If you came here after seeing A Voice for Men mentioned in the New York Times, welcome. You were led here after reading the following:
“Lurking around the edges of the male studies movement, moreover, in Web[sic] sites like Paul Elam’s A Voice for Men, is a certain amount of anti-feminist hostility, if not outright misogyny,” or so says Times writer Charles McGrath.
Please allow me to take a brief moment to demonstrate how fallacious this statement is, and why.
First, and it seems silly to have to say this, we are not “lurkers” here, though I give McGrath due credit for creativity with dark metaphors. Very compelling.
I support the concept of male studies, and I have been personally enthused about the efforts of the Male Studies Foundation since my days as Editor-in-Chief at mensnewsdaily.com. I have no official relationship with The Foundation and am much more concerned with an array of issues other than Male Studies.
The Times article was just taking ideological sides in the men’s studies vs. male studies debate and attempting to paint the very misleading picture that male studies is appealing to misogynists. It was intended to color your perception and to send you here prepared to be angry.
If you are unfamiliar with the men’s movement, it’s easy enough to throw those kinds of stones. There is an abundance of anger here, unapologetically expressed. Much of that anger is intensified because we live in a culture that renders men’s struggles invisible- or worse, believes that men deserve to suffer.
A Voice for Men is a place where that and other problems are examined, with unblinking candor. We are on the frontier of ideas about sex differences and institutional misandry. Being on the frontier things can get pretty raw. But it is also where there is a meaningful conversation about things that are otherwise taboo in our PC culture.
However, there is no hatred of anything here but injustice. And even as McGrath was forced to concede in his article, there are many factors negatively impacting the lives of men and boys. Actually, he barely touched on them. The sad reality is that with the exception of times like this, when something threatens the status quo at places like feminist academe and the New York Times, they will scarcely even acknowledge those problems exist.
In fact, as this article demonstrates, they can be quite hostile to the idea of even discussing the problems of men and boys without feminist supervision and approval. That approval seems to be their litmus test for calling someone a misogynist.
I would like to invite you to review the articles on this site, and I would like to suggest a few in particular. Reading them might surprise, even shock you about many of the ignored difficulties faced by men and boys. And yes, some of the things you read here might raise your hackles. Perhaps knowing that no one here is lying to you will make it more palatable.
Either way it still might help you understand the growing numbers of men and women from all walks of life who are concerned about the future of men and boys- and are beginning to speak up. And getting louder.
The web is lighting up with them.
Addendum: Also please note that in the online edition of The Times article, your ability to comment on the piece has been denied. I submit that this is not accidental, but rather just part of the abundant evidence that these ideologues, both in the media and academe, operate only on the graces of a society that refuses to hold them accountable for deceptive propaganda.
They know those days are near over, and the wagons are circling. There really is A Voice for Men, and the time of it being silent is coming to a close.
Domestic Violence- Women are Half the Problem– By Paul Elam
Men’s Studies: The Complete Freak Show– By Paul Elam
Legally Obscene– By TDOM
Countering APA Mythology: A Response to Christopher Kilmartin at The Good Men Project– By Paul Elam
Jessica Valenti Calls for End to Presumption of Innocence and Due Process– By FRS
The Modesty of Man– By Uma Challa
