Boys face compulsory feminism programs in state schools across Victoria

From the article:

Possible classroom activities include students acting out scenes of sexual coercion after which students would suggest more appropriate behaviour.

A VicHealth report for the state Education Department calls for teachers to be trained in gender, violence and sexual health issues so they would be comfortable discussing “taboo” issues.

But it would help if teachers could “make the program fun”, the authors said.

The report says programs for all students should start at primary level and be reinforced across all year levels in subjects including drama, English, science and sport.

They would combat common attitudes among boys such as young women are either “good girls or sluts”, the report said.

It said feminist theories were best at explaining the link between gender power relations and violence against women, and must underpin the programs.

But the authors of the “Respectful Relationships Education” report admitted there was considerable community hostility to feminism, even among teachers and students.

The hostility comes with good reasons. Programs like the one Michael Flood wants instituted are little more than demonization and blaming tactics meant to belittle and attack boys. They are incredibly insensitive, completely ignoring female-on-male violence and ignoring the fact that many of the boys who will be subjected to these programs are victims of emotional, physical and sexual abuse, often by their mothers. The language and tactics used in these programs can have a disastrous effect on boys who have been or are being abused, essentially blaming the boys for what was done to them and leaving them with the impression that they either deserved it or their experiences do not count as abuse.

Flood halfheartedly tries to address this problem:

Report author Dr Michael Flood admitted there was always the risk of a backlash, but said it was crucial that students were taught that sexist attitudes and unequal relationships between the sexes were central to explaining violence.

“We need to do that in ways that are careful and respectful and don’t make boys in particular feel blamed and demonised for the problem,” he said.

“Not by shoving capital ‘F’ feminism down their throats.”

Yet that is exactly what will be done. Recently I emailed Flood in regards to his XY Online site. For a site supposedly concerned about men’s issues there is a complete dearth of articles, research, links and information about male victimization, male rape, male suicide and other issues that affect boys and men. The bulk of the content on the site revolves around feminist propaganda attacking males and masculinity. As I said to Flood in the email, the site leaves the impression that male victimization essentially does not exist and unfortunately the language used on the site can be quite triggering for male victims, especially since the many of the articles belittle and minimize male victims’ experiences.

Even in Flood’s responses to the live blog comments he could not manage to explain away the obvious biased nature of what he intends. The effect it can have on boys, especially young boys who cannot articulate the reasons they may be hurt by Flood’s intentions, is severe. I wrote about one such program that was done in my cousin’s school and how it harmed him. In my correspondence with Flood he seemed rather dismissive of acknowledging abuse against males and particularly dismissive of acknowledging that women commit such acts. One must wonder just what he has planned in regards to teaching boys about “respecting” girls while teaching girls to express their sexuality and wills however they wish regardless of the impact it has on boys.

15 thoughts on “Boys face compulsory feminism programs in state schools across Victoria

  1. “We need to do that in ways that are careful and respectful and don’t make boys in particular feel blamed and demonised for the problem,” he said.

    A very odd sentiment. Feminists have never been particularly concerned about that in the past. Why start now?

  2. Michael Flood, Rob Moody of VicHealth and Stephen Fisher, Director of Welfare Studies at Chisholm Instutute are the male feminists at large and influencing all things in Victoria.

    All of them have argued that male victims should be disbelieved from the outset. Fisher writes to this effect regarding partner abuse in an article reproduced on Floods site. Moody, in a preface to a report ostensibly about the “cost” of intimate partner violence, effectively says there are so few male victims of abuse we needn’t worry about them.

    The only positive I can put about the state is that the individual units in the govt supported counseling networks do not discriminate. But even their peak bodies run a gendered line so the actual outreach still conforms to pre-existing prejudices. Part of my formal engagement with that system is designed to change that.

    Unfortunately that engagement is also a guarantee that I will be confronted with one or all of those individuals I mentioned at some point in the future. It is not a prospect I savour.

  3. Michael flood is the biggest misandrist on the planet. PARENTS OF SCHOOL CHILDREN BEWARE, THIS MAN IS OUT TO DEMOLISH YOUR CHILD’S SELF ESTEEM !!

  4. Having skimmed the first 30 pages I can tell the report is incredibly biased and nothing more than feminist propaganda. The report lists several statistics regarding child abuse against girls, but never once mentions child abuse or sexual violence against boys. Once I have the chance to read the report more fully I suspect that I will find boys as victims was not mentioned at all in the report.

  5. The attachment of shame and blame to pre-pubescent boys particularly with the sexual elements involved is quite likely to create symptomology similar to that of actual victims. I’ll be telling the pollies that it’s no different to sexually abusing them. The outcome is likely to be more violence and abuse rather than less.

  6. Michael Flood is a very sick individual. I can only compare his social engineering to that of Hitler when the latter targetted Jews. Michael Flood targets males.

    Overtly, Flood decoys people from his true agenda by claiming that he wants to champion “a plurality of masculinities”. ie. he wants a world where we all appreciate many ways and styles and beliefs of men.

    BUT….. then he uniformly concludes that there exist no plurality of masculinities (to use his phrase) in school boys and in mens rights groups and collectives. As far as Fascist Flood is concerned all these males are of a singular mono-type: conservative patriarchal, violent anti-feminists. Only one kind of man exists outside of pro-feminist men’s groups.

    So in short he OVERTLY champions a plurality of masculinities, then COVERTLY writes studies concluding that there is no diversity among school boys, men’s rights groups, fathers collectives, and the like.

    He takes what is truly a diverse rainbow of views and men, and homogenises them into one stereotype.

    His reason? He was bullied at school and wants to take revenge against all males, particularly school boys. It is a vendetta.

    Parents protect your boys from this monster!

    Girls protect and stand up for the boys you love and respect!

  7. While I agree that Flood is incredibly contradictory and hypocritical, using the Nazi or Hilter comparison is uncalled for. The situation is not applicable and it is an egregious, overused comparison.

  8. As I’ve already said at Glenn’s, we have the rare opportunity, so cherished by linguists, to watch how a word acquires a new meaning. The word is “victorian”.

  9. You have to use it in sentence though. Like Colbert did with “truthiness.” Then you can submit it to Websters and the secondary meaning will become legit.

  10. We Victorians are well acquainted with the term.

    However it may be that Queen Victoria’s reputation is somewhat undeserved. Apparently she and Albert were quite enthusiastic about sex in all it’s variations and were quite experimental. It should be noted they had nine children.

    I suspect her eventual strait lacedness was a reaction to, or rebellion against, Albert’s control over the workings of the regency.

  11. “It should be noted they had nine children. ‘

    My ex-wife’s hobby is the royals, and she says that apparently Victoria had really awful menstrual cramps, and staying pregnant was the only remedy available in those days.

    I think the term “Victorian” applies to the era and not the person, and that era was the height of the Romantic period, when everything primal and mystical was valued over reason – a reversal of the Enlightenment. The same sexist tropes about women being all primal and mystical prevailed as before, but in the Romantics thought that was good thing. Does this remind you of anything?

  12. @Jim…

    I’m not sure what part of the world you’re from. The sense I’ve always got within my Australian culture is that the overly moralistic sense of “Victorian” attached to the queen herself rather than the era.

    re Vickie and Alfie’s early relations it seems they brought books about sex(oooOOOooo!!) from Paris(Arrrghhhhh!!**) and studied them together. They started out as enthusiasts. I can imagine the source of the books would be more ghastly than the content for many English.

    ** Every real Englishman understands that the French are their real enemy.

  13. gwallan, I’m American. here there’s a style of architecture called Victorian, and I never thought the name referred to her directly, as if she had designed them or anything.

    I think the prudishness thing ataching to her may have more weight to it though. There’s that story of a pregnant woman showing up at courtt, and being positioned behind a table or something to hide her swelly belly. Stupid culture – pregnant women are beautiful.

    “** Every real Englishman understands that the French are their real enemy.”

    They hate each other like litter mates. It’s amazing how similar the languages and cultures are. Cooking in particular – French cooking and English use all the same basic techniques, just with very diiferent efect.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s