the extremists, the internet fights, and the misandrist implementations of law, bigoted awareness raising, disproportionate anti-violence support. Feminism has it’s problem but it’s not inherently bad, it’s the individuals in the movement that make it good or bad.

  5. Not buying it says:

    So let me see she was willing to have children with the two boyfriends / fiancee’s, but she didn’t know that neither of them were the (SAHD) type or not the (SAHD)type , who’s to blame in this case unless they lied to her which I doubt that they are willing to be SAHD, what does it take for these ideological demagogues to take responsibility for their own choices & actions specially when they are claimants of independence, self reliance , …etc, it seems hypocrisy & arrogance are consistent traits in feminism.

    • I think that was the purpose of the discussion, to determine whether her boyfriends would be willing to do what she was definitely not willing to do – raise their children for the five or six years before they are old enough to be in school full-time. Since they weren’t willing do to this, and neither was she, the relationships ended. This happens sometimes, no reason for Rampell to be resentful about it. I mean, the guys didn’t appear to resent her for her unwillingness to do it, so it’s only fair she cut them the same slack. The bottom line is that one of the two in the couple must be willing to do this, otherwise, that couple should not have children. It’s the kind of thing that’s hard to bring up when you’re initially dating – it seems rather preemptive – but does have to be discussed if the relationship is heading towards the “I would like to spend the next several decades with you” stage. Even if the relationships were perfect in every other way, they simply weren’t well-matched in future plans, no reason why Rampell should have been so indignant about that. She needs to find a man who wants to be a stay-at-home-dad for a few years, while those men need to find women who want to be stay-at-home-moms for a few years. But not all feminists are like Rampell – she’s just one example of the kind who generate a lot of press because of their strident views. But if you look at the comments in the original article, many other educated, intelligent, feminist women offer counterpoints.

      • Not buying it says:

        Rachel, are you trying to convince me or yourself, I have read both of your comments & you definitely come across as an egalitarian, free mind justice centered, though might be slightly influenced by the wide spread belief in women always victims & men always the reason of it narrative! !, heck there’s a huge number of males who at least partially believe that even when the average male on the low end is struggling with survival, loss,…etc , let alone self improvement, since emotional, self reflective attitudes in males are looked upon as weaknesses , it’s called male privilege in the feminist circles, you can have my male privilege any time you want to miss.

        • I was merely pointing out that no one should be offended by this label of “sexist” as it’s flung about so callously these days. But I won’t deny being a feminist just because other feminists think I’m a chauvinist. Perhaps it is they who are incorrect. Things that I am supposed to find offensive according to feminists don’t bother me (e.g. historical fiction and fantasy novels), whereas things I care about, specifically, self-defense and situational awareness, are meaningless to them. For example, if I walk into a deli and guy behind the counter says, “Hi darling, what can I get you?” Doesn’t bother me any more than when the waitress calls me “hon.” According to other feminists, I’m supposed to be outraged, but I am too young to remember the 1950s when female office workers were patted on the behind and asked to make the coffee. That is not widespread these days, so why should I be offended at a harmless endearment that was not intended to offend? Or if a man on the street says “good morning” or even offers a compliment about my apperance in a courteous way, I always just say “good morning,” or “thank you!” Or if a shop clerk calls me “ma’am” – many women find that offensive because it makes them feel old, but to me it’s just a respectful form of addressing a stranger. I don’t feel empowered by readings of the Vagina Monologues on Valentine’s Day; the play itself offends me, to be honest. I don’t even get how that is supposed to be helpful to anyone. Whereas things I do care about – teaching situational awareness, self-defense, or just helping young women develop confidence to make their own decisions and not cave to peer pressure – don’t seem all that important to feminists.

          As a woman, I simply feel better equipped to be a role model and inspiration for young women interested in martial arts or self-defense. I feel that men need that, too – especially in an era in which there are many single-parent households, and many boys do not have a father or a strong male figure in their lives which is, in my completely subjective opinion, less than ideal for boys. I think sites like ArtOfManliness are wonderful – I am a big fan of the site. If nothing else, it allows men to see that manliness and masculinity itself is not the problem. Uncouth, disrespectful, impolite behaviour is a social problem, but not a gender-specific one. And it’s not that I have no interest in empowering young men through martial arts and self-defense – I absolutely do. 77% of homicide victims in the US are male, and men are twice as likely to be victims of violence as women, so I do feel that awareness and self-defense are important for everyone, but positive roles models of our own gender are also important. If I thought I’d be a great role model for young men interested in self-defense, I’d be striving towards that, but each his (or her) measure.

          • that last line should be “From each according to his ability..” but I mixed up John Stuart Mill and the Old Testament, sorry.

        • Sorry, I posted the wrong comment below – I meant to post it a bit further down under another comment. I was just suggesting that it’s not at all uncommon for relationships to fail because the couple has differing views on raising a family and it’s not that big of a deal – it happens, it can be sad, but it’s just part of the whole process of finding a compatible mate. Why should Rampell get to freely admit that she hates the idea of giving up her job to raise her kids, and yet lambast her two boyfriends because they didn’t want to do the very thing that she herself does not want to do? That is a double standard that I find completely unacceptable. If you yourself don’t want to do something, then don’t be a giant hypocrite about your boyfriend not wanting to do it either. That’s what I don’t understand – the indignation in her article because the men don’t want to do the very thing that she herself doesn’t want to do. I do not believe women are always the victims of men – if you mean literally, no, of course not, men are twice as likely to be victims of violence than are women, and more than 3/4 of homicide victims are male. If you mean figuratively, hm, I don’t really know what that means. I am afraid I’m just too uninformed about all this stuff, sorry – I started working full-time after college in 1998, so I’m too young to remember the way women struggled in the 1970s though I did reap all the benefits of it, lucky me. I just dislike the double standard – and I see it a lot – something that is prohibited for men (for example, posting comments about female martial arts instructor’s appearance in a photo of her teaching a class) is entirely permissible for women (posting comments about a male martial arts instructor’s appearance in a photo of him teaching a class). We can’t give women a free pass for the very things that we criticize men for doing! That’s all I meant.

          • i didn’t see anything in the article that sounded like she was lambasting her boyfriends for wanting stay at hone wives. She was just saying that’s not part if her life plan so she had to end those relationships. She didn’t sound angry about it, just frustrated perhaps.

  6. I followed the comments in the NY Times over to this site. I was a bit dismayed to read that article, which seems to be just another version of making other women feel ashamed for how they choose to raise their children. Rampell begins her article: “I happen to be an educated young woman who loves her job, sometimes gushingly, occasionally annoyingly,” but doesn’t acknowledge that other educated women might feel that emotion for their children. Why stigmatize women for being “stay at home” parents, as if breastfeeding a new baby at home is somehow destroying the economy? I am not saying this cannot be done by stay-at-home dads, if the mom is willing to pump at work and/or the couple uses formula. A dad can also be a nurturing parent to an infant – I know two single dads who had to do this (widowed/wife disappeared), and their kids are now thriving in elementary school. A lot of couples simply choose whoever’s job pays more or offers more stability and upward mobility to be the one working outside the home, or they figure out which job can be done part-time or telecommuite. It’s never easy on a tight budget, but there are families who do not want to put a six-month-old infant in day care to be raised by strangers. Or hire a nanny whom they then have to spy on with hidden cameras to be sure their own children are being properly cared for. Or even just because these women might not want to pump their breasts in a stall in the office lav. The reasons are myriad, but I fail to see how any sort of feminist motivation is fulfilled by finger-pointing and shaming other women because their opinion on parenting differs from your own.

    • Tom Brechlin says:

      Rachel, Thank you for your sentiments. They very much mirror what my wife had to deal with in the 70’s. The difference though was that back then , even though she could have easily out-incomed me, her choice was to stay at home. I made a good income but there is no doubt that having a second equal if not greater income, would have been nice.

      For my wife and I, it was all about the kids and what we felt was best for them. I’m sure as hell glad we did. All the “things” we accumulated are long gone but the memories are alive and well.

      A SAHD wasn’t looked at as an option back then, as it is now but even if it were an acceptable option, I wouldn’t have been interested.

      And BTW Rachel, my daughter is a stay at home mom and loves it.

      • I was born in 1971 so I well remember this era. We were poor as dirt and yet my mom, who married at 19 (not at all unusual for her generation) stayed home with us until I was in second grade and my brother was in fourth grade, when she went back to college to get her degree. That was 1978, and I remember how the other moms thought she was abandoning us even though my stepfather was a stay-at-home dad, since that was their arrangement until she finished school (he was a piano tuner and sometimes brought us to appointments, but was able to set his own hours). But the idea of a stepfather doing the “mommying” was appalling to the other moms. No one could believe that she had left an eight-year-old and ten-year-old home with a man! It’s hard to believe that what was so controversial back then would hardly lift an eyebrow today – I know people who put eight-month-olds in day care. I have to admit that I don’t want children, never did, but in some crazy hypothetical situation in which I had kids, I would rather be poor for the first six years and be at home with them – I never would be comfortable letting others spend the majority of time with my own children. I know many families have no choice and I don’t criticize them for it, but nor would I ever look at someone who decided to make do with less and spend more time with their own kids as an economic or intellectual letdown. I give my mom a lot of credit for all she did for us – she never once hired a babysitter, brought us to daycare, or left us at a stranger’s house. The only people she trusted to babysit us were close friends and family. Was it worth being so poor to have a full-time parent at home? Oddly enough, I think it was. I’m sure it was considerably harder for my parents than for us kids, since we hadn’t even started school yet and weren’t really cognizant of what it means to do without. However I will say that the cost of living has increased so much that it may not be possible to have even one kid on a single salary. So I make no judgements, but as a woman who does not want kids, I’m mystified as to why any woman would want them if they idea of being home with them for the first five or six years is so repugnant. Nothing wrong with a dad who chooses to be the one at home, but I seriously question why anyone would want to have children if both mom and dad are repelled by the idea of spending five or six years at home with them. I don’t even have a dog, because I’m only home at night, after work, and to leave my dog in doggy day care for forty hours a week seems to defeat the whole point of having a dog. Surely a kid deserves the same consideration as a dog?

        • ‘…Was it worth being so poor to have a full-time parent at home?…’

          Yes, it was worth it.

          Yr Mom

    • I didn’t get anything from the NYT article that was shaming toward stay at home parents. She seems to be responding to the controversial “Lean In” idea (from the recent book by the Facebook COO) which argues that women can succeed at work by being more committed (leaning in) at work. the NYT writer points out that would be easier if men took more paternity leave etc. not everyone is cut out to be a stay at home parent.

  7. I’ve been wondering about this lot and reading the comments – and it;s clear who is flying under which banner.

    For me it get very clear as I read the Times Article when i read this:

    I don’t pretend to know how common this situation is, and how many other young women have found themselves in it. But it clarified not only the choices that future mothers must make about their careers, but also how early in their careers they must begin to think about them. And while fairness and feminism may urge us to find better ways for women to balance work and life — — the most convincing argument seems to be an economic one.

    It sums up so much else in the article and the half image – the shadow. Call Me Terribly old fashioned, but I remember when there used to be two people in a relationship so things like this would be written “…and how many other young couples have found themselves in it.”.

    There is what I call the Operatic Tuneless Noise of me,me,me,me,me,me,me going on! I hater to have to point this out to so many Young Feminists (and older one’s too) but a Relationship is generally seen as have two people in it and even referring to them in equality – and even using those tiny little endearing words that show so much and the depth of you commitment to the other person …. you know …. words like “We”!

    To paraphrase Mahatma Gandhi “An I and another I leaves leaves your whole world Ignoring You!”

  8. Tom Brechlin says:

    Something has been knowing at me for some time now and I’m gonna put it out there to discuss. The stay at home dad is GREAT. You’ll never find me questioning their abilities in that I feel, as others do, that they are just as capable as women. That being said …..

    I feel that we’re forgetting the fact that there are many men who aren’t interested in being a SAHD. That they have talents and skills outside the home and have a right to use them as women do. Seems to be a big focus on opening the proverbial home front doors to men so that they can be the SAHD but it appears we’re neglecting another, much larger male population.

    Is this new age male development doing that which women rebelled against in the 60’s? Let’s put an apron on the guy and hand him some diapers, that’s the place he should be in the next generation(s)? I’m gonna say something else which will more then likely ruffle some feathers and that is that I feel that we are moving toward the feminization of men rather then celebrating who men are.

    Just as women resisted the idea of making women more “masculine” …it appears that women are playing “make over” with men. The last thing I think of as a man is how limited men’s wardrobes are. We’ve gone from “men are slobs” to let’s open the world of color for men? Is he too buff, not enough buff. Should he tan, not tan …. Blah blah blah. How superficial is all this?

    In the meantime, male suicide isn’t going down. Health care for men isn’t getting any better. Jobs are scarce for men and child custody still predominantly goes to the mother.

    And now we have international V-day which does nothing but promotes men are perps, women are victims and it’s gone world wide.

    I get tired of the smattering of so called progressive feminists that want to level the playing field and fight for men’s rights but won’t give up the label for anything. FEMinism is what it is. You can paint it every which way you want but it is what it is and the focus will forever be for the primary benefit of WOMEN.

    Sorry … had to get this off my chest.

    • Mostly_123 says:

      I agree that suicide rates and health care should focus the attention far more than ‘How sexist is it to wear plaid?’ and various ’empowerment’ days. The simplicity of superficiality distracts from the hard work required by examining more concrete issues.

      In regard to the last three paragraphs specifically: Rightly (or even wrongly) I think most everyone can relate to at least ONE moment when they have felt put upon by someone who claims to speak as the true apostle of all feminism; valiantly protesting the innumerable evils that Men have done. For better or for worse, with any ideology inevitably comes some ideologues that put the idealism in its worst possible light.  

  9. wellokaythen says:

    Sorry for the multiple postings. Sometimes I have my clearest thought after pressing “Post Comment.”

    What I’ve noticed is that many of the SAHD’s portrayed on the GMP are shown as heroic figures or even a “new kind of masculine role model.” For me that’s sort of a good news/bad news situation. The good news is that the definition of male role model seems to be expanding to encompass a variety of roles. A man can be secure in his masculinity (if that’s important to him) and be in a childcare and/or homemaking role.

    On the other hand, the bad news is that these men are taken as heroic because there’s a larger perception that they’re “beating the odds” somehow, or that they’re singlehandedly thwarting all the stereotypes directed against them. They take on heroic status because they’re assumed to be some sort of underdog. It would be great if one day SAHD’s stopped being seen as heroes. It would be great if they weren’t underdogs anymore. It would be great if some day there were virtually no distinction between stay-at-home moms and dads, and we mostly just talked about stay-at-home parents.

    These men’s heroic status kind of reinforces all the obstacles they face. Let’s actually find a way to make it so that being a SAHD requires LESS heroism.

  10. wellokaythen says:

    There’s a lot of talk about how in terms of gender roles men and women are not on a level playing field. Usually this metaphor shows up when people talk about women being more disadvantaged than men, so their choices are not as easy.

    But, there are also ways that men face a situation tilted against them. The idea that more men should “stay home” and take more responsibility for childcare flies in the face of:

    1. The fact that there are millions of fathers who do, in fact, do this. With virtually no well-known role models, not much support, and contrary to all sorts of negative stereotypes about men.

    2. The fact that it’s an uphill choice for a lot of men. Men in our society are simply not as trusted as women are to take good care of children. It’s not just men being afraid to lose some sort of masculine ego or something. There are all sorts of larger social pressures AGAINST men taking care of children. Even the legal system tends to assume that mothers are more important than fathers. Certainly men are much more commonly viewed as incompetent, dangerous, abusive, and exploitative when it comes to children. we can’t pretend that for men it’s just a simple choice between two equal options.

    So, it’s not just a question of more men simply stepping up to the plate. We should also work to remove some of the social and cultural barriers set up to discourage men from stepping up to the plate. If someone says that men need to do more at home, I have to ask that person, “be honest with yourself. Do you actually trust a man to do a good job? Do you honestly think that men are just as good at it as women?” (I say yes, men are just as good at it as women, but I wonder if many women sincerely believe that.)

  11. Jen Crook says:

    Regarding “What’s a Man to Do?” along with the comments from Jimbo and Tom Brechlin, THANK YOU! I signed up for this blog in order to learn more about the issues men face, how they think, what they want. Having found myself dating again at an age where most people are enjoying their grandchildren I came to realize that no one changes after high school, maybe even junior high! I realized also that I much preferred understanding what was going on from a man’s perspective than a woman’s, even though I am female. The book, and movie, “He’s Just Not That Into You” got it right when they wrote that women lie to themselves from an early age about men’s actions, so why not seek guidance from men? So, PLEASE, keep writing what is going on with you and try to ignore the attacks from women who see every action as a slight to their abilities. Like the hoopla over President Obama’s comment on Kamela Harris’ (good) looks – it may have been dumb on his part, but it in no way warranted the response and outrage across the nation. No high-profile woman would consider publicly saying that a male politician was smart, and good looking, but every woman I know says things like that in private, and they are not reducing that male politician’s capabilities or accomplishments in any way by saying it.

    Frankly, lean in, lean out, or just sit down, but keep talking! Please!

  12. Tom I enjoyed the piece and think it is needed, but I have to wonder if you’ve been reading your own website the past couple of months. I nearly quit coming here as i felt the opening months of 2013 have featured a large number of men blaming/shaming articles mostly authored by women.

    I come here for articles about men that help me see that –

    I’m not the only man stressed at work, I’m not the only man who struggled mightily at dating (despite doing everything “right”)

    I’m not the only man who feels like my wife can sometimes seem like an alien from another planet that I have to live with for the rest of my life

    I’m not the only man who loves being married, loves my wife yet still understands marriage is hard

    I’m not the only man who grew up thinking feminism was a movement with goal I agreed with (equality for the sexes) only to find modern feminism full of snark and hate filled attacks on men in general which they justify using concepts (like rape culture and the patriarchy) made up by gender studies grad students in their university library but which I see no evidence of anywhere in my real life

    I’m not the only man who can’t figure out why legitimate criticism of anything women do is met with a belief that women walk on water, nothing they do is wrong, and any criticism is just hateful misogyny

    That’s just a small example of what I come here looking for and encountered months back when I first found my way here. Unfortunately the last few months have included articles to the point of overkill about Steubenville which essentially blamed all men for what happened there, numerous unrealistic article about gaining consent, dating articles that blame men for dating issues (never acknowledging just how contradictory or underhanded women can be when dating. articles calling for men to see women acting “crazy” (the article’s word not mine) as just part of them being their beautiful feminine selves that we should just learn to deal with.

    Maybe it’s time to stop trying to get the feminists on your side and turn GMP into a place where men and women can speak openly and truthfully about all subjects that impact our lives as men yet not have to stoop to the anti-woman level that the “MRA” site stoop to. I’m just a normal guy, can’t I just read and converse with other normal guys about what’s going on in our lives without having author after author trumpet the false promises of modern feminism as the cure for our [men’s] ills?

    • Tom Brechlin says:

      Well stated Jombo.

    • Having grown up in a time where birth control and abortion wasn’t available and blatant sexism was rampant, I cannot understand why so many women have thrown the baby out with the bath water. (Oops, this rant does not have anything to do with babies.)

      I like men, I don’t blame them for all the problems in the world, and I think most of them are doing the best they can under enormous pressure and expectations.

      I think that I like men because I like being a woman. It is so very easy to be a woman, anything we do beyond just being a decent human being is applauded, but I admit I prefer the company of men because women, mostly young women, have such a sense of entitlement, such a sense that they deserve to ‘have it all’, despite the fact that the real injustices were visited on earlier generations, not them.

      I do not understand acting crazy or behaving badly and expecting to be excused, just because you are a woman. I do not understand expecting men to behave like adults, while a woman can behave like a child. I do not understand why a woman staying at home with children expects her working husband to walk in the door and help with her job, which she freely chose, taking care of the home and children (I do not mean playing with children), as if she also goes to his office and does part of his job. I do not understand women getting insulted when men open the door for her, as if insulting her was his sole intention. I do not understand women who cannot bother to learn to cook, as if cooking was some sort of slave labor.

      I understand men just fine, but I cannot figure out modern women.

      • So you like being a woman because its a privilegde
        ,but you feel bad for men for the pressures they have to deal with that you don’t have to as a woman
        and you dislike other women for not having to deal with the same pressures as men being as they are too, women?
        Huhhhh. I see

        • I’m not the original commenter, but that’s not how I interpreted it, rather that society sees a man as a failure if he chooses to spend his whole life as a low-level secretary or gas station attendant or retail clerk or stay-at-home parent, whereas the social judgement of women who do those exact same things is much more forgiving. Social expectations for women are still quite low. Being a single mom is applauded, as it should be, but being a single dad is not – it’s often frowned upon. The anger and resentment towards men that so many feminists express – even in all these comments – is disheartening; and to know that’s how other women feel about our husbands, boyfriends, brothers, fathers, and male friends doesn’t feel good – the very word “manly” has become an insult and masculinity itself has negative connotations – that flavor of sexism is no better than the pre-liberation sexism of the 1950s.

    • Robin (Female) says:

      I find women acting ‘crazy’ to be the height of narcissism. I do not understand what is wrong with most women or why they are such man-haters, especially since so many of them are young and grew up with rights that Baby Boomer women could only dream about.

      I much prefer the company of men, as most women are difficult, self-absorbed, and self-centered, with an inflated sense of entitlement that astounds me.

      Take the ‘body acceptance’ movement, which was started by overweight women. (Men are part of the movement too, but it is mostly for women.) What this movement means is that people who are unhealthy, overweight, and slovenly should be accepted just as they are. We all get a gold star, just for ‘being’, right?

      (Interestingly, I date younger men and I like to ask them what it is they like about older women. I can various answers, but one young man in his mid-20s told me, reluctantly, that it was because women his own age were fat and out of shape and they didn’t care about it. He told me that he and other men his age talk about it, but don’t know what to do, so they date older women from an earlier generation who put some effort into looking good.)

      It is a two-way street though. I like men who take care of themselves, are in shape, not overweight, well-groomed, clean, well-dressed (no sweat pants!) because it says they understand that they do not live in a vacuum and will be judged, at first, by their appearance. It is a sign of respect to care about yourself and how you look and that takes a certain amount of effort.

      I have been in relationships where the man asked me if I would still love him if he was fat. I told him I would still love him, but I would no longer want to have sex with him. Harch truth, but while I do not expect a man to look like he did in his 20s, I do not want to be with someone who let’s himself go, as that is saying that he doesn’t care how he looks to me, so he doesn’t care about me.

      If man or a woman does not want to make an effort, that’s their choice, but it can hardly be a surprise when the opposite sex finds them unattractive.

      Only a person’s mother (if they are lucky) loves them ‘just the way they are’. All other love is conditional, unless you have a dog.

      • 🙂

      • Have you ever had kids? Some women put on quite a bit of weight during and after pregnancy, would you feel ok if your partner didn’t want to have sex with you because you put on too much weight?

        The body movement is less about trying to make it ok to be unhealthy, but more about just having self-esteem and not hating yourself simply because you’re fat. It’s not good to be overweight AND have a low self-esteem n feel like shit, especially for comfort eaters whom those negative feelings simply make them crave more bad food. There are those who feel so bad about their body that they don’t like to exercise in front of others. How do I know? Because as a fat person I am one who HAD trouble exercising in front of others, especially the “gym” junkies who were usually in far better shape. A positive mind is much better for losing weight.

        Also I find your male friend strange in assuming older women aren’t as fat as younger women, must be different here because usually younger women are less overweight, especially teenagers. Shaming someone into losing weight doesn’t work but supporting them, helping them deal with issues that bother them if they are comfort eater, positively encouraging them DOES work. But weight issues are far more than simply too much food, there are many factors at play from genetics to the intestinal flora, obese people for example are more likely to miss out on key intestinal flora that thinner people have. Then you have issues regarding ghrelin resistance where the body does not get a “full” signal, which is what I had until I got a lap band done and for the first time in a long time I could actually feel full because the lapband sits on the nerves that stimulate ghrelin. The other issue is that exercise is actually a very shit way to lose weight, it takes an enormous amount of exercise to burn off the excess energy so it’s better to eat right, and eat far smaller portions. But we have a society that quite frankly is obesenogenic, too much junk food, too big a portion size, after I got my lapband and realized how little food I need to eat to survive even with my very large 6’6 body that has quite a high metabolism vs the average person it really made me disgusted with the portion sizes we have. Growing up and being told to “finish your plate” is the worst worst worst advice ever and many poor eating habits are gained in childhood. Weight loss is not easy, especially for some who’s body will literally adjust itself to try keep weight on, it can make it extremely difficult to lose AND keep the weight off especially if that person has other health issues. The gut flora one is probably a huge issue too, it’s already linked to diabetes and I wouldn’t be surprised if gut flora transplants were the future of successful weight loss.

        ht tp://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=gut-microbe-swap-helps-weight-loss I am very very interested in this and hope they hurry the fuck up with it, it’d be great to not worry so much about my weight. I doubt most overweight people enjoy being overweight but the combination of our sedentary lifestyle + very calorie dense foods + genetic issues + gut flora + sugar addictions + all the other shit the body has makes it a tough battle. I know people who probably eat more than I do, aren’t very active and stay thin, hell there are differences in how much excess energy we excrete too which plays a part. It’s not as simple as put down the fork, starving oneself doesn’t work due to sugar crash n then huge hunger sets in, hunger itself is a huge problem for some and after I had my thyroid removed due to cancer my hunger actually increased.

        We’re looking at a future where the majority of people will be overweight the way life is setup, and I hope new research allows us to manage our hunger much better. Imagine a world though where people spent 1/10th the time working on their personality as they do on their physical body, where people spent less time pumping iron to get fullysick muscles and less time painting their face in makeup and more time working on being decent, caring, intelligent human beings. Your looks will fade, do you have any other traits worthy of keeping around for a partner?

        • And to answer your question, I would expect not expect my partner to want to have sex with me if I put on a lot of weight. And he should expect the same from me.

          I have the same standards for men and women.

          Respect your body and your mind will follow.

        • Hi Archy
          You are gooooooooood:

          “Imagine a world though where people spent 1/10th the time working on their personality as they do on their physical body, where people spent less time pumping iron to get fullysick muscles and less time painting their face in makeup and more time working on being decent, caring, intelligent human beings. Your looks will fade, do you have any other traits worthy of keeping around for a partner?”

          • Why does everything have to be either/or? As far as I understand from the comments above, if I work out, or wear makeup even occassionally, simply because I enjoy doing those things (exercise is practically my only form of recreation and I get depressed without it), or because I want feel pretty for my own sake, that means I cannot also be a decent person but instead am a painted-face tart like some 19th-century streetwalker? Or that I lack personality, intelligence, or decency, simply because I enjoy exercise? And of course, once I am old and my looks have faded, my boyfriend or husband, who will be just as old, will have no interest in me any longer since my looks are all I had to offer? Of course, if he packs on an extra 100 lbs, I have to pretend that he’s still attractive to me since it would be insensitive and uncaring to expect him to stay trim for my sake. Whereas I, of course, will have nothing but faded looks and a lousy personality from a lifetime of fondness for exercise and painting my face. Not to mention the whole notion of now matter how fat my boyfriend gets, I must not object, even if he wants to sit around on the sofa all day eating, smoking cigarettes, and generally being a totally different man than the one I first met and fell for – because I am just a painted-face tart who cares more about exercise and make-up than being a decent person.

            I see the same harsh judgement of men, by the way. A guy who lifts weights can’t be a decent person – he’s a macho jerk. A guy who likes to hunt or shoot at the range – also a macho jerk, we all know that decent men shouldn’t enjoy recreational shooting. Watching football and drinking beer with his guy friends? Likewise, a macho jerk. The list goes on and on. How about we stop judging total strangers based on their hobbies or exercise routine or whether or not they wear makeup, and take a page from one of the greatest men who ever lived, and judge them only on the content of their characters? Judge your own boyfriend or girlfriend however you want; it’s not my place to say how you ought to conduct your relationship. But please leave off judging my exercise routine, hobbies, makeup or lack thereof, and my own relationships – if I want to ditch a boyfriend for gaining 100 lbs and refusing to budge from the sofa, I honestly do not care if other people think I’m a shallow bitch for doing so. The thing with relationships is that only the people actually in that particular relationship are entitled to make the rules. Unless there is an abusive situation, everyone else has to just has to suck it up and accept that their control does not extend to other people’s romantic and sexual lives.

        • Because we cannot help what we are sexually attracted to and without that attraction the relationship might work, but it is a hard slog.

          An example is a man I know who likes tall leggy blonds, Scandinavian types, of which I am most assuredly not, so there would be no point pursuing a relationship with him, even if I were interested.

          On the other hand, I like slim men, not too tall (I am short) and not too muscular, Slavic types. That is just the look I like in a man. I have met men I liked very much, but were big bear of men and that does nothing for me, attraction-wise. I know some women who like that type, but I do not, so I would not pursue a relationship with a man who looked like that.

          I would not find a man I loved unattractive because he got old or lost his hair, it is the things within his control that he should take care of, because he wants to stay healthy, take pride in his appearance, and cares that I like to look at him. Just as he does for me.

          But then I am not a person who only looks nice for work, then is a total slob at home, lying around all day unshowered in a bathrobe and expect my mate to be the same. I do not understand showing your best for strangers and saving your worst for the person you love. This goes equally for men and women and I will not tolerate someone unshowered in a bathrobe all day, as if they were an invalid. It is disrespectful of the relationship and no one who does this should be surprised when they become like siblings.

          • Robin
            You both are right.
            I agree with both of you.
            But we live in society that does not put much emphasis on working on our character.
            We have self help books about person growth but everybody that really had do the job in real life know that is takes 24/7 for year after year after year. It is hard work.

            But I agree you about grooming, make up and all. As far as I am concerned make up is Gods gift to women, at lest to women like me.
            And if men need it I am not 100% against it. But I have never seen it here.

            • Yes, it is regrettable that things like behaving honourably, keeping one’s word, being respectful to yourself and others, not telling lies, and just generally being a decent person aren’t emphasised as much as looking hot or attracting any sort of attention – but that’s probably been the case since the first newspapers were printed. At a certain point we all have to take responsibility for our own conduct, no matter how lousy society may be, that’s no excuse. Keep in mind that some of the most dreadful societies in the history of the world have produced truly exceptional men and women – those who rose above the ignorance and prejudice and even brutality of their societies and yet still managed to become inspirational figures. 13-year-old Rekha Kalindi, born into a life of poverty and child labor, defied her parents and refused to become a child bride, and instead became a model of inspiration for other young girls to seek a life better than forced marriage. History is littered with examples – Booker T. Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Martin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi, Sacajawea, Harriet Tubman- all people born into far less tolerant societies than our own, with much greater disadvantages than nearly any American alive today, and yet they did not use society as an excuse for poor conduct. We should be no less resourceful than they. It is hard, but few attributes worth acquiring are effortlessly attained.

              I don’t happen to care too much about looks, I have no particular type, except men who are witty and smart and kind and courteous and reasonably active and not couch potatoes – the rest falls into place if I have intellectual compatibility, but I completely understand having these sort of preferences. I know guys who are shorter than average who don’t want to date women who are six inches taller – I see nothing wrong with that, nor if someone is simply not attracted to a particular complexion, body type, or whatever – it is not necessary to want to sleep with everyone in order to respect and value them as human beings.

  13. Tom, I’m also confused about why the NYT article made you “puke.” I thought you were in favor of more parental leave for men?

    • I also know that GMP champions the personal narrative of writers, which is what Rampell was doing…with studies to back up her own observations. Should she not have told her story?

  14. Tom, If I can’t tell my wife she looks beautiful in the morning (which she does, and which I often tell her), then what do I lead with, “Honey, this Astros lost again last night. I don’t think I can go to work.”
    Thanks for injecting a dose of much needed sanity and common sense into the world.

  15. The thing that most people (addressed to you Julia) is that for 1000s of year women never had to pay the social price for what they received, they never had to go to war and fight for their country, were not held liable both legally and socially for the acts of their husbands (men were). So yes, perhaps men had some privileges, but they damn well earned them

    The person I miss most who used to post here was GirlWritesWhat, look her up on youtube. Very articulate and to the point.

    I have no idea why she stopped posting and it seems now GMP has gotten rid of her old articles.

  16. David May says:

    There has recently developed an interesting double standard in terms of gender parity, and I for one have often wished there was an All-Male on GMP, one where in women would not feel compelled to point out men’s short comings with such fervor. Misinterpretations of statements like “my wife is beautiful first thing in the morning when she wakes up” is, if not deliberate, certainly motivated by a readiness, if not an outright desire, to be offended. And this is not an isolated instance on GMP: When men speak in their language to other men on GMP, women have repeatedly accused the men of being violent, hateful or worse. Ergo, why can’t we have an all-male space? Because women would be offended and accuse of misogyny, male privilege, at cetera. Never mind that women only spaces have been encouraged and developed over the last few decades, something that, one suspects, most of men who read GMP have gone out of our way to respect.

    Recently, when a doctor’s office tired switch providers on me at the time of my appointment, I explained I explained I preferred a male health care provider (for a variety of reasons, none of them relevant to this discussion) and was immediately put on the defensive by protestations of the doctor’s ability and training. I said nothing but left the office since the doctor with whom I had my scheduled appointment was out the office for obscure reasons. I later pointed out to the original doctor, whom I was able to see the following week, that when a woman wants a female provider, no one questions her reasons — but when a man wants a male provider is immediately seen as misogynistic. He could only nod his ascent.

    • Every male space gets invaded sooner or later. It’s even happening over at A Voice for Men, and its causing their message to change, and not in a good way.

      There is one male-only space. And it’s severely guarded. Not sure if registrations are currently open, and not sure if you can look past the deep resentment you will find there, especially among the divorcees, but give it a go.. mgtowforums.com

  17. Hi obmon
    Thank you for answering.

    It sounds to me you was once married to woman that tried to dominate you. And I can understand why you disliked that intensely.

    This Good Man Project  wants a dialog that includes the whole world. They should bring in more writers from other countries and cultures.

    I am not so sure what is the best way.

    I live in what is often called “a feminist state”.
    Our men have paid leave from work when get become fathers. It is 10 or 12 weeks I think.

    Maybe I am wrong,but I can not see any signs of the same frustration among men in this “feminist state”. Those hurting are the divorced men,apart from that I sense little despair.

    • Never married. Still single.

      The woman you would have to refer to, would be my mother. But she isn’t the reason for my particular demands towards marriage. Other people’s experiences with the entitlement of modern women. Actions without responsibilities. I see it every single day.

      Here’s another good example.. I’m sitting in a friends house at the moment. His wife just came home. In front of me, she yells at him for smoking in the house. And just so I don’t get misinterpreted; it isn’t the nagging about smoking, but the nagging in front of me, a guest, that shows lack of respect for her husband. It used to be, at least I thought so, that common sense would prevent either man or woman publicly ridicule, mock, or nag their partner. I certainly rarely (can’t remember the last time) see a man do this to his wife. It’s incidences like this that I will never abide, and if that means I will remain single, so be it.

    • … and where-ever you are, especially if you are in a “feminist state”. If you don’t see it, then you aren’t looking. You are asking the right questions to the right men.

      Please read Warren Farrell’s book, The Myth of Male Power. It’s a very good start.

  18. It seems to me from the comments in this article that the basic premise of any gender issue is gender itself. Women deny gender biological roots, and blame it all on the patriarchy.

    If we instead realized how integrated “Chemistry” is to our existence, we might be willing to let go many of these issues.

    To deny three million years of human evolution just so you can wear yoga pants with impunity is beyond just childish and highly solipsistic.

    Men want women to be nurturers and mothers, to stay at home more than work 60-80 a week away from home, and dare I say, be a little submissive to their husbands (it turns us on and makes us feel all sorts of loved).

    Don’t like it..? Don’t get married.

    • “Men want women to be nurturers and mothers, to stay at home more than work 60-80 a week away from home, and dare I say, be a little submissive to their husbands (it turns us on and makes us feel all sorts of loved).”

      Honesty is refreshing. Hoo boy.

      • Not what I want, though I think it should be a viable option for those women that do want it.

        I’d settle for:
        1. Not being demonised for being male (or white or whatever).
        2. Not being held accountable for the actions of generations of men who weren’t me.
        3. Being able to hold feminist thought to proper public account and scrutiny without being called misogynist, sexist etc etc merely for the act of questioning.
        4. An end to the de-facto censorship of ‘call out’ culture and a policy of ‘making more things’ rather than trying to destroy what other people enjoy.

      • Just out of curiosity.. how many women do you know are with Stay At Home Dads (and actually respect them..)?

        This was one of Warren Farrell’s biggest points.. there are plenty of men who would actually consider being SAHD’s.. there are very, very few falling in love with them though..

        Your reply is another point.. you think what most men want w warrants a “Hoo boy”, but heaven forbid women get challenged for what they want..

        I’ve been reading all your posts.. you are hypocritical. You want what you want, and you want men to fall in line. You can’t fathom why when we refuse..

        As for your “Get up and doing some thing about it” shaming language above, though I am not a fan of them, Voice for Men do A LOT.

        You also assume that because we aren’t picketing in the streets, holding rallies and so forth, we are not doing anything… MGTOW, which are the majority (not MRA’s) ARE doing something by abstaining from the system entirely.

        You only need to do a Google search for “Where have all the good men gone” articles or to study the last 20 years of economics to understand how men abstaining from the hypocritical, misandric, and unbalanced society created by the feminist movement is more damaging than any rally or fundraiser.

    • Hi obmon

      Can you explain to us what you mean when you ask women to me more submissive?
      Can you give examples from everyday life?
      Frankly ,I have no idea what you are talking about. Tell me more…….

      • Femininity as it used to be. A deference of love to the husband.

        It doesn’t mean that the woman is weak in any way.. hell, if we can both afford nannies and are good at balancing time.. it high-powered woman can be sexy.

        But the absolute last thing I need is to feel like I married another man. No offense to gay people, but I married a woman. I want a woman. I don’t want to feel like everything I say, do, wish for, plan for, look forward to, think about is a competition.

        A submissive role does not mean a woman has no authority of her own. But I demand to be the final veto in the house, in all matters.

        It wasn’t always this way.. I fell for the propaganda of a loving-equal relationship when I was younger, and wouldn’t have thought of imposing my moral and financial authority. I thought it would be shared..

        I no longer believe that is conducive to a healthy relationship. Two alpha dogs can not stay in the same pack for long.

        • Correction for the top line.. it should have read: *a deference of love and authority to the husband*

        • Disclaimer: obmon’s views do not reflect the views beliefs or positions of any other GMP author, commenter, or person.

          • Not surprising. I know what part of the internet I’m in..

            • Martin Nash says:

              From where I am sitting I hope you are in a place where I can read your views, disagree with them but absorb their message. And hopefully you can do the same.

              I personally admire you for saying things that most here won’t agree with (you dont read like a troll or a poe).

          • Mostly_123 says:

            “Disclaimer: obmon’s views do not reflect the views beliefs or positions of any other GMP author, commenter, or person.”

            So say we all.

  19. PursuitAce says:

    The real question is why is this debate always like a match. A little heat and poof, off we go. I try to think like what I am, an individual and not representative of an entire gender. How about we just start working on doing the right thing for each and every one of us humans. If you can’t find a way to check the anger at the door than maybe you can step aside and let cooler heads lead when it’s called for.

  20. Not that we aren’t still the leaders of the free world and dominate in the positions of economic power.
    We are? Really now? Men as a group are the leader of the free world and dominate positions of economic power? I’m really not being a smart ass about this but I’m questioning how exactly the few men at the top of the ladder represent us all to the point that it can be said that be sharing gender with them we are the ones with power.

    • “Men have all the power!” Meanwhile most men don’t have power, intersectionality plays a big part here from what I understand (wealth/class), I’m at the point where I don’t think it’s really fair to say men have the power, I think more emphasis needs to be made on WHICH men because it damn sure isn’t 99% of them. I reckon a seperate category for the elite needs to be made, elite male, elite female, average female, average male, etc.

  21. Tom Brechlin says:

    Tom, you rock! Men are struggling with what’s important to them. Why? Because what used to be important to them has been pulled out from under them. Now we’re having to have to reinvent ourselves to accommodate the changes. In doing so, we’re having to have to be under the microscope and our thoughts, feelings and opinions constantly scrutinized.

    • Tom Matlack says:

      Amen Tom

    • What has been pulled out from under you? Change *is* hard. You know what’s harder? Having to wait 1000’s of years to have equality. I don’t see it as a zero sum game, though. Do you? I think we can share, I really do. The good stuff and the bad–we can share.

      • What has been pulled out from under you?
        The notions of what is important to us as men. As in the things that we are supposed to value (and/or not value) because we are men.

        You know what’s harder? Having to wait 1000′s of years to have equality.
        Why bring this up its not like Tom is saying anything about what women have been going through or about who has the harder lot to bear.

      • I don’t know about you, but I haven’t been alive for 1000’s of years and I haven’t been privy to the olde time male privileges of yore. I suspect that you havent been oppressed for 1000’s of years either, and currently enjoy a range of privileges that most men alive today are completely unaware of.

        I can tell you what I’ve experienced in my 26 years however. How masculinity is “toxic.” How women are supposed to be smarter, more spiritually and emotionally rounded, generally better than men. How I, as a man, am guilty for the “sins of the father” and all this other crap. It took years, and a very supportive mother, to cut through this feminized view of the world and be comfortable with myself a man amid all the messages trying to shame me into being something else.

        Sorry, Lori. Sentiments like that only ring hollow to me now.

        • The majority of men also had to wait a very long time for equality and had to die in their droves in war before some of it was extended universally.

        • Mostly_123 says:

          Lori, with all due respect, in the 21 century I think we North American settlers should probably steer clear from any references to ourselves as experiencing anything that sounds like ‘1000 years of oppression’

          “The world owes you nothing. It was here first.” –Mark Twain

      • Tom Brechlin says:

        What was pulled out from under us? Simply put, the “family” as we once knew it to be. Men went to war, built roads, railroads, etc. making the US a manufacturing leader of the world. Meanwhile, we had a constant in our crazy lives where we had wonderful wives and mothers taking care of the home and family. Men were the providers and protectors for the family. All of a sudden, men became the bad guys, oppressors, and their roles as they knew it, were gradually eliminated.

        “Change is hard” … you’re right but when change is made, it generally prompts the development of a platform for change. What platform was given to men to make these changes? You mention 1000’s of years …. Let’s look at the last 40 and you tell me what’s been done to help men make these changes? And look at the “changes” we’re being asked to make? Who’s asking us to make these changes? Men aren’t asking to change, they’re making changes to accommodate and simply adapt and survive.

        • What do you mean, “what has been done?” One of the things I’ve been thinking a lot about lately is how I, as a woman and human being, can do more for society than I’m doing. I’ve concluded I need to spend less time online, and more time doing things IRL.The women’s movement did not bring equality for women, but it got us closer, and there was no internet then. You had to go to rallies, meet with other people, fundraise, get paper petitions signed, etc. I don’t see the men’s movement men doing that, but I do see a lot of men complaining online. I know *I* complain online. What does it accomplish? I need to do less of it. Do we all perhaps need to do less of that, and more outside our own houses, off our computers? When I see anyone–including men–complain about everything they don’t have, I do wonder why I don’t see them out in the streets, marching, collecting signatures, building DV shelters, going to school board meetings, doing the *work* of whatever needs to be done. So why is the question “what has been done?” rather than “what am *I* doing?” to solve the perceived problems. I have come to believe I do not have the right to complain as an able-bodied person if I am not also actually offline doing things, which I am. Maybe every commenter on this article is as well, and if that’s the case, bravo. Otherwise, I suggest dropping the passive voice of “what has been done?” or expecting others to do it for you. Again: if you are doing the work, awesome, seriously. Everybody needs to vent online sometimes. I’m just saying, ALSO, “be the change you want to see in the world.”

          • Lori, can you provide citations to all the comments you’ve left for Jill Filipovic, Amanda Marcotte, and Melissa McEwan to stop complaining online so much?

            I’ve seen comments like yours before, where women and/or feminists make disparaging remarks about men’s online activism and feign a neutral stance. (“Online activism isn’t real! We should all go out and do real stuff instead!”) But I’ve only seen them make these comments in threads where men’s issues are the focus; I don’t see those same individuals making disparaging remarks about women’s much more extensive involvement in the online gendersphere.

            FTR, I completely disagree with the premise of your comment (that online advocacy is somehow ‘less real’ than other activism). I think online analysis and advocacy is an extraordinarily powerful tool for people who would otherwise be shut out of a debate to make themselves heard. Writing thoughtful and persuasive comments and posts is time-consuming work and — if you’re any good at it and reach a decent number of people — has a much greater chance of affecting society than being just one more person in a march. (Don’t get me wrong … there’s definitely time for marching, and I’ve done my share.)

            • Both are real. I do both. I want to start doing more stuff IRL on top of online stuff. I do make similar comments in feminist spaces, and am actively working on many projects right now beyond online activism with many other women and men who feel as I do. I believe in online activism–I’ve done quite a lot–but when people ask “why hasn’t xyz been done?” I have to ask back, “Are you working on it?” and I personally believe that this work must be both online AND off, otherwise it is a lot of complaining, and a lot of waiting around for someone else to do the work, which I feel is unproductive. Clicktivism only gets you so far, IMO. It’s not that it’s “less real,” it’s that it’s limited, and should be combined with getting off of computers and out there and working on stuff. That’s how I believe stuff gets done, ultimately. We need some excellent writers doing their stuff, and we also need people to get out from behind the screen. This is my personal opinion. You can disagree and believe it can all get solved by commenting on blog posts. I just don’t see it that way.

            • “I’ve seen comments like yours before, where women and/or feminists make disparaging remarks about men’s online activism and feign a neutral stance. (“Online activism isn’t real! We should all go out and do real stuff instead!”) But I’ve only seen them make these comments in threads where men’s issues are the focus; I don’t see those same individuals making disparaging remarks about women’s much more extensive involvement in the online gendersphere.”

              It can be a form of dismissal (don’t think Lori is using it that way though). I see them quite often a few minutes after someone claims feminism is for both genders, then says men need to go do the work….are there no male feminists already? Is the question that burns in my head.

          • I agree, the internet is too often an echo chamber of negativity and self-righteous indignation. I periodically quit visiting blogs and then I cone back against my better judgment. Has one single social problem ever been solved by arguing about it on line?

            • Not by that exclusively. Online writing and commenting can help, but actual work out in the real world is needed, and so if someone only talks the talk and doesn’t also walk the walk, I don’t have patience for it.

              • From what I see of MRM stuff, A lot is in Canada and Australia. There are also a heap of groups that advocate for men’s issues but don’t say MRM, such as the various fathers groups, some feminist groups, etc.

          • “You had to go to rallies, meet with other people, fundraise, get paper petitions signed, etc. I don’t see the men’s movement men doing that, but I do see a lot of men complaining online.”

            You didn’t see the offline work being done in the University of Toronto where a few extremist-feminists violently protested against them – ht tp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0 and further fighting ht tp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvYyGTmcP80 . People tried to setup the Mens center at Canada’s Simon Fraser University and again a group tried to stop it. It doesn’t exactly help the movement to have people stifle it, but I think the MRM is still in the early days of trying to get setup offline. Online is where most of the awareness happens, without the net I wouldn’t have a clue what is going on with the MRM or the shit men deal with because the local media here just doesn’t give a damn.

            “I see anyone–including men–complain about everything they don’t have, I do wonder why I don’t see them out in the streets, marching, collecting signatures, building DV shelters, going to school board meetings, doing the *work* of whatever needs to be done. ”

            It IS being done, but there are those who hide behind the name of feminism who try to work against it. That is what I don’t understand, the backlash instead of each group supporting each other.

            “I have come to believe I do not have the right to complain as an able-bodied person if I am not also actually offline doing things, which I am. ”
            Sadly health issues prevent me doing much, I’m not even sure where to begin. One day I wouldn’t mind helping out a movement that says fuck gender and actually works on ending violence, bullying etc, but the local (country, nothing happens in my town) stuff I’ve seen is heavily gynocentric. There is a “Men’s Sheds” group that helps with depression, etc and is probably the only group for men’s mental health which I may end up joining although I would rather also have women there too to learn skills, etc. The other groups doing stuff are the fathers rights groups which face HEAVY backlash from what I can understand, there is the oneinthree.com.au campaign and that’s about it.

            There is also a lot of pressure online given from various groups, Lego is copping hell over gendered ads, Victoria’s Secret is copping flack over one of their higher up’s saying some very strange shit and the targetted advertising of teens with sexualized lingerie, online activism can be a force to fear.

            Note, not all feminists do the above. Just highlighting that it’s not much help to have bigots try to stop a men’s group from happening for instance because of quite frankly the worst excuses I’ve ever heard.

          • You had to go to rallies, meet with other people, fundraise, get paper petitions signed, etc. I don’t see the men’s movement men doing that, but I do see a lot of men complaining online.

            I keep hearing this sentiment expressed and with it all the TROPES and implications that men are lazy and women somehow orally superior. I happen to have one hell of a lot of OLD school feminist Friends, many who were in the 1960’s/70’s and 80’s doing one hell of a lot – and each one tells me about the men they had supporting them – the men funding them – the men giving a great deal for them! Of course they have been made not to count!

            It’s also very interesting to see the men who have been made to vanish – men like William Fuller – Larry Cannon – Renner Wunderlich – and so many others. These men were there campaigning, they were doing it the same as the girls…. but then they got rubbed out of history because they were Men and Black African. They just got bulldozed into the ground with the political/social view and mass sympathy vote that came as a wave on the back of US Civil Rights. Odd how the Black community got there first but it’s mostly white middle class women who have been benefiting ever after!

            There were men such a Warren Farrel who got removed from the board of The National Organisation for women. He did a hell of a lot of meeting greeting and fund raising and then got thrown under the bus!

            As for what men are up to today – may I suggest you get off your computer and get with the real world. You may find the net handy as way to find out about events, but it still means you have to go and attend.

            I have to say Lorry that i used to see you as balanced and honest, but as time as gone by your comments and retreat into the Victim Narratives has been sad to see. I hope that you regain your Equality and Egalitarian mindset soonest.

      • You do realize that it’s only been the past 150 years that any sizable (not even majority, just sizable) number of men have had any sort of societal “agency” that women didn’t have right (outside of family structures)? I doubt any male peasants, serfs, sharecroppers, homesteaders, early industrial factory workers, 19th Century soldiers, victims of Jim Crow, or _slaves_ would be shedding tears for the equality a woman living in the United States in 2013 claims to not have. How again were these men holding women down for thousands of years?

      • Nice oppression olympics. Do show me in history where 10’s to 100’s of millions of women were killed in battles they were FORCED to fight in. See I can play this game too. I think you’ll find that in history, MOST men and Most women had extraordinary levels of oppression against them in various ways. The fortunate few at the very top, which had both male n female elites had very disproportionate levels of power over the rest of humanity. History is full of cold, evil examples of oppression and whilst men did have it better in many cases there were cases where it was hell, whenever major war comes about, you do NOT want to be a man in certain countries even today.

  22. I think that these issues between men and women will not be resolved anytime soon. Both sexes send each other mixed messages. Is it as bad as the 1970s when most of what I learned about how to treat women was turned on its head? I’m not sure. Is it going to get better, where men won’t have to feel like they are walking on eggshells? Not in my lifetime…but maybe in two or three generations.

  23. The hypocrisy in some of the articles posted is ridiculous. Amelia McDonell-Parry over at The Frisky didn’t just argue that men who say they prefer women without make up are sometimes mistaken, but actually implies in her last paragraph that many of them are simply pretending. But then she’ll turn right back around and blast one of the writers on this site for pondering whether the women who say they wear yoga pants purely because they are comfortable are being completely honest.

    Its part of a larger narrative I often see where the actions of men are put under a microscope and often assigned sinister, or ulterior motives. Meanwhile, women are to be taken completely at face value and whatever explanation they give for their actions is to be accepted without question.

    • Tom Matlack says:

      Jack I really try not to let it get to me. But when I see it show up in the NYT, like it did today, I just get too upset not to say something.

      • And it’s great to see you come out swinging buddy. Just when I thought this site had completely gone under you gave it a shred of credibility with this post. Kudos.

  24. Adam Mandel says:

    Thank you, Tom. Please don’t be discouraged by the Rebecca Cohens of the world. They will always try to patronize and refuse to try and understand our culture from a male perspective. What they really want is for you to just shut up and accept where we are as a gender. Please, please, ignore them.

  25. Also, if I might make a suggestion, please do not allow Amanda Marcotte and Hugo Schwyzer to use this site as a podium from which to spew hate anymore. I think they have made their stance quite clear on the issues of men, and frankly, they both seem pretty quick to stab you in the back which I find shocking because I recall them being friends of yours.

  26. Yes, Tom. YES! You’ve been through way too much BS over this whole thing, and I’m glad that you aren’t letting it silence you. Without you, this site would be going down the path of gender idealogues who want nothing more than for us to shut up, and I’m glad that you continue to take a stand.

    It might not mean much, but I’m backing you buddy.

  27. Tom, this may be the biggest BS you’ve ever written, and it’s stunningly hypocritical to boot.

    You spend 3 paragraphs lamenting how feminists misinterpreted your NYT piece. Yet you mischaracterize Rampell’s piece so wildly that I wonder if you actually read the whole thing.

    Rampell doesn’t use her two boyfriends anecdote to draw any conclusions about what men are doing or should do. Not even close. In fact, she literally refuses to generalize: “I don’t pretend to know how common this situation is, and how many other young women have found themselves in it. But it clarified not only the choices that future mothers must make about their careers, but also how early in their careers they must begin to think about them.” The anecdote is a jumping-off point to discuss the choices that women face in their lives. It’s not the basis for any conclusion about men whatsoever.

    The conclusion Rampell does make is that paid paternity leave would be beneficial. Yes, she frames it in terms of the advantages to women in the workplace (or, more accurately, the easing of disadvantages). But nowhere does she accuse men of not doing enough at home.

    The FACT is that relatively few dads take parental leave or go for part-time work arrangements. Does that make you want to puke? Does it offend you to your core? I don’t know why you’re blaming Rampell for that. It’s the truth. Is she not allowed to acknowledge it? Is acknowledging that reality an attack on all men everywhere?

    Tom, I would think that you’d be all for Rampell’s point. She’s advocating for paid paternity leave. You want men to be able to stay at home with their kids without stigma. You want them to be able to break out of the two-dimensional gender box. I would think paid paternity leave would help in both regards.

    Our society and culture are structured in a way that makes it hard for men to take on domestic and childcare duties (at least, hard for them to take on an equal or greater share than women). Feminists, despite your incorrect perception that they’re obsessed with telling men what to do, are not responsible for those social structures. Here a woman is actually advocating for dismantling those structures, and yet you take offense. I honestly cannot imagine why. It’s almost as if you’re just looking for any excuse to decry the horrible feminists who make it so hard to be a man. Which is sad, because the mission here (I thought) was to lift up men, not put down feminists. I wonder what’s the best way to help men be full human beings – to support paid paternity leave, and talk about how it can be great for men (and not just a boon to women in the workplace)? Or to complain about those nagging feminists… yet again?

    • Thank you for this, Rebecca. I believe Tom is also misreading what the fuss was about with the yoga pants as well. It wasn’t that men get happy looking at women in yoga pants. It was the suggestion and remark that women do it on purpose just to taunt and torment men. That was the remark that caused the problem.
      And the heat behind that remark was explained many times.

      I honestly don’t know what to think about this piece. I’m…upset on many levels. Blown away on others.

      The issues isn’t gender though yes old models of gender would have the man at work and woman at home, as it is an economic system that is destroying all our lives and crushing the self esteem of people who have lived their lives defining themselves by “work” rather than “relationships”. Paternity leave is something we want. More freedom of roles, something I personally want.Sure thing. More equity in parental roles, hell yes.

      Many of us live those lives, and well. My husband and I have have switched breadwinner roles many times and he never seems to want to puke. I”m glad of that. Of course we are hippy liberal peaceniks that think corporate America is ruining the planet so there’s that.

      Prisons? Yes, the entire system is set up for profit and slavery and crushes men and families. We should rethink and revamp them. Absolutely. I could go on. I have gone on in many pieces, about all of it, including, yes rape and rape culture and cultures of dominance and that is the problem at the core.

      I’m sad to see this piece Tom. Women and feminism…that’s not the problem. There are much much bigger ideological forces at play smashing down all of us.

      • Tom Matlack says:

        Julie you and I haven’t agreed on any of this for a long time.

        • You speak the truth, Tom. I don’t think this is helpful in finding our way through this. We disagree fundamentally and utterly. And I’m totally ok with that.

      • I agree that Tom’s reaction to Rampell’s piece was misguided, but wouldn’t you agree that some of the reaction to Tom’s article on make-up was equally misguided and included some of the same type of hypocrisy? And on the issue of Seth Mcfarlane’s Oscar bit, hes right in that I saw plenty of articles on how Seth was “celebrating rape”, while completely ignoring that he could have been making another point or the fact that women involved were actually in on the joke. If Seth was deserving of as much scorn as he got, then surely the women involved should have been as well, but almost nothing was said about them.

        • I don’t like takedowns of anyone, Jack. Yes of course I think people going after Tom, or people going after anyone online (and there has been a HUGE amount of it in both directions, in all directions all over right and left), I think it’s a kind of violence, like a nasty stressful emotionally draining kind of violence.

          Do I think Tom needs to be attacked and treated like hell? No. And I’ve said that. Should people have been doxing Zerlina Maxwell and issuing rape threats? Of course not.

          I do think disagreement is part of dialogue though. I don’t think disagreeing and stating such is an attack.

          As for Seth? His comedy failed. If he was attempting the satire suggested, it failed.

          Rape, sexism, gender stuff it’s a big deal right now, it’s like a flame. People get very sparked and lit up very easily. So why add fuel to fires online or off? This post I feel is just another spark, and it will encourage (accidentally or otherwise) more posts back, more anger back, more more more. I don’t think it heals a damn thing. I take no pleasure in people being hurt. It just means lots of angry people being angry and hurting each other, even people I disagree with.

          And that? That makes ME want to puke.

          • Its hard to have a dialogue when any disagreement is dressed up as rape apologism, sexism or misogyny. Its like pointing and shouting ‘witch!’.

            Seth failed – in your opinion. A lot of other people, myself included, seem to have gotten what he was getting at and to have enjoyed him bursting some Hollywood pomposity and self importance.

            For it to be a dialogue there need to be two sides engaged, not one side screaming the other down and (ironically) dismissing everything they say on the basis of their gender (or race, or class while we’re at it).

            ‘Issuing rape threats’ is a bit of an overstatement of trolling, don’t you think?

          • It sounds like we’re mostly in agreement here, Julie. Regarding the Seth McFarlane bit, my problem with a lot of the criticism to it was that it wasn’t framed like you just said, a piece of satire that didn’t work, but that they often assigned more negative intentions to what he was doing. Accusing him of “celebrating rape” as one headline read is just ridiculous.

            Regarding “yoga pants gate”, Tom acknowledges in this article that a lot of the criticism was people telling Nathan that women wear yoga pants for comfort and not to tease men, but his point seems to be how that reaction was framed. It was like you said, a viscous take down of Noah who would even dare suggest whether or not women may have had other intentions when they claimed they wore yoga pants only for comfort. Its was the hypocrisy that really got to me because I know some of those people have no problem believing that men often have other, secret motives behind what they do.

            Also, I believe that Tom’s defense of his article on make-up is something that absolutely needed to be said and I didn’t see you or Rebecca comment on this, only focusing on the reaction to the Rampell piece and how this article may fuel more negative feelings.

    • Tom Matlack says:

      Rebecca I rest my case.

    • Feminists, despite your incorrect perception that they’re obsessed with telling men what to do, are not responsible for those social structures.
      Is Tom saying that feminists are responsible for those structures or is he saying that feminists, despite saying they want to dismantle those structures, can and will support those structures when it suits them.

      Surely if feminists are working towards freeing up gender roles for everyone they don’t have a problem with a guy saying his wife is beautiful on a regular basis right? I thought the problem wasn’t telling them that but in actually pushing the idea that their beauty is the only thing of value. Does merely telling a woman she is a beautiful inherently strip her of all other qualities and reduce her to her physical attractiveness?

    • Good points, Rebecca Cohen. While I’m very sympathetic to Tom’s overall point, I’m completely baffled at his reaction to the Catherine Rampell article, which I thought was thoroughly unobjectionable.

  28. Good for you Tom for sticking, civily, to your valid points. And for the excellent work you are undertaking.

  29. sunshine says:

    American gender-feminist empowerment, at the expense of guys basic constitutional equal protection rights, are turning hetero-sexual relationships in the US, into legal liabilities for men. How is this going to benefit anyone in the long run???

  30. Matt Miniatt says:

    We need to get men out of prison and back into college. Fact is no one cares what happens to us because of backward sexist views. If feminists were truly concerned about equality they would not be seeking superiority. There are more challenges that we as men are facing today that females are not. Frankly society is not stepping up to the plate to bat for us. “They just don’t care.”

  31. Tom Matlack says:

    Grim I couldn’t agree with you more. I am all for equality. I am all for women’s rights. What I am not for is making this one giant zero sum fight in which men get bashed.

    • Tom M, ive just read you the founder have left this place (i was so busy this past week, i didnt have time to read gender blogs.).
      quite a shock to hear.

      after hunting found out you got jumped again by the online f-mob. so your decision is understandable.
      best wishes in what you decide to do next
      ill miss yr weekly column detailing what you were doing. was always an interesting read.

  32. All in all a good article and one that had me internally going ‘Yeah!’ but I think the idea of gender politics needs to be put to bed and the idea of equality promoted over feminism or masculinism.


  1. […] of Tom Matlack, the founder of the website The Good Men Project, which happened in the wake of this post he wrote in response to a New York Times article last week.  While the commentary about this has […]

  2. […] What’s a Guy to Do? on The Good Men Project – A response to the NYT piece above. I’ve thought for long enough now that the whole gender politics argument could easily be solved by respect. Simple as that. […]

  3. […] today, Matlack published another whiny post that basically equates to “Why me? WHY. (Me)” opining, yet again, feminist “attacks” on […]

  4. […] Good Men Project regularly faces a firestorm of angry dogmatic attacks by MRA’s and feminists alike that simply can not imagine why a men’s site hosting a […]

Speak Your Mind