Commentary by Ashli Howell (Staff Writer)
Barbra Kay, a speaker at the men’s issues conference in Michigan, said to the few hundred men and women (mostly men) in attendance, “The vast majority of female students alleging rape on campus are actually voicing buyer’s remorse for alcohol-fueled promiscuous behavior, involving murky lines of consent on both sides, it’s their get-out-of-guilt-free card, you know, like in Monopoly.” Whether or not Kay’s characterization of on campus rape victims is true – I could find nothing to corroborate her claim – it’s one of the talking points for men’s rights activism. In fact, it is one of the many talking points of Sage Gerard (Victor Zen) the president of KSU Men.
I first became aware of KSU Men after seeing a few posters around campus and decided to look into it. As a woman who considers herself a feminist, I wasn’t exactly sure what I was going to find and I was mentally preparing myself for the worst. Here’s what I found after hours of watching videos on Sage Gerard’s YouTube channel, which is under the name Victor Zen and researching the men’s rights movement: it appears to have some valid points. However, bringing awareness and discussing these issues is not the goal of KSU Men. The posters I saw around campus said, “Meet KSU’s non-feminist community”. An ad in the KSU Sentinel read that KSU Men is a community where “we critique feminism for the damage it has caused due to its inherent hatred of males.”
There are three main problems that I have. The blame game the men’s rights movement plays, the shock value statements they make, and the incorrect characterization of feminism. While researching the men’s rights movement, there was no shortage of feminist vitriol, there was a lot of discussions on the A Voice for Men discussion board about the friend zone, and there was very little about any issue concerning men’s rights. That’s not to say that it did not exist, but it was background noise and was always accompanied with blame. It seems to me that the men’s rights movement is not trying to advance any concerns they have, but to degrade and discredit feminists at any opportunity.
The second problem I have with the movement is the shock value it often uses to gain attention. The founder of A Voice for Men, Paul Elam, which funded KSU Men, said, “In the most severe and emphatic terms possible the answer is no, they’re not asking to get raped. They are freaking begging for it…near demanding it. And all the outraged PC demands to get huffy and point out how nothing justifies or excuses rape won’t change the fact that there are a lot of women who get pummeled and pumped because they are stupid (and often arrogant) enough to walk through life with the equivalent of a I’m a stupid, conniving b*itch – please rape me neon sign glowing above their empty little narcissistic heads.” This statement, admittedly, was incredibly shocking. It was also exactly what Paul Elam aimed to do. He has said that the Voice for Men movement does not actually believe those things and was just saying them for shock value. He didn’t bring attention to the issues that A Voice for Men claims to be concerned about, it merely infuriated most sane women. It also landed A Voice for Men on the Southern Poverty Law Center Misogyny sites list, further detracting from any issues it wants to address.
The final problem I have is that the men’s rights movement really misses the mark. They believe that because you are pro-woman, you must be anti-man. This equates, in my mind, to the idea that I have to hate gelato because I love ice cream. It’s absurd. In general, feminists support equality for all and prefer movies with a trong female lead over movies like Twilight. Unlike some prominent figures in the media seem to think, feminism does not want to take away power from men so they can have all of it for themselves; they do not favor matriarchy over patriarchy. They favor equality.
The bottom line is, if there is to be any meaningful discussion about the concerns that groups like KSU Men have, the hate has got to stop. When researching some of the issues facing men, I could not see through the blame. And yes, extreme feminists that bathe in the tears of men have some blame here too, but I do not know any feminist that bathes in the tears of men; that sounds disgusting. So, if groups like this want to really to raise awareness about how men commit suicide at four times the rate of women, that male enrollment in college is decreasing, and the plethora of other issues that exist, I’m all for it. But let us discuss those things – not a hateful judgement of feminists.
….
Talk back! Leave a reply below.
Greetings!
My name is Jessica Fisher, I am a first semester junior here at KSU.
Having read this piece I want to say thank you for courageously taking a stance and speaking the truths about the situation.
I wanted to let you know that there is movement to protest the ‘Male Students in Peril’ conference that KSUM and AVFM are putting on in the Carmichael Student Center on November 1. The protest is being organized on the grounds that these groups make students feel uncomfortable, unwelcome and unsafe. We believe that these groups (KSUM and AVFM) hold views in direct opposition to the views of KSU. If you’re interested in being a part of that and/or know people who may be interested, please contact me at JFishe19@students.Kennesaw.edu
Again, thank you for your editorial.
Jessica Fisher hatefully wants to silence men “on the grounds that these groups make students feel uncomfortable, unwelcome and unsafe”.
This is a great example of how feminists blame men and try to shut down discussions about men’s concerns. The hatred of men is strong in Jessica Fisher.
How equal is it silence men? This is clear proof that feminism is NOT about equality, despite the claims of this editorial.
Her comment doesn’t contain a single hateful statement. Further, she is not attempting to silence the conference, but to protest it. Even further, silencing men is not the equivalent of protesting a particular AVFM conference.
A protest, by definition, is an attempt to make conference speakers and guest feel uncomfortable and unsafe. That is HATE.
By contrast, everyone is welcome at the conference, even those bigots who hate men.
That’s actually not the definition of a protest. This is
“an expression or declaration of objection, disapproval, or dissent, often in opposition to something a person is powerless to prevent or avoid” according to dictionary.com. Just so you know
“Her comment doesn’t contain a single hateful statement.”
Let’s see. If I complained to the police you made me feel “unsafe,” and sought and got a restraining order, would you not consider the implication and inference that you are a violent person a damaging, aggressive attack to your reputation, especially if you made the person unsafe only because you had different political opinions?
Is the protest going to be like what feminists did multiple times in Canada in the last 2 years, when they VIOLENTLY disrupted Dr Warren Farrell’s speech? when they did the same to several other speakers, such as academics Paul Nathanson and Cathy Young, and ex-feminist Dr Janice Fiamengo?
All political ideologies are open to criticism. Conservatism, Progressivism, Libertarianism etc are all criticized every day. why not feminism?
There are numerous women who criticize it. The vast majority of women are not feminists, and neither are the vast majority of men.
It was Katherine Young (of the “Spreading Misandry” fame shared with Paul Nathanson). Cathy Young is a different person.
I promise you, protesting is the perfect way to feed into their narrative. It’s exactly what they want and expect. They will record you on video and say “Look it’s those feminists oppressing us!” If you don’t believe me, look at the videos at the end of the post. You have to realize that you are only going to drum up publicity for them and create an extreme dialogue.
Here’s a better idea: start a feminist group on campus and request a debate with KSU Men. Let the strength of feminist arguments go against MRM arguments. That way, they will not be able to paint you and other feminists as unreasonable.
http://youtu.be/iARHCxAMAO0
http://youtu.be/CRWff4gCwTw?list=UU7PfGhJXlJiDs4jvGGGgqsQ
It’s these type of videos that encourage people to view feminism in a negative light. The red-headed woman in particular has become something of a mascot for the Men’s Right Movement.
I hope KSU feminists don’t become the same.
I’m all for a debate, but why not go to the conference and debate right there? You’re all welcome to oppose Men’s Human Rights, just have good arguemennts ready!
Challenge accepted. Please leave a note here and we can make contact.
…and we certainly don’t want to be exposed to opposing views; it might make us have to think.
Trouble seeing through the blame? Hilarious
All feminism is based on blaming men via “patriarchy theory”, the hate-filled idea that all men cooperate to oppress women throughout history.
Yes, the hate must stop. From feminists, immediately.
“I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” — Feminist Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor.
“I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” — Feminist Andrea Dworkin
Are men just supposed to quietly accept the violent rhetoric and physical assaults from feminists? NO. That time is now over.
Just a few of the factual corrections and edits needed for this editorial:
1. The speaker at the Men’s Issues Conference was Barbara Kay, not Barbra Kay. Barbara Kay is a conservative columnist with the National Post in Canada.
2. “prefer movies with a trong female lead” should be “prefer movies with a strong female lead”.
3. The notion that men’s human rights activists “believe that because you are pro-woman, you must be anti-man” is a fabrication, a ludicrous distortion of the movement and ignores the large number of women who support men’s human rights.
4. “facing men” should be “facing men”.
5. “most sane women. It also landed ” needs a space after the period.
This editorial was a poorly researched, slovenly effort, particularly when compared to the superior writing of “KSU Men’s club fighting feminism?”
“So, if groups like this want to really to raise awareness about how men commit suicide at four times the rate of women, that male enrollment in college is decreasing, and the plethora of other issues that exist, I’m all for it. But let us discuss those things – not a hateful judgement of feminists.”
What’s to discuss? It’s already clear that the solution is for men to ‘man-up’, ‘grow up’, and reject the ‘patriarchy.’ Feminists have nothing to do with it.
Honestly AVFM is a terrible group, if you see the things they do behind the scenes… Even the leader, “Victor Zen” has been known to hide in the women bathroom during love your body week and will not listen to any arguments other than his own.
You think Sage is the leader of A Voice for Men? And we should take your word for anything because…?
“Hide in the womens bathroom?” This sounds fishy to me. Did you make this up?
When you said “AVFM”, did you actually mean to say “KSUM”? It sounds like it.
\”So, if groups like this want to really to raise awareness about how men commit suicide at four times the rate of women, that male enrollment in college is decreasing, and the plethora of other issues that exist, I’m all for it. But let us discuss those things – not a hateful judgement of feminists.”
The decreasing male enrollment in college is not actually a bad thing….it\’s a great accomplishment per Obama….
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/06/23/op-ed-president-obama-president-obama-reflects-impact-title-ix
\” In fact, more women as a whole now graduate from college than men. This is a great accomplishment—not just for one sport or one college or even just for women but for America. And this is what Title IX is all about.\” ~ Obama
Yes, he was just kidding about all that rapey stuff. You know Paul: always acting out for attention. Boys. All the MRAs are kidding all the time, what with those silly rape and death threats to dissenters.
I think the quote from Paul Elam has a HUGE impact on the KSU Men perception. If a FUNDER says things like that, it sets a precedent for members to think alike. Paul Elam needs to realize that what he says, whether he’s saying it for shock value or not, affects others. Let’s say one of these men of KSU Men heard the quote and co-signed without understanding it was just said for shock value. Accountability is needed.
Just as any movement, feminism has had different stages and comes in many forms. Their lack of understanding feminism is appalling. You can’t stand against or disagree with something you don’t understand. As you pointed out in your article, you can be pro-woman and pro-man at the same time. If you’re arguing feminism has had such a negative impact on your life/campus/generation, why perpetuate negative and harmful behavior? Promote equality rather than one-sidedness.
Well said! This is not a zero sum game. Both sides can contribute to the very real problems that all genders face. There is not equality in this world and there can be. So instead of trying to discredit and hate those that disagree with you lets actually do the research and find out why these problems exist and then discuss real solutions to those problems.
Oh and attempting to discredit someone’s argument on the basis of a missed space or a dropped s is a logical fallacy. It does not change the argument.
“Both sides can contribute to the very real problems that all genders face. ”
Really? Then why does Warren Farrell and Christina Hoff Sommers routinely get attacked? Given they both have identified as feminists rather than MRA’s, one would think they would be welcomed and feminists would work with them… but they are hated by feminists because they speak to issues men face. Because they DO THE RESEARCH and come to non-feminist approved outcomes. Are you aware that Mary Koss, a prominent feminist, actually erased male victims in the CDC’s NISVS? How are we supposed to “do the research” without being critical and trying to discredit feminists when we MUST discredit feminists in order to show the research being done is being tampered with and misrepresented? Seriously, how do we address issues like the CDC’s NISVS erasing male victims without challenging the feminist narrative that informs Koss’s actions?
I’m curious why Ms. Howell would pick out one angry satire article from several years ago instead of any of the content published in the last week, month, or year. And I’m wondering which web site she’s writing about, since surveying today’s front page on AVfM doesn’t look much like she describes.
I would like to suggest people who want to know what the Men’s Human Rights Movement is all about visit our front page and read for a day or two–or just come to the KSUM conference to learn what Men’s Human Rights Advocates are really like.
She picked that old quote because she has an agenda and any facts would get in her way.
Howell is a staff writer for this publication? Horrible research (none) – as Dean said, and all of you students reading, check out the web site avoiceformen.com and judge for yourself. These feminists are scared that you may start THINKING about men’s issues from a non-feminist POV. We MHRAs (mens human rights activists) have nothing to hide and we welcome all to this movement of TRUE equality.
Direct Lie #1: “However, bringing awareness and discussing these issues is not the goal of KSU Men. ”
Which is why Sage Gerard has written multiple articles about men’s issues, and started an organization about these issues, and spend hours vlogging about these issues. Cause he doesn’t care.
Direct Lie #2: “While researching the men’s rights movement, there was no shortage of feminist vitriol, there was a lot of discussions on the A Voice for Men discussion board about the friend zone, and there was very little about any issue concerning men’s rights.”
Out of a bit over 11k threads, friends mentioning both the words friend and zone make up 39. Meanwhile, circumcision produces 164 results, healthcare produces 182 results, fatherhood produces 122 results, and men’s rights produces 500 results.
Direct Lie #3: “They believe that because you are pro-woman, you must be anti-man. ” MRAs.. like Karen Straughan, Alison Tieman, and Tara Palmatier?
This is apart form the no true scotsman statements “Unlike some prominent figures in the media seem to think, feminism does not want to take away power from men so they can have all of it for themselves; they do not favor matriarchy over patriarchy. They favor equality.”, as well as other deception.
I commend Ashli Howell for respecting protocol, by forthrightly disclosing her position as \\\”feminist\\\”, and by doing so right at the beginning of her article. Many feminists try to be shifty about this, so it is good to see that Ms. Howell is an exception.
I will disclose my own position. I am non-feminist.
The purpose of KSUM, is to establish a non-feminist social and intellectual oasis (or \\\”safe space\\\”, as some might call it). Ms. Howell clearly objects to such a thing at Kennesaw, so I can only assume that she\\\’d rather silence non-feminist voices in academia, and maintain the feminist hegemony.
Ms. Howell\\\’s stance, as revealed in the article, is clearly that of feminist subjectivism. To merely call oneself a \\\”feminist\\\” bestows no authority to tell others what is or is not feminism. We all live in the same world and have access to the same information, hence we are all entitled to draw conclusions as we see fit and discuss these accordingly. That is especially true in academia, where the free exchange of ideas ought to be held in high esteem.
So if the non-feminist group KSUM wishes to \\\”critique feminism for the damage it has caused due to its inherent hatred of males,\\\” then I say \\\”full speed ahead\\\”. Those sound like pretty serious matters, yet I get the impression that Ms. Howell doesn\\\’t want them to be talked about at all. But surely, feminism OUGHT to be critiqued for its inherent hatred of males, and for the damage this has caused. To me, that sounds like am urgent issue, and I can\\\’t help wondering why Ashli Howell would want to sweep it under the rug.
Ashli Howell devotes a long paragraph to discussing AVFM, but apparently doesn\\\’t notice that AVFM is not KSUM. These are separate organizations. Nor is there really such a thing as \\\”the men\\\’s rights movement\\\” — apart from the phrase itself, there is no monolithic entity or point source that one may properly assign that title to. As the saying goes, \\\”there is no \\\’there\\\’ there.\\\”
Moving along , , . I have a problem with the following statement:
\\\”The final problem I have is that the men’s rights movement really misses the mark. They believe that because you are pro-woman, you must be anti-man.\\\”
Ms. Howell misses the mark here, for reasons explained above, namely, that there is no \\\”men\\\’s rights movement\\\” in a concretely identifiable sense. As such, it is simply misleading to suggest that \\\”they (who is \\\”they\\\”?) believe that because you are pro-woman, you must be anti-man.\\\” That generalization has no warrant, and does no credit to the author.
The bottom line is, that if there is to be any meaningful discussion of feminism, and its implication in men\\\’s problems, and its coexistence with the non-feminist community at KSU or anywhere on Earth, then \\\”the hate has got to stop\\\” — and that means from all directions. \\\”Extremist\\\” feminists are not the issue here. All of feminism is the issue here, because all of feminism is implicated.
It is simply not possible to discuss men\\\’s issues in isolation from a broader critique of feminism. Certain conversations must (and will) take place, and academia has always been the venue of choice for such talk.
KSU, by providing a space for such discourse, can make itself a shining example to schools everywhere, and to the world at large.
I have a very sharp rebuttal for you at my site. This commend form couldn’t me justice this time.
“…feminism does not want to take away power from men so they can have all of it for themselves; they do not favor matriarchy over patriarchy. They favor equality.”
Finally, a breath of fresh air, thanks Ashli. Let’s find out then how much funding goes into Women’s Study courses in colleges and universities, and put the same amount of funding into Men’s Study courses. Whatever funding goes into women’s help shelters, let’s put the same funding into men’s shelters. There are so many other things to examine, so I look forward to seeing your participation in support of male symposiums which mirror the feminist ideal for true social equality.
“There are three main problems that I have. The blame game the men’s rights movement plays”
Because that’s something the men’s movement started? The idea of patriarchy theory, or “teach men not to rape” (because men are inherently rapey and must be re-educated to stop it… it’s not just sociopathy in a small segment of PEOPLE) isn’t blaming at all, right? The whole “women have been oppressed for centuries by men wanting to control them”, or any anti-abortion discussion being blamed on men wanting to control women’s bodies (because those 41% of women opposed to it don’t really exist, right?).
The fact is, everything about feminism is about blaming men, or at least, blaming patriarchy, which, once examined, is just a proxy for “men” that offers plausible deniability. So it’a rather hypocritical to condemn another group for playing the blame game.
“the shock value statements they make”
One simply needs to point to femen to show the same in action with feminism. But even ignoring that, feminists also have their controversial statements. The #killallmen hashtag, the bra burning in it’s infancy, all sorts of examples of inflammatory statements throughout their history. So again, seems rather hypocritical to condemn the men’s movement for doing what feminism has also done.
“and the incorrect characterization of feminism”
Not entirely sure it’s incorrect… The fact of the matter, though, is we’re not even allowed to discuss the topic without being called misogynists… which is rather like incorrectly characterizing men, as well as the MRM.
So again, seems like your objections are all largely hypocritical… which is kind of how feminism is being characterized, which would imply your last point is not only hypocritical, but wrong.
I monitor this hate group on my website mancheeze. I’ve been monitoring them for years, first on video format and then on my blog. Another monitor is We Hunted the Mammoth site.
AVFM is a sponsor of this KSUM group. The money flows from AVFM no matter how much KSUM denies it. The goal is to get MRA’s into an American University. They tried in Canada and failed so far.
If you allow this group on campus you’re asking for trouble. A group against feminism is a group against the human rights of women. It’s really that simple.
Any exploration of them will yield nothing but hatred no matter how sugarcoated they make it appear. They’re not interested in men’s rights. They directly say, they’re against women’s rights.
You are dancing with danger. Once Paul Elam steps on your campus it’s over.
“You are dancing with danger. Once Paul Elam steps on your campus it’s over.”
What’s over? Hysterical much? Is he really THAT persuasive?
“A group against feminism is a group against the human rights of women. It’s really that simple.”
Do you ideologue, much?
Try this: “A group against Nazism is a group against the human rights of the German people. It’s really that simple.”
mancheeze, Are you saying you are THE David Futrelle??
Bravo to Sage for standing up for men and boys in college, in the face of this kind of biased article. It looks like KSUM should support free speech and make room for alternate views on men, masculinity and criticism of feminism.
“They directly say, they’re against women’s rights. ”
Please be more specific with links if possible. Thanks
Wow… so much feminist hatred directed against men. But I understand why. For feminism’s next wave of hegemony, feminists need men to stay engaged with societal structures and institutions designed to intimidate, indoctrinate, and exploit men. That’s the only way feminists can de-masculinize men and remake them into a serf class of New Men crushed in perpetuity under feminist power. Pushback is unacceptable — especially within the university gulag; if men can’t be crushed and remade there, the prospect of men managing to secure human rights for themselves becomes a real threat to the privilege and power of the feminist/Marxist establishment.
For a real look at hatred why don’t you take a look at A Voice for Men’s forums. This thread is particularly popular (http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showthread.php?11933-What-annoys-you-the-must-when-it-comes-to-Behavior-of-Women). What annoys you the must [sic] when it comes [the] behavior of women? Fair question right, I mean for an organization that’s all about equality….
I don’t know what it is about the KSUMen group, and the followers that insist on perpetual dishonesty.
I am a Man; I am a Feminist; I do not hate Myself; I do not hate Men.
Feminism means nothing more than treating women as moral equals. Men and Women are biologically different, but need to be treated as moral equals. This is a position of love not hate.
The ignorance of the group is frustrating, and the lack of common decency if downright offensive. It is painful spend more than even a couple minutes watching one of Sage’s videos or pursuing A Voice For Men–their flagship–that does things like harass rape victims, etc. in the name of their cause. But let us not forget:
“Every relationship of domination, of exploitation, of oppression is by definition violent, whether or not the violence is expressed by drastic means. In such a relationship, dominator and dominated alike are reduced to things – the former dehumanized by an excess of power, the latter by a lack of it. And things cannot love.”
— Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed
Something probably happened to make them broken, and we must try to find ways to treat them with dignity…
Really. I think of “oppression,” as a SWAT team breaking down my door to arrest me for a missed child support payment.
Not having a men’s rights group on campus which I don’t even have to acknowledge and can completely ignore.
Maybe you should rethink what you mean by oppression. Ideology often doesn’t track with current realities.
Here’s my take on the conference and planned protest:
http://youtu.be/FZqpGE9SmLs8VW3QR
“The blame game the men’s rights movement plays,….”
You’re kidding right? The one ideology know for the shame sammich, known for lying and prevarication, known for refusing to allow women to take responsibility for their actions. is doing it again.
Reality 101, Calling people on their poor behaviour IS NOT misogyny should the offender has a vajayjay.
Calling people on their poor behaviour IS NOT attacking “women and girls” should the offender have a vajayjay.
“They believe that because you are pro-woman, you must be anti-man.”
What a disgusting lie. Patently untrue. Every time you do this, we get more supporters. All they need do is go directly to AVFM and see for themselves.
A stupid lie. Childish in its conception.
The truth
http://www.oneinthree.com.au/news/2014/10/28/new-anglicare-wa-report-finds-over-half-of-dv-victims-are-ma.html
Hi Ashli,
You write: three main problems that I have. The blame game the men’s rights movement plays, the shock value statements they make, and the incorrect characterization of feminism.
This is pink fluff. Feminism doesn’t specifically address men’s rights. In fact, Feminism promotes a zero sum game where any gain in men’s rights is a loss of women’s right. So how can Feminism be a fair, impartial broker of men’s rights and advocacy?
If Feminism is not an fair advocate of men’t right, it should stand to reason, that if gender equality is the social goal, then a fair advocate for men’s rights is needed.