I got my latest Glen Sacks newsletter and started scanning through some of his latest topics. Among them was his interview with a women's magazine about the men's rights movement and its "frightening effectiveness". He claims he was misquoted about a very extreme case in which a man opened fire on a gym full of exercising women. The man's diary was later published in which he had listed a long history of women rejecting his advances (for as much as I can tell). You can read the article here.
Let me start out by saying that I don't ever want to see this movement or even the anger caused therein cause violence. This is an example of a crazy person, pure and simple. I believe that in all causes there are extreme cases and it is unfair to judge a cause based on them. These cases give us all a bad name.
My issue with the article has to do with the characterization of the men's rights movement as "anti-feminist". Perhaps it's just me but I never saw it that way. I always viewed feminism as a desire for EQUALITY between the sexes. That's all I ever saw masculism as. I am wondering if people indeed use masculism as a justification for misogyny. I sure hope not.
In no way do I endorse any kind of hatred toward women nor do I oppose feminism if it is indeed to be used for the purpose of seeking equality. I have mentioned before that one of my arguments will always be that feminism has worked... too well. I see many instances where men are now indeed viewed as the inferior sex. There are injustices everywhere we look. My argument is now, and has always been, that there is no inferior sex.
I cannot speak for all men's rights activists, but personally I don't see myself as anti-feminist but rather pro-equality. It is in that spirit that I write things here.--STEVE
(The Male Abortion Debate is coming. I promise.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment