|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Marc A. on 02:18 PM May 17th, 2006 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
It wasn't like that a few years back. They used to be the "Women's Resource Center," and their materials were all feminist half-truths. We put pressure and gave them more information, and eventually they changed it to "Center for Women and Men" and improved their website, etc. There is definitely still room for improvement, and there are still alot of misandrists involved with the project on campus. But we're helping to force change. Unfortunately the article didn't give the data, but it looks like that was the fault of the editors, not the author, who was sympathetic to us. When we first contacted the Daily Bruin two weeks ago on this, they were like, "oh, we haven't ever covered the Clothesline Project from that angle, ok..." The silence of these issues on college campuses is just incredible. They began interviewing us and then decided to do a whole separate story on this. Their story on the Clothesline Project itself was gender-neutral. Men's activists are also posting flyers on the campus today to help balance the issues out.
I wasn't going to submit this story here because the photo is so bad. But someone did so anyway. Oh well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 05:26 PM May 17th, 2006 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Tina Oakland, director for the UCLA Center for Women & Men, was quoted as saying --
"There are things that men are willing to discuss with other men around that they're less willing to discuss (with women present)."
That’s an interesting observation, because all state-approved domestic violence "treatment" programs (Duluth Model clones) absolutely mandate that a woman counselor/monitor be present at all treatment sessions. She is there to guard against "male collusion," i.e. men speaking their truths. ("in a different voice?" --- screw that gender-fascist Carol Gilligan.)
(From the UCLA Center’s web site regarding the "new" men’s program ---)
"The program, although relatively new, is designed to promote discussions about gender issues, and asks men to question how "traditional male socialization" adds to or detracts from their academic, personal, and professional goals."
Does the Center ask women to question how feminist indoctrination has "added to or detracted from their academic, personal, and professional goals?"
Actually, this effort at gender inclusivity appears to be one of the more honest initiatives that I’ve read about on a major university campus.
However, the usual feminist mathematics of "equality & inclusivity" appears to not yet be endorsed by the women who run the programs --
There is only one male on the Center’s staff directory roster in a female-dominated Center for WOMEN and "men."
So, are these women shills for i-feminism or potential allies?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Marc A. on 07:19 PM May 17th, 2006 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
In my opinion, these are not potential allies in the sense that i-feminists can be. But they aren't exactly enemies like the avergae misandrist bigot we deal with in most domestic violence fields. I think some of these people, though not all, are "workable," in the sense that their public acceptance of our basic statement helps bring credibility to our efforts and our movement in the public eye. This article, I think, is an example. Thousands of students read about this issue and the lack of shelter for male victims, and heard about NCFM, in many cases for their first time, and it is far more legitimized with the school's "Center for Women and Men," and even the Clothesline Project spokesperson, agreeing with our basic message. That is powerful for those who are hearing of these things for the first time, or who aren't yet indoctrinated with all the lies. That's where I think people like this are especially helpful. But they are in other ways as well. These are the types, for example, that I hope will be reviewing our grant applications. These are the types I hope the media will go to for "feminist" quotes in response to our statements when doing a story, rather than fembot misandrist liars. These are the types that will allow us to set up tables at events, etc. that than trying to block us. We just need to work with them at arm's length. They, I'm sure, probably feel the same. But they feel the same about radical feminist groups. They try to appear rational to the public in order to maintain credibility. In some sense, they're forced to. But to some degree, they are more level headed than the misandrists, too. They're not perfect, but I'm thankful they're there, and it's helpful to be on good terms with them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by RandomMan on 08:08 PM May 17th, 2006 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Green is one of an unknown number of male victims of intimate partner violence. As campus groups hold events during Women for Change Week this week, organizers and campus officials are noting that men can also be victims.
Unknown? The number of male victims is well known thanks to plenty of recent research, but likely under-reported due to anti-male bias on the part of law enforcement and prosecutors, coupled with some men's unfortunate shame at admitting they've been assaulted. Claiming the number is "unknown" strikes me as a convenient way of maintaining the politically correct status quo. Still the overall language of the article is very encouraging as is the change of a "womens center" to a "womens and mens center", even if it's a change in name only at this point.
Keep up your fine work, Marc. Men all over the world are watching and we are eternally grateful for and inspired by your efforts. I'm trying to raise interest in these issues in my own community, but it's a struggle to break through people's Duluth-compatible conditioning and get the message across that services for men are necessary, that the laws and government agencies need to be overhauled, and that there is bias throughout the system that is costing men (and women) their lives. More importantly, treatment programs for both victims and batterers need to respect the needs of clients and the realities of the problem, even if they are inconvenient for feminist ideology. In a situation where a man IS assaulting his partner, it does that victim no good if the program he enters for treatment does nothing but "shame and blame" him, and does not remedy the situation. Therefore, the bias against men and the misguided Duluth model are both hurting women as well as men. It amazes me that feminist ideology can blind workers in the DV industry to a fact that obvious and harmful to their own clients! Many of these people are, after all, legitimately interested in helping others who are suffering through DV!
When it comes to change, I'm not interested in seeing anything "taken" from women or marginalizing them as feminists have marginalized men, I want to see ALL of us treated with respect and dignity. I'm sure that you and most of the others around here do too. Breaking the unproductive, blind and often injurious cycle of misandry and the "myth of male power" woven into DV programs (treatment, shelters and training for law enforcement/courts) is an important first step. NCFM LA's reference on stats and research on this matter is invaluable in the fight to educate others, by the way!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 09:41 PM May 17th, 2006 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
I respect everything Marc A. has achieved.
Excellent and beyond comprehension how he did it.
Marc, what practical steps would you suggest for men who lack your financial means?
Also kudos for his colleague Glenn Sacks.
But it may be time to stop "hoping" and start "demanding."
Why are men now petitioning to become masculine?
This is tragic.
How can we repeal the feminazi laws?
The misandrist media?
And, most importantly ....
Do I have to live another 100 years to see progress?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by RandomMan on 12:12 AM May 18th, 2006 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Do I have to live another 100 years to see progress?
I know your question was intended for Marc, but I hope you don't mind me responding.
I don't think you do, Roy. I'm already seeing some faint signs of improvement. See the article I submitted earlier tonight about the woman pulling her husband's genitals off - I know, how could that be progress, right? It's how the media handled it, and how the police and the prosecutor reacted that I'm surprised at. They're dealing with it as (possibly) an attempted murder, although they may not prosecute for that charge. Still, the media didn't do it's usual "humorous" tapdance about how "funny" it was that some vicious, psychotic woman directed her rage at a man's genitals this time: they treated it as a vicious attempted murder.
It sounds minor, and it is, but it's also significant. The message that men are being marginalized and that women are frequently violent and abusive is finally starting to get out. We need to keep the pressure on, but I believe that progress is being made, and I'm seeing this sort of miniscule but measureable progress in many places these days.
I recently "converted" a 65-year-old, hard-core, patricidal, radical feminist. It took months to carefully show her the statistics, explain my motivations (equality, not the marginalization of women), and to get her to finally understand that I was equally concerned about the welfare of men and women in society. Just today, she finally admitted to me (in tears) that her experiences as a child rape victim, a DV victim, a shelter volunteer (where she actively preached the Duluth model) and a proponent of the likes of Gloria Steinham and Betty Friedan have all led her to hate all men without any sort of reason. She understands now that men like us aren't looking to harm her, or victimize women, or marginalize them. She finally "gets" that activist men like me don't hate women, and that we don't seek privilege for ourselves. She gets the fact that while feminism, with the help of activist men and women got women the vote and access to birth control, education, employment and abortion in its earlier forms, it has now been co-opted into a vile, angry hate movement for spoiled western women who already lead a life of privilege. She finally understands that men and boys are being marginalized in society, are suffering, and that they need some help to achieve "equality", too. Finally, she accepts that unless something is done, men will eventually inherit the "right" to respond by criminalizing and marginalizing women for the indignities we've endured, according to the feminist's own twisted victimology, and that this can only lead to MORE hate, violence and inequality for men AND women alike.
When the time is right, I'm going to ask her to help us.
You see, as a result of her experiences, she has many contacts in my community's domestic violence treatment and shelter network, and as she finally accepts that men are being denied proper protection, treatment and interventions in the community when they are either victims or perpetrators of DV, I want her and her former associates in that network, including representatives with the police forces and prosecutor's office to sit down with some of the experts in the area and work out a plan to properly address the needs of ALL people affected by DV in the community. I've mentioned this to her, and she's amenable, but I think she needs to collect herself a bit first and digest some of the information I've provided.
THAT gives me hope. The walls are beginning to crumble, my friend: most women don't accept what the "women's movement" preaches in their name. The original radical feminists can, with gentle persuasion, understanding and time, be shown the way to a more balanced view of the sexes. Erin Pizzey did it. This woman I talked about did it. That means that almost all of them can do it.
I don't think we have to wait 100 years, Roy. The changes are upon us. We just have to know how to respond to them and maximize the opportunities they present. If we stick to the central idea of equality, and never descend into hate, fear and intolerance, I truly believe that we CAN achieve meaningful change in our lifetimes. It's going to be a struggle, but it will be worth it in the long run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 11:46 PM May 18th, 2006 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Well, if there's anything that puts me in a funk it's a rational optimist.
RandomMan you really know how to bring me down!
I appreciate your "convert one feminist" strategy, but as you admitted, it took months!
So, is SHE now going to revoke VAWA 2005?
Is SHE going to stand outside Family/Divorce courts with a big MRA sign?
Is SHE going to PURCHASE a few Congresspersons and leverage their votes towards actual gender justice?
I totally endorse your "micro-level" strategy.
It's important to convert feminists.
But at a MACRO-level... you are dust.
Lint.
A microbe.
(Not you personally.... you have a great writing voice and passion for real equality.)
We're talking D.C. baby!
Hijacking the shitstem!
(This is all hypothetical now ...)
If you were a Senator, and could have all the sweet female interns you wanted giving you blowjobs (some intellectual) every day ...
Would you vote against VAWA?
Would you even care?
WTF is happening in this cuntry?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by RandomMan on 12:19 AM May 19th, 2006 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Roy, I refuse to sell out, and I have altogether too many principles I hold dear. As a senator, I'd vote down VAWA as it stands and propose or write an alternative, ideology-free treatment and intervention program to be administered at the community level, where needs could be assessed properly on a case-by-case basis. Under such a program, which would include arms-length monitoring/auditing, up to and including independent auditors posing as clients, any organization found denying care or treatment to any person of EITHER gender would instantly be denied funding and subject to fines and restitution orders. The Duluth model would be scrapped, and a new set of "concensus guidelines" would be mandated, just as they have been for mental health care of various conditions with a great deal of success. I have experience developing public health programs and health care delivery programs, and that's how it's done if you want it to work. THAT's what I'd do if I were a sitting US senator, because it'd be my JOB.
As for the "blowjob" issue, Bill Clinton and his type are idiots, and the women who get involved with them are manipulators. I'd insist that my staff observe a strict no-harassment policy, and provide access to a neutral third party to handle any complaints fairly - I've used this system before, and it works well, and frequently prevents stress AND lawsuits. In years of working with pretty, intelligent women in academia and industry, I've become quite immune to their charms when they attempt to manipulate me. I don't tolerate sexual manipulation in the workplace or my personal life, and I've sent plenty of people home to change for dressing provocatively in the workplace, and I've terminated friendships where I felt a woman was "crossing the line" in an attempt to manipulate me. I never look at a woman below the chin when I'm at work (unless it's work-related, i.e. she's showing me something in her hand, pointing at a pin on her lapel, etc.) and I demand the same courtesy.
I've lost alot of business, grants and friends over the years because I won't lie, I won't sell out, and I don't do political nonsense. I say what I mean, and I mean what I say.
The only way to win this fight is one person at a time. It will take time to do, but it's the only way. We don't control the media, feminists and their pet politicians do, and politicians will do whatever will get them votes. Feminists have convinced them that women will vote for whoever gives them the most goodies. We can't change that, because men are generally poor at organizing themselves politically on a large scale (we tend not to get interested until real danger is involved, and don't generally get into politics for anything less). Sorry, but that's decades of experience talking here, and most men don't believe that they're in danger right now, whether that's true or not.
Convert a radical feminist. Deprogram a man. Convince them to do the same. If you manage to change 100 people in your life, and each of them changes a few, well, do the math. It doesn't take long. The lady I just helped to change will now help change an entire community full of people from the top of the DV industry down. Even if others don't become activists for our cause, they are innoculated against feminist propaganda and misandry to some extent, and won't support it blindly, so you're eroding the support for such hate movements, even if they keep it to themselves.
Sure, I may be dust, but a ton of dust weighs just as much as a ton of bullets, and it'll kill you just as dead if it lands on your head!
To answer your other questions Roy, I certainly do care. We're all human beings, and we all deserve to be treated as such, politics and profits be damned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 03:53 PM May 19th, 2006 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
RandomMan,
I'm not yet entirely convinced of your "micro" one-person-at-a-time strategy, but your ethics and integrity are beyond reproach.
Where is your corporate web site and how can I apply to work with you?
You are a rare voice.
(PS - I have a trust fund....)
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
The UCLA Daily Bruin has printed