Uni Teaches ‘Male Privilege’ With Its 'Men and Masculinities Project'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Stanford University is pushing the myth that male identity is a “social privilege,” despite numerous studies indicating that men disproportionately suffer from unique issues that circumvent their economic, educational, and social pursuits.

The claim was made by the school’s Men and Masculinities Project. The project aims to convene male students with counselors to help them develop “healthy and inclusive male identities,” almost as if male students oppress women by their very existence.

“We acknowledge that male identity is a social privilege, and the aim for this project is to provide the education and support needed to better the actions of the male community rather than marginalize others,” explains Stanford officials.

Instead of aiming to help men regain parity with women in academia -- men nationwide are less likely to attend college, and less likely to graduate in four years than women -- the school instead aims to help men “redefine masculinity.”

College men should be “active agents of positive and sustainable change on campus and in the community, striving to understand male privilege, redefine masculinity, [and] dismantle systemic structures of power and oppression,” the program states.'

Like1 Dislike0


Got to love the way feminists love femsplaining to men about masculinity.
It's not like they know anything about being a man, or about masculjnity. But they never seem to tire of telling actual men, who have lived masculinity, how it should be done.
The icing on the cake is that study after study has shown that the very men they hate so much, are the ones they find more sexually attractive!

Like1 Dislike0

"The icing on the cake is that study after study has shown that the very men they hate so much, are the ones they find more sexually attractive!"

But you know... there are men out there who are what feminists would call misogynists. They don't hate all women... they are fine for example w/ their mothers, etc. No, they hate (though I am not sure that is the right word) women who they think are "out of their league", ie, they want such women but believe they are unobtainable so instead of just accepting this idea they instead despise that which they THINK they cannot have. This is an ego defense mechanism. Women are as susceptible to it as men. There are women who for whatever reason believe that certain kinds of men are not in their league so they hate them rather than accept their feelings of inadequacy or unattractiveness. There is also this: both sexes would like to be able to order up a person of the oppo. sex who fits their wishes. Now this is a hazard b/c most ppl don't want what they THINK they want. There is a diff. betw. wanting X but not being satisfied w/ it when you have it. I.e., be careful what you wish for, you may get it. No truer than when talking of what the sexes want from each other. Possibly for a particular woman, let's say she is a feminist too, she thinks she wants a feminist man in her life. But in truth he would only disgust her with his constant crawling and apologizing. She doesn't THINK she wants a guy who cares zilch about feminism and who also simply wants to bang her and that's that. In short, the kind of man who views women as a means to an end as much as she views men as a means to an end. Someone to complement her own objectification of the oppo. sex. That indeed may be what will really make her enjoy life in the sack, as it were, and may make her feel safe too bizarrely b/c that kind of man asks nothing much from her except to fuck. He asks no fidelity, emotional risk, etc. He just fucks her, gets her off, kisses and hugs her, then drops her off back at her place. That indeed may be EXACTLY the kind of man she needs. But her ideology is getting in the way. Subconsciously she knows that he is the kind of man she needs but will not let herself accept it. So to deal with the dissonance pressure, she projects the conflict outward on to that kind of man. Thus she hates (again -- is that the word to use, really?) that kind of man instead of just accepting the fact that all she wants is a good dicking and nothing else. After all, as a feminist, what else are men useful for to her except as fuck-toys?

Men and women both can fall to this phenomenon. What today's battle between feminists and self-identified "incel" men is IMJ simply a battle of projections, of disowned unresolved internal conflicts around what people THINK they want from the oppo. sex vs. what subconsciously they really know in terms of what they need: their naked body pressed against them in heated lust.

Let's face it -- that's all it comes down to. Once the contrived need for one another based on social constructs is removed, the only utility the sexes have for each other is holding each other close and making each other come. Can a long-term relationship be built entirely on such an arrangement? Hell yes. As my own mom used to say, her rel'p w/ my dad was based entirely on sex. It worked for over 40 years. Yes, it can be done.

Like1 Dislike0