Patriarchy, gender roles & the quote/unquote war on men (part 3)

It seems recently there has been an influx of people I’m coming across in various social media settings, who decry injustices that are seemingly being inflicted upon them as a result of…equal rights.. Its strange, confusing and appalling all at the same time In this past week I fielded a thread (explained in my previous blog post)  about how women lie about being raped. This thread evolved (or is that devolved?) into hill of comments built upon slut shaming. Next came a post or reposting rather of a blog written by Suzanne Venker, “niece of Phylis Schafly & FOX News correspondent” about the “war on men.” I went back and forth about replying to this posting but decided rather than start a flame war which would result in no one listening to each other (Internet-wise) I’d post something else on a related topic & comment on that so those that know me got a clearer idea of my views. Lead by example, I’ll let you know how that works out for me……

But since this is my pwn personal space I can explain and respond to the article in question.

So Suzanne Venker whose website lists her as an “author and social critic” writes books. Her latest is entitled “The War On Men” and under the header advertising that are several blog pieces covering a range of topics such as gender roles in modern marriage, the “luxury” of at home motherhood and how fathers roles in society are devalued. Dont get me wrong I believe these issues are alive and well in modern day United States…just not from the angle she’s throwing at. The initial quote I read by her stated “you’ll never hear that in the media. All the articles and books (and television programs, for that matter) put women front and center, while men and children sit in the back seat. But after decades of browbeating the American male, men are tired. Tired of being told there’s something fundamentally wrong with them. Tired of being told that if women aren’t happy, it’s men’s fault.”

This quote along with her multiple blog pieces give me more material to opine about than I could possibly cover in one blog post so I’ll start by responding to her quote and the points it raises. I don’t know what era Ms. Venker grew up in, but when I was growing up in the 80’s father centered families were the norm on TV -Who’s The Boss, Full House etc- not to mention numerous upon numerous fairytales without moms (but maybe distant fathers & evil stepmoms) . It was in fact almost more common to see a father-only scenario than a nuclear family almost and definitely in most Disney movies of that time. In modern day 2014, there really seem to be a wide scope of shows which range from nuclear family to two mom-households or two-dad households. To be sure, the media still holds up the standard fare of two kids, a mom, a dad and a dog but a viewer doesn’t have to flip channels as long as they would have in the 1980’s, in order to find alternatives to this mold.
Additionally,  I know tons of dads who stay home with kids, or women that work & don’t have kids. It really goes both ways, the questioning & raised eyebrows….Many of Venker’s pieces  completely miss the mark or overlook some points. Venker’s blog piece about “modern marriage”  decries women who joined the work force because being home wasn’t good enough. It also misses several key things. Women didn’t join the work force because they were power hungry to control two spheres. Some women flat out rejected the role of housewife/mother  because they wanted more from life than a domestic role — and  there’s nothing wrong with that. Not to mention its near impossible to be a one income family in the middle class nowadays (which Venker more or less acknowledges). Certainly she cant criticize women for joining the work force than claim a war on men who want to be home. It doesnt really work out that way logically. To be fair I agree that women who choose to stay home and be a wife and/or mother are undervalued in society. I also agree that those women shouldnt be made to feel that way….but yet she doesnt claim there is a war on women. She claims this roots from their own insecurities…..yet fathers who are made to feel under valued feel this way as a result of society. Hmm.
Fathers should be able to stay home without criticism also, just to put that  out there lest anyone wonder how I feel..
 I think anyone who wants to stay home should, as long as their partner is okay with that, then what does it matter to me? to us?
Her Aug 17th blog about fatherhood in America, quotes two  women-who are neither married or have kids, but do have careers & money- saying they dont need men to have children..I think its safe to say thats hardly representative of a war on men. Katy Perry and Jennifer Aniston are beyond rich. They have both been married and divorced. Maybe they have decided marriage isnt for them, and thats ok (Refer back to your own words on this Suzanne). Lesbians have kids too, are they part of this war or do they get a free pass?
What I find most obvious about Suzanne Venker and others like her is the use of a classic formulaic argument about a perceived war on the part of <group seeking more rights/less suppression> waged against <group whose seen as the norm for whatever the perceived right/privilege is>.. Whites in the 1960s had similar arguments against black people who didnt want separate schools, jobs, restaurant seating etc. “Traditional Marriage” pundits use this argument every day on FOX News blubbering about the War on Traditional Marriage wrought by LGBT people seeking to marry. One could literally take out the parts where Venker uses “women” and plug in LGBT then take out “Men” and plug in “traditional family” and have almost vebatim the same paragraph, example “Those gay & lesbian people wanted an alternative lifetsyle and now they want a traditional one and take away from us straight people” But gays & lesbians never said they wanted an alternative lifestyle. Maybe some do. And maybe some want to be married. And it doesnt take away anything from straight people for tat to happen. I use this as an example because I think it shows what I’m talking about more clearly. Regardless of whether someone shares your view or a different one, be warned by use of an us/them dichotomy or extremist talk “This is how it is/I’m right so I dont need to hear any further opinions/You’re wrong because its not my view/ I already know youre wrong” etc type stuff (Or when in doubt, expletives and grammar insults). Cant we all just get along?

Patriarchy, gender roles & the quote/unquote war on men (part 2) “A lot of women lie about being raped”

Recently I had someone I know post an article about a female that accused a man of rape & then retracted. The thread that followed comprised of: curse words, slut shaming and generalizations about how women “all lie” about rape and put “innocent men” in prison. Don’t get me wrong, I definitely believe there are people on death row for murders they didn’t commit as a result of faulty eyewitnesses and the like, but….rape is a bit of a different story in terms of the proof needed to prosecute. Rarely are there “eyewitness” and mostly whats relied on are DNA obtained from a rape kit which is a very invasive exam that frankly a woman probably wouldn’t endure just to scare a man. Additionally, getting a rape conviction would involve either one of two things: evidence of a rape or confession of a crime (or a plea bargain) . I find it highly unlikely either of things would occur without guilt but alas who am I? The aforementioned “thread” in this case was almost entirely comprised of male voices who I cant imagine truly understand the ramifications of prosecuting a rape conviction, thus those same voices alluding that “a lot of women lie” show their own ignorance in laying down such claims. The irony of this claim lies in its ignorance. The fact of the matter is that statistically most rapes are not reported. Not because they didn’t happen but because most women DON’T want to endure an rape exam and a trial where their reputation will be torn apart. This doesn’t make them less innocent or their attacker less guilty, it just is the truth of the matter.  Just my two cents out here in my own space.


Post note: and to be fair, yes I acknowledge there have been and are women who lie about being raped. However these cases quickly become undone once its discovered whats involved in prosecuting the claim of rape. (my opinion) In certainly dont think its a regular “thing” among women that they would choose this path lightly or en masse just to be vindictive. (again, my opinion, as a human being and a person with thirty seven years experience as a woman)

patriarchy, systems of oppression and blatant old fashioned sexism, still alive after all these years (part 1)

The email warns “a Montreal Massacre style attack will be carried out” against those in attendance, students, staff, and the women’s center. “I have at my disposal a semi-automatic rifle, multiple pistols, and a collection of pipe bombs,” the email continues. “This threat is giving (The University) a chance to stop it….I will write my manifesto in her spilled blood, and you will all bear witness to what feminist lies and poison have done to the men of America.”

This email was sent this month in response to  a planned speaking event at Utah State University featuring Anita Sarkeesian, a feminist culture critic who recently has been lauded for her research on female stereotypes in the video game industry  ….all for challenging sexism in video games.  In 2012, Sarkeesian was targeted by an online harassment campaign following her launch of a Kickstarter project to fund the Tropes vs. Women in Video Games series. At the same time, supporters donated over $150,000 to the project, far beyond the $6,000 she had sought. The situation was covered extensively in the media, placing Sarkeesian at the center of discussions about misogyny in video game culture and online harassment. It would seem that Ms. Sarkeesian has struck a chord with a few people in the gaming world. One could surmise that is probably the result of her uncovering their truths, for if what she said was not true, why get so worked up over it?

This is apparently also crime to some gamers worth threatening rape, death, acts of terrorism, and massacre for. The day before, members of the university administration received an email warning that a shooting massacre would be carried out at the event. And under Utah law, she was told, the campus police could not prevent people with weapons from entering her talk. It was decided that canceling the event was the solution. I however can think of many better solutions that do not involve bowing to misogynist cyber terrorists. While I don’t condone putting Ms. Sarkeesian in harms way I think canceling the event altogether was a huge mistake. This sets the standard that women can be silenced with one threat. It also shows that society will tolerate such behavior. Had I been the decision maker in this matter, first off I would actively be seeking the person responsibility and handing there ass to them by way of a stiff prison sentence. Second, I would not have canceled the event. Okay so the University cant provide security. Can they move it to a place that would? An Event Center? A police precinct perhaps? Minimally  make it a webcast & present it at a screening on campus. Or if the University was afraid to do that, why not a podcast sent out to all University email addresses? There are many solutions to this situation. Backing down to sexism and lunacy should not be one of them.

According to the Entertainment Software Association, 48 percent of game players in the United States are women, a figure that has grown as new opportunities to play games through mobile devices, social networks and other avenues have proliferated. Game developers, however, continue to be mostly male: In a survey conducted earlier this year by the International Game Developers Association, a nonprofit association for game developers, only 21 percent of respondents said they were female.

In this day and century , the fact that the permissive attitude of misogyny in many forms and many industries continues to pervade society is inexcusable. Its quite frankly ridiculous. Guys, women make up at last half the population. Its not rocket science. This is the 21st century. Women have jobs and interests in all areas of society. As such its your job to adjust. Move your chair over and make room. Or take your ball and go home..


CA Adopts a “yes means yes” sex assault rule

ACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) – Gov. Jerry Brown has signed a bill that makes California the first in the nation to define when “yes means yes” and adopt requirements for colleges to follow when investigating sexual assault reports.

Brown’s office announced that he signed the bill Sunday.

State lawmakers last month approved SB967 by Sen. Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, as states and universities across the U.S. are under pressure to change how they handle rape allegations.

De Leon has said the legislation will begin a shift in how college campuses in California prevent and investigate sexual assaults. Rather than using the refrain “no means no,” the definition of consent under the bill requires “an affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity.”

The legislation says silence or lack of resistance does not constitute consent. Critics said it overreaches and sends universities into murky legal waters.

(Copyright 2014, The Associated Press, All rights reserved.)

This article originally appeared in KRON4 on their Facebook page. I will be blogging on this later.

Emma Watson, Ambassador for ALL

“We don’t often talk about men being imprisoned by gender stereotypes but I can see that that they are and that when they are free, things will change for women as a natural consequence…

I want men to take up this mantle. So their daughters, sisters and mothers can be free from prejudice but also so that their sons have permission to be vulnerable and human too – reclaim those parts of themselves they abandoned and in doing so be a more true and complete version of themselves.” – Emma Watson, UN Women Goodwill Ambassador