Well, it's collective punishment, isn't it? As they exit the womb, little boys pick up responsibility for all the imagined oppression of women for the past 200,000 years. If you try to argue for the defense of boys and men, you are a selfish, exploiting, chauvinist, rape apologist, and the magic of shame will make you acquiesce in repression of your darling boy for another generation. Shame on you. Or not. It's a matter of what you choose.
http://canadiancrc.com/PDFs/The_Invisible_Boy_Report.pdf

Mark Sherman Ph.D.
I am obsessed with gender issues, and thus am constantly surfing the Internet, using various Google combinations to see what goodies I can find. My main problem is that after years of being a strong supporter of feminism, I discovered, nearly 25 years ago, that it was boys much more than girls who were struggling in school, not to mention in other even more significant ways – for example, committing suicide at around four times the rate that girls were. Having three sons (the youngest of whom was 12 when I made this discovery), I realized that my children were being ignored. Having later been blessed by the birth of four grandsons, my concern about boys as a group has only increased.
But the concern of our country hasn’t.
For example, in spite of data overwhelmingly showing the problems that boys struggle with, there is no White House Council on Boys and Men to parallel the one established for women and girls very soon after President Obama took office — this in spite of years of hard work by a bipartisan network of experts who have pushed for one (for full disclosure, I am part of this group). And the situation I wrote about here more than six years ago, in piece titled “Boys and Young Men: A New Cause for Liberals,” has barely changed. If you do see an article or book in support of boys or men, it is usually by someone known to be a conservative or it is on a conservative website. Consider the first well-known book on this issue, The War Against Boys, in 2000, by Christina Hoff Sommers (now with the American Enterprise Institute). Or a 2015 article in the National Review, titled “Why Do More Women Than Men Go to College?” My fellow liberals continue to focus almost exclusively on women and girls.
Yes, the New York Times occasionally writes on this theme (less now than they used to, it seems to me), but you’ll most often see concerns expressed on the conservative side.
In a sense, I get it. I’m 73 years old, so I don’t have to read books to remind me of how women were treated years ago. In 1968, a Harvard (then Radcliffe) undergraduate told me that when she was looking for an internship at a law firm, and asked if they hired women, she was told, “Well, perhaps we would; we hired a cripple last year.” (In how many ways was that an atrocious statement?!) I saw the life my mother-in-law led, a brilliant woman, born in 1922, who grew up poor, and at a time when girls, especially from poor families, were in no way encouraged to seek professions. I saw my wife treated shabbily by a succession of male (and granted, occasionally female) bosses.
Have things totally equaled out? No. Are things radically different? Yes. Law firms hiring women? Today, approximately half the graduates of law schools are women. Poor women going to college? Today, young women of all socioeconomic strata are strongly encouraged to pursue a higher education. All this notwithstanding, there is a genuine memory for any woman over the age of 40 or so of sex discrimination (and much still exists); and what you remember stays with you. I call this the victim antennae. I have always had this as a Jew. My nervous system will automatically note almost before my mind does any comment that could even vaguely be construed as anti-Semitic. And I have had that same kind of sensitivity for years now as a father and grandfather of males. And I assume that many, many women have it too for anything they sense as devaluing women.
But let’s for the moment concentrate on one group only, absolutely the most important group of all:
Children.
Just for today, let us stop thinking about anyone over the age of 21, and simply consider the world of young people. Forgetting for now about the world of women and men, can anyone show me statistics showing that whether it is poor school performance, being the victims of homicide, suicide rates, absence of same sex role models in the home, being incarcerated, and being victims of drug overdoses, boys and young men are doing better than girls and young women? No, it is quite the opposite.
My grandsons, who range in age from three to 11, are doing fine, at least for now. But if they were old enough and sophisticated enough to appreciate media and academic coverage of gender, they would realize immediately that they live in a country that barely cares about them and their future. And they are the lucky ones. They are white (although one is half-Asian). They are privileged. For African-American boys, the situation is horrific.
I am for equality, which some feminists say is their goal. So I am not saying to forget about the girls and the important issues they continue to face. But let’s remember the boys too. And not just for today. Every day.
This Goes Back a While
War
Anonymous wrote:Well, it's collective punishment, isn't it? As they exit the womb, little boys pick up responsibility for all the imagined oppression of women for the past 200,000 years. If you try to argue for the defense of boys and men, you are a selfish, exploiting, chauvinist, rape apologist, and the magic of shame will make you acquiesce in repression of your darling boy for another generation. Shame on you. Or not. It's a matter of what you choose.
http://canadiancrc.com/PDFs/The_Invisible_Boy_Report.pdf
Yes, the men must suffer for being the ones that are killed in war. Woe is she.
I would've carefull with that lack of empathy doc, someone might think that you have something dangerous.
Same old waffle
I wouldnt say boys pick up the oppression from women, they suffer a completly different problem.
One i dare say stems from the same problem: sexism.
Boys are not allowed to show emotion (suicide rates), dont talk about feelings, to do so makes them weak or girly.
Boys must fit the stereotype of strong and masculine... 'dont throw like a girl'.
It seems the problems men have are coming from trying NOT to be weak or... like a girl. Why is it more acceptable for a woman to walk around in boots and suits than for a man to wear a dress? It is an insult to be like a girl. I wonder how that makes girls feel.
Further, i have a major respect for those who were conscripted into war, but that is not a valid point.
Women didnt go to war because the powers that were (men) didnt want them to, not because they chose to stay at home. It is also worth noting that gender in first world countries are forced to go to war now. If its history that is being argued... there are a plethora of injustices women suffered not even as far back as the big wars.
Regardless
Regardless of who gave the order, the same song and dance of "protect the women" has been played throughout history.
And I wasn't calling into question a matter of resect, I'm saying that the "oppression of women is overstated" while the sacrifice of men is understated. .
Quite true.
Quite true.
The question that must be asked is who is shouting 'protect the women'? Naturally, mostly the women (and some men).
The bigger question in relation to this article would be who is shouting 'protect the men'.
Not a lot of men (or women) unfortunately... society dicates that to do so is an admission of some kind of weakness, which does not fit the stereotypical patriachal model.
"Women didnt go to war
"Women didnt go to war because the powers that were (men) didnt want them to, not because they chose to stay at home. "
False. If you read the history of the suffragettes, there were A LOT of anti-suffrage women. Simply because they did not want to go to war. Once they were given assurances that they would not be conscripted in exchange for the vote, they went along with the vote. So, in both cases, women did not want to go to war.
Evidence please.
Evidence please.
Are you refering to the same anti-suffragist women who had internalised misogyny to such a level that they believed they werent capable of having the freedom to vote.
Deference does not indicate will.
Also with that question in mind, had the roles been reversed and men were given that choice, i know what i would pick. Can you really blame women for that? Men didnt have a choice, but you are blaming the wrong group of people for its consequences.
I have heard of there being
I have heard of there being feminists post-suffrage endorsing that the requirements to vote for men(admission to the draft) shouldn't be applied to women, but I cant remember where I read it.
WW1 and Suffragettes
Pankhurst herself campaigned for a "conscription of men and boys to fight the Kaiser". You forget that the first 2 years of the War were volunteer armies only. You also seem oblivious to the Suffragettes involvement in the Order of the White Feather shaming men not in uniform and the masses of printed material urging men to go and fight for the "women of England". My personal favourites being "Daddy what did you do in the War? and "Women of Britain so 'Go!'". You also seem to forget that more than 50% of those who died in the war couldn't vote and that Pankhurst was not looking for votes for ALL women but just the rich land, business or property owning ones like her. I understand how that doesn't really help the feminist mantra though ;)
A quick google came up wih
A quick google came up wih this on wikipedia
'Pankhurst called for the military conscription of men and the industrial conscription of women into national service.'
It seems im not alone in my'obliviousness' of the matter. That being said, you are right in that she campaigned for women not to fight specifically. Though again, i will say who can blame her?
Going back to the original point (i fear we are digressing here) there were no men campainging against themselves to be conscipted. Why? Because to opt not to fight was viewed as a weakness and something a 'true' man shouldnt do ( a view held by boh genders, with exceptions) the biggest obstacle in men resisting was shame. Which relates greatly to the boys struggles in school: 'dont communicate your emotions' a boy should be stoic. Hence we have a generation of school boys acting out and not reaching their potenitial because they havent been taught how to express themselves emotionally. They cant cope well because theyve been forced to be robots, when both men and women are emotional beings and need to feel(again look at male suicide rates).
As for the posters of 'daddy go to war' or something along those lines. Propaganda is not evidence of truth, it is evidence of intent and social pressure. If anything history has taught us propagandas social influence is bad for everyone.
Hate when I remember
Hate when I remember something I couldve said once ive already posted, so here i am again!
Was Pankhurst the only person campaiging for men to go to war? Or were other men campaigning too?
Cuck Manginas like you, John...
Anonymous wrote:Evidence please.
Are you refering to the same anti-suffragist women who had internalised misogyny to such a level that they believed they werent capable of having the freedom to vote.
Deference does not indicate will.
Also with that question in mind, had the roles been reversed and men were given that choice, i know what i would pick. Can you really blame women for that? Men didnt have a choice, but you are blaming the wrong group of people for its consequences.
..Are a big part of the problem.
You white-knight assholes, in you pathetic bid to win female approval, help spread lies and fake issues for your dyke overlords.
For men to advance, cucks like you need thier asses kicked.
At the onset of the first
At the onset of the first Gulf War an amazing percentage of women who were in the active National Guard suddenly became pregnant and could not be deployed overseas.
Since that time female enrollment in the military ha decreased.
Women like to call themselves solders, as long as they don't actually have to be solders.
Im struggling to understand
Im struggling to understand what you are trying to get across?
'Amazing percentage' 'suddenly got pregnant' 'Women like to call themselves solders, as long as they don't actually have to be solders.'
Your tone suggests quite bitter feelings towards women during war time. Have you ever been to war? I havent, so i couldnt possibly judge the actions of those resisting (by whatever means) during these times.
Your evocatory tone suggest you feel as though women should have suffered at the hands of war mongering leaders the same as men.
The arguement i would like to pose is why are we condemning women for not fighting, when the truth is, men dont want to either. Quite frankly it is because men are more scared to opt out of this cursed life. To do so is a designation of weakness, one that does not tie in with the big-strong-masculine rehtoric our society expects. God forbid we addmit passivity. No, lets blame women for their own potency to work their way out of a deplorable situation.
Take the conscientious objectors.
Whom I would say were a lot braver than are given credit for. They stood up for what they beleived was right in a society that condemned them and called them cowards.
Governments have a long and ongoing history starting wars and sending innocent people to fight them. Then calling them gutless through propaganda in the media when they resist.
I for one support anyone (male or female) who resists the vieled oppresion of so called first world societies.
Nice article but your missing the point
Its not that boys are not allowed to show emotions, its that those emotions are ignored and boys treated with contempt and suspicion when they do.
Its not that men are expected to be strong, but weak and submissive, and not allowed to answer back.
They are expected to provide for themselves because no one is prepared to help them out. Only to see that in every walk of live, females get preferential treatment.
There are plenty of actual injustices that men have suffered in the past and still suffer now, except females want their imaginary injustices to take priority, and too many men are more than happy to indulge them.
Exactly!
Exactly!
Boys are ignored when they show emotions because its not acceptable (allowed) in our society. We are just arguing semantics there.
Have you ever heard any of these expressions?
'Boys dont cry'
'Man up'
'grow some balls'
If that isnt an indication that men are expected to be strong we need to consider re-writing our dictionary definitions.
Also with all due respect, youve also contradicted that statement by stating that men are expected to provide for themselves... a weak and submissive individual would be incapable of this.
There are innumerable injustices men have faced throughout history, but to say womens are imagined is stetching it.
I will say again, with some exasperation this time as i seem to get no reply to this point:
Women (and some men) are campainging for/ building, whatever you want to call it, domestic abuse centres, equal pay, sexual hassasment cases etc etc etc!
These facilities are few and far between for man. Why? When you consider governing bodies, councils, senates and big business (the people with the power!) are predominantly made up of men?!
Because.... drum roll please... to show vulnerability is a shameful thing for men by and large, to admit to! Where are the men campaigning for domestic abuse centres for males? Not it the public eye thats for sure! Oh yeah, theyre all on the internet complaining about how women get a free ride in life.
Only Half the Story
Expressing your emotions, being in tune with your sensitivity, is only half the answer, John.
Just try, as a man, to talk about legitimate issues surrounding your gender. Without mincing words or holding back.
Trust me when I say you're going to be shouted down by the majority. Then you'll be charged with "Whining" and "Taking attention away from women's issues". If you're a white male, expect invalidation and disrespect to come your way because "You're more privileged than women".
Believe me, John, I know the fine print on this little contract that comes with "Knowing you can cry", being a survivor of serious abuse from both genders. Yet, encountering heavy resistance and ostrasization when steering the subject towards female abusers compared to male abusers.
Want to support boys? Don't place any restrictions on what bothers them or police their language. Because why should they bother if their problems are going to be disregarded because women's issues and female empowerment are suddenly top priority.
Help is only for women
Any man who could use some help is disdained by women when he tries. He's seen as weak, and not deserving of assistance, and is rejected to work out his issues largely on his own.
Knowing how he was seen by women, his opinions of them are greatly diminished, and he's likely to avoid any interaction with them since he knows what they are like under those pleasant appearances.
Hurt me once, shame on you. Hurt me twice? Like Hell!
Haven't men always struggled with school?
There are more men getting educated than before. The situation is nit deteriorating in that sense.
School is about sitting down and learning. Men who don't like school can still find good paying jobs: plumber, electrician, etc. As a woman, choosing a profession that involves finding yourself alone in a stranger's home is something I would never do, no matter what the pay check. How can you fight back a man twice your size with your head under the sink?
For men, school isn't the only option, for women it's the best way to physical security. Women are more at risk, so they work more to protect themselves.
Paranoid
You've scared yourself beyond reasonable levels. Not everything is out to rape you.
Also a woman that was actually empowered wouldn't be deterred by the thoughts of someone who has not been on said job.
Re: Haven't men always struggled with school?
You asked, "How can you fight back a man twice your size with your head under the sink?"
Well, notwithstanding that even a man would be at a disadvantage with his head under a sink, I've personally met two women who are easily capable of taking down men twice their size. One practices Wing Chun, the other some kind of Thai kickboxing. I've seen them in action and believe me, your average street thug wouldn't last 5 seconds against either of them.
That, to me, is female empowerment. No victim cards for those two; they've taken responsibility for their own safety and done something about it. And for that they have my utmost admiration and respect. If more women thought like this instead of being scared ittle snowflakes there'd be no need for feminism.
It is not women's
It is not women's responsibility to keep little males in their place. We live in a ridiculous rape culture where they seem to have no consequences for their actions. Fine if women can fight. Teach males they are not gods and women are not things. It sounds to me like the pathetic males are the snowflakes!
There is a female dominated
There is a female dominated vocation that requires being alone in a strangers house, being a maid. Also, men are much more likely to be murdered than women are, and non-college educated men are more likely to be murdered than college educated men are. So, education is important for men's physical safety as well.
It's a complex issue
One of the first things taught to boys is to always act confident and never ask for help. In the last decade boys are also being taught misogyny. This doesn't set them up well for a demographic that is going to receive assistance. Nobody wants to help people who don't want help or appreciate help, or will spit on anyone that tries to help them.
Girls are taught social skills, and are encouraged to practice social skills. This is good training for today's economy. I can see why the are doing well.
If boys are going to get help that have to set themselves up to receive it gracefully, I don't see anyone working on this challenge. A few basic social skills will go a long way.
Do you understand you are
Do you understand you are talking about kids.
5yo kids.
Boys are at a bigger risk for fatalities, violence and so on since the cradle.
It's incredible with feminists, always talking about empowering, but when it comes to boys it's always how they, a bunch of kids, should pick themselves up from their bootstraps.
"In the last decade boys are
"In the last decade boys are also being taught misogyny." Are you implying that boys are being taught misogyny more so than they were in the past?
Boys are miss-understood
The genders are NOT equal. Boys learn in different ways than girls and public schools feed kids a one-size fits all that leaves the boys behind.
Thank you, Mark for a more than generous article
I am less liberal than you, so I bristle at a few of your liberal assertions. But your argument about the ignored half--that is, males, is unassailable, not withstanding the simplistic antipathy spewed by a few of the commenters.
I have written on this topic with less circumspection, for example: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/how-do-life/201411/our-approach-men-reinvented
Failed human being write article pretending to care about boys
"there is no White House Council on Boys and Men to parallel the one established for women and girls very soon after President Obama took office"
The problem isn't that there is a Council on Boys and Men. The problem is that there is a Council for Girls and Women. The eagerness you have to politicize everything is the basic problem facing our country. The cultural problems you note are directly attributable to the politicization of what you call "gender" issues (they are sex issues).
I'm quite certain you find people like Donald Trump just appalling. Since that's the case, why are you so eager for him to have power to determine how little boys and girls should be taught? Why are you so against parents choosing for themselves to teach their own children as they want? In short, why do you have so much distrust for your fellow man, but so much trust for Donald Trump?
In short, YOU are the problem. Instead of leaving people be, you insist on imposing your values on everyone else using the coercive powers of the state. Your rejection of our basic American ideal of liberty is the problem.
Stop thinking of your fellow man as serfs upon which to be experimented by powerful politicians.
"I don’t have to read books to remind me of how women were treated years ago"
Translation: I prefer my fantasies to actual reality. If you are actually "obsessed with gender issues", then you'd know that men have always been treated worse than women. Men were more likely to die without having children, live in poverty, die violently, be imprisoned, etc. Instead of learning the actual historical record, you choose your flight of fancy, where men had it so good and women were oppressed.
That "sex discrimination" you bemoan was simply the obvious recognition that men and women are actually different.
"But let’s for the moment concentrate on one group only, absolutely the most important group of all:
Children."
Children are absolutely NOT the "most important group of all". There is a rather straight forward way to see this. Imagine if society were broken down into age groups 0-20, 21-60, 60+. If everyone in the the age group 0-20 all the sudden died tomorrow, society could still be rebuilt. The same is true for those in the 60+ group. Society would collapse, though, if everyone 21-60 died.
So Many Excuses
You make so many excuses, seemingly punctuate your valid points with digressions to ensure you don't run afoul of the current vernacular - what are you afraid of? Being right? Or not having the courage of your convictions?
You're old enough o remember the reeducation camps in China, Vietnam and Cambodia - tell me, what is the difference between the "off with their head" policies of those regimes and those "liberals" of whom you are seemingly wavering to self identify with?
You're a coward. You know you are a coward. Good luck explaining it to both your sons and grandsons.
Boys....
Boys are defective girls. To be modified or destroyed.
And your a sexist arsehole.
And your a sexist arsehole.
If there is a problem with
If there is a problem with boys at school or in other areas, certainly address those problems. I just don;t see what it has to do with feminism. Equal rights and equality are a given. They're not up for debate. When women didn't have their rights, they fought hard for them. Men are free to do the same.
Boys struggle? Oh, so they
Boys struggle? Oh, so they aren't as strong and superior as they like to pretend, huh? That's right. The male sex is weak and has only been superior because they often have more muscle. But their minds and hearts? Weak. They have no place on the top of the modern civilization. And let's not forget all the suffering they've caused to women. They deserve any struggle they face and more.
Aileen
Anonymous wrote:Boys struggle? Oh, so they aren't as strong and superior as they like to pretend, huh? That's right. The male sex is weak and has only been superior because they often have more muscle. But their minds and hearts? Weak. They have no place on the top of the modern civilization. And let's not forget all the suffering they've caused to women. They deserve any struggle they face and more.
Wow, what a nasty psychotic woman! Modern civilisation was created by men, not just with muscle but with brains. Systems of law, maths, physics, science even psychology. All the creation and work of men. Women have been nothing but passengers, protected and pampered. Now though men are waking up to just how much they've sacrificed for over entitled and selfish women and you know what? Women aren't worth the effort. Hoorah for men and all they've done, had it been left to women we would still be in mudhuts navel gazing and having group hugs because life is tough :(
Boys struggle? Oh, so they
Anonymous wrote:Boys struggle? Oh, so they aren't as strong and superior as they like to pretend, huh? That's right. The male sex is weak and has only been superior because they often have more muscle. But their minds and hearts? Weak. They have no place on the top of the modern civilization. And let's not forget all the suffering they've caused to women. They deserve any struggle they face and more.
One more reason to detest feminism. The very notion taht your baleful movement has anything to do with equality is risible.
Awful people abound in these comments
...but you, your comment is so twisted with hate you've made your own category here. Please tell me you don't have any authority or influence over any boys or young men. Your kind of poison needs to be buried in a toxic waste dump. Your mind is perfect.
Why boys struggle
I think we tend to focus on little details that we believe are indicators of "equality" and miss the big picture. We see the trees…not the forest. Men and women have very defined rolls that we all embrace and promote. We are driven by instincts that we pretend don't exist. Boys and men struggle because we cannot allow males to be victims. It starts with boys don't cry.…we tell boys it is not ok for them to feel and express physical or emotional pain and then it becomes " take it like a man" or "man up" or " grow a set"...etc. All ways of saying to males that your pain is irrelevant, your struggle is irrelevant because you are not allowed to be a victim. Which is why we don't talk about our feelings, or go to doctors. Our whole lives we are told to suppress concerns for ourselves as men.So as a society we do not recognize when males struggle because we are not comfortable seeing them as victims.
Liberals are not liberal any more
Liberals no longer advocate inclusion, but intolerance instead. Liberals no longer advocate equality, but supremacy instead. Liberals no longer advocate compassion, but hatred instead.
Forget liberals, they are the problem, not the solution.
Conservatives only care about money and profit. It is sad to say, they are now preferable to liberals.
The skewed narrative
Dear all,
Wow. So many comments here are proving the author's point: there is something very ingrained, intrinsic in us that keep us from seeing men as a group as (deserving) victims. The stats have spoken clearly even before the education gender gap was reversed, and contrary to popular belief, archetypically patriarchal Egypt and Saudi Arabia are no better.
What I find particularly befuddling is the narrative that says that women used to be oppressed, and maybe now the pendulum has swung too far. Only a few hundred years ago, life was short, rough, and ridden with disease and violence. Do you really think we could afford to or even survive treating women WORSE than men? Quite the contrary: we had to organise society so that women could do what was essential for the bare survival of the tribe: procreate. Which, by the way, was excruciating and life-threatening enough.
We remember the witch trials, sometimes as gendercide, because the majority of the victims were women. But scores of world war battles with many more victims with a much more one-sided gender distribution are fading fast. We ignored Boko Harom as they slaughtered THOUSANDS of men and boys, but saw world leaders rally around 200 kidnapped girls.
Nothing bad about that. In fact, defeating the witch trials and extirpating Boko Haram is good for their male victims as well. And I am not going to be as blue eyed as to think that we can change these gender roles completely. But to seriously think that we used to hate women just because of some gauche comments back in the days where professional women were still a novelty, is bad enough. The comments here: egregious.
What makes this all the worse: everything that happens to men and women affects the other gender too. This is not the case with race, which is why I have much more sympathy for Black Lives Matter, although of course I find their rhetoric widely exaggerated. As a white person, I can feel my privilege, and I can feel my own racism (I am trying to fight it, but a group of drunk black men at the end of the street is more likely to make me take a detour than white men - although the sexism is stronger: a group of women would have to be Thow Mamma Off the Train-type intimidating to have the same effect). I am also incredibly lucky to be born in a rich country, to have a family that loves me, and not to be ugly (can you imagine any discrimination worse than that faced by ugly people?). But because I am a man? How can this be serious?
Shameful article
You need to tell the whole truth. Women are advantaged by society nowdays way beyond men. You left out that around 60% of those graduating from college are women. Do you really believe that women face discrimination that is at all comparable to the discrimination men have been facing for the last 2 decades? They benefit from affirmative action, tons of scholarships, scores of programs to encourage them to go into STEM fields. Where are men's programs? They don't exist, or at least, barely exist compared to the massive amount that women have.
And to posit that your sons are privileged just for being born white is horrendous. It's just more identity politics that leads to discrimination. This is no different than when you assumed that men were clearly the privileged ones. Perhaps you're still stuck in the mentality of the 60s and have not caught up to how things work in the modern day, or perhaps you're so caught up in academia that you haven't managed to venture out into the real world ever and see how things are. We have a saying where I come from that goes something like "You have to be really well educated to be that stupid." Now I'm not calling you stupid, but I hope you get the point.
You should want the best for your son and grandson, and telling them that they're privileged is anything but that.
Seriously?
Boys' struggles are perpetuated by the toxic masculinity and expectations of the patriarchy. This is why feminism exists. Feminism is about obliterating the patriarchy, dismantling sexist stereotypes for ALL PEOPLE, and creating a society in which equality and acceptance exists for all.
I find these articles about "what about the boys" so infuriating. Just like white supremacists whine about not being able to celebrate their whiteness, this mentality assumes that boys and men have not been at the forefront of everything for most of humanity's existence.
Here's an example: medical testing is done almost exclusively on males. Why? Because menstruation is considered too difficult of a variable to manage. So the birth control pill, created to prevent pregnancy, to be taken by women, was tested exclusively on males, who cannot get pregnant and would not be taking the pills.
If our society truly wants to recognize and address the struggles of boys and men, it needs to embrace feminism. It will only be when boys and girls and men and women are fully accepted and treated as HUMAN BEINGS and not genitalia and sexist stereotypes (that include all sorts of sick and harmful expectations) will our society move forward and help everyone who needs it.
Men, they're like white supremacists
Conflating the entire male gender with racists shows just how hateful, delusional and miseducated you are. Gender studies degree I'm guessing?
I agree
As an outspoken feminist, I agree. Gender roles are a double edged sword; whereas girls are taught they are inherently more delicate than men and therefore that crying etc. is only natural, boys are taught that to show emotion, to be shy/sensitive, or, god forbid, to cry in front of other boys, is a sign of weakness/femininity and makes them less valid in the eyes of other males. It is this attitude that creates a vicious cycle; the boy who is continually told to 'man up' grows up to be a man who cannot deal with or express his emotions and treats 'wimpy' men the same way he was treated. Then he tells his son/grandson/nephew/student to man up, and it starts again.
Also, you wouldn't believe how many people have seen me talk about the issues guys are faced with, and are shocked when I say I'm a feminist. Stop saying that standing up for men's rights is oppressive to women, and vica versa. It's supposed to be about equality.
P.S this comments section is really awful and completely missing the point. You're all acting like this post is a brave stand against the evil lies and oppression of those who believe in women's rights/empowerment. OP specifically said that there is nothing wrong with standing up for the rights of either sex.