[aum] Re: Will Paternal Paranoia Triumph by Trish Wilson
- Hello Michael,
There ws a screw up in my mail program so that
"Geoffrey Mulkern" was on my "reply to address"
instead of me. I, Tom Smith, sent this.
This is a good point you raised about the anger issue
in the men's movement. I think the way to understand
it is from the history of these kinds of movements.
People who have been in the movement longer tend to
get more "radicalized" with time. The men's movement
has been going since the fifties.
This article you are responding to was written by a
NOW person and is on thier page. NOW has consistently
opposed all men's issues not for reasons of their
legitimacy, but purely on political grounds. In other
words, THEY ARE THE ENEMY. This article and all their
political stands for the past thirty years clearly
indicate that. They are not to be reasoned with, but
to be brought down. The ways traditionally to do that
in these kinds of movements are to produce a positive
identity for the group you are advocating for
(Masculists) and to take the opposite position of the
other group. NOW advocates for female superiority, so
we need to counter withour own superiority. Here's
where this movement differs from others, we are
superior in the areas that NOW is claiming
superiority. Where I agree with NOW is that there are
certain realities to modern civilization that may not
make that superiority desirable to execute. WE CAN
WORK THAT OUT LATER, after they recognize our
superiority in those specific areas.
--- "Michael S. Helton" <heltonms@...>
> Although I believe this article was heavily
> biased, judging from the
> tone and the author, It raises some important
> issues. I am not talking
> about whether men or women are better parents, but
> where all this paranoia
> (both male and female) is coming from.
> Women have been fighting for thier rights for a
> long time, but men, for
> the most part, have been firmly entrenched in their
> roles as fathers and
> husbands. The typical male role has been known, so
> there was no question of
> what needed to be done. I think that many men in
> America are coming awake,
> as if from a dream. They are looking around and
> questioning who they are,
> and what they should be doing. Some of this
> confusion, or fear, is
> transmuted into anger. We need to fix the cause,
> not the effect. In other
> words, I believe we need to look at the male and
> female roles in current
> society; not get wrapped up in male anger. If we
> get caught up in the
> actions, instead of the reasons for those actions,
> it becomes a matter of
> being "right".
> Does anybody have thoughts on this?
> Michael H.
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com