In many ways, the argument that women should be fully equal to men has won in the public discourse. Sure, a lot of people still fight against equality, but they often pretend that it’s about something else—fetal life, religious liberty, women’s “choice” to make less money—because even they know openly stating the belief that women are a subclass of people put here to serve men tends not to go over very well with a general audience. Women’s education rates and income are going up. Violence against women is going down. The attacks on reproductive rights are escalating, but that’s in part in response to the fact that women themselves, especially younger women, are increasingly comfortable with the belief that they are the decider when it comes to what happens to their uterus.

However, there’s one growing trend that, while it’s hard to really get an idea of its size, should be a cause for concern: The number of men online creating communities dedicated to advancing the plain old, unvarnished misogynist belief that men deserve to control women. On “men’s rights” forums and “revenge porn” sites, groups of men are gathering together to find reinforcement for the plain old abusive belief that women who make their own choices about who to sleep with and who to marry are evil, and that allowing women this most basic of freedom is somehow oppressive to men. That there are many men who feel this way is no big surprise, particularly to anyone who knows the extent of domestic violence in this country, violence that is usually rooted in just this belief about male entitlement over women’s bodies. But the fact that they have found each other online and are pumping each other up and feeling more and more empowered by the minute in their ludicrous beliefs should be a major cause for concern.

Two stories from this week show exactly how true it is that these communities are about crafting the belief that women “oppress” men by wanting to be the masters of our own bodies instead of ceding that control over to men. In California, Attorney General Kamala Harris announced the arrest of Kevin Bollaert, who is being hit with 31 charges of conspiracy, identity theft, and extortion for running a “revenge porn” site. “Revenge porn” is a nasty little subset of the Internet where men take naked pictures they usually obtained during the course of a consensual relationship, and they post them against a woman’s will in order to humiliate and harass her. Often, as was the case with Bollaert’s site, the woman’s name, location, and social media information is also provided so that the men who use the site can more effectively harass her.

The name “revenge porn” really points to the fact that this is about establishing the claim that men own women, and women do not get to say no. The men justify putting up the pictures as a form of “revenge.” Revenge for what? Well, usually for something as simple as dumping him. In some cases, the men try to beef up their claim of a right to vengeance by citing cheating or some other relationship infraction. It doesn’t really matter. You have a right to dump someone if they cheat on you, but the belief that you are “owed” the right to “revenge” by stalking and humiliating them is rooted in the belief that you own them and their bodies, and what they choose to do with their bodies somehow is a violation of your rights. While there are (reportedly) a few “revenge porn” pictures of men floating out there, by and large this is a violation enacted by men on women, and reinforced by an Internet community that assures these men they deserve to hurt and abuse women because those women are making choices with their own lives of which the men do not approve.

Similarly, David Futrelle of the site Man Boobz, which is set up to track and mock the “men’s rights” movement, recently discovered that the site A Voice For Men (AVFM) was debating what cover Warren Farrell, who is a sort of godfather to the movement, should put on his e-book arguing that, contrary to feminist claims, it’s men who are the real oppressed gender. All three cover ideas were of sexy women. Paul Elam, the site’s founder, explained the idea behind putting a sexy woman on the cover of a book arguing that men are oppressed: “Imagine the juxtaposition of the title, “Myth of Male Power” over one of these images. The cover alone will challenge the idea of male power in men and women alike on a gut level.”

The argument, which went over like gangbusters on the website, couldn’t be more obvious: Men are oppressed because there are women they find sexually attractive who are sexually unavailable. And that this is the real oppression, and not all that feminist jibber-jabber about rape, domestic violence, abortion bans, and pay inequity. Indeed, that women are actively oppressing men because women don’t accede to demands to have sex with any man just because he wants it.

Now, it’s worth pointing out that there’s no website where women are arguing they’re oppressed because they can’t snap their fingers and have Alexander Skaasrsgard or Ryan Gosling waiting in bed for them. For the anger and vitriol and whining at AVFM to make any sense, you have to assume that men are the rightful owners of women’s bodies. The right of a woman to determine when she has sex and with whom is perceived in these circles as a theft by women of something that rightfully belongs to men. Without this sense that they’re entitled to have sex with a woman regardless of her opinion of the matter, the anger and rage and sense of “oppression” at the mere sight of a woman’s sexualized body makes no kind of sense at all.

Again, there’s nothing new about men who have it into their heads that they are entitled to control women and women are somehow oppressing them by declining sex or declining a relationship with them. Every day women are stalked, raped, and beaten in this country by men who use physical and sexual violence as a form of control over women. The problem here is that these online communities have become refuges for men who want to retain this belief in opposition to a culture that’s rapidly embracing the idea that the owner of a woman’s body really can only be the woman herself. It allows these angry men to coach each other to believe that they’re fighting against a big, mean world that’s stealing the female flesh they’re entitled to control, and to persist with the delusion that they’re oppressed because they can’t have everything they want. As with the increasing attacks on reproductive rights, it would do feminists well to know that women’s increasing control over our own bodies is going to face opposition, and be prepared for a long and ugly fight.

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/ ... -autonomy/

Interesting read ~ the idea of "revenge porn" sites is repulsive to me ~ suggests immaturity and meanness of spirit ~

I very much believe in gender equality ~ but there's no one-size-fits-all ~ and that's a very long discussion in itself ~ I think any man who is compelled to control a woman has either an over-inflated opinion of himself or an under-inflated sense of self ~

I need to think about this more ~

Sooz

This topic is stuck in my brain ~ for me, it's evidence that the "patriarchal" mindset remains alive and active for some ~ and the more I read about these "revenge porn" sites, the angrier I get ~ at the very least, they should be classified as sexually abusive ~

We all know that relationships are often tricky ~ especially when it comes to things that are subject to ego ~ while I don't deny that there are some purely toxic females who thrive on getting what they want no matter how or the cost, there is no question in my own mind that the deck is stacked in favor of men ~ people, female and male alike, need to recognize that actions have consequences ~

Sooz

This topic is stuck in my brain ~ for me, it's evidence that the "patriarchal" mindset remains alive and active for some ~ and the more I read about these "revenge porn" sites, the angrier I get ~ at the very least, they should be classified as sexually abusive ~

You know that women run revenge sites too, don't you Sooz? I guess that makes women sexually abusive.

Yes, jim ~ to me, anyone who would "go public" by using a revenge porn site to "get even" is sexually abusive ~

Sooz

The one revenge site I saw run by women is intended to expose/humiliate the "other woman"/mistress/whatever of their men. So, women are blaming other women. The old double sexual standard is alive and well. It's the woman's fault according to men and women.

If the woman posted nude pictures of the man and his social media info, it's sexual harassment, too.

I have loads of problems here because didn't both Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian become hugely famous because of supposed "revenge porn".

I have huge problems with the objectification of women in the media. It was a persistent theme in my sociology class, but women have to demand that it stops. We are not always victims and it does not do the true victims any good when non-victims are complicit. That sentence was confusing and I hope it made sense.

Here's the problem mindset in a nutshell: refusal to recognize gender equality ~ for me, "real men" do not feel threatened by strong women ~ for me, the strongest relationships are based in mutual respect and support ~ Sooz

9 Things Media Called The "War On Men" in 2013
Blog ››› 1 hour and 13 minutes ago ››› HANNAH GROCH-BEGLEY

Men are under threat. Despite the fact that women still make less than men do, are hugely underrepresented in media, and face so much sexism on a daily basis that Republicans actually have to undergo training to learn how to talk to women in non-offensive ways, conservative media would like you to know that it's really men who have it tough.

The "War on Men" is waged on multiple fronts, from elementary school classrooms to the workplace to men's own marriages. Nowhere is safe. So to help the besieged men out there, here is a list of all the things conservative media said were examples of the "War on Men" in 2013.

1. Kids Don't Play "Tag" Anymore.

In September, National Review Online hosted a debate which asked "Is there a war on women? Or is it a war on men?" An example of the suffering of men, according to the panel, was that "schools are replacing boys' favorite game, 'tag,' with a more female-friendly alternative called 'circle of friends.'" As Alice Munro noted in the New Republic, this isn't true.

2. "Female Sexual Freedom."

The "War on Men" really began with contemporary feminism in the 1960s, according to Wall Street Journal editor James Taranto, when women dared "to be equal to men" and wanted "sexual freedom":


3. Obamacare.

According to conservative media, the Affordable Care Act's mandate that insurance companies can no longer discriminate is the same as "sticking it to men" and waging a "war on bros." In reality, the law makes sure insurance companies can't force women to pay more for health care just because they are women.

4. "Feminized" Schools Have Rules, Standards.

The "War on Men" starts "as a war on boys," according to NRO's Helen Smith, which manifests when schools "take away recess" and adopt "a feminized approach to schools to the point where it is mainly for those who conform, sit still, and like to follow rules."

5. Sometimes, Men Are Accused Of Sexual Harassment.

Wall Street Journal editor James Taranto fights the "War on Men" on a regular basis. In June, he dismissed the epidemic of sexual assault in the military, claiming that efforts to address the enormous problem contributed to the "war on men" and were an "effort to criminalize male sexuality." Taranto conveniently ignored the fact that many victims of sexual assault in the military are also male, and that most men probably don't agree that "male sexuality" necessarily includes having sex with drunken women in cars.

6. Commercials And Sitcoms Make Men Look Stupid.

In 2012, FoxNews.com columnist Suzanne Venker claimed that a factor in the "War on Men" was that "Women aren't women anymore," because now they have college degrees and have sex outside of marriage. In 2013, she took this probing analysis further, saying that men -- who are "second class citizens" -- are under threat because Title IX forbids discrimination in college sports and because of "sit-coms and commercials that portray dad as an idiot."

7. Women Work Full-Time Jobs.

In December, Venker uncovered yet another layer in the war on men: women these days are "financially independent," and despite the "simply irrefutable" fact that they "prefer part-time work," many continue to insist on working full-time jobs, harming men's ability to fulfil their natural inclination to be primary breadwinner.

8. Women Would Like To Make The Same Amount Of Money Men Do.

At FoxNews.com, Carrie Lukas argued that President Obama's nominee to the Office of Personnel Management was the new "general" in the "war on men's pay," because she was tasked with attempting to close the gender wage gap in government salaries. Lukas baselessly claimed that this would result in men being paid less money in order to make up the difference -- literally the opposite of what was intended, which was to pay women more.

9. "Obama's America."

Finally, WSJ editor James Taranto blamed "Obama's America" for waging the "War on Men" with the sexual harassment regulations under Title IX, which he claimed unfairly police men's sexuality.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/12/18/9-things-media-called-the-war-on-men-in-2013/197324

jim, I agree that women who run the same kind of sites for the same reasons are equally bad. There is something else to consider though. Women shown are seen as sluts and thus it is a humliation to them. Men are more often seen as players or studly and thus it is not a humiliation to them. It is the double standard. So, while the action and intent may be the same, the result is most often not.

Ldybroker posted this over at CE and I was amazed by some of the responses.

I don't understand why some find it necessary to point out that some women are equally guilty of bad behavior.

Jim just did it again. And Jim, I'm not saying there is anything inherently wrong with your comment. It would be especially relevant if a member sounded as though they believed women totally innocent on this issue, but who has made that claim?

At CE, we actually had members raise such points as childbirth jealousy by men, separate bathrooms, and "gender martyrdom". No, I'm not kidding.

As I wrote in response, "I fail to see how you can look at the history of how women are treated by men and men are treated by women and conclude that there is cause for the same concern about both."

I am divided on articles like this. I taught gender stratification in Sociology class a couple weeks ago, and one of the male students told me that he believed that the text was perpetuating stereotypes. He said males still make more than females, but last year more women were in college than men and more women received PhDs. He stated that making it into a gender war served no one.

Addressing Jeanne's remark, I think there is less stigma now. Women hookup, too. and it's fairly accepted behavior. My 11th grade girls bragged about their exploits and would have been proud of their sex tapes.

However, there are still abusive men and battered women out there and it's a huge problem. It's all about control. I think the easy availability of porn on the net to very young boys and men is a large contributing factor to the objectification in the minds of many men. It's hard for women who grew up in family dysfunction to break the cycle.

People put too much info on the net, and as an old supervisor always said "Crazy attracts crazy". I think these "revenge sites" are examples of that.

I've been looking at this thread for a couple of days--and i read the posts at the other site as well. I'm not going to post over there because our favourite maschogynist is alive and well and busy proving the point of the original post.

Having said that: i don't plan on worrying too much about revenge porn sites and woman hating sites. The fact that they have been regulated to the internet is actually something I find vaguely comforting. The internet provides a venue for all kinds of crazies that don't feel welcome expressing their views in the general public--including racists, pedophiles, conspiracy theorists, strange religions, and those who are sexually attracted to automobiles, among others. If traditional women haters have been regulated to that status, then yay us. Don't let the doorknob hit them on the way out of mainstream public discourse. Bah bye!

I do find the argument that "women are just as bad" in all it's various forms very frustrating. That's not a valid argument against feminism because the women who post to "women can do it too" revenge sites are not feminists. They are traditionalists who believe in a power system that they perpetuate by using the same dysfunctional systems against their aggressors, without truly trying to change anything. Lorraine Bobbit was a fifties housewife who believed the only way to challenge her husband's power over her was to attack his manhood, ie. cut off his dick. You aren't going to find that strategy in a white paper on improving the status of women any time soon.

The "who is worse" women or men argument completely misses the point of reforming traditional gender roles, which is to improve the lives and status of everyone. I don't believe in a zero sum world where we are all in direct competition for resources and opportunities. I believe in a culture and a society where improving the lot of one or more groups improves the whole.

Improving the workplace opportunities for women increases the potential of the work force as a whole--it's purpose is not to make it harder for men to get jobs. Reforming cultural stereotypes with regards to women's roles not only opens increased opportunity for women, it also opens opportunities for men, by making it easier to get involved in roles that were traditionally womens--like parenting. In canada, husbands and fathers can take parental leave from work and spend part of a young child's first year at home as a caregiver--how cool is that? And i agree that an eventual goal is better court recognition of male roles in child caregiving in custody arrangements. My brother won full custody of his two children in a divorce a few years ago, and is now their primary caregiver. Things aren't perfect by any means, but they are on the right track. I think everyone needs to stop seeing it as a competition and start seeing it as a move towards a better more productive, just, and functional society.

There are always going to be throwbacks--especially in times of stress people tend to fall back on what is comfortable and what they know or were raised with. But i think in general, things are moving in the right direction. I don't think we should point to a bunch of revenge breakup sites and declare the gender wars catastrophic. People just act like assholes when they break up, and some more than others. That probably WON'T change, unless the entire human population grows up, and, watching Rob Ford in city hall this week, I'm finding that unlikely.

I don't understand why some find it necessary to point out that some women are equally guilty of bad behavior

In my case it's because I get sick and tired of these members of the "women are martyrs" industry blaming "men" for things which are only committed by individual men. "Men" as a whole, do not harass women. As a whole they do not beat their wives. There is no such thing as a "culture of rape" nor are men as a whole "rapists" although individual men may be rapists or beat their wives.

It is not unknown for women to beat up their husbands, but, if someone we to accuse women of being husband beaters the way men are accused of it the feminist industry would go berserk.

What I really don't understand is why so many women allow these people to speak for them. Don't they understand that, what these womens' groups are saying is that women are incapable of being equal to men...that the rules and standards have to be relaxed so that women can compete. The more they tell women how put down they are, the more women come to believe it. It's not unlike a parent constantly telling their kids they aren't good enough. If it was noticed the parent would be accused of child abuse but these women's groups constantly send forth martyrdom barrages aimed at other women in order to keep the money rolling in.

I think talking about the culture as if it is one holistic thing is probably naive. There are definitely cultures of rape out there--I've seen them and been in them. That doesn't mean that all men are rapists, and I don't think anyone has ever claimed that. At least, no one with any credibility. But it does mean that in some circles certain kind of talk is socially acceptable, and that some kinds of behaviour becomes immune to the social criticism of the group. Those football players caught making jokes about the girl that was raped are a good example of a rape culture microcosm. I sat in a common room in university and listened to similar talk one night about some girls that got drunk at a campus party in the 90s. I think the term that was used was "masturbation tools" upstairs in a bed for the taking. That doesn't mean that every boy in the room was prepared to take advantage of those girls--but it DOES mean that in the mini society of that group, it was socially acceptable and uncensorable to have unconsentual sex with an unconscious girl who had no idea what was happening to her. I don't think you can point to a similar situation where the gender roles were reversed--but if you could, I personally would find it unacceptable.

Perhaps you could point out where in the article it blames all men rather than only those that commit certain oppressive and violent acts, because I didn't see it.

The article was pointing out that some men get together via websites. That's the "culture".

but these women's groups constantly send forth martyrdom barrages aimed at other women in order to keep the money rolling in.

You can't argue against blanket statements and then turn around and make blanket statements. lol

jim, we had this same argument when a woman dared to say men should be taught not to rape. You, for some reason want to include yourself when they talk about rapists and men who have the revenge porn sites. Why? I just can't figure out why you hate feminists so much. You appear to turn into a different person when articles like this are posted.

Imo, these guys are weak little whimperers and they would be weak little whmperers regardless of what women do.

I don't understand it, Jeanne. I read that article and thought how sad it is that some men have such attitudes toward, sometimes ending up with violence and abuse.

Others seem to read it and think, How dare they blame all men!

Never have I felt that women are blaming me for the actions of other men.

John - jim isn't the only one. In both my Sociology and Social Work classes some men took exception to the women are an oppressed minority (majority) chapters. Some people personalize gender criticism.

So you don't have a problem with me pointing out that women are violent abusers of men and that some of the millions devoted to womens' shelters and programs be transferred to mens' shelters and programs. After all, in Canada there are 520 government funded womens' shelters and 0 mens' shelters. There was one men's shelter up to March of this year but it received no funding whatsoever.

What do you think the reaction would be if someone organized a male dominated candle light march to decry womens' violence against men, or a statue commemorating male victims of female violence.

For the most part anybody who doesn't toe the party line as dictated by the "women as victims" industry receives the kind of bitter, ill considered ridicule spewed in Soozs' post 8 or the faux mystification at "how can people mention women do the same things" diatribes.

jim, I don't remember any one here EVER defending or denying that there are abusive women ~ a few of us have even posted that in this thread ~ and you are welcome to post news of that defense/denial whenever you see it ~ when a post about male bad behavior is posted, please DO NOT assume the poster is including all men unless you see the words "all men" in the post ~ but what you call "... bitter, ill considered ridicule" in my post #8 is, in reality, being done by real-live men to real-live women today ... much of it by male politicians who are creating and passing onerous, sexist laws and virtually all of which promotes gender inequality ~ THAT is something we should all care about and reject ... no matter if the target is female or male ~

Sooz

Funding shelters for male victims of violence is a good idea. I don't think the funding has to come from existing shelters, but I think they should exist. Among other things, they would service victims of violence from same sex marriages and relationships.

do you get that the discussion about ending violence towards women doesn't mean that violence against men isn't important? I think most people believe that much less men are victims of domestic abuse than women. That may be partially because of gender biased assumptions about men's inherent "toughness" and it may partially be because of a reluctance on behalf of men to report relationship violence. So honestly, I have no idea what the numbers really are.

I do know that if you want to have a serious discussion about it, I'm open. But you have GOT to stop swallowing FM's patronizing garbage and neutralize the way you express yourself though. Jim, I know you've been through the ringer. But that doesn't mean that female victims haven't been through hell as well.

So you don't have a problem with me pointing out that women are violent abusers of men

Since that seems to be your theme song, go right ahead.

After all, in Canada there are 520 government funded womens' shelters and 0 mens' shelters.

Supply and demand, perhaps?

What do you think the reaction would be if someone organized a male dominated candle light march to decry womens' violence against men, or a statue commemorating male victims of female violence.

Why would you think anyone would oppose that?

For the most part anybody who doesn't toe the party line as dictated by the "women as victims" industry

If you're going to try and justify or excuse violence against women by claiming that it's all just a made-up "industry" be prepared for ridicule.

Supply and demand, perhaps?

No. The house was always full.


Why would you think anyone would oppose that?

The women as victim industry is violently opposed to anything that they perceive could reduce the funding they receive. In a time of limited government finances, any acknowledgement of female violence against men threatens that flow of cash.


If you're going to try and justify or excuse violence against women by claiming that it's all just a made-up "industry" be prepared for ridicule.

Typical industry response. Find one place where I have tried to excuse violence against women. My argument deals with the women as victim industry's propensity for blaming all men for the sins of a few. It seems most women and some men fall for it.

Violence and abuse are gender-neutral. Men hurt women - men hurt men - women hurt men - women hurt women. There seems to be a recessive gene in all humans - myself included.