• Men Depicted as Victims Part 2 – “Depressed, Repressed, Objectified: Are Men the New Women?” by E. Day – Or: Is it Scientifically Plausible That Men Are Innately Dumber Than Women And Do Men Biologically Prefer to Fail School?

 Men Depicted as Victims Part 2 – “Depressed, Repressed, Objectified: Are Men the New Women?” by E. Day – Or: Is it Scientifically Plausible That Men Are Innately Dumber Than Women And Do Men Biologically Prefer to Fail School?

If you’ve seen the blog heading, please do me a favor and read the entire post before tweeting or posting nasty comments at me. Thank you. (Do I seriously think that all men are born dumber than all women, and so on? No. I’m trying to make a point that will become clearer as the post continues.)

I recently found this web page by E. Day below – it was published in 2008. It’s a report filled with quotes by men (and if I remember correctly, a few women) complaining that today, men are victims, that men have life so, so very difficult, those poor things.

What was I just saying in an older post?

I was just saying that my fellow conservatives disparage feminism for one reason of several because they claim that feminism creates a perpetual victim-hood status or victim-hood mentality in girls and women.

But, I noted in that older post, this anti-feminist and conservative supposed disdain for victim-hood mentality sure does not halt all the men in “men’s rights groups,” or conservatives, or other types of anti-feminist men and women, from pitying men, and depicting all men as victims.

Some of the things some of the men complain about in the article below – about how men are supposedly treated so unfairly by women or by culture, or how men have this or that aspect of life more difficult – are actually products of a patriarchal culture – not of feminism.

These men are blaming women or feminism (or Western culture) for some of the very problems that patriarchy has created. And who benefits from patriarchy? Not women – only a small number of men at the top of the pyramid, that’s who. But women (or feminism) get blamed. As usual.


Also, as to the portions of the article that talk about how girls are out-scoring boys on reading tests, how young women are earning more college degrees than men, and all the other ways that women are “beating” men in culture or employment:

Hey, how about I pull a trick like the James-Damore supporters do, the MRAs, the anti-feminists (such as the Christina Hoff Sommers, the Susan Pinkers, and the Katie Rophies), and my fellow conservatives, and suggest the reason women are out-performing men in school and jobs is due to – science! SCIENCE!

That’s right, let’s just posit that a scientific study out there that would corroborate that men are biologically inferior than women in educational aptitude and in ambition across the board – from life to jobs to school, and that boys and men are born dumber at reading than girls, and that all men do not have an innate desire to earn college degrees, hold jobs, or earn straight A’s.

Therefore, men, and those who support men (and who hate feminism), should realize that there is actually no sexism against men in education, relationships, or employment. There are actually no problems with lots of boys falling behind in reading classes, or in not graduating college at the same rate as women.

You see, when men fail school work and drop out of school and do nothing but sit around in their boxer shorts all day (while women are out there earning straight A’s and getting college degrees), men are just fulfilling their genetic programming and evolutionary destiny, that’s all there is to that.

Men are actually happy, deep down – and should feel content – fulfilling their biological programming of living life as failures, in frustration, while the women are out-performing them.

God obviously created men to be perpetual losers who have no ambition, who can’t read worth a damn, and God never intended for boys and men to keep up with female students.

How do you pro-Damore types and complementarians like it when the tables are turned on men like that? That’s what you jerks do to women in these discussions, but you argue it in the reverse. 

Interspersed through out this article, I’ve included a few comments (in brackets).

Depressed, repressed, objectified: are men the new women?

They’re less fertile, more weight-obsessed and ‘non-essential to parenting’. No wonder men are confused about modern masculinity.
 reporting by Elizabeth Day

If recent research is anything to go by, 21st century man is in a desperate muddle.

In June, men discovered that their libidos are in freefall, prompting a 40 per cent increase in males seeking counselling for impotence problems. Their existential angst worsened in July, when British men discovered that they have the most unequal paternity rights in Europe.

According to Nicola Brewer, chief executive of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, fathers in the UK are seen as ‘not essential for parenting’.

The same month saw the publication of a medical study that proved the quality of men’s sperm declines to such an extent after they hit 45 that the chances of a partner’s miscarriage are doubled.

It’s not only their internal biology; men are also succumbing to the traditionally female preoccupation of looking good on the outside, too. Sales of male beauty products have leapt 30 per cent over the past decade.

Almost 20 per cent more men are having plastic surgery than ever before while, last year, researchers from Harvard discovered that a quarter of anorexia and bulimia sufferers is male. During the fashion shows, male models had their own equivalent of the size-zero debate. ‘Male models look chicken-chested, hollow-cheeked and undernourished’ noted the New York Times.

In the UK, men account for 75 per cent of all suicides. They are twice as likely to die from the 10 most common cancers that affect both sexes and, typically, develop heart disease 10 years earlier than women.

….It would be easy to dismiss these arguments as anti-feminist but there are some commentators who think this could be a fundamental misreading of the movement’s original goal: equality for both sexes, rather than the dominance of one at the cost of the other.

Rosie Boycott, who co-founded the feminist magazine Spare Rib in 1971, points out that their first editorial insisted liberation should be for men as well as women. ‘It is as much of a trap for a man aged 18-65 to feel solely financially responsible for 2.2 children and his wife, to be entitled to two weeks’ holiday a year and to work nine to five, as it is for a woman to be responsible for all the childcare and housework,’ she says.
‘Men don’t feel comfortable admitting that they’re taking time off work to take their daughter to the dentist. We need a bigger critical mass of people to make that happen.’

…At the lowest end of the economic scale, women are still attempting to shrug off the yoke of oppression and inequality.

Meanwhile for many men, their loss of status in the home and the workplace is twinned with a loss of confidence in themselves. Neil Oliver, the television historian who has just published Amazing Tales for Making Men out of Boys, says that there is a conspicuous dearth of positive male role models.

…In the classroom, too, boys are at risk of losing out on male role models.

…Some critics argue that this creeping ‘feminisation’ has led to girls outperforming boys on almost every level: they use more words, speak more fluently in longer sentences and with fewer mistakes. [Note by blog owner: I already did a post debunking this idea that schools are “feminized” and therefore suit girls more]

…For a long time, it wasn’t particularly fashionable to stand up for men. Warren Farrell, the daddy of the so-called ‘masculinist’ movement, has been making his arguments since the late 1970s and frequently attracts outrage. His books –Why Men Earn More and his latest, Does Feminism Discriminate Against Men? – seek to redress what he sees as an endemic sociocultural bias against his gender.

In almost all respects, he believes that men are now the weaker sex: ‘The problem with feminism is that it saw man as the enemy. When only one sex wins, both sexes lose.’ [Note: feminism did not see men as the enemy. This is one of the several common misconceptions anti-feminists typically hold of feminists or feminism]

On a superficial level, Farrell’s insistence that men are scrabbling around in the dark searching for their lost masculinity like a mislaid dumbbell seems ill-conceived and borderline offensive.

However, over the last few months, several books have been written reiterating Farrell’s belief that men are disgruntled with their lot and must fight back against a Western culture that worships womanhood while demeaning masculinity.

Apparently, men are stymied by biology as well – human genetics experts estimate that man will be extinct within 125,000 years owing to their declining sperm count and the mutation of the Y chromosome.

So – although women hold only 17 per cent of parliamentary positions across the globe, despite there being only 10 female CEOs of Fortune 500 companies and ignoring the fact that it is still illegal for a woman to drive a car in Saudi Arabia – it seems that, sometimes, it is harder to be a man.

Just ask Guy Garcia, author of the forthcoming The Decline of Men, an upbeat look at how the American male is ‘tuning out, giving up and flipping off his future’.

There is, says Garcia, ‘a social predisposition to treat men as unworthy parents, betrayers and incorrigible philanderers’.

Or there’s Michael Gilbert, whose 2007 study, The Disposable Male, does pretty much what it says on the tin. ‘Motherhood is immutable,’ Gilbert writes. ‘Paternity is the social construct. Amazingly, we have been doing everything we can to deconstruct it.’

[Note by blog owner: I can correct this Gilbert guy on  societal attitudes towards this parenthood thing right now. I’m over the age of 40, a woman, and I’ve never married, never had children, due to circumstance, not by choice.

And let’s just say that my fellow conservatives, Christians, and some segments of secular culture treat never-married and/or childless women such as myself as losers, failures, or freaks of nature. So if this guy thinks only men face some kind of discrimination in the area of fatherhood, he is sorely mistaken, and he can get bent.]

Nor is it just men who have taken up the cudgel. This year saw the publication of Save the Males: Why Men Matter, Why Women Should Care by Kathleen Parker, a pithy stateside newspaper columnist who prides herself on her Coulter-esque capacity to say the unsayable. ‘I think men are confused because they are receiving conflicting and often confusing messages from women and culture,’ she explains. ‘…

Parker reserves much of her ire for ‘the highly lucrative boy-bashing industry’ that views sexual discrimination against men as a form of shared hilarity. So while you can buy T-shirts emblazoned with the slogan ‘Boys Are Stupid – Throw Rocks At Them’, to claim the same about women would be viewed as an incitement to violence.

…Discrimination against men increasingly seems socially acceptable. ‘When Susan Pinker, the highly regarded psychologist and journalist published her recent book, The Sexual Paradox: Troubled Boys, Gifted Girls and the Real Difference Between the Sexes, she received an email from a colleague asking her to give a comment ‘on the difference between men and women’s brains – or rather, men’s lack of brains!’

[Note by blog owner: Susan Pinker and Parker are concerned about girls wearing t-shirts that say “boys drool,” or “throw rocks at boys,” but meanwhile, boys and men are sometimes murdering girls and women who sexually reject them or who refuse to date them.

Do a Google search for the name Elliot Rodger. And see this news story as well – there are many, many more like it online about other men who have killed women who refused to date them or have sex with them.

I thought anti-feminists argue that feminists make a big deal out of small potatoes and mock them for this?

You know, American women are not supposed to complain about pay gaps or cat-calling or sexual harassment on jobs in the United States or the UK, all because men in Middle-Eastern, Islamic nations throw acid in the faces of girls and women.

Somehow, in this bizarre logic, men throwing acid on Islamic girls, or stoning women to death in honor killings, makes all forms of milder sexism or sexual harassment against Western women totally acceptable.]

…Nor is this cheerful presumption of man’s uselessness limited to fatherhood. The Advertising Standards Bureau reports a steady increase each year in the number of complaints about the way men are portrayed on television as ‘buffoons’ or ‘idiots’.

…Does any of this really matter when men occupy an almost unquestioned position of primacy in nearly all walks of life? Are they getting their boxer shorts in a twist about trivialities? And is it patronising to assume that the nagging disaffection felt by primarily middle-class men in the Western hemisphere is shared by men the world over?


Pinker is quoted at the end of that piece as saying she thinks we’re all just people, and she does not believe in the “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus” rhetoric.

Has Pinker not noticed that it’s anti-feminists who are guilty of perpetuating the “Men Are From Mars, Women From Venus” nonsense?

Christian gender complementarians and secular anti-feminists (some of whom are conservative) constantly argue and want to point to scientific studies that purportedly show that women and men are biologically different in every area or are designed by God to be interested in only some tasks, hobbies, or jobs, and not in others.

Pinker herself sometimes criticizes feminism, but it’s not really feminists who are setting up these false dichotomies or arguments that, ‘All women want X or are designed to be Z or are biologically programmed to be Y,’ or that, ‘All men want C or are designed to be W or are programmed to be G.’

It would generally be Christian gender complementarians and other conservative anti-feminists who engage in that sort of argumentation.

But here we have it:

A 2008 article summarizing, up to that point, many of the comments, books, or arguments by people (mostly by male authors, but a few women as well) that…

  • men are just big old victims of women,
  • men are victims of culture,
  • boys and men are victims of educational systems,
  • boys and men are victims of genetics,
  • boys and men are victims of feminism, and
  • boys and men victims of about anything and everything else in life.

And the conservatives and other anti-feminists have the audacity to say that feminists are promoting a “victim hood culture” among women? I don’t think so. It looks like they themselves have a running start at painting boys and men as being Victims in life.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.