You’re Not Helping v.14

Dr. Janice Fiamengo, an English professor at the University of Ottawa, gave a lecture at the University of Toronto last Thursday. This was the same venue Warren Farrell spoke at last year, during which feminists protesters tried to stop people from getting in to hear his speech. So it comes as no surprise that when Fiamengo began her lecture someone pulled the fire alarm.

Nicely done, protesters.

Fortunately, the lecture did go on. It can be viewed in full online. Fiamengo’s point about the biased nature of women’s studies is nothing new. Over the years, many people have noted that the women’s studies departments on many college campuses have become nothing more than ideology factories. They teach doctrine and religion, but offer no critical analysis of any ideas. That results in people simply repeating the same rhetorical nonsense with no understanding of what is coming out of their mouths. As Emma Teitel noted:

Almost every pro-women’s studies person who approached the mic last night, spoke another language, a jargon you might misconstrue as scientific–only the words they used weren’t shortcuts meant to simplify or summarize complex concepts, they were used to make simple concepts sound complex: Hegemonic, racialized, problematic, intersectionality. It was pure obfuscation, 1984 with tattoos and septum piercings. Some of the students couldn’t even string together a single lucid sentence. All they had were these meaningless, monolithic words. I felt like I was on a game show, the exercise being how many times can you say patriarchal, phallocentric hegemony in 45 seconds or less. It was frankly, for a feminist, depressing.

Teitel went on to agree that women’s studies needs the overhaul Fiamengo suggested because the detractors were not an example of women’s studies at its finest. I disagree. This appears to be as good as it gets.

As I noted above, this is not the first time people critiquing feminism or discussing men’s issues faced hostile feminist opposition. The same thing happened to Farrell last year, feminist opposed the creation of a men’s group at a UK university, on GMP Danny noted  another group of feminists tried to ban the discussion of men’s issues by arguing it is anti-woman hate speech, and even feminist professors have written about the ideological abyss that is women’s studies.

How can one have an open discussion if one side tries to shut it down before it starts? How can one have an open discussion if one side thinks they have all the answers? How can one have an open discussion if one side thinks the other side is the cause of all their problems?

What is interesting about Danny’s op-ed is that no feminists participated in the discussion. Part of that may be that GMP has run away most of its former feminist audience with its rape posts from last year. However, that does not stop the resident feminist authors from commenting. Yet none have.

This is the problem with the current state of “gender issues.” One side has zero interest in hearing about the other side’s concerns, feelings, and experiences. One side refuses to listen to, let alone accept, any criticism about their views while hurling nothing by mockery and insults at the other side. And the discussion, conversation, or debate does not happen on their terms, one side decides leaves.

How can one have an open discussion if one side will not even show up?

It will take more than an overhaul to fix this problem because the issue not really the academic setting or the lazy indoctrination that many in women’s studies call “education.” The real problem is the ideology guiding those views, and few people to accept that ideology are willing to change it.

About these ads

16 thoughts on “You’re Not Helping v.14

  1. “”What is interesting about Danny’s op-ed is that no feminists participated in the discussion. Part of that may be that GMP has run away most of its former feminist audience with its rape posts from last year. However, that does not stop the resident feminist authors from commenting. Yet none have.””

    None that are known about publicly! You assume that the Moderation Que is empty and not over brimming with rational, on-point and valid comment that some fear being let loose in public.

    Or … Maybe I’m just caught in a time warp where that used to be reality and now it’s past it’s sell by date?

    So many have given up commenting at GMP (And reading whether for free or paywall) due to the extreme defensive positions taken by those in the back rooms. GMP needs to get some quality editors who can lead debate and widen thinking, and dump the lazy reactionary pueriles they have. So lazy and incompetent they missed all of November – “Men’s Health Month”. It takes a hell of a lot of effort to deliberately miss the bleeding obvious – and it’s very easy and even normality to miss it all when you lack any form of competency or qualification for the job.

    Only another 5 Months until the college rape season opens up again – and so much bad content can just get recycled again – no competency or planning required. Oh the treadmill of being wedded to pay views over good content and even good business.

  2. on GMP Danny noted another group of feminists tried to ban the discussion of men’s issues by arguing it is anti-woman hate speech
    Now to be fair about that situation. I must say that in the reading I’ve done on this none of the opponents of Santhosh’s group actually identified as feminist. Oh I’ll be the first to say that there is a very high likelyhood that at least some of them do. (And BTW the link you gave to my GMP piece is messed up. It looks like instead of the link pointing to the URL of the post its got some extra info in the URL that has to be removed and then it works.)

    What is interesting about Danny’s op-ed is that no feminists participated in the discussion. Part of that may be that GMP has run away most of its former feminist audience with its rape posts from last year. However, that does not stop the resident feminist authors from commenting. Yet none have.
    Again as far as I can tell none of the people that ID as feminist seem to have said that they are but you can’t be sure. I did get a few bites on Twitter about the post from a few feminists. As for why none of the regular feminists didn’t comment its almost pointless to try to figure it out. It could be that they were busy. It could be that they felt unwelcome. It could be that they know I have a bit of a point and can’t admit it. Oh well.

    But what I do know is that this was a chance for them to at the bear minimum say that they don’t agree with what that committee did.

  3. Danny: “But what I do know is that this was a chance for them to at the bear minimum say that they don’t agree with what that committee did.”
    This is a sneaky statement. What you say is true, but it is burdensome and unfair to expect people to distance themselves from positions one might suspect them to have. The GMP feminist might just agree with you and not feel the need to prove once again that they are good egalitarian feminists. (btw I personally doubt that many of the GMP feminists are egalitarian; above I am referring to their self-image).

  4. The GMP resident feminists…some have had first comment on an article before (doing a whataboutthewomenz derail for one of them), I find it pretty dodgy that none have commented yet to defend feminism or speak on the issue. It’s been 3 days yet NONE have commented? Are they trying to ignore this? Do they not realize a simple comment supporting the men’s right to speak at their conference would do good for repairing the reputation of feminism??

  5. This is a sneaky statement. What you say is true, but it is burdensome and unfair to expect people to distance themselves from positions one might suspect them to have. The GMP feminist might just agree with you and not feel the need to prove once again that they are good egalitarian feminists. (btw I personally doubt that many of the GMP feminists are egalitarian; above I am referring to their self-image).
    If that is the case then it should also be considered the same to expect men to speak against other men, mras to speak up against mras, etc. But time agai women and feminists ask for almost demand it.

    So we are supposed to just know where they stand (saving them the trouble of actually speaking) butwe have to constantly remind them where we stand lest they think the worst of us?

    Nice.

  6. This is a sneaky statement. What you say is true, but it is burdensome and unfair to expect people to distance themselves from positions one might suspect them to have.

    I second Danny’s response and also want to add in this particular situation my assumption is based on positions those feminists have explicitly expressed. The resident feminists at GMP have previously stated they oppose such acts, yet they remain silent when presented in examples of it.

    The GMP feminist might just agree with you and not feel the need to prove once again that they are good egalitarian feminists.

    Perhaps, but one can easily flip that logic: how would we know they support men’s issues if we never see them do it?

  7. Archy, it is also likely that many feminists simply stopped posting on GMP. The most recent articles on the site have been feminist-leaning — Schwyzer’s piece, the one about “white masculinity”, the Wonder Woman piece — yet they have few comments. I think GMP took a real hit from the backlash against their articles from last year, at least with feminists.

    On an unrelated note, I also noticed that GMP has had problems getting married men to submit articles for their marriage series. I think GMP’s editors may now begin to realize the flaw in marketing a men’s magazine to a largely female audience.

  8. I’m so disgusted with them for cozying up to Schwyzer once again knowing the things he had done in the past. Didn’t this guy, with his tag-team partner in crime Amanda Marcotte, criticize Tom Matlack via Twitter? Didn’t Hugo also lambaste the entire Good Men Project after leaving the editorial team?

    All these along with his well-known history of blaming a boy for being abused by his nanny, cuckholding a man into raising his son, and nearly killing his girlfriend, it boggles the mind that his latest piece is getting praise over there.

  9. Speaking of censorship, Stoner, I made another comment calling out a commentator at The Good Men Project”. Guess what? It was put into moderation and gone.

  10. “Is radfemhub banned? Or any of the radical feminist websites showing hatred with transphobia?”

    Of course not! If that happened there would be an orchestrated media outcry by the state and federally funded Women’s groups in the USA. Have Tax Dollars will abuse them!

    One of the big issues is that a certain group “The Southern Poverty Law Centre” is being used as a source for supposed hate speech referencing by Norton et al. As such, there is a double whammy – and Norton is ending up as a Political group and not a supplier of on-line safety and security software.

    To deal with the abuse effectively, there would need to be two simultaneous actions – one calling Norton to account for their Politicisation of on-line security and second the Ongoing Political Activity of The SPLC and their discrimination against men.

    In the means time – PUBLICLY SHIFT SOFTWARE and say way – and Don’t support companies that act politically and hide behind other peoples’ hit lists.

    Norton Security Software is Sexist and plays with female perceptions for purchasing purposes. They are pandering to the false demographic of women doing the buying … so push free as better value and Norton will have to look at the bottom line in a very competitive market.

  11. Danny and Toysoldier,
    I will try to be more clear. It is unreasonable to demand that the GMP feminists state their position, anytime you mention a discrimination against men. It is not unreasonable when the discrimination is “their business”. I have no definite answer how to distinguish “their business” from “not their business”, but here are some examples of “their business”:
    -politics in the country they live
    -actions and opinions of people they willingly associate themself with (like other GMP feminists in this case)
    -prominent positions of a social justice movement they declare themself a part of (like here feminism)

    Also, what good would GMP feminist comments on Danny’s article do? They likely largely agree with Danny in this concrete case (and their agreement would likely have little effect in this case) and even if they don’t, I wouldn’t expect them to be honest in such a mixed forum as the GMP.

  12. Jupp, I am not demanding that GMP feminists make comments. I am only noting that they made no comments despite previously stating that they oppose such things. I suppose I should have been clear they typically do not comment on articles like Danny’s at all. That is why I find it odd. How can someone say they oppose something yet remain silent when presented examples of it? What makes it curious is that those resident feminists will comment when the reverse situation is presented.

    As for the good their comments would do, I think it would go a long way in showing that feminists are actually critical of the misandry in their own community and movement. They cannot assume that people will just know they oppose such things if they are never seen actually speaking out against those biases.

  13. “Speaking of censorship, Stoner, I made another comment calling out a commentator at The Good Men Project”. Guess what? It was put into moderation and gone.”

    Eagle 35, I made this recommendation to you before, I’ll make it again-start your own blog…

    If you feel the need to comment in a place where they aren’t exactly “free speech friendly”–maybe it is best you make your own blog, post a link to the original article and comment on your blog. That way you don’t lose 20-30 minutes writing something that no one but a moderator ever see’s…

  14. Stoner you are such a gentle soul – and it’s so kind of you to indicate that Mods actually are courteous enough to read blocked content before consigning it to the bin.

    We both know that depending upon the magical mix of Author. Mod and Content all too often there is no reading due to the Hidden BIAS that is allowed to operate unchallenged and even unrecognised within GMP.

    Personally I’m quite glad that certain folks have departed and no longer have magical mod powers. It was overly tiresome to make a comment only for it to be blocked and then I got emails from some telling me was not to post – period . Talk about bias and how not to reveal it! Some have been so stupid there can be no regret in seeing their demise!

    It’s bad for business and image being so stupid – it’s even worse being caught out! … and it’s even more stupid to use access to data illegally and cause liability issues for the Site owner. Bias is a terrible thing and has so many manifestations and ways to escape into the real world.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s