Reforming gender: We’re all in this together.
—
This past Monday, James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal’s Editorial Board wrote a bad column. If you’re at all like me, (and by like me, I mean liberal), you’re probably not shocked that the WSJ Editorial Board produced something wrongheaded. There are a whole lot of strong outlets and sources for good conservative thought across the internet, but the WSJ Editorial Page is, unfortunately, not one of them. Anyway, in the piece, Taranto wrote that modern efforts to prosecute and prevent sexual assault in the military amount to “a war on men,” constructed of “he said, she said” justice, and showing signs of “becoming an effort to criminalize male sexuality.”
Considering the fact that there are more male-on-male rapes in the military than male-on-female rapes, and the fact that the vast majority of men are not rapists, any effort to work against sexual assault in the military simply cannot be a “war on men.” Anyone who has worked to prevent sexual assault knows that the forces driving male-perpetrated heterosexual rape and the forces driving male homosexual rape are basically identical. It is the same belief in sexual domination, the same validation of male sexuality as uncontrollable, the same social dynamics of group silence, and the same lack of meaningful justice and prosecution that all drive male-perpetrated rape, whether it be against women or men. So, any effort to prevent rape in the military by working against those constructs will necessarily help men more than women, frankly because more men are raped in the military than women. Yeah, it’s not a war on men.
Furthermore, efforts to curb sexual assault only become “an effort to criminalize male sexuality,” if you think, as Taranto seems to, that male sexuality is predisposed toward sexual assault and aggression. That is just a lie, a bold-faced lie that is insulting to the vast majority of us men who would never even think of acting with sexual aggression. And, moreover, it is a lie that is further perpetrating rape. The idea that male sexuality is inherently aggressive only further helps to insulate actual rapists from social recrimination and justice by implying that their behavior is normal, or in Taranto’s words, merely “reckless.”
♦◊♦
So, what’s the relevance of Taranto’s column to guyhood, the topic of this section and piece? Of course, fighting against sexual assault is most certainly relevant to our lives. It is estimated that 83% of all sexual assault in America is perpetrated against those under the age of 25. Much more often than not, It is our friends, girlfriends, boyfriends, sisters, and brothers who are experiencing the real effects of our country’s willful inability to address sexual assault.
But, in addition to making ridiculous, hyperbolic claims that serve to retard just efforts against sexual assault, Taranto’s entire argument is prefaced on the worst trope of our modern conversations about gender. Regardless of how logically absurd it is, the concept of a ‘War on Men,’ the general idea that all feminist, gender-equal progress will necessarily come at the expense of men, seems to show up everywhere. We hear it from anti-feminists like Suzanne Venker; we hear it from men and guys across American who see advocacy against domestic violence, sexual assault, or pay equality as feminism ‘going too far;’ and we hear it from people like James Taranto in regards to male sexuality, who like to argue that feminism stands in opposition to some sort of natural, every-guy manhood that is either virtuous, evolutionary or just a fact of life undeserving of change.
That paradigm of conflict between the sexes, or between feminists and regular, everyday men, is most certainly relevant to us, because as a messaging tactic, it is extremely effective. A perception of conflict induces defensiveness and obstinacy. And, more than that, it stands in direct opposition to a central idea upon which all gender progress is dependent: that a moral reform of gender is in the interest of all genders. That notion is essential, but I don’t expect you to take my word for it. That claim deserves continuing justification, because the message of sexual conflict provides it with continuing opposition.
So, to demonstrate the point, and since we’re on the topic of sexual assault prevention, there’s more than a few ways that the eradication of widespread sexual assault will directly help us men who aren’t even victims or future victims of rape.
♦◊♦
First and foremost, there is a gendered construct of female submissiveness and gracefulness which perpetuates rape. Many women live beneath the burden of the expectation that they are supposed to always be kind, deferential, and cheerful, to never make a fuss or assert themselves against someone else’s wishes. And if they defy this pressure, they are called bitchy, crazy, hormonal, histrionic, high-maintenance, or asked if they are menstruating. And, this expectation rears its ugly head in the bedroom, as many women fear such negative reactions if they assert their own sexual needs and desires, or if they decline a certain advance from their partner. But, here’s the thing about gender roles and expectations: they come in pairs. Basically every female gender role out there has a male counterpart. Often, these expectations of us men are, by nature, less constricting, but they affect us nonetheless. In the case of female submissiveness, the tandem male expectation is that we are assertive, aggressive, always-confident, always-initiating, and dominating at times. If we fail this pressure, we are called cunts, pussies, wusses, faggots, homos, bitches, women, or girls.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with being assertive, confident, or initiating, just as there is nothing wrong with being deferential or meek. But, the problem with gender roles is that they don’t offer the full freedom to choose these behaviors. They merely offer partial freedom, with associated social sanctions if our choices don’t jive with that which is expected of our gender.
Understandably, just as many women live in fear of defying the expectations of submissiveness, so do many of us men chafe under our expectations. We don’t always want to make the first move. We don’t always enjoy the task of deciding the tone of our sexual exploits. Many of us have know what it feels like to live without the benefit of innate confidence, as well as the pressures from other men and women that we somehow be confident. (It’s not that simple!) These expectations don’t kill many of us, and they don’t make all of us downright miserable. But they kill a few of us, and they’ve made most of us unhappy at least one point of our lives. We men would gain a lot if we could abolish these expectations, just as women would gain from the abolition of their expectation of submissiveness. And, just as they were created together, so do they need to be destroyed together. We can’t have one without the other. We can’t live with freedom from one, without also living with freedom from the other.
Likewise, consider the fear of rape that women live with each and every day. With new evidence saying that approximately a third of all women worldwide are victims of sexual and physical violence, most often at the hands of men, that is a well-justified worry. Not only should we men be aware and concerned of this fear for the simple sake of its effect on all women and those that we hold dear, there is also a real and significant effect for each one of us when we engage with women in any capacity. When so many women are the victims of rape, each and every day, it makes complete sense to approach interactions with men, who are overwhelmingly the perpetrators of rape, with, at the very least, some back-of-the-mind skepticism of that man’s intentions. And when you’ve personally seen the horrid effects of rape, as I and so many of my friends have, or when you’re in an environment where sexual assault is horridly common, as all young people are, it also makes sense for women to approach heterosexual interactions with more than lingering skepticism. It makes sense to be downright wary of and incredibly attentive to the actions of those you meet.
All of these behaviors are just and reasonable reactions to a widespread crime that we, as a society, have failed to address in any meaningful way. And it is an equally reasonable reaction, from men, for us to dislike that skepticism. We should not judge or censure those reactions, because as I’ve hoped to show, they make every ounce of logical, safe sense, but we don’t have to enjoy them. In fact, I doubt that any of us enjoy them. It’s downright awful to live in fear of rape, but it’s no fun either to live life as if we are each “Schrodinger’s Rapist.” Furthermore, the distrust that this necessary reaction engenders can have a chilling effect on friendships, relationships, social organizations, and even political movements. And, of course this is becoming a theme here, the only real way to erase this reaction is to make it unreasonable, to remove the factors which contribute to it. In other words, if we men want to be trusted more, given the benefit of the doubt more often, and altogether experience our heterosexual relationships with more freedom and enjoyment, we need to sincerely help lower the incidence of sexual assault in this country and the world at large.
♦◊♦
These are but a few of the examples of the ways in which a moral reform of gender, one which freed us of gender roles and expectations, is in the interest of both men and women. These are just a few of the reasons why invocations of a “war on men,” are often ludicrous. These are only a few of the gendered constructs that should drive us men and women together, rather than apart, in a shared progress toward a better, freer future.
Image Via:USACE HQ/Flickr
@Archy Why do Australian men put up with this nonsense?!
@Ogwriter, depends on who. Some put up with bad behaviour because they want access to a relationship/sex/etc, some do it because socially women get away with more than men in some respects (ie women can hit men here with little if any consequence in MANY situations, even publicly), others don’t put up with it though. I don’t put up with it, I will tell that person male or female if they’re behaviour is bad. I use to put up with it due to low self-esteem and no backbone and hopes of getting laid but these days I try to stick… Read more »
@Archy Once again you demonstrate incredibe patience,far more than I have,in wrestling with these issues.I live in the SF area and I don’t interact much with women here for so many of the same reasons BarAreaGuy mentions.They have been raised to believe that no matter what happens,they and they alone,are the world’s last best chance. Whenever a group confers upon themselves such shameless grandiosity,things rarely turnout well. Clearly,these women are emotionally,spirituallyintellectually superior to men.Obviously.
Thank you for writing this article, Kevin. I like how you point out that we have to continually provide support for the claim that we’re all in this together, because there is continuous opposition. I hadn’t thought of it before, but it’s absolutely true. I also really respect your compassionate take on the “Schrodinger’s rapist” problem – compassionate to both sides, that is! My only point of disagreement is that I don’t think it’s worth our time to assert that women have it harder, or don’t have it harder than men. Comparing who has it worse just doesn’t get us… Read more »
@BayAreaMillenial “Bay Area, Young Millennial Woman here. If you’re getting that much “sassy, surly, and assertive” behavior from women of my generation, I’ve got news for you. You’re doing something to provoke it. And it’s your behavior that has to change, not theirs. We do still get the message that we’re supposed to be “deferential and cheerful” – I see it every time some guy tells me to “smile!” I always automatically smile. And I always kick myself. But at 5am at the airport, running around on two hours sleep, caffeine, and a prayer, that stupid social conditioning takes over,… Read more »
Kevin you have your heart in the right place however I find it necessary to clarify a few things.Sociopolitical paradigms dont work to solve sexual violence and they breed hatred towards the target group (men) which is why men avoid modern feminism like the plague.When we start replacing advisory boards with crimonologists and social psychologists instead of gender studies professors we’ll begin to see a fall in sexual violence.Men hate feminism because it advocates on false premises such as the pay equality myth and denigrated men with sexist conjectures about masculinity while ignoring male disposability.
Sexual assault as defined in the military is not rape. It’s everything including rape. Rape is a subset of sexual assault. The two shouldn’t be used interchangeably. They are not the same.
interesting….
“Considering the fact that there are more male-on-male rapes in the military than male-on-female rapes…”
I consider this extremely unlikely, and would need to see the definition of “rape” operationalized (defined formally.) I’m a six-year Army veteran. This sounds like someone’s “zero-tolerance” get brownie points with my superiors wet dream for defining horseplay and towel-snapping as sexual assault idea for promoting their own career.
” So, any effort to prevent rape in the military by working against those constructs will necessarily help men more than women, frankly because more men are raped in the military than women. Yeah, it’s not a war on men.” Do we know what form these prevention measures will take? Why do you think it will necessarily help men? Have you spoken with abused / sexually assaulted men? I have and guess what rape prevention / DV prevention efforts that reenforce the male as perpetrator / female as victim actually makes it more difficult for men to see their own… Read more »
When you talk about military sexual assault allegations, I wonder what percentage are related to fraternization / adultery / pregnancy laws / rules in the military. Sexual assault is up since 2006, but we’ve also been actively at war during that time and don’t pregnant women get to serve state side? In 2009 the military wanted to court martial anyone who got pregnant or impregnated a fellow soldier, but backed down due to pressure. I think before you can say it’s not a “war on men” you need to know precisely how the military is going to prevent, investigate, and… Read more »
This is another thing that irks me about this whole debate. People will say that since the reported incidence of sexual assault has risen in recent years, then that must mean that the rate of sexual assault has increased. But the thing is, the military has been on the sexual assault awareness/prevention bandwagon for YEARS. Doesn’t it follow that if sexual assault awareness increases, then more people will come forward with their cases if they are sexual assaulted? Could it be that the ACTUAL rate of assault has decreased, but the the PERCENTAGE of reported assaults has increased dramatically? Wouldn’t… Read more »
I doubt rape on the whole is increasing, but simply people are more aware of what it is and it’s reported more. In the military however women are gaining a larger portion of the population there right? So rape of women may be increasing as a result of that since every extra woman means there’s another 1 in whatever chance of rape in the military. Each additional male would also bring in another chance.
James, I’m a Christian conservative, so pardon my interruption in this ongoing liberal spiel. Just a head up for the male crowd. There were two laws passed just recently in the US, one in the military and one as public law. Both suggested men were guilty until proven innocent and women are virtually untouchable. Austrailia had a similar problematic law implemented too. The US laws have been circulated through legal experts and this is like an adverse action type law. Petitions have been filed already to get these repealed. Just so you are aware, these were originated by our dear… Read more »
I apologize, the new sexual assault law was not in Austrailia, but New Zealand.
I believe you’re referring to the University of Montana agreement (also referenced online as the OCR DOJ blueprint). This should be required reading for any men headed off to college or parents of young men in college. Under the old policy, most universities had sexual harassment policies defined harassment as behavior that was “unreasonably interfering with a person’s work or educational performance.” Now it has be re-written such that any sexual conduct that is simply “unwelcome” could target someone as a perpetrator of sexual harassment. The new guidance also strongly suggests that accused students in these cases be subject to… Read more »
Do they mean touching someone without permission, or does it include merely asking for a date or sex?! I think the first instance of asking someone out shouldn’t be criminalized or treated badly, but touching without permission I fully understand is sexual harassment/assault.
Archy, touching, hugging, and asking someone out on a date is normal human behavior, BUT our lawmakers decided to ban hugging and many social behaviors because it may lead to a sex crime or rape.
Talk about strict, the Bible isn’t even that freaking strict about hugging or talking to people…as a matter of fact I don’t think the Bible prohibits hugging or asking someone on a date.
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rulesforengagement/2013/03/hugging_bans_and_school_climate_confusion.html
In 1991 our commander had a no touching policy, at any time for any reason, unless you were administering CPR. He was way ahead of his time.
That’s not the military I remember, and it’s not one I’d be willing to be a part of again. This is nonsense. It started with “no-fraternization, which probably should have been challenged constitutionally. This is all un-American CYA.
Archy,
It’s my understanding that simply asking a woman out on a date is enough to potentially trigger a sexual harassment charge on college campuses now. Administrators are in debate on what the new law means, but it triggered quite the uproar when it hit a few weeks ago. You can google OCR-DOJ blueprint if you want to read up on the details, but it’s beyond scary from what I’ve read so far.
Tsk Tsk.
Puritanical Americans.
DD, Military disciplinary actions need to stay in the military, period. This is the only way to keep the chain of command in tact. Congress recently, took the reporting process out of the military hands and put in outsiders and DoD civilians in control, under the latest National Defense Act (ie. Military Improvement Act) This is microscopic-management of the military…commanders are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. This is one major democratizing reform. They will not solve these problems with democratizing reforms, because the military is not a democracy, it’s an autocracy. The military needs time to… Read more »
Yes.
Did you seriously include a link to an article by Kate Harding in your article?
You just killed whatever credibility you might have had with the men on this site.
Oh, oops. It wasn’t an article by Harding. But the fact that you decided to defile a men’s website with her name is offense enough.
Often, these expectations of us men are, by nature, less constricting, but they affect us nonetheless. Ah yes, the common feminist trope: “Women have it far worse than men, and to the extent that men suffer, it’s mere collateral damage of the patriarchy. If you men work with us feminists and help women first and foremost, we’ll find some time to get to you. But just remember, you’re junior partners to us.” And I must scoff at this notion that women are always expected to be passive, deferential, sweet, nurturing, submissive, etc. Maybe someone forgot to pass the memo to… Read more »
Right there with you BAG. I wish I’d met one of these “kind, deferential, cheerful, submissive” women you talk about when I was dating. Seems like most of the women I tried to get to know, or ask for a phone number had no problems being rude, treating me like I was beneath them, or in one case laughing in my face for having the gall to ask for a phone number”. I guess I wasn’t the “right type” of guy I suppose for them to be “kind” and “cheerful” to.
Yeah, women are only cheerful, deferential, submissive, etc, towards that small minority of high status men. If you’re a dominant, successful, confident, wealthy man (ie. if you’re Christian Grey), then you can get women to be compliant and submissive towards you.
But if you’re the average guy? Forget it.
Archy I am going to date myself…RIGHT ON! Just last week, during my Sunday morning constitutional, I stopped at a local café. Once there, I had a conversation with two men I didn’t know about this very subject. Get this, we all realized that we have altered our behavior because of the reasonable fears you so eloquently write about. We have been made to feel so guilty, so responsible for how women feel it has altered our behavior. To a man, we admitted that when we approach a woman walking down the same sidewalk we go out of our way… Read more »
I’ve done the same thing for years. Just like DD points out, it comes from years of military training. It’s my understanding from this website that those actions are some form of misogyny. Treating women as less than equal or something. So I’m not sure what’s wanted here. Although the message that as a white privileged American male I’m the cause of every problem, that message is unmistakeably clear. Don’t worry, I’m working on them.
PursuitAce
What branch were you in? Air Force? Yeah ,you are right about the white males are THE problem trope; it’s pretty flipping stupid.
You could always be saved; just become a feminist and viola, you will be transformed. It’s sort of like going to confession.
Or you could have a sex change operation,permanently rising above all of the imperfections that define males, thereby cutting out the middleman. This way you won’t need to have a woman validate that you are not a rapist, a racist or sexist. God only knows it works for them.
What I fear the most is that other shy men will end up fucked up like me over these fears and it will harm their chance at finding female friends or love. I am actually at a point where I am far less shy with men, even though I am slightly more on guard from violence from men but I guess being able to read males body language infinitely better makes it easier for me to judge character of men. I also feel bad that so many women are missing out on great guys, I know quite a few great… Read more »
32 years, 5 months, 19 days – Air National Guard…although some people don’t consider that the military…haha. Thanks for the advice. Becoming a feminist is not that easy. I find it difficult to embrace all of the required ways of thinking. However; I’ve learned quite a bit along the way. Which is why I’m here.
I remember in highschool I was already pretty large and at least 6’4ish whilst the women were 5 to very rarely 6 feet tall, my size alone I was told was intimidating them and it made me feel like a monster, like I was some evil being simply for existing. These girls/women were nervous around me because I towered over them when in reality I was often told by very close friends I was a teddy bear, a gentle giant. Funnily enough my size actually helped one of my male friends feel safe because his bullies left him alone when… Read more »
Is it justified then that men should be afraid of trusting women since for a man the most likely person to abuse him intimately is most likely a woman (cheating, abuse, etc). Should we all fear the opposite gender because of the treat of violence, rape, and heartbreak (yes even heartbreak can be traumatic for some). Should men be afraid of other men too? The majority of deadly violence is against males afterall usually by other men, maybe all of us males should be afraid too and walk around with fear like so many women do. I am sure the… Read more »
“Is it justified then that men should be afraid of trusting women since for a man the most likely person to abuse him intimately is most likely a woman (cheating, abuse, etc).”
33% of intimate partner murders are women killing men. Women who kill are far more likely to kill an intimate, about 40% of their victims are intimate partners, than a man who kills. For men fear the stranger. For women, the one you know.
Scary thought!
I’ve see data showing that the murder rate for partners was the same in the 1970s and since then its dropped 73% for men being murdered by women, women murdering their partners now are much more likely to be acquitted or have their charges committed to a lesser charge and so will not show up in the homicide stats.
If anyone wants to see the studies just ask.
This is just wrong on so many levels. So Kevin Carty has obviously never served in the military, but I can’t believe he would make this argument without first even attempting to consult with people who’d been in the military and had some familiarity with its culture. I’ll be the first to concede that the military has a problem with sexual assault; which mirrors the same problem our wider culture has with it. The military doesn’t differ significantly from the civilian world in rates of sexual assault, and I can tell you from experience that it does far more than… Read more »
Thank-you for sharing this-
These are insights that don’t come through in 75 seconds stories on the evening news with generals in front of congressional hearings, or from quick sound-bites.
Mostly_123 and for those who are still following this post, Step back and take look at the title and subtitle. ‘The Lying Fiction” and “Reforming gender”. Now take a look at the themes behind the comments…we are all saying the same thing: we are putting harsher and harsher laws in place to modify and socially engineer new behavior, especially men’s behavior. Who spreading the lies and reinforcing the lies? Who wants to reform a gender? It’s clear to me that this faulty social movement is spreading the lies and government needs reform. Not men. We will not hear this on… Read more »
My bad!?. It wasn’t there just a moment ago.
Kevin How can a privileged, white, 20 year old frat boy who just left home a few years ago, who has never genuinely spent quality time in the trenches with men of color studying or living their struggles, comment on those struggles. What makes you any different than a conservative, racist intellectual wonk. Understand that the tipping point is your utter lack experience to speak for them or about them, not you skin color. I know plenty of white guys, men and boys, some educated some not,who are much better versed and therefore far more legit has a spokesperson for… Read more »
Where are the MRAs I wonder, almost every single contributor to this mens site self IDs as a feminist.
I’ve tried contributing a few articles. They won’t post us or very rarely will.
Saitek, I’ve been preaching this same thing for last 20 years…Feminist-Marxism was debunked a long time ago. I’m exhausted. Now, for those in the US that are fed up with the nonsense PC policing actions. Get back to the basics this 4th of July and re-educate folks. Review the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, US Constitution, State Constitutions and your State Legislature procedures. (each state is a little different, I believe CA assembly is the most complex) This is a great time to make some history, because our lawmakers are doing some scary things on both sides and putting… Read more »
Can you show some examples of fems fighting for male issues?
There is far more evidence of a war on men in the culture than there is one on women, asking a tiny section of women to pay for their own BC or slight restrictions in reproductive privileges that men do not yet have does not constitute a war on women. Treating things like abuse and sexual violence as if they were male and rolling back civil rights of men accused of these crimes while ignoring false accusations against men, would be a better example of a “war”. This is what happened to black men in the progressive era, they depicted… Read more »
I agree that what you describe would be terrible, but I don’t see it in the real world. Black men had their freedoms restricted in many ways, alongside black women. Fear of rape was one of many false justifications. However I don’t think white men as a group have faced any restrictions on that level in any sort of a similar way, let alone with fear of rape as the main justification. There are some stereotypes that paint privileged white men as rapists, but most of the time there are plenty of people supporting the guy accused of rape (really… Read more »
As I understand it the war on men means a multi pronged attack in education, health, prison, public shaming, systemic discrimination, family law , civil rights, reproductive law etc.
This book goes into it.
http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628
QuantumInc and many others make the point. The government and lawmakers (led by feminists or black advocates, gay-communtarians or pro-life/pro-choice or pro-women/pro-man, pro-hugging, anti-assault, gun-control, blah, blah) should NOT be micromanaging our behaviors in the first place. This repeated trope about assault is really about is HOW MUCH CONTROL is in government hands. Our dear bureacraps keep inflaming people about issues, not talking about the size of govt. They are creating the War on Women or War on Men…the War on Black People or White People. If academics and poli-sci majors –hint Kevin–were thinking about our future, they’d get off… Read more »
man I am neither Christian-although-I used to be- nor conservative, nor liberal. I don’t believe any of those associations have any answers themselves for what ails humanity.As such I have no dog in this show. However, I would be glad to discuss the Bible with you. Let me ask you this. How many white ethnics were put to death by the great Christian leader Charlemagne for their refusal to convert to Christianity? King David himself personally killed tens of thousands in the name God and bragged about it. Hitler put countless non Christians to death. How many wars has been… Read more »
ogwriter, extremist Christians are a shameful bunch, no doubt. That goes for extremist Muslims, extremist Jews, extremist whites, extremist blacks, extremist women, extremist men, extremist governments and the whole lot of them. Using religiosity or the government-religion to justify bloodshed, oppression, war, fear, hate is plain wrong and ignorant. We’ve learned this lesson a hundred times and we’ve arrived again!! War on Men? War on Women? War on Drugs? War on Religion? War on Obesity? I have a problem about being shamed and legislated by a govt that tells me hugging is no longer allowed, obesity is a disease, and… Read more »
man Charlemagne wasn’t then and isn’t now considered an extremist. King David the warrior is not considered an extremist either. My point is that God and government dirtied the waters..As a person of color, I have absolutely no logical reason to believe in documents or institutions that set the table for my destruction…ehem, like the Bible and the Constitution. Frankly, I don’t understand why white men who aren’t wealthy believe in the Constitution either. It wasn’t written for them. Poor whites or those that didn’t own a certain amount of property were not represented in government. From 1840 to 1860… Read more »
man Now, the Bill of Right’s is something I can get my head around. How stupid were the founders that they” legally” enslaved and degraded millions of people, set them free without providing them the legal to support themselves, allowed a terrorist/Christian organization to hunt them down for an additional hundred plus years, burn them at the stake, make and take trophies of their body parts and commit other bestial acts upon their persons, and then expect them to “pull them up by their boot straps”.That’s just the dumbest shit I ever heard of. I make NO apologies for being… Read more »
ogwriter, each one of has been ‘oppressed’ by either the reigning govt or reigning religion at some point in history. However, a modicum of religion and a governance is necessary and desireable for society. Oppression or dominance from either govt or religion is a different story. I can’t reverse history nor am I telling you get over it, I’m saying it’s sucks…but our youth needs level-headedness and stewardship so we don’t repeat history. I’ll say this in the PC fashion, currently we’re under the govt oppression from a democracy that has strayed too far left. Most are resistant to that… Read more »
man My point is that if one merely takes a cursory stroll along the shoreline of human history and reads the Bible,they will find millions upon millions of dead bodies piled up like sandbags, all put there by Christianity. Why would a reasonable conscious person associate themselves with that? You speak of big brother but fail to note that the biggest oldest brother of all is God, Allah, and Yahweh. He tells what to think, what to do and he solves all of your problems for you, if you just believe in him. Right!? He is THE answer. You don’t… Read more »
ogwriter I see your point clearly and we are on the same page more than it appears. If I had to put it simply, our priorities are out of whack. I’ll say it this way, it’s about God, Country, Family, and Individual…those are ‘relatively’ universal to all of us. But… State of God or Spirituality is dysfunctioning. State of Govt is dysfunctioning. State of Family is dysfunctioning. State of Individual is dysfunctioning. Not everyone, but look at the big trends. We as Americans need to fix our stuff at home before we get carried away and get further tangled up… Read more »
man
you are right in that we need to focus on us and stay out of other people’s business.
Here’s an example about States’ Rights and how it is supposed to work. It seems radical, but it’s not, we just let the Feds takeover too much. We have Fed Laws that should a State Laws: The National Farm Bill is filled with pork. The pork on this bill is our national Food Stamps Program and it costs $82B is Food Stamps (80% is pork). Congress is debating if they should put separate Fed bills. http://blogs.rollcall.com/goppers/farm-bill-defeated-in-blow-to-boehner/ We’ve allowed them to frame this as a Fed responsibility and blame feds for our debt. Food Stamps and Farm Bill should be a… Read more »
man You are right in that we are not far off in some of our ideas and points of view. However, when you write that what those power hungry, self absorbed, knuckleheads called the founding fathers did to “my ” people and others as well…sucks…I read that as get over it. My father fought in Korea and was taken from me. My oldest brother, who was my surrogate father, was also taken from me and had to give up a baseball career to fight in the stupidest war( until Iraq) in the history of this country, VN. I guess you… Read more »
Save me a poison oak leaf or shove a spoon up my a$$ to take mind off things. I know folks voted for Obama thinking he’d be the savior, next they want Hillary so she can run on the women-power ticket, the right wants Romney to save us, none of these knuckleheads will fix our broken system because they campaign on the issues, race, or gender, not the govt. They all sound the same to me. We’ve all lost someone in these manufactured wars or wars at home because of this type government. It sickens you, me, and many others.… Read more »
I should add by ‘mis-guided’ I mean this global-socialization that’s occurring. The religious folks liken it to the Book of Relevations and the govt likens it to the new world order…both theories compliment each other, but neither is a path to individual freedom, just new oppression from a central arm of government in the international community and IMF. We’d probably become a puppet govt to the Middle East. I’m sure the feminists would be more than happy to don a burkah or get arrested for showing ankles….but I digress. Sweet irony? The way to stop this ‘progress’ is to pull… Read more »
man Yeah,women power,thats gonna unite us and fix everything right up.Shoot me now.
It’s coming and their talking about Gilliand from NY as her running mate…ahh feel the estrogen. With these kind of excessive assault and rape laws in place currently, I wouldn’t be surprised if they try to legalize castration in some weird manifestation. They already are full supporters of the Fonda-Steinam Masculine Studies Program…they are going to teach the-man-right out of us. I apologize, I lost respect for this movement a long time ago.
What’s up man? I had to write that. I think, which could be problem, that there is percolating just under the surface, a growing resistance to and resentment of identity politics that extends across the political aisle.Say what you will but there was, in the past, a necessity for such arrangements that had benefits. I think that time has passed us by. The Constitution set us up for this dynamic to exist in the first place, no question. The document was designed to award human rights to those not originally afforded them in a slow painful process. Why? Federalist paper… Read more »
man We saw clearly, in the last two elections, that believing in the messiah syndrome doesn’t unite people. We also saw that the conservatives, socially, are behind the times and their message doesn’t bring people together either. The Constitution is a contract between the government and its citizens. Any first year tort lawyer can tell that if a contract doesn’t provide for both parties, it is not really a valid contract, period. One cannot expect to place contractual demands like military service on citizens while denying them due compensation, in this case that means the same rights as all citizens… Read more »
Ogwriter, I’m with you. The document itself is flawed and the execution of it is flawed. Even the 14th Amend is like Affirmative Action and many of powers and devices need to be ‘re-evaluated’ in modern terms. Do we need Affirmative Action or a Men’s Rights Association or do we need our inalienable rights? Neither party is talking about real reform…they have band-aid approaches. The Right has caved into the Left on every issue…they haven’t been listening since 1800 anyway, especially since 1913. Currently Liberals are turning their backs on Liberals. Pelosi just got heckled by her constituents and lost… Read more »
man I failed to make note of the ages of the framers. That a few were in their twenties is almost beyond reason. What the hell could they have possibly known at twenty years old? Hmmm…where has Kevin been anyway? I couldn’t agree more with most of what you are writing. The Constitution is majorly flawed and is in need of revision. However, you know that document is,legally, resistant to change, which is what the framers wanted. Then also, as is demonstrated everyday in American life, most citizens don’t understand the Constitution at all and have a completely romanticized idea… Read more »
og, 20 is young, but, it depends on the person. I don’t expect anyone to have full visibility on the issues at hand or the constitution, but a handful is all that’s needed. Yes, once again we see eye to eye. The constitution was designed to be difficult to change to retain its integrity, but broad enough to flex with the vicissitudes of peace and war, life and property, etc. Congress always had the lawmaking device, but in the last 10 years laws have accelerated. They created over 30,000 laws just last year and Supreme Court saw 75 large cases… Read more »
man I have raised three children who all twenty something’s, all are intelligent and all have graduated on time from quality schools. I raised them, not the other way around .I also actively mentor many other twenty something’s. When it comes to leadership, I wouldn’t follow a twenty old year down a dark alley even if they were stoned drunk leaking 100.00 dollar bills out their back pockets. Twenty something’s lack the requisite brain development and life experiences to be wise enough to lead a nation properly. As you noted, democracy has a tendency to make or pretend that everyone… Read more »
Truth be told, Black Panthers are part of our modern history, so are the feminists-maxists, and Westboro Baptists. Panthers paved the way to a black president, the feminists have paved the way to a female president. But as ‘old-timers’ we see change and progress in terms of seasons, not months or congressional calendars. This is the advantage of age and experience, that our youth lacks…patience and perservance. We may need to endure a female administration before our youth figures out, the govt is there to govern–not for freebies or policing. It may take that time and more a$$ pain for… Read more »
I should clarify, I didn’t mean no women in White House, I’m not anti-woman. I meant the activist-types such as Hillary…who may be a little out of touch.
ogwriter, You’re right on track; the document was not designed to be democratic, it was designed to be ‘representational’, however over the years we’ve embraced democracy as the end-all-be-all. We’ve been force feeding it to everyone else too. Democratic principles tend to obviate the individual and water everyone the common dominator. Over time it becomes simple majority rule and blasé herd-mentality. However, unchecked democracy can turn into too much power in govt (i.e. communism) or too much power in the masses running amok (i.e. civil unrest). It’s exactly what people are complaining about today, the loss of personal liberties and… Read more »
man I gotta tell you my conservative friend, given that the political terms conservative and liberal are by nature fluid, meaning different things to different people; Believing in one over the other as the answer is difficult for me.Very few, in fact, even know the “original ” meanings of the words. Political parties are as broken and lacking in leadership as the machinery is in which they operate. Political parties are the minor leagues for the lobbying companies. Most politicians want seniority so they can chair committees. These politicians are the first round draft choices of the lobby firms. There… Read more »
Og, we are in this together and we have legitimate skepticism about our govt and the power we vested in them. No other nation’s constitution has lasted this long as ours, because of its unchanging quality, yet we’ve lost sight. This growing gap between the haves and have nots will come to a head faster than most people think. As the govt and media mince words about the definition of marriage and obliterate our rights, we have two forces advancing under the surface: foreign policy and domestic policy. Our foreign policy is much like Roosevelt’s Dollar Diplomacy combined with asymmetric… Read more »
Orchid, As the rest of the world sleeps, this week the Supreme Court will hand down four decisions that will mark a turning point for the United States, and some possible outcomes could even change the course of this country for the rest of our national existence. This is why I advocate getting the 17th Amendment repealed (and clean up other deficiences in the constitution) and put governance back in the states and people’s hands. Those discrimination laws you mention would virtually vanish. The High Court heard 75 cases this year. As this week begins, 64 have been decided, meaning… Read more »
That paradigm of conflict between the sexes, or between feminists and regular, everyday men, is most certainly relevant to us, because as a messaging tactic, it is extremely effective. A perception of conflict induces defensiveness and obstinacy. And, more than that, it stands in direct opposition to a central idea upon which all gender progress is dependent: that a moral reform of gender is in the interest of all genders. That notion is essential, but I don’t expect you to take my word for it. That claim deserves continuing justification, because the message of sexual conflict provides it with continuing… Read more »
Hi Kevin
Have you read up on theories of WHY human beings rape each other?
I can not understand why they do it.
They use their own sexuality to damage ,humiliate and scar somebody else for life. But why?
A psychiatrist told me one theory is that men rape women to harm other men. Does that make sense to you?
Iben, I’m not an expert, but I believe this idea comes from history. Going back thousands of years and up to the present day, warring men would rape the women of the group they conquered because the women were considered the property of those men. Also, by impregnating them, they could create babies that were genetically belonging to the victor. Women were the spoils of war. In many places this still happens.
Lori Day What are you talking about? You need to be very specific when making such charges. Not all wars are the same nor are the cultures who fight in them the same. It is a fact that in medieval Europe, women were involved in the habit of pillaging, which included rape, torture, thievery and murder. Pillaging was an accepted form of exacting payment for professional soldiers who wee seldom paid for their services. Professionals, often from other countries, usually fought in these wars ,not draftees. Women helped create and manage the systems that counted and dispensed the booty from… Read more »
Lori Day
Additionally, men have always been counted amongst the spoils of war. They have been routinely sold into slavery(very common), forced to fight against their will or just outright put to death by the hundreds of thousands. How could you not know this. This is all easily researched information.
Let’s not forget that some wars DID have female leadership influencing the battles and starting shit. At times women were seen as property but MEN WERE NOT EVEN THAT, they were put to death if they weren’t slaves. It’s not uncommon to have all men put to death whilst the breeding age females were “spoils of war”, which means it is MEN who are harmed the most there. Raping someone to harm their partner isn’t always about property, it would hurt me bigtime if my family members were raped and I’d want to put the rapist on a firepit. That… Read more »
For sure Archy. Queen Cleopatra, a favorite example among feminists of a strong woman, instantly comes to mind. She was cunning ,ruthless, bloodthirsty and had no problem sending mostly men to their deaths in war to achieve her goals. She also murdered and exiled relatives to consolidate her power. Queen Hatshepsut was no stranger to war either. Queen Isabella comes to mind because of her interest in expansion which cost countless lives of natives and helped shape the modern world. Let’s not forget the inquisition either. These are just a few I could name. These lies about women and war… Read more »
Kevin Unfortunately, as usual all men are ,regardless of obvious vast cultural, economic ,religious, and sexual and other differences, have been lumped into one big bag called all men. When you do this how can I take what you write seriously? Furthermore, even though you correctly note most rape occurs between people who know each other, which calls into question the idea that men are just randomly raping women at will, you don’t mention at all that women rape each other and others too. I have many times asked this question of GMP contributor’s and have yet to receive an… Read more »
I’m confused – where did Kevin lump men into one “big bag”? How does the fact that a rapist knows their victim mean the rape is not “random” or “at will”? (and are you saying that this type of rape is more acceptable?) The focus of this article is on disputing the notion that fighting sexual violence amounts to a war on men. How would a discussion of female sexual violence or different sexual orientations have altered the points made? (And besides, Kevin did mention male on male rape.)
When he uses the term war on men, he implicitly suggests that all men are the same, have the same world view, etc.,etc.,. He also writes “…from men, for US to dislike…” How could he know what all men think and feel? Hell, at twenty years old, he barely knows what he thinks. Excuse me, but in no way shape or form am I advocating that rape is alright. Quite the contrary. I am saying that Kevin doesn’t see or include all of the victims or perps the way I do.