TVOntario: Do you think, in some circumstances, men are discriminated against?

A very interesting show. There is nothing new in what has been said, but the very fact that the discrimination of men begins to be discussed on TV means a lot.

As a Yank in the inferior still-trying-to-be-enlightened former colonies, I highly recommend spending 30 minutes watching this video stream.

All the MRA essential issues are covered, and not in a shouting match like the "Point-Counterpoint" thrashing that is so tired on U.S. tee-vee.

The discussion among civilized (!!!) educated people, with a program moderator who is not about throwing kerosene on the conversation, covers ---

are men discriminated against? has feminism liberated men? why don't male politicians vote for men's issues? how does popular media portray men as inadequate, evil, or as "honorary women" (the only good category for men), what's the feminist double-standard for men?, how come all the studies about gender parity in domestic violence have been ignored?, what's the religious angle on men's roles in society/, how come higher education is now dominated by women as professors and as students?, why is chivalry really really bad for men?, how do we define "powerful and powerless" in the gender wars and why are these definitions completely stupid?

If it weren't for my little house in Carriacou, I could be persuaded to move to Canada after seeing how it is still possible to have intelligent civilized dialogue on TV.

One can only imagine the conversations that are going on in Ontario's untelevised pubs! ;-)

I only read about half the responses, but this one sucks:

"Response to 'Consider This':
Sure. Every agency of the Canadian government, except the Status of Women, works for the preservation of the Status of Men. To paraphrase FDR, "We have nothing to fear except our loss of status."

Is this guy being sarcastic, or what??

-axo

Please please please how can you save this? Does anyone know how to get this on you tube? I quite obviously do not. It really needs to be done!!!!!!!

And pay close attention to the feminist supporter, notice when they start talking about societies false perception of domestic violence vs current stats and the medias being seemingly "unaware", notice how before either, left media or general stereotypes were suggested, before any reason was sugested, he is the first person to bring up the lace curtain, he is the one that says “What do you think that journalists all sit there and don’t write stories because we don’t want to dump on women”. NO ONE HAD SUGESTED THAT!!!! It’s the classic Sherlock Holmes admition of guilt. It’s like saying, I don’t know nothing about the murder officer before any thing about the murder comes up in conversation.

How many other Canadians KNOW FOR A FACT the media were aware of those stats because you mailed them to journalists an editors after reading countless stories about only men beating women and that being the norm?

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050714/d050714a.htm

You guys should really read her book, "Spreading Misandry" (written with Paul Nathanson).

I liked it when she talked about how male college students are afraid to speak out, when the class is mainly women. I have some experience in that area. In the early 90's I took a summer class at my university, called "Psychology of Women". I took the course because I needed an easy 3 credits. As you can expect, the class was mainly women - there were only 2 other guys besides me.

Now first of all, the class itself is bogus in principle. Women have a "different psychology" than men? Give me a break (we are talking about psycyology as an academic/scientific subject here). Also the class is Junior level (300 level), which is a joke. The only prerequisite is "Psych 101". Of course it turned out to be largely a series of bitch sessions.

During some of the class sessions, while the professor was lecturing, the girl who sat behind me would periodically vent her hatred, by whispering and mumbling things in my ear, like "oh you stupid man, you don't know what it's like to be a woman..you jerk..". Then in one class where the issue of rape came up, I was not allowed to speak. Every time I would get a couple of words out, the women in the class would silence me. They were enjoying dwelling on their anger. (It is my observation that even today, women just do not want to hear men's opinions on the rape issue, including date rape. The mentality is "a man doesn't know what it's like..". I suspect most women don't know what it's like either, since most women haven't been raped, but that is a different issue.)

Then there was the class where the William Kennedy Smith trial came up. (the trial was going on that same summer I was taking the class. He was accused of raping his girlfriend on a date. He was found not guilty). The professor's position on the issue was, "they should find Kennedy Smith guilty to send a message to men about date rape.". One of the other guys in the class immediately said, "What if he didn't do it?". Man, did that professor ever put her foot in her mouth!

Anyhow I got an 'A' for playing along, I guess I was in my honorary woman stage back then.

-axo

P.S: I almost forgot to mention, the interviewer in the video (the news guy) sounded like a biased, clue-less jerkoff. The one guy in the studio was a classic honorary woman. The lawyer was ok, he was very knowledgeable but a little argumentative, which the interviewer took advantage of, to detract from his position. The other guy on remote was ok, just not confident-looking enough.

If only Katherine Young had Naomi Wolf's surface beauty and also Christina Hoff Sommer's incisive analytic skills and Ariel Levy's sense of feminist irony...

then the men's movement would have it's ultimate Joan of Arc.

Because it's all about the major mass media coverage.

Why is there no post-feminist female capitalizing on this opportunity?

Oh, I overlooked the precious Laura Kipnis.

She has major potential.

I think mangina man came off really stupid, like when he says to Katharine young “30 years is a lot longer than the 3 months a spent wandering around campuses and talking to guys” HAHA, yes douche bag, 30 years is a much greater experience than 3 months, then he accuses Walter of being bias because of his base of clients, while his book is the result of talking with a select group of young men, fresh out of their parents basement that haven’t experienced the system yet for a whopping 3 months. What an expert. [/sarcasm]

He was constantly drawing off stereotypes “cmon that don’t make sense” while the others were well informed and knowledgeable.

It was good that they attempted to be "balanced" by having a contrare opinion present.
What was most interesting was that the contrare opinion maker tended to use exactly the same tactics as feminists - trying to overshout, cutoff, outloud and deny everybody else who just happened to bring data. It put him in a tough spot when he had 2 or 3 other commentors all showing data from different sources completely undermining Mr. Contrare.

I'd love to have this on youtube. Any idea how that happens??

oregon dad