Slate.com, Salon.com Agree to Fix Misleading Attribution in Piece Criticizing Fatherhood Movement
November 9th, 2009 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
Two major online publications--Salon.com and Slate.com--recently did articles about the men's and fathers movement.
Kathryn Joyce's DoubleX/ Slate.com article appeared to attribute the views of another activist to me, and Salon.com's Judy Berman picked up on it and publicized the misattribution. I wrote to both Slate.com and Salon.com asking for a correction and, to their credit, they both agreed.
In Kathryn Joyce's "Men's Rights" Groups Have Become Frighteningly Effective (DoubleX/ Slate.com, 11/5/09), she wrote :
Sodini’s diary was republished widely, including on the website of a popular men’s rights blogger, “Angry Harry,” who added his assessment of the case. “MRAs should also take note of the fact that there are probably many millions of men across the western world who feel similar in many ways, and one can expect to see much more destruction emanating from them in the future,” he wrote. “One of the main reasons that I decided to post this diary on this website was because the western world must wake up to the fact that it cannot continue to treat men so appallingly and get away with it.” In a phone interview, Angry Harry said, “Of course there will be more Sodinis—there will be many more,” likening him to Marc Lépine, a Canadian man who killed or wounded 28, claiming feminists had ruined his life...Perhaps, Angry Harry mused, that as the ranks of online MRAs grow, “the threat” of their violence “may be enough” to bring about the changes they desire.
Glenn Sacks dismissed Angry Harry as an “idiot” without real power in the movement and yet he cautiously defends him. “I want to be careful in wording this,” he says, “but the cataclysmic things I’m seeing done to men, it’s always my fear that one of these guys is going to do something terrible. I don’t want to say that like I condone it or that it’s OK, but it’s just the reality.”
I specifically, repeatedly, and emphatically told Joyce that any linkage between the men's & fathers' movements' grievances and Sodini is not my view. What I did say was that when I do hear of a drastic action--a man on a bridge threatening to jump, the guy here in LA who tried to commit suicide by parking his car on a train track, etc.--my first thought is that it might be a guy dealing with a painful family law issue or injustice.
In Judy Berman's "Men's rights" groups go mainstream--Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability (Salon.com, 11/5/09) about Joyce's article, she picked up on the erroneous attribution, writing:
It's certainly chilling to hear Sacks empathize (albeit ambivalently) with men like George Sodini, the deeply misogynist Pittsburgh gym shooter...
Again, I never said anything remotely sympathetic to Sodini and I made that abundantly clear to Joyce.
I complained to Slate.com and Kathryn Joyce and Joyce, to her credit, quickly responded, explaining, "Glenn did not defend George Sodini whatsoever in our conversation, and although this seemed clear in the original sentence, Double X is further clarifying it now so that it is not misread. I regret any confusion."
DoubleX/Slate.com fixed the sentence and also added a note at the bottom of the piece explaining the correction.
Berman said she would forward the issue to her editor at Salon.com for an update.
I'm writing several posts about the issues raised in these two articles--to read the others, click here.
"));
19 queries. 0.329 seconds.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:28 am
"but the cataclysmic things I’m seeing done to men, it’s always my fear that one of these guys is going to do something terrible. I don’t want to say that like I condone it or that it’s OK, but it’s just the reality.”
To any reasonably objective, intelligent human being, this would be a perfectly acceptable thing to say. It is even obvious. Oppression begets violence, from both sides. It is a measure of the intelligence of this debate that you are forced to distance yourself from the obvious.
Of course, the other side knows this and that it is obvious. They have to deny the obvious in order to disable any intelligent debate by the other side simply because their own position is so patently absurd.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:54 am
I emailed Berman, she didn't bother to respond, but the essence was what JD says above.
"but the cataclysmic things I’m seeing done to men, it’s always my fear that one of these guys is going to do something terrible. I don’t want to say that like I condone it or that it’s OK, but it’s just the reality.”
Apart from misattributing it to you endorsing Sodinia, there really is very little wrong with that statement. As I pointed out to Berman, who is Jewish, like me, it's probably how she (and I) feel when we think of Israel after a terrorist attack.
By claiming it was such a foul attitude to have, Berman was basically just engaging in a smear, and best of all, based not on her own evidence or interview of you, but on her reading of someone else's article.
Craptacular!
November 9th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
The fix might be applied but I highly doubt the feminists that have gone to town with that piece will even acknowledge it.
Check this out:
http://www.femini*****sting*****.com/archives/018780.html#comment-315473
This is a little nit-picky, but could we call the "Men's Rights Groups" what they are and refer to them as "Anti-Woman Groups"? Men have their own set of inequalities to fight, whether it's registration for the draft, stigmatization of male stay-at-home-parenting, or the need to *expand* domestic violence laws to better protect men, who appear much less likely to recognize and report abuse against themselves.
Calling these woman-hating vigilante groups that seek to shore up patriarchal relationships "Men's Rights Groups" tars the work of people actually working for gender equality and men's rights.
As you can see to some that piece by Kathryn Joyce confirmed what they think they already know. You folks aren't trying to help men's right and should be called "anti-woman groups" (AWA?). Whether is was Joyce's intent to make that association and trying to smear all MRAs it is apparent that is affect it has had at least with some feminists (but more than likely they were already seething with anti-MRA sentiment and this article was just icing on the cake).
November 9th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
i found it funny with some of the people on the article comments page attacking people from here by name ..... heck one on her own website lied and said i supported perpatrators of domestic violence while here which is an outright lie , heck the only one i have had issues with is a feminist who was somewhat racist while here ..... the responders here are probably more moderate than anyone i have seen on feminist websites and thats why the backlash has started,
November 9th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Good 4 u Glenn... I'm glad it was fixed.
November 9th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Echoing sentiments similar to:
NE Says:
November 9th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Good 4 u Glenn... I'm glad it was fixed.
Just shows what a little effort can do to correct something.
And, with time on our side we are on our way to correcting many more things left to us by paid-for by government money 'feminist' organizations world-wide.
November 9th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Glenn, I'm not making any promises, but when are you going to interview lawyer Wendy Kaminer (of the ACLU) or Alan Dershowitz? I strongly suspect either one WOULD have at least a little more sympathy for MRAs than Joyce or Berman.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
"I'm not making any promises, but when are you going to interview lawyer Wendy Kaminer (of the ACLU) or Alan Dershowitz?"
Former Florida ACLU leader Robyn Blumner probably would if you can find her. She wrote the article, "Guess who needs the equal rights amendment? Men." I can't find it online anymore. I did find this email address but I'm not sure it works. Blumner@sptimes.com Anyway I don't think she's with them anymore but she might know somebody.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
HERE's an old one by Robyn Blumner in which she exploses the primary aggressor doctrine as anti-male:
"Domestic Abuse Laws Treat Men Unfairly," St. Petersburg Times, 12/5/99
http://www.sptimes.com/News/120599/Perspective/Domestic_abuse_law_tr.shtml
November 10th, 2009 at 2:08 am
I think it's interesting how what frightens Kathryn Joyce is that men feel they should have a say in what happens to their children and should be represented equally in the courts. This is what frightens her? I guess she's confused about equal really means.
November 10th, 2009 at 2:16 am
Glenn - Is there a down - side to adding a Share Button to your site ? I'd love to put some articles on Facebook !
November 10th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
"Domestic Abuse Laws Treat Men Unfairly," St. Petersburg Times, 12/5/99
This is a very good article that Mark A. pointed us to. The writer explains very clearly how one-sided and injust are the DV laws and VAWA in general. She gives specific examples to support what she says.
Her points are so clear and precise about the inequality and predjudice against men concerning the DV laws and law enforcement policys
.
The article was written 10 years ago and all her points are still valid today.
Seems there has been little reform in the past 10 years...
November 10th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
The Holidays are coming up guys and don't get depressed you are not alone at least you have friends here on this site who share your pain and are understanding to your situations.
I hope everyone here has a safe and fun Holiday.. i.e. turkey day and christmas...
Even if you are alone find fun stuff to do.. :)
November 11th, 2009 at 2:10 am
at least you have friends here on this site who share your pain and are understanding to your situations.
And sympathetic lurkers, too.