Glenn Sacks Becomes Executive Director of Fathers & Families
February 11th, 2009 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
I am pleased to announce the merger of Sacks Media Group and Fathers & Families. Our merger gives the family court reform movement an excellent chance to build the powerful, well-funded national advocacy group it has long needed to effectively drive our agenda forward.
There are many groups and individuals doing good work on these issues. However, nobody has yet built the unified organization this movement needs to go up against the well-funded national organizations which oppose shared parenting.
I have by far the largest E-Newsletter list (50,000+) and web traffic of any advocacy organization. Fathers & Families brings its own E-list, funding, staff, success in the media, and history of accomplishments. Fathers & Families' starting point of over 50,000 people is a giant step towards the unification of this movement, and we expect to grow another 25% in 2009.
Ned Holstein, MD, MS, the founder of Fathers & Families, recruited me to this position. He will work closely with me as Chairman of the Board.
In addition, we will seek ways of working cooperatively with other groups and individuals around the country. This will include establishing affiliated chapters in addition to the ones we already have in Massachusetts and California.
How You Can Help
There is tremendous potential here and a lot of work to be done. We're looking for people willing to help in a variety of ways--please fill out our volunteer information form here.
An effective organization requires money--to make a gift, click here.
Join the new Fathers & Families Action Squad by clicking here.
Fathers & Families' Accomplishments Are Many
These include:
• Reduced excessive child support by over $1 billion from 2001 through 2008 in Massachusetts. Won seat on the Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines Task Force in 2007-2008.
• Enlisted over one-quarter of the Massachusetts Legislature as co-sponsors of our shared parenting bill.
• Gathered thousands of signatures to place shared parenting on the 2004 Massachusetts ballot; led successful campaign for its passage, winning 86% of the vote.
• Instrumental in passing law opening up access to report cards and school records to non-custodial parents in Massachusetts.
• Persuaded the Boston Globe to become first major newspaper in country to endorse shared parenting in principle in editorial (Feb 23, 2008).
• Wrote amicus brief which helped win precedent-setting Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case protecting children in joint physical custody from being moved out of state, away from one parent.
• Pushed “shared parenting” to the number one issue on the Massachusetts Governor’s website for citizen input.
Working Together, Glenn Sacks, Fathers & Families & Its Allies Have:
• Led a 2008 campaign which stopped FOX from airing an anti-father reality TV show called Bad Dads.
• Helped spearhead massive nationwide grassroots protest campaign against anti-father PBS show on custody, forcing production of an even-handed documentary.
• Helped spearhead a successful national protest campaign against Florida’s refusal to reunite a fit and loving Cuban dad with his daughter.
• Led a campaign against anti-father Dallas domestic violence bus ads, garnering widespread, positive media coverage which included CNN, The Associated Press, FOX, CBS, hundreds of radio stations throughout the country, and many newspapers.
Other Glenn Sacks Campaigns Include...
• Glenn helped lead successful campaigns in 2004 and 2006 to defeat California bills which would have made it too easy for custodial parents to move children to other states without regard for children’s best interests.
• Glenn helped pass a California bill to protect military parents’ rights in family court. SB 1082 was signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in 2005.
Media Presence
Glenn Sacks & Fathers & Families have established a presence in major broadcast and print media, including multiple appearances on CNN, ABC, FOX, CBS, PBS, and NPR, as well as in Newsweek, Time, the New York Times Sunday Magazine, Forbes, U.S. News and World Report, People magazine, the New York Times, USA Today, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, and hundreds of others.
Fathers & Families' Mission
Fathers & Families improves the lives of children and strengthens society by protecting the child’s right to the love and care of both parents after separation or divorce. We seek better lives for children through family court reform that establishes equal rights and responsibilities for fathers and mothers.
Fathers & Family's Core Principles are:
• Shared Parenting
• Gender Equality
• Respect for Human and Property Rights
I'm happy to work with a variety of groups to help advance our issues.
Introducing Robert A. Franklin
As many of you know, for the past six weeks Robert A. Franklin has been handling much of the blogging at www.FathersandFamilies.org and www.GlennSacks.com, and has been doing an excellent job. Franklin is a national board member of Fathers & Families and is an important part of our organization and movement. To learn more about Robert, see his biography here.
A Thanks
As I take on my new role as Executive Director of Fathers & Families, I think of the many people who have taught me so much about these issues over the years. I hesitate to name names, because I will inevitably leave out many others. But just to name a handful, I'd like to thank Dianna Thompson, Mike McCormick, Dave Roberts, Marc Angelucci, David L. Levy, Mike Robinson, Warren Farrell, Lisa Scott, Stan DiOrio, Ned Holstein, Rita Fuerst Adams, Stephen Walker, Jayne Major, Mike Oddenino, Peter Walzer, Jim Cook, Jack Kammer, Cathy Young, Sanford Braver, Stephen Baskerville, Phil Cook, Don Dutton, Christina Hoff Sommers, Jane Spies, Carnell Smith, Ron Henry, Jim Semerad, and countless others.
Best Wishes,
Glenn Sacks, MA
Executive Director
Fathers & Families
GlennSacks@FathersandFamilies.org
and
Ned Holstein, MD, MS
Founder and Chair of the Board
nedholstein@fathersandfamilies.org
"));
19 queries. 0.784 seconds.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Glenn,
Congratulations, and my you experience much success. Keep up the good fight.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
Congratulations to you Both ! 3 Cheers for Ned and Glenn !
I know that both of you are true humanitarians that will bring a fair, reasonable and unified voice to loving but wrongly disenfranchised fathers and children.
Kudos !
February 11th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Glenn,
Congratulations on the new promotion you are an inspiration to all and a leader in the cause for justice for Fathers and Families and I will gladly fill the volunteer form to offer my help and I
HOPE many of the guys on the boards will do the same you have done more than your share
now its time to unite and create a force to fight the injustices.
Lets us unite as brothers and sisters
February 11th, 2009 at 10:26 pm
Good on you Glenn. For lack of better words, your cool.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
Two men of action!!
May you progress with gods speed ahead, for the nations youth may need some real leadership.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
WAY TO GO GLENN!
GR
February 11th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
Correct me if I am wrong but arent' the NAGS down to about 100,000 members??. With the joining of Glenn and Ned that brings the connected membership to over 100K??!!. MMMMMHHHH..........................I am going to have to reconsider giving up on the Promised Land.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:08 pm
The unification by far represents the single biggest wrench thrown in the spokes of the noisy machinery that is radical feminism.
Congratulations Glenn and Ned!!
February 11th, 2009 at 11:09 pm
p.s. I got the idea for that wording in my comment above, from one of the reviews of "Spreading Misandry". I hope they don't nail me for copyright:-))
February 11th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
And so it begins. This is really exciting.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:24 pm
Our most sincere congratulations. So many appreciate the efforts you and your associates put in on issues that are of paramount importance to fathers and families.
Onward and upward!
February 11th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
Mike M. # 3;
I have an idea where some energy could be well spent. My brother ran for US congress in 2008 and lost. He is running again and knowing my brother he will win. He is divorced twice and has been through the DV mill and the divorce industry . He will be an excellent advocate for Father's and Children. He has been on the Dennis Prager show a couple of times and has been endorsed by like minded individuals. I don't know where Glenn and Ned are taking this movement but a congressman from California might be a good start.
What do you think??
February 12th, 2009 at 12:47 am
Congrats and thanks!
February 12th, 2009 at 2:55 am
Wonderful innovative move. Kudos to all concerned.
I wonder what this means in terms of the character of this particular environment. By this I mean what direction will this blog be taking from this point onward?
Will it be devoted solely to issues relevant to fathers and families or will it continue to examine the broader range of issues confronting all men and boys?
February 12th, 2009 at 3:13 am
The email sent out carried the heading "Glenn Sacks is leaving".
At first I thought Glenn was ending this blog. I must admit I was a little shocked.
Where else could we unload all our grievances!
February 12th, 2009 at 3:16 am
Thank you too Glenn! Good luck with that!
This blog has made history and I hope it stays active.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:01 am
Thank you Glenn for all you've done for men's rights. You are a truly great ambassador.
All the best with your future endeavors.
David from Melbourne, Australia.
February 12th, 2009 at 8:39 am
Now if we can get Steve Baskerville also, the triumvirate will be complete and the world will be ours hahahahaha
Congratulation Glenn look forward to seeing you in March
February 12th, 2009 at 8:54 am
Good Glenn, mount the charger. Lead us in tearing down the feminist NOW idols polluting our land. Drive the feminist NOW swine out of our halls of government. Let their misandry devour their hearts until only its root of their self loathing remains. Free our children from their wicked grasp.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:10 am
Well done to both Glenn and F&F - this is a big step forward - but they can't do it without us. We need to support Glenn and F&F and stop whining about our situations.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:02 am
This is great news. Congratulations to all.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:08 am
400 years ago in 1609, Galileo made his first telescope. The reality of the earth's shape could not be hidden from the masses any longer. The powers that be were outraged with this development and the crumbling of thought systems it entailed.
Like Galileo, Glenn's work shows the world of families as it really is bypassing the distorting prism of the MSM. Unlike Galileo the Inquisition will not stop him.
Glenn - best wishes on this new leg of your journey!
When I learned this news I pledged $10/month to F&F for the needed war chest. Its a small amount but I hope it helps.
I encourage everyone here to give what you can to F&F so that the crumbling of the old regime can be accelerated as quickly as possible.
February 12th, 2009 at 11:03 am
Congratulations for Glenn!
February 12th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Something just occurred to me...
Congress has an overwhelming compulsion to write and doctor laws and regulations. Perhaps something to really get your name out there, that even the VP can't complain about and that could get Congress salivating...
... an amendment (or even state law) enumerating parental rights in gender-neutral language. It's sorely needed, would put much of the court dispute to rest, and would give Congress something very important to do.
Also, if a gender-neutral law/amendment was pressed by men's rights activist, it might even shame and expose the feminists more than anything else to date. If anybody in Congress tries to change the wording to be gender-specific, though, it would be unconstitutional, as per equal protection under the law.
February 12th, 2009 at 11:22 am
Glenn good luck in your new endevors. After I was forced through the family court ginder, I thought my life was over. I still can't wrap my head around the disfunction, corruption and greed of the family courts system and it has been years.
I searched for months on the web before I found Glenns site. It's the one that was worth a damn. What can I do to get this type of movemnet started in NJ? Here are a couple of thinks I WILL do, 1) I will fill out the vounteer sheet. 2)I will pledge as much money as I possibly can to fight system.
We should ALL do the same, we need to band together as men helping men and fight this horrendous and evil system.
Thank you Glenn
February 12th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
3 cheers for Glenn Sacks! May the father movement grow ever stronger!
February 12th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Glenn,
Congratulations and thank you for your great work. You have enormous integrity and are the right man for the job.
I would encourage everyone who supports Glenn and what he stands for to donate money. Be generous and consistant. With 50,000 to 100,000 potential members even $10 a month will make a massive difference. Men have been out-organized by the feminists for decades now but the one thing men can do is raise money. It gives us a huge strategic advantage!!! Think about 1,000,000 at $20 per month.
One thing that has held me back from fighting for the greater good. My battles with the legal system have been personal and individual. But being able to donate money allows me, like most of us to pitch in and do something. I would encourage Glenn and the others at Fathers and Families to use their increased power to access the media. We need to put out our own message rather than constantly reacting to theirs.
February 12th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Congratulations Glenn and keep up the good work
February 12th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Very wise to separate out MRAs from Father’s Rights people. Better chance that you’ll be taken seriously. Good luck.
February 12th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
Glenn,
When I first read the email this morning my first reaction was devastation. It didn’t take long for me to realize that is really is a good thing. Yeah, there are lots of us that are going to miss you on this blog, but there are so many out there that need you more. We all know this new step for you will be betterment for us all. Thank you for always being here with your words of wisdom.
Best of luck!
JeanB
February 12th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Jean--Thanks for your concern but www.glennsacks.com will remain what it is now--the movement's leading blog and a place for discussion. The only difference is that over the past couple months and into the future, Robert Franklin, not I, will be doing the majority of the writing. I will still be writing some and won't be hard to find.--GS.
February 12th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Congratulations Glenn, and to Fathers and Families... SMART MOVE!
February 12th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Jeana;
So what are you a MRA or a Father's Rights advocate??
February 12th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
Congratulations to Glenn Sacks, to Fathers & Families, and--most important--to the many people that this will help: children, families, and everyone in their lives.
February 12th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Hurley Hacker, I think Jeana is saying that father's rights supporters should separate from MRAs, as MRAs are more extreme and only father's rights supporters have any legitimate claims.
Methinks Jeana takes us seriously merely by being here.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Hurley Hacker (33), I was wondering the same thing myself! But let her "talk", she just keeps digging deeper each time. I was also considering changing my user name so people don't confuse us.....................but I have been on here a long time with this user name, so I think I'll keep it. All I ask is other users please keep us straight. K? Thx!
Glenn, we know you will still be around, and we are so glad! So far, I like Robert. He is doing a good job. And we know you will be doing great work with Father's & Families. Our household is so proud of you!!
February 13th, 2009 at 1:20 am
jeana didn't seem to read the article very carefully - it says one of the goals is gender equaility. That is the goal of MRA's.
February 13th, 2009 at 1:28 am
JeanB et al...
Please ignore jeana's wedge politics.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:32 am
What I meant is that I can get on the same page as men who want more time with their kids and don’t want to be taken advantage of by the court system in custody battles. I have no problems with fairness and equality or with men who actually want to be fathers and as involved as they want in their kids’ lives. And in working to change unfair situations for good fathers.
But to mush in “fathers rights” with “mens rights” will not help the fathers rights people. Because “mens rights” is, to me, not about “rights” at all. It’s about woman bashing. That’s it. For many, saying you’re an MRA is merely an excuse to hate women.
If you’re truly concerned with issues that hurt men, then you’d also include things like men who commit violence against men. Highlighting the random woman who shoots her husband skews your perceptions. How about supporting labor unions so men can get paid decently? How about universal health care so that men don’t have to choose between paying their rent and buying their kids medicine? How about supporting economic policies that keep jobs in this country instead of in Bangladesh? How about ending those “3 strikes and you’re out” and other mandatory prison sentencing for minor & drug-related crimes? Keep men working at a decent wage in decent conditions and you’ll do more to help them than inciting them to think that the real, true cause of their problems is the female gender.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Oh, and JeanB,
Thanks for letting me talk. Although what I dig myself deeper and deeper into is a little thing I like to call REALITY.
And I don’t want to be confused with you either. :)
February 13th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
This is probably the best news to come along in, well, ever
The power's in the numbers when fighting retailers who help brainwash the public into becoming misandric anti-male robots
Concerning an area where the influence is HUGE, advertising....the higher the number of activists threatening to boycott, the more likely the retailer is to pull the ads
100,000 activists/mras acting as one group in an effort to boycott if they continue to run an ad, is very significant
This is EXACTLY what feminists did to gain the power they have now...threats of boycotting (which they still do regularly with businesses).....threats of non-vote to politicians if the politician doesn't do it the 'feminist way'
Because money talks with businesses, and votes talk with politicians...these are the same avenues mra's must take to set things straight
The goal is different of course, unlike feminists, mras aren't interested in pressuring retailers and politicians to follow a sexists ageda, but to follow an anti-sexist agenda
February 13th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Jean
I have no problems with fairness and equality or with men who actually want to be fathers and as involved as they want in their kids’ lives. And in working to change unfair situations for good fathers.
As long as we keep paying though right?
February 13th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Wow, Jeana just described an MRA.
I don't have a stake in fatherhood issues. Why do I read this blog- because of these issues:
"If you’re truly concerned with issues that hurt men, then you’d also include things like men who commit violence against men. Highlighting the random woman who shoots her husband skews your perceptions. How about supporting labor unions so men can get paid decently? How about universal health care so that men don’t have to choose between paying their rent and buying their kids medicine? How about supporting economic policies that keep jobs in this country instead of in Bangladesh? How about ending those “3 strikes and you’re out” and other mandatory prison sentencing for minor & drug-related crimes? Keep men working at a decent wage in decent conditions and you’ll do more to help them than inciting them to think that the real, true cause of their problems is the female gender."
- But Jeana, highlighting the random woman who shoots her husband, the female sentencing discount, female privilege in family law, the female-only safety net, etc.- says-
1. there are double standards against men, and men experience sexism and oppression that is often much worse than the supposed "pay gap" and "pressure to look beautiful"
2. meanwhile, male issues are ignored and suppressed with extreme hypocrisy by empowered advocates of female issues. Female issues have become the ONLY gender issues that are acceptable to advocate for.
3. "patriarchy" is not just a simple lie, but a prejudiced lie that actively hurts working class and other disadvantaged men
4. Once those things are clear it will be easier to change a system of dual-sexism.
5. But empowered advocates for female issues don't care about doing that, they only have their own interests in mind. They actually hurt women and men with one-sided "progress" that makes more inequality.
You apparently should read Warren Farrell, because he does everything you suggested and more.
February 13th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
WOW, I find it still amazing that people still respond to Jeana antagonizing comments.
I for one am proud to support equality for all but at this moment there are no wear red for mens heart day, the selective service still exists, men die younger, more women go to college than men, women can murder and get off along with other crimes by claiming the man made her wear white shoes or some other feminist mantra.
I am an MRA who is a fathers right advocate and proud of it, so Jeana you can kiss my
February 13th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
jeana,
Let me see if I understand this. You say that men's rights=women hating. Following that "logic" would mean that women's rights=men hating.
Hating either way is wrong. And the way I see it, the men on this site are not women haters. They are men who have been burned, horribly, by a woman, or women, and are looking for help and a place to vent. There are more sites out there for women than for men. I did check a few out and was sick to my stomach with what I read. It was all hate filled and down-right vicious. I won't go back. The gentlemen on this site, for the most part, act properly. And those who do not are usually pulled back by the others. Unlike on the sites for the man-bashers.
You want reality? Take off the rose colored glasses. Women can be much more evil than men. Where a man will tell you straight forward the way he sees it and what he expects, most women think they have to be conniving and manipulative about it. And let us not forget that men are expected to read our minds. Right guys? Please, that is not how it works in REAL life. And when women doesn’t get her way and starts to boo-hoo………..they give in, every time. Many women know this and use it to their advantage. That is called being manipulative.
I’m not saying a man can’t be manipulative because I know firsthand that it does happen. That is a large part of the reason he and I divorced……
February 13th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Apparently, Mary Winkler is not the only woman to get away with murdering a man
"http://www.myeyewitnessnews.com/news/local/story/Monique-Johnson-Sentenced-to-Probation/7vs_4SNFiku_ejdo2OKhRg.cspx"
This woman got away with murdering a man - 6 shots execution style murder. Punishment - Probation.
collateral damage - 16 year old son has criminal record as a murder accessory after the fact.
February 13th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
So Jeana doesn't think there is a need for MRAs as all they do is "hate women" (assertion unproven, and provably false).
So Jeana, who then should address these issues?
Domestic violence policies, criminal sentencing gender disparity, paternity fraud, forced labor, military conscription, public health policies, genital integrity of male infants, false accusations against men by women, reproductive rights, the boy crisis in education, etc.?
Feminists? Please don't make me laugh. If anything 30 years of feminism has shown that it is a hate movement against men.
February 13th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
#41,
Steve, don't stop the ads, we want to know exactly where they stand, let them say what they want.
BUT you are definitely free to boycott their products. I do that.
Jeana says
"How about supporting labor unions so men can get paid decently?"
UAW has made sure that men have gotten paid decently... correct? Forget them, the refinery workers are also making sure men can get paid decently... while they strike!
"How about universal health care so that men don’t have to choose between paying their rent and buying their kids medicine?"
How about "no"?
"How about supporting economic policies that keep jobs in this country instead of in Bangladesh?"
FYI, what you are saying is that a bangladeshi young girl should be poor enough to be sold at the age of 11 for money you spend on one pair of gucci shoes or her and her siblings die hungry. Nice support for the female kind there.
"How about ending those “3 strikes and you’re out” and other mandatory prison sentencing for minor & drug-related crimes?"
I am with you on this one .. SURPRISE!
"Keep men working at a decent wage in decent conditions and you’ll do more to help them than inciting them to think that the real, true cause of their problems is the female gender."
Actually no one else needs to do that - men do this already. The problem comes when half or more of their salary goes to their wives and the rest goes to taxes, and they are reduced to THINGS that work and earn salaries - its worse than being an ATM.
February 13th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
My brain is fried from (over) working on Porky's site so i'll just assume everyone else is right and say congrats to all involved.
Anyone here surprised that it was whats-er-name that decided to spoil the festive mood? No? I didnt think so.
And isn't it funny that feminists are allowed to ask for things that go specifically to women but we second-class citizens have to be happy with measures meant to help all people rather than measures targeted specifically at our sex? In other words women are allowed benefits as both people and as women, whereas we are allowed benefits only as people but not as men, coz the menz is evils ya know.
February 13th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
JeanB,
It never fails to shock me whenever one of you acts absolutely surprised that a non-MRA could possibly find anything hateful here. It’s almost as if you are all in another universe or another dimension.
No, men’s rights don’t HAVE to mean hating women, but that is how it’s practiced everywhere I’ve seen. It is possible to want to help men WITHOUT hating women. I do it. It’s really quite simple.
You called the guys here “gentlemen”. LOL. Seriously, you’re kidding, right?
“Hey Jeana, Stoning a women for adultery would certainly stop a lot of divorce filings and I would support it.. Yes, Jeana, my only reason for not raping a woman is because my ego is satisfied when they demand sex from me; I can't speak for other men.”
Are those the words of a gentleman? A would-be rapist and killer? Wow. How about, “You ARE stupid, self deceiving, and a sexist bigot sow.” I have so many more but I can’t find them now.
No, JeanB, there are NO gentlemen on this site. Not in the traditional sense of the word, anyway.
“And those who do not are usually pulled back by the others.”
I have NEVER seen this happen. Never. I heard one guy tell me several times about an instance when someone said that he never met a good woman and Glenn and some others corrected him (after all, statically speaking, out of 3 billion women, ONE of them must be halfway decent, right?). But no one chimes in when guys demean rape victims. No one chimes in when that no-good said he’s practically a rapist and is ok with murdering women. No one corrects each other’s hate speech. They will, however, immediately jump in when a new guy tells them to not be too harsh with me. Then they’ll rip into him. And I never hear from those new guys again. You people frighten away moderate men who could be allies of yours. Not too bright of you.
Whether or not you were burned by a woman does not give you the right to hate all women. I hope all it is is venting. I see violence in lots of these guys, and it’s frightening.
But turn a blind eye and pretend that I am the crazy one. I have given up hope that I could ever make anyone here understand that feminists aren’t evil and that women aren’t bad. I don’t know why I ever thought I could.
Extremists? You bet. But none of you will be able to comprehend anything I’m saying. So I might as well shut up.
February 13th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Oh, and JeanB, unlike all of you female MRAs, I don’t feel the need to sink so low to get male attention that I have to cater to the hate by despising my own gender. I get plenty of male attention liking both men and women and being nice to both. It’s so much more pleasant to be friendly. You might want to try it.
February 13th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
take a pill jeana, it might help your problems... nobody here can
February 13th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
I have nothing to add to jeana's post, except that ....
ALL of the women on this blog deserve a big box of See's candy for Valentine's Day for putting up with you MRA's!
You can email me for my address *snorty snort*
February 13th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
Congratulations Glenn and Ned. This looks to be the start of a beautiful advocacy group!
February 13th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
GG, wouldn't you settle for some Cheez-its instead?
February 13th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
*crunch*
February 13th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Jeana said, "But turn a blind eye and pretend that I am the crazy one. I have given up hope that I could ever make anyone here understand that feminists aren’t evil and that women aren’t bad. I don’t know why I ever thought I could."
Jeana, I will agree with you that that person's opinion disgusts me (stoning, rape et al), and others I've seen I don't always agree with and think reflect badly on the desire for equal treatment for men. We are all individuals here, after all, and many are angry at being mistreated by the system, while others have unconventional opinions that you must tolerate in a free society.
Now to correct your fallacy that feminism isn't evil, or for that matter that criticizing feminism is akin to criticizing women. For the latter, feminism is bio-political advocacy, and criticizing it or its proponents or what it does specifically, is not the same as criticizing women (since not all women are feminists), although there is some of that certainly on the board, and often it is highlighted due to the disparity of such in the media, and the promulgation of masculinity as evil and femininity as more virtuous or superior to masculinity in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Feminism is evil, and I can defend that because despite whatever definition of the day feminists use to describe themselves (I'm not THAT kind of feminist), the fact remains that feminism actively works to hurt men. Whether through legislation, ideology (all men are potential rapists, etc.), and the subversion of justice, feminism IS what feminism DOES. And to a lot of people, it seems pretty freakin' evil.
Now, to counter your claim that MRA's are unnecessary, I posit that you are unable to fully see men as human, as beings who have needs that are external to females, and needs that are external even to fatherhood. Men are useless to you unless they are somehow connected to women. Whereas many in the men's movement have long ago realized that they are perhaps the last remaining followers of 'true' equity feminism, in that they believe in equal rights for women AND men, feminists like you actively work against anything that could help men.
So screw you and your self righteousness.
February 13th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
good copy/paste jobg #57 ... now why don't you dummy down and translate it.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Jessy,
Seems to me that “equity feminism” really is “uterus envy”. And you guys need to get over it. You can’t reproduce. So move on. Deal with it as best you can and stop trying to punish us for being the child-bearers. We have the ability to reproduce and take care of kids on our own. So do you, actually, through surrogates or adoption. No, you can’t give birth. If you can’t handle that fact, go get counseling.
“I posit that you are unable to fully see men as human, as beings who have needs that are external to females, and needs that are external even to fatherhood. Men are useless to you unless they are somehow connected to women.”
This is ridiculous nonsense. But not surprising. It’s hard to be considered a victim unless you think your oppressor doesn’t see you as fully human. Did you know some here refer to me as “it”? How human do you think I’m considered to be? So how about you cut the crap about how you’re second class citizens, etc. That is only true for gay men. Not heterosexual men.
“Feminism is evil, and I can defend that because despite whatever definition of the day feminists use to describe themselves (I'm not THAT kind of feminist), the fact remains that feminism actively works to hurt men.”
Funny you assume there’s only one true feminism, and that it’s evil. And if someone like me does not identify with someone who’s extremist, somehow it doesn’t count. Yet MRAs feel free to distance themselves from the extremists. You just did from the would-be rapist (who, I’m guessing and hoping, was just trying to be a big shot). I guess you’re free to be individuals but we’re not. Sure, you go ahead and define feminism and hold all of us to your definition. Feminists do try to work for the betterment of women. That does not mean that they think men are subhuman. There’s no reason why men and women can’t work together and compromise. Seriously, it’s not that hard.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
All anyone has to do, Jeana, is look at what feminism has done and what every brand of it does; plays gender war as a zero sum game.
For all your talk of working together, you are the first to say, "but..but.." to anything that could help men. Your feminism, is like every other feminism. When it comes to a situation where it is women vs. men, or often when it is just something to *help* men, men get thrown under the bus every time. Women must win EVERY political argument, whether it is just, fair, or equitable, or as in most cases, not.
So please don't play people as fools. People see and understand what feminism is in practice (not your soul seeking platitudes to the blog), every strain, every instance views every man vs. woman conflict as one that women must win. And men (even those dreaded MRA's) often agree.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
The proper thing for people concerned about men and women, and how they interrelate to call themselves might perhaps be a humanist. Certainly it is less divisive than feminist or masculist/MRA, and it is perhaps more centrist in approach than either as it seeks to understand the ontology of the dynamic of humanity.
The problem is that political nutbags like feminists would almost certainly corrupt the term beyond meaning. And even with such a centrist approach you would always need to ensure the needs of both sides were taken care of. If only one side ever spoke it's needs, and you had no way of discerning, you would just assume the other side was doing fine, when in fact it was not.
So, there will always be a need for representation of both conditions of humanity. I'm a humanist, but by definition that makes me a non-feminist and a non-mra. I often argue the mra viewpoint as feminism often lacks truth, and a true humanist understanding must incorporate the best of both understandings of the human condition. Feminism has long since lost the plot. The men's movement and men's rights activists at least have a fair amount of truth on their side and do not resort to shameless propaganda like feminists. Nonetheless I am male and experience the human condition as a man. So I understand my limitations in attempting to empathize with women. I do not however, think feminists even TRY to empathize with men. This much is evident from everything they say and do.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:29 pm
jeana says "Oh, and JeanB, unlike all of you female MRAs, I don’t feel the need to sink so low to get male attention that I have to cater to the hate by despising my own gender. I get plenty of male attention liking both men and women and being nice to both. It’s so much more pleasant to be friendly. You might want to try it."
Jeana, here is something for you to think about. If society is so biased against women, then why do you suppose that even feminists like yourself can still attract male attention?
And if men have all the power, surely they could just boycott feminist women and only deal with women who are more compliant?
I guess you are just up to your old game of 'let's rub our noses in female privilege, while simultaneously complaining about being oppressed'.
Just checking to see that nothing has changed.
February 14th, 2009 at 12:33 am
Audemus Jura Nostra Defendere!
Is the cry of those who seek to be free of feminist tyranny.
February 14th, 2009 at 12:58 am
Watch out Jeana is engaging in Feminist "Slut-Shaming". It works with sex, so now she is trying to use it in terms of ideology.
February 14th, 2009 at 1:15 am
IF men have uterus envy, why is it that American women and feminists were the biggest proponents of IMBRA, a law that has to do with foreign women and American men?
Face it, you are in no position to be envied by anyone sane. You are proverbially sterilizing the hen that laid the golden egg, which is why you need the law to protect your income - only laws cannot make a sterile hen lay eggs again.
February 14th, 2009 at 3:20 am
Good one jeana.
"Oooo...oooo....there was this man on the blog who thinks rape isn't as bad as I think it is. Outrageous!"
Meanwhile thousands of women on prime time, free to air, international TV stand and applaud rapists. A million Aussie women readers of New Idea pay the travel costs for a sex tourist. But thats OK because women should be allowed to have sex with boys. It's harmless after all and the rapists didn't really mean any harm anyway. Their victims aren't real victims and are non-fathers generally(**) so they don't count either. Besides, the woman who rapes is actually the real, and only, victim anyway.
Bit of a difference between mass media rape apology and one fruitloop on a blog methinks. Bit of a difference, also, between that fruitloop and the countless women happy to openly, publicly celebrate and defend and sponsor a female rapist.
** Of course the rapist can force the victim into parenthood and extort money from him as well. Nice!
February 14th, 2009 at 8:20 am
Gwallan,
That was just one example, a very recent example, of a “fruitloop” here. And by the way, you keep using the same example of that female sex person. If, as you keep saying, women praised a woman for having sex with boys, then those women should be ashamed of themselves. I agree with you. There’s no excuse.
Maybe the sun’s rays from that hole in the ozone melted their brains.
February 14th, 2009 at 8:32 am
Nick S,
“Jeana, here is something for you to think about. If society is so biased against women, then why do you suppose that even feminists like yourself can still attract male attention?
And if men have all the power, surely they could just boycott feminist women and only deal with women who are more compliant?”
I don’t think I really talk about society being biased against women, do I? I think we’ve come a long way and have things pretty good, although there’s more to be done. I also don’t ever talk about being oppressed. You MRAs keep saying that I think we’re oppressed. Try to be on the lookout for one example of me saying that.
I’m not sure that men have all the power anyway, not in western society. Unless you’re talking about rich men and corporate men. Not regular men.
And I guess if I walked around with a big “Keep you hands off my body” sign and wore a “ERA Now!” button and screamed at every man I saw, I wouldn’t attract any male attention. Not the good kind, anyway. I don’t ever bring up anything feminist to anyone unless they bring things up AND want to talk about it. Which pretty rarely ever happens for some odd reason.
February 14th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
@jeana...
That "one example" is numerous examples up to and including Oprah Winfrey. There is no effing "if" about it. The numbers of women involved in the applause, excuse making and general legitimisation of female rapists is genuinely and provably in the millions.
It is not a few individuals on obscure blogs. It goes on large scale and is entirely open to public view.
What you complain about here is tiny bikkies by comparison. The occasional idiot on a blog may be a rape apologist. Huge numbers of women are rape apologists in droves and don't even mind doing it it openly.
Simply put I don't see men behaving like this when confronted with another man who raped. I've seen numerous examples of women doing it however.
Ask yourself how Georgia girl would feel if the man who raped her, or somebody very like him, was invited onto the Letterman show and given an international forum to put his side, and only his side, of the story unchallenged in any way. That this was done with no reference to how she was hurt by the experience. And that thousands stood and applauded him for it. Should any victims be subjected to this?
We live in a culture that is permissive of violence and abuse of one gender. Within that culture is a political force demanding that only violence the against the other gender be taken seriously. When the gender represented by that political force is violent towards the gender unrepresented we not only permit it we excuse the violent party any way we can whilst ridiculing and mocking their targets.
Mean and nasty.
February 15th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
Glenn, I applaud you. This is truly a historic moment because it means you have the clout necessary for the concerns of men to be heard on a grander scale instead of regulated to the underground. If progress were a flower, it'd be a finely cut rose in this case.
Jeana, I don't want to bother responding to you all the time because you're the most predictable loud mouth contrarian on the face of this blog and have proven yourself incapable of controlling your hatred against all Men's Rights Advocates when it should be reserved for those few who have made the uncalled for comments you're concerned about. And you've redirected the topic yet again.
I was a little miffed at you lumping me in with Men's Rights Advocates in the past. Because I'm more of a centrist when it comes to gender issues. But I don't care anymore. And your shaming tactics won't work on me. I'm proud of being an advocate for men and women.
Because it's not about women or men in the end. It's about a paradigm and hard wiring. Men and women are different. There's no denying it. The feminine point of view gets racked across the coils in certain circles, I agree. With one difference: There are now laws in place to enforce punishment. People are also starting to embrace the feminine.
The concern I have, Jenna, is that old cliche: Pendulum making its swing to the feminine and leaving masculinity in the dark. I don't mind masculinity being re-examined. As long as its done by men. However, modern feminism isn't satisfied unless masculinity is shamed and redefined in its terms. And pro-feminist males are also a part of it as well, swallowing the propaganda of "Masculinity is bad. Destroy it" and teaching it to men who aren't feminists or pro-feminism. One male feminist works with boys, but continues to call them "Priveledged", thus enforcing the agenda on them disguised by good will.
It's gotten to the point where men examining masculinity outside the realm of feminism is politically incorrect. And the feminine is being branded not as an EQUAL paraidgm that deserves respect but as the SUPERIOR mode of thinking. Where do you think all those statements of "Women are the missing peace" and "If women ran the world, there'd be no war." come from? Do you honestly believe that modern feminist organizations like NOW are the answer to men's grievances? You think masculinity deserves such derision?
That is why I'm no longer pro-feminist and have spent my time giving both women and men's rights balanced attention. Both paradigms compliment one another, however now that the feminine is gaining traction, the masculine paradigm is all but wilting in the dessert. Nobody wants to look at masculinity without shaming it or filitering select portions through the feminine paradigm. Which doesn't work at all. It'd be like me forcing everyone to be autistic.
Let's ignore all the "Males are this", and "Women are that" rhetoric. THIS is what it boils down to: Two different paradigms. Unfortunatly, I can't accept a paradigm that is being advocated as the superior one. I'd say the same thing if the masculine were being promoted over the feminine again.
Yes, I'm a men's rights advocate. And you can lump me in with the crazies all you want. I don't give a damn anymore. Men have grievences and the masculine paradigm doesn't deserve to be shunned just because the feminine needs attention.
And on that note, good luck Glenn with your new endeavor.
February 15th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
If masculinity is so despised, how come women are attracted by the most “masculine” men and not as much (sometimes) by the less “masculine” men? Why do men and women want their sons to be more masculine and not feminine at all? Why not dress boys in typically girl colors, like pink? Why not encourage men to go into typically female occupations? I actually think that masculinity is admired, looked up to, celebrated, and imitated. Why do some women feel the need to act more aggressively in business and with other people in society in order to be taken seriously?
I think “female” and “feminine” are actually detriments. Not very admired, unless you’re talking about a girlfriend or wife. And I also agree that there would be more peace in the world if more women ran things. It’s ok for us to think this. You guys think that kids would be much better off living with men only, don’t you?
For the record, I don’t want to see masculinity destroyed. I like it. But if you think that some don’t believe that and want to destroy it, then by all means challenge that. You should not be made to feel ashamed for what you are. THAT’s something that I can see MRAs being involved in.
February 15th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Gwallan,
I don’t want to say that “huge” numbers of women are rape apologists, but it does seem that both men and women are much more accepting of females having sex with men against their will than vice versa. I remember hearing about some woman in England, I think, who kidnapped a Mormon missionary guy that came to her door and kept him for some time as a sex slave. Every account of it I heard was made into a joke. It is pretty disgusting when things like that happen. I think, though, that men actually do make jokes about rape. But usually not when talking about specific women. Although they will joke about men being raped in prison. They shouldn’t be mocked either, really. I think woman and men need to work more on their recognition of male victims. I agree wholeheartedly with that.
February 15th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Jenna: "And I also agree that there would be more peace in the world if more women ran things."
I don't. Not one bit. Women aren't perfect, Jenna. If you want the men here to admit that men aren't perfect, then it's only fair you step up and start decrying that statement. It's absoloutly unhealthy. And why I stopped being pro-feminist in the first place.
I also find the statement personally offensive. Because my father's mother abadonned him; basically wrote him off and was a very difficult women to get along with, traditional and possessed a bad attitude. Granted, my father's father was an abusive bastard as well but she didn't even bother to try and get along with him even when he finally left his dad as an adult. My half-aunt also vouches for this as she hated her as well. And you're asking me to think "Women are the missing peace"? That things would be better if they ran the world? I really find that offensive.
You have a right to think it, yes. To even agree with it. Just don't go around asking men to believe they aren't perfect when you don't hold the same standards towards your own gender. Otherwise, you're nothing but a hyprocrite. Don't ask me to believe it either, or else I'm going to give you a major earful in addition to disagreeing with your opinion.
February 15th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
I should add that my half-aunt is my father's half-sister, in case you didn't know.
February 15th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Oh, one more thing, Jenna, just so you get my point.
My mother's uncle (her mother's brother) married a totally abusive control freak of a woman who always beat him down and manipulated his emotions to the point where he was a changed man I saw as I got older. He was very gentle and sensitive yet I could feel a bit of submissiveness in him. And it's not just me who thinks his wife was a cold-hearted monster. The whole darn family have disowned her after she screwed up his life as he was dying of cancer, telling him who he can and cannot see, and obsessively micormanaging his lifestyle to the point where she'd let him have it if he did anything she dissapproved of.
Mom loved him and was so disgusted with what this "woman" did to him as was everyone else. And you're telling me that the world would be better off if women ran it?
February 15th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
"If masculinity is so despised, how come women are attracted by the most “masculine” men and not as much (sometimes) by the less “masculine” men?"
Actually, depends on what attraction means. It means different things to different women with their different priorities. For example, a young handsome man would definitely be more attractive than the same man, 60 years later. Unless the man's name was Ted Bundy.... or maybe not. Ted, as you may have heard, received groupie mails AFTER he was caught and known to be the serial killer.
"Why do men and women want their sons to be more masculine and not feminine at all? "
Actually most sane men and women sometimes allow their sons the choice to dress up whatever way they want. Unfortunately, there are a whole lot of insane ones who enforce gender roles (possibly believing the myth that these roles ARE to be enforced).
"Why not dress boys in typically girl colors, like pink? "
Why not? Because the boys have a thing called choice.. maybe?
"Why not encourage men to go into typically female occupations?"
You can encourage a person to dive off a cliff as well - but you wouldn't if you want him to enjoy having his limbs and head in one piece.
"I actually think that masculinity is admired, looked up to, celebrated, and imitated."
You forgot denigrated and deconstructed
" Why do some women feel the need to act more aggressively in business and with other people in society in order to be taken seriously?"
Because their "business skills" aren't enough to take them seriously - and mistaken belief that "aggressive" (what does that mean? Punch your competitor?) behavior is the fix for that.
"Not very admired, unless you’re talking about a girlfriend or wife."
You forgot daughters and mothers and sometimes even sisters or friends. You are right, I don't start talking about random women, that I have nothing to do with. IF it makes you feel better - same goes for men as well.
"And I also agree that there would be more peace in the world if more women ran things."
Try maintaining peace in a house with 5 teenage girls without breaking down in fits of rage and frustration - we will talk about the "world" later.
"For the record, I don’t want to see masculinity destroyed."
If masculinity is to be redefined as servile subservience and unquestioned faith in feminists - then I want such "masculinity" destroyed.
February 15th, 2009 at 11:15 pm
jeana says "If masculinity is so despised, how come women are attracted by the most “masculine” men and not as much (sometimes) by the less “masculine” men?"
Because human nature is full of ambivalence and not always logical. Sometimes people are attracted to something but also resent it all the same. Or people will like something if it benefits them, but resent it if they can't have it, or if it benefits someone else.
For example, people may admire successful and wealthy people. Or they may appreciate it when those people can contribute something to the community. But they may also feel resentful and envious of them at the same time.
Something that is admired and respected in one context, can also be resented and feared in another. Women may want to marry a man who is able to earn enough money to help maintain a standard-of-living. But they may also resent other successful men in the workplace or society.