?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Men's Studies' Journal
 
[Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View] [Friends]

Below are 20 journal entries, after skipping by the 40 most recent ones recorded in Men's Studies' LiveJournal:

[ << Previous 20 -- Next 20 >> ]
Thursday, June 16th, 2005
1:54 am
[thescuspeaks]
Tuesday, June 14th, 2005
2:09 am
[adonism]
News from Adonis Mirror
News from Adonis Mirror

Today we’ve published a new article, “The Mythology of Capitalism in Criticism,” that explores how criticism as a genre is used to sneak antifeminist polemics past editors—and lawyers—that would otherwise meet criticism of their own.

After all, how many book reviews themselves get publicly reviewed?

The article tracks numerous examples of this phenomenon—reviews that are not about the subject matter ostensibly being criticized but just an excuse for writers to wax on at length about their own pet issues with impunity—such as the treatment of the rap group Northern State and their “Dying in Stereo” album, JK Rowling, and even feminist powerhouses such as Gloria Steinem and Catharine MacKinnon.

Please check it out at

http://adonismirror.com/06132005_leader_mythofcapitalism.htm

And this is a bit backdated, but in May we published an article about the worship of masculinity in organizations that are presumably anti-violence, the article “Our Humanity is not in our Strength” can be found at

http://adonismirror.com/05162005_leader_strength.htm

In retrospect, I believe the article to be a bit light in its criticism of the White Ribbon Campaign (especially compared to how Men Can Stop Rape was not afforded the same amount of charity), and have edited it to include a link to feminist concerns about the group:

Roberta Spark’s “Gift Wrapping The Men’s Movement: Canada’s White Ribbon Foundation Campaign”

http://www.members.shaw.ca/sparkspeaks/wribbon2.html

For further reading, please consider “Uneasy Questions about the White Ribbon Campaign” by Martin Dufresne:

http://www.rapereliefshelter.bc.ca/dec6/whiteribbon.html


—Adonis Mirror
Tuesday, May 10th, 2005
10:26 pm
[jodawi]
Suggestion
In a group like this, it is probably best to avoid using the word 'you', and instead use 'I'.

"Do you really think that..." > "I don't think that..."

It's very difficult in English written text to avoid getting into flame wars over controversial subjects if you focus on the individuals involved in the discussion instead of ideas.

I don't like having to police the group, and don't want to have to decide whether or not something qualifies as a personal attack.
Tuesday, May 3rd, 2005
1:34 am
[babybloodheart]
If you were asked to come up with male-positive slogans what would you put forth?
Obviously male-positive and men’s issues, not anti-women, also if you know of any good images, logos or symbols that would fit in too – reason being a very silly superficial one, I have a bag covered in menstrual activism/feminist buttons, I want one for men’s issues too. Stupid I know but it’s my way of expressing my opinions.
Monday, May 2nd, 2005
9:21 am
[adonism]
A new pro-feminist journal
Hi, I'm the editor of a new pro-feminist website called Adonis Mirror. Things are just getting started but there's a lot of content posted already.

We have a new article up on the blog phenomenon, entitled “Kill Your Blogs.” While in some ways it's ironic to broach the subject in this forum, it's important to take a look at the gendered components of blogging beyond the facile men=politics/women=fluffy-stuff that such accounts regularly devolve into.

Excerpts:

“While self-publishing has never been easier, instead of simply contending with editors, writers are now awash in a digital world where no man will budge from the stage and be demoted, if only for a moment, to a mere member of an audience. This development has been widely taken as a good thing, a universal theater for mankind to hurl his defiance at the stars: through a patriarchal lens, dueling tyrants are often confused with democracy.”

“...the explosive popularity of blogs is in no small part due to the fact that men can actively express themselves not just in their own blogs, but in those of others, reading only so much as they need to in order to form their own rebuttal—which one can imagine to be quite a meager amount of reading indeed. Writing has become the new reading, subject to the “if a tree falls in the forest” effect: reading as an activity only possesses efficacy when it can be proven, empirically, by immediate material benefit. This is something that renders blogs exceedingly valuable to the masculine mind beset by doubt. Despite our gender’s happy illiteracy, we have always managed the lion’s share of letters to the editor in other venues as well; here, the rewards for being a ‘reader’ have never been so enticing.”

Check out the full text at:

http://adonismirror.com/05022005_leader_killyourblogs.htm

Today we also have a new collection of illustrations drawn by Timo Honkasalo.

AM
Friday, April 29th, 2005
5:49 pm
[loveboat]
COMPULSORY HOMOSEXUALITY FOR MENS RIGHTS ACTIVISTS?
What do people think about radical feminists who endorse "compulsory lesbianism"? There is a lot of literature and websites out there written by feminists who believe that in order to be a "true" feminist then they must stop "sleeping with the enemy"...even if they are straight they must either just give up men...or only indulge in sexual practices with other "womyn"?

I mean, has anyone heard of this radicalism permeating into radical mens rights/masculism? If this type of radical theory exists for feminism...then I am sure it has been suggested by some masculinist author or man involved in men's rights...does anyone know of any weblinks/books that suggest if MEN want to fully be politically active in men's rights and masculism then they need to "give up" women and only engage in sex with other MEN?

What do people think of this theory/idea? Do you think it is viable/reasonable to suggest that the only way you can be a "true" feminist or masculist is by completely avoiding the other sex? I think it kind of makes sense...I mean, all those feminist authors bitch about how evil/bad men and the patriarchy are...but at the end of the day they are hypocrites because they still actively go looking for sex with men...should the same be said about ,say, Warren Farrell or Michael A Messner...these men bitch about how women only use men as wallets and (rightly so) condemn the divorce courts which are unfavourable to men...but at the end of the day Warren Farrell/Michael A Messner/or any man who calls himself a "masculist" or "mens rights activist" goes out looking for sex with women? Isn't this hypocritical? Shouldn't these men make a conscious effort not to involve themselves with women if they are so corruptive and distrustful...which would mean only having sex with other men?

Your thoughts please...

Current Mood: curious
Monday, April 18th, 2005
7:59 pm
[babybloodheart]
I need more books to read at work, most of my books are just not suitable for reading at work, funny thing is I am currently reading ‘The myth of male power’ by Warren Farrell, Ph.D. and I get accused of being a feminist – yes I am a feminist but people seem to think of me in terms of the stereotypical feminist, saying as this is a book that is pro-men, written by a male feminist you would think they would have more sense. They enjoy reading my menstrual activist buttons on my bag, but I don’t think they understand there meaning, they just assume it is a woman only issue or a woman only celebration, I think I would be far less likely to get away with proudly displaying penises than I am proudly displaying cunts. I need more books like this one, this is good however it is very Americanised in that it goes for big bangs in it’s presentation and fancies up the obvious with radical theory – if anyone knows of any similar books not quite so irritating to read please let me know.
I retain my opinion that men’s issues are almost completely ignored, which leaves us all totally screwed, but it is just the way we move forward, it is always the same, we are incapable of moving forward together so we move forward one before the other. I can go online, or go to the library and read up on female anatomy, read up on feminism and a load of wonderful things empowering women to take control of their sexuality, their bodies and their lives, yet I try to find the same sort of information on men it just does not exist, if I find sites on male anatomy it is simple and with a tone of Viagra adverts, if I find information on empowering men it is at the expense of women, or simply too scared to say much in case it is thought of as being at the expense of women. I don’t think I can be a good feminist unless I care as much for men’s issues as women’s, but then I can’t really care if there is nothing out there about men’s issues, nothing to give me the side of an empowered male.
I don’t see males moving forward to catch up with us women any time soon, especially not when the women’s movement gets so much bad press. There simply is nothing here to encourage men to move forward past nagging women, at least with women we have things that push us forward, but I don’t think men really even realise there is a problem.
Is there any hope for men to move forward in terms of sexual liberation and equality as women have?
Wednesday, April 13th, 2005
10:08 pm
[maxim_rulez]
WTF why would any1 want 2 study men?? thats just GAY
now chicks on the other hand, i would like to study (because i'm straight, so i like hot babes and maxim magazine)!! LOL!!!
Monday, March 7th, 2005
1:11 pm
[jodawi]
disconscious has been banned from the community. See the community rules in the profile.
2:26 pm
[disconscious]
feminazis revolution
Women make babies. Men don’t. Women carry babies during 9 months in their womb. Men spurt some ejaculate with force grunting and a small pleasure spasm, and then… well then that is all and they played their role. I mean, however much MEN would like to pretend they are all important and without them nothing would happen, it is quite evident their role in procreation is quite reduced.

And yet, I have no problem with all that. I mean, that is what evolution led us to. That is BIOLOGY.

I DO have a problem however with the fact that, statistically, I am about as likely to have a BOY as I am to have a GIRL. I do find it quite unjust that while men do very little and me most of the work, they still manage to occupy HALF the space in my womb (I mean, err, on average, I am not having twins, nope nope).

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND why, with present day birth control methods, which allow us to easily select the SEX of our children, we still keep on producing as many BOYS as GIRLS, when boys will spend maybe 2 or 3 useful minutes in their life on average, while girls will have to spend between 2 and three years carrying baby if they are to replenish the population on our planet.



What should therefore be the proper proportion of males to females if we are to re-establish justice that evolution stole from us? In other words, let us see: What is the worth of one female in terms of males?

Some calculations: 9 months = 270 days = 6480 hours = 388800 minutes = about 129600 men if we assume a man spends 3 minutes fucking, which is about as much as most devote to their partner until their base animal instincts are satisfied and they pull out with that most precious (not!) grunt.

THIS MEANS THAT if we were being fair, and a MAN had to devote 9 months to procreation in his life, the ratio of man to woman should be about 1/100,000.

In that calculation, I am being very GENEROUS to men. With the advances in procreation technology, a man wouldn’t have to perform the sexual act. He would be milked for his sperm every day (suppose, conservatively, he has 100,000 X spermatozoa each session. His masturbation, if done efficiently, would last about 2 minutes before he gets to ejaculate, but let’s be generous and count every day where he contributes as a working day (after all, even the best of them can only ejaculate about 3 to 5 times a day, which means replenishment of their reserves is not immediate).

That means the REVISED figure would be:

270 days by 100,000 = 27 millions. Yes. That means ONE woman is worth about 27 million men. THIS MEANS you would need to produce only about 2 to three men for the entire California!

OK, you will tell me, but what is in this for US women? DON’T YOU REALIZE!!! NOW, you spend about 2 to three years carrying babies. THEN, in the new world of the future, you will have to spend only 9 months to replenish the population. This is because you will produce GIRLS only, girls who in their turn will produce girls, and so on, and so forth. There will be NO MORE WASTE. We won’t have to feed useless men. This will be a formidable advance in economic productivity.

IMAGINE! When did you last hear of an improvement that led to a TWO FOLD decrease in labor (gestation period) at such a low cost of implementation: we will only have to simply generalize existing techniques, and let existing men progressively die out (I am not advocating their forced withdrawal from the economic system, as this would encounter too much resistance from well-meaning members of society).

IMAGINE!! No more men to take up your job when you are away on maternity leave!! No more men to take advantage of your relative physical weakness to beat and rape you (Reminder: Domestic violence is on the rise, and it is disproportionately applied by men onto women).

IMAGINE!!! A society where everybody would be equal, where everybody would contribute equally to that most important social function (you could argue, the ONLY properly social function), I mean, the REPRODUCTION of the social body.

Sisters, brothers, do you see the huge promises of my project?

Yes, I said sisters, BROTHERS! Brothers are part into my most awesome project. For I believe that MEN will rally under the rule of reason, and for the sake of humanity and the better functioning of society, will accept that their place in society must be curtailed down.

After all, aren’t we all human? Why should men rebel against a process that will replace less productive human beings with more productive, more deserving ones? Won’t humanity survive the elimination of men? Why should it matter to a human whether the surviving human is a male or a female?

A true feminist is one who believes in humanity. A true humanist will submit to the rule of reason. Reason calls for the elimination of men. Let’s be real feminists / humanists / reasonable people. Let’s get rid of the male dead weight on society. For equality. For efficiency. For a better world were we all are truly BORN EQUAL. This is what the CONSTITUTION called for in its opening preamble. This is what we are called upon to finally achieve.
Wednesday, February 23rd, 2005
5:38 am
[disconscious]
My intro post.
You will join the feminazis

Enraging the LJ populace since, like, uh, forever.


I couldn't believe my luck when, after my community matriarchy was suspended for its seditious content (sic), I found out nobody thought to create an user account called feminazis. Since then, we calmed down the rhetoric and do not anymore call for the killing of all males (Pay attention!). But the spirit is still alive and kicking butts.

Join the SCUM fuckups in training.
Saturday, January 1st, 2005
10:59 pm
[gonzocheetah]
As if there weren't important, real issues to worry about...
I found this article online a few months back (don't know where it's from or who wrote it), and am curious as to what anyone here thinks of such weirdness:


SYDNEY, Australia— Young women in Australia and Sweden have a new cause: They want men to sit down while urinating. This demand comes partly from hygene concerns – avoiding the spalsh factor-but as reported in The Spectator magazine, “more
crucially because a man standing up to urinate is deemed to be triumphing in his masculinity, and by extension, degrading women”.
Frieda Nightanvil of Women Arise Australia is gathering pledges from young men to abstain from urinal use and recommends they pour fast drying cement in to urinals around Sydney during the Olympics.
"We are hoping this will draw the attention of the world’s media to this ongoing fascist symbol of subjugation. This will be the last generation of males who will employ such tactics of oppression as the urinal. But it will be a struggle with the Cave Man mentality that even today is the mindset of too many Australian males”.
Stockholm University is about to ban urinals on campus, and one Swedish elementary school has already removed them. Some Swedish women are pressuring their men to take a stand, so to speak. Yola, a 25-year old Swedish trainee psychiatrist, says she dumps boyfriends who insist on standing. “What can I do?” said her new boyfriend, Ingvar, who sits.

Current Mood: weird
Friday, December 31st, 2004
9:41 pm
[mintogrubb]
A recent news story in America has thrown up some serious questions for me.
A pregnant woman was recently murdered, and then the woman who kille her actually cut out her baby and stole it.Read more...Collapse )
Saturday, December 4th, 2004
4:10 pm
[autumndreamer]
Tuesday, November 30th, 2004
8:11 am
[blurrygauze]

Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S. The Friendship Questionnaire: an investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism, and normal sex differences. J Autism Dev Disord. 2003 Oct;33(5):509-17. [pdf]

and

Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S. The empathy quotient: an investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome or high functioning autism, and normal sex differences. J Autism Dev Disord. 2004 Apr;34(2):163-75. [pdf]

Thoughts?

5:00 am
[mintogrubb]
An argument came up in the pres recently. Isit better to have boys and girls educated seperately or together?
In Britain, at least, a lot of girls schools are making the claim that girls do better in science and maths because there are no boys around , so the social biases in society do not work to disadvantage female pupils.
Others claim that having both sexes/genders around has a 'civilising' effect on both. Having been to a mixed school myself, I am not so sure of that one, and there is more than one gender, anyway...
but does anyone here have any comment to make? are there any studies on this ?
X posted from my LJ and to other communities I'm in.
Monday, November 15th, 2004
9:58 am
[mintogrubb]
The Other Side of Male Privilege
I found this, and thought it useful. Any comment appreciated.
Read more...Collapse )
ETA
Here is the original in full.
Monday, November 8th, 2004
8:51 pm
[anthrocub81]
Health Textbooks in Texas to Change Wording About Marriage
Here is a NY Times article from Nov. 6th. You can search the NY Times site to get the original article, but you have to register with them first.

The text of the article is copied below.
Health Textbooks in Texas to Change Wording About MarriageCollapse )
11:24 pm
[_raging]
Hello everyone. I am writing about a Rape Awareness Project I am in the process of starting. I have just recently created a separate journal which describes the project and how you can help. Please visit and contact me if you would be willing to contribute.


_consequently - Thanks so much!!
Saturday, October 23rd, 2004
12:43 pm
[dva2004]
Media Recon Project for Domestic Violence Awareness
Media Recon Project for Domestic Violence Awareness

Every October, in media throughout the country, both old and new, two statements are repeated so often they’ve almost become a mantra for domestic violence:

“95% of the victims of domestic violence are women,” and “every (fifteen, twelve, nine, or six) seconds a woman is battered.”

Often, they take a prominent place in an article or website, and have even been used as a headline or lead. The problem with both of these statements is that they simply have no basis in fact.

Reporters believe them, because they are usually given by a spokesperson for a women’s shelter, or other service in aid of domestic violence victims. The fact that these statements seem to have taken on lives of their own does not make them any more credible. They are untrue, which is misleading to the public, and ultimately misrepresents the real picture of the issue.

These urban legends are debunked here:

http://desertlightjournal.blog-city.com/read/867130.htm

and here

http://desertlightjournal.blog-city.com/read/867233.htm


This October, the DesertLight Journal has launched a campaign to combat these and other distortions in an effort to promote full awareness of the issue of domestic violence. DVA2004 – Media Recon, tracks stories on domestic violence and highlights those with inaccurate information and faulty statistics. Each day, the website will link to those stories, and encourage readers to contact the media outlets in their local areas with correct information.

According to Trudy Schuett, Publisher of the DLJ, “There can never be any progress made in the treatment of victims or solving the problem until the issue is objectively studied. There has been so much advocacy research, and political agenda obscuring the facts, that only a fraction of the victims can be helped by today’s programs. This is not even to mention the waste of taxpayer dollars in misguided services.”

Also on the website are the most-often repeated factual errors, with explanations why they are wrong and links to sources with correct information. In addition, the site provides background on the history of domestic violence programs, and how the problem came to be considered a “women’s issue.”

http://desertlightjournal.blog-city.com/index.cfm

Trudy W. Schuett
P.O. Box 1252
Yuma AZ 85366
[ << Previous 20 -- Next 20 >> ]
About LiveJournal.com