Entries with no category
Recently the catholic church announced it still would not let women into its upper ranks, and feminists were pissed, making all sorts of sexist arguments when in reality it was more of a concern and desire for tradition. They made all sorts of accusations and argued it would be better PR because it would reduce pedophilia in the church if women were higher up. This puts them on the wrong side of the right argument. The fact that it is a sexist division of labor would be a solid and sufficient argument however it then moves into the form of misandry as it proposed that women are in fact better than men and aren’t pedophiles, which we all no isn’t ture and putting them in the church wouldn’t change a thing. The promotion of celibacy is what really creates problems in the church. all this has done is hurt their credibility again.
It should be noted that they couldnt do anything about it form the start more here...
This is part of a two part set of articles on food and gender, the other is written from the female view by Hestia on her blog The Coming Night
Food is a major part of society. Food ties everyone together so its no doubt that it has served a key role in the relationships between men and women and has been a way for men to compete and show their skills. Unfortunately a lot of society and the relationships between men and women have been about “how to get the girl” or “how to compete with other guys” but food shows a bit about our personalities as well.
Look at potluck dinners. They originated in the Midwest due to large farming communities who would socialize on occasion. Due to the size of plots of land it was hard to gather on a regular basis so when they did gather together it was large events and everyone would bring something. This is how men showed off. It showed the quantity and quality of the yield of what they had grown throughout the year. Whoever had the best yield, would be given the highest “ranking” and having high end yields year after year gave one quite a bit of prestige. Unfortunately the potluck dinner social events also generated square dancing.
Food has been an excellent way to show knowledge and skill. Baking takes quite a bit of
scientific knowledge if you want to be excellent at it, from physics for building cakes and gingerbread houses to temperature management for caramels or tempering of chocolate. Theres a reason there are separate programs for baking and pastry at culinary schools, it’s a whole different set of skills and knowledge and it can be mind boggling. It even approaches physics and architecture when it comes to cake design and plating. more here...
A while ago I wrote about the changing family unit and the problems when it comes to social welfare and divorce and how it changes the family dynamic. The biggest problem is the fact that we have a system that creates incentive along with support, and the challenge is to get rid of the incentive. I think I have found a basic solution which can make a difference but no promises that it will solve all our problems.
Step 1: Scrap Alimony
Ive talked about this already, get rid of being paid after divorce, if you are the one who chose to get the divorce. If we do this then there will be fewer people getting divorced when profit is involved and taking one person to the cleaners. Now some people may be stuck in unhappy marriages because of this and the fear of financial struggle if they leave, but that is something I think we should be willing to risk.
Step 2: Equal time among parents
Have the children spend and equal time (or atleast for all practical purposes) with each parent being the one with primary custody. This cuts back on the need for childsupport which then cannot be abused.
for part 3 (which is the major change) click here...
We all know labeling is like a well crafted knife (like the shun) it’s a beautiful thing that can be used for great purposes, there is a use for labeling in dividing to acknowledge difference. However it can be used as a hateful thing as well chopping things up into bits destroying unity. This is a criticism I have seen of the zeta male concept. In a way it is a legitimate concern. We don’t want to divide people up to the point where its not just acknowledging and appreciating differences, but to the point where it leads to hate and arrogance.
However, that’s not what the zeta male philosophy is about to me. Its not about separating from the side, but its about stepping forward. Similar to the idea of leading a revolution (but note its not the same, I don’t want a total revolution we just end up with a new pile of shit after that) but it’s a strive for change, in a sense lead by example without being arrogant, and to push forward and say-“we don’t like the old system we are doing things our way” we aren’t going to bend over backwards and pander to concepts like chivalry-while the MRM has this how does the zeta male differ?
The zeta male takes a look at any individual or group that is sticking to a more traditional manner, and if we don’t like it we let them be. If we don’t like it and they try to force us to assimilate we stare them in the eye and to put it bluntly, say….FUCK YOU and then we walk away.
Harsh I know but no one gets anywhere being passive-aggressive (fear mongering), its time to step forward and look towards a new tomorrow for better or for worse. my blog
A common stereotypical assumption is that when men cook they grill-not entirely true most men are chefs in professional kitchen but at home? Its all about the grilling.
So how did this come to be? Is it simply because men are associated with the outdoor housework or is there more to it?
My guess is….war.
Men were out in the middle of fields for weeks at a time, canned goods were nice once they got them but even then they weren’t sufficient, they would hunt the local animals to eat. And that meant…meat
This of course meant cooking over an open flame-slowly roasting, cooking over an open fire-it was great, social bonding laughing, drinking, and eating. Food is one of the biggest things that society is based on, and brotherly bonding during wartime could easily happen over a good meal.
Then war ended. What were men to do?
Who hasn’t heard that one? Im going to start with everyones favorite: Bullshit
There are so many more in depth ways to answer that response. I don’t even know where to begin-actually I do:
If that’s what feminism’s goal is, then its done a shitty job
That should be enough, arguing that we are not content with what it has done to men and we want more, and we want to do it our way(say this to someone who thinks feminism has done more good than harm to men…if you can find one tell me)
When has it campaigned for the one of the largest downsides of being male-social conscription?
Why would they support VAWA which has ended up preventing men from getting DV help? more here....
Last week I did an email interview with Dr. Paul Nathanson, co-author of Spreading Misandry, Legalizing Misandry, Sanctifying Misandry. He and Katherine Young are currently working on a new project called Transcending Misandry
to read the interview (warning! its long :P) go here...
It has recently been brought to my attention that my final draft of a book review for "Spreading Misandry" was not put up and instead only the little gripes/first draft/nonformal information was placed online instead. I formally apologize to my readers and to both Dr. Paul Nathanson and Dr. Catherine Young for this mistake the actual review has been put up in full where the old one was prior
Welcome to Part 2 of ____ of my Struggle for Fairness series, today we are going to look at the world of business and work, things that we have done to change the world and how they have pushed one groups back and forward.
Discrimination in the work place, after finishing the “Why Men Earn More” its fresh in my head and I would like to take care of it now. Lets start by looking male and female in-groups. In-groups are tight social groups, which feminists often describe as a “boy’s club” that keeps the “glass ceiling” in place. It is and isn’t there, we do tend to socialize more with our own gender because we find it easier based on habitual practices. However women do the same thing, and in my opinion what women feel comfortable talking about is more alienating, maybe that’s due to the break down of gender roles for women and not for men, but it exists nonetheless.
This boys club is not the entire reason there are not women higher up in the workforce (once again-look at why men earn more) but it is a tiny tiny tiny part. Quite frankly as more women enter the work world, get some knowledge and fight there way to the top (only 15 of the fortune 500 companies are run by women) we will see this happen in future generation, basically we are waiting for part of sexism to literally die out. The backlash is the “boys club” view will still be there and the “girls club” will take its place.
Because of the “boy’s club” illusion we push women forward even when they are not qualified or less qualified. More here...
One big MRA issue is suicide, and for a good reason. Men are more likely to commit suicide than women and have been for ages. Emile Durkheim, French sociologist wrote an excellent book called Suicide you can probably guess what its about. Essentially suicide is related to social bonds and generally speaking a lack of them. This is why closer communities and religions institutions often have lower suicide rates. However, there are also excessive social bonds that can cause suicide. Looking at the basic ideas from any intro to sociology class I can see theres a huge difference in the types of social bonds-essentially there are those of personal identity and bonds regarding social duties.
It also explains why men have such a high suicide rate. Looking at the conservative theory of masculinity and what it means to be a man, we see a theory of labor and providing, valuing men for what they did and for who they did it, not how they felt about it. So what happens when men lose the value in what they did?
Heres what we get when we have a lack of social bonds regarding identity:
When wartime ended suicide went up (both because the people committing suicide were getting shot during war and the loss of the value of soldiers leading to a lack of social placement) this also explains why suicide rates are higher among soldiers than civilians
The higher the education level the more likely you are to commit suicide, so when men were expected to pursue higher learning to provide…you can do the math (think of the episode of the simpsons where lisa draws a chart relating intelligence to happiness)
The rest of the reasons men commit suicide are here...
antimisandry.com is a voluntary-sector organisation supported mainly by member reader donations.
If you wish to reduce the advertisements, sign up and log on as a registered member.