Movements, moods and political ideals

Following a bit more back-and-forth with my commentator, I've been thinking a great deal about what I've been looking at, and what I've been writing.

In the last month in particular, I've been spending more and more time on the MRA sites and boards. And stopping for a moment and looking objectively at where my mind has been going, I'm a little concerned.

I started exploring this because, when I found these sites, I found a lot of what struck me as genuine problems facing men and boys today which could do with close scrutiny. These were issues like health, divorce law, education, domestic violence and apparent cultural misandry.

I also found a lot on these sites I did not agree with. Many, if not most, of the men (and women) involved in the MRM are politically conservative - some extremely so. Not all, but a lot. Being a liberal myself, that can be problematic, particularly when it comes to their views on society, and also women. Sometimes, it feels more that what they really desire is a return to pre-femenist ideals. Either that, or women are just the enemy (I don't frequent the Men Going Their Own Way sites, but there are quite a lot of them). Then, of course, there's the whole tricky world of Game tied up with the MRM, something I'm not comfortable with at all, but seems to be gaining prominence, particularly with Paul Elam, who is one of the leading MRA figures. The pattern often seems to be more about victimising yourself and 'protecting' yourself, over actually working or campaigning to make things better (not always, mind - once again I will reference Glenn Sacks, whose Fathers&Families group is doing a lot of good in the US).

There is also the problem that a lot of the debates that occur with feminists come from the more extreme wing of the feminist movement (in honesty, they're the ones most likely to be blogging and commentating), resulting in a very real 'us vs. them' mentality - which quite often doesn't actually translate when you step out your door and walk into the real world.

But, besides all of this, I found issues raised that in my mind still stood. And so, in order to examine those, I decided to start this blog. The intention was, as I said in my introductory post:

really trying to figure a lot out of it in my head – how it affects my life, what I can do, whether I agree with or believe some of what is found in the MRA (men's rights activists) blogs and forums

[...]

Finally, one last thing, just to be clear: I am not here to play victim.

Having written that, I jumped back onto the MRM sites with renewed vigour, constantly reading them, checking up on them, and absorbing what they've been saying.

It would appear that over the last month, such dedicated following has removed my objectivity. I appear to have stopped looking at them critically, picking the wheat from the chaff of their discussions and ideas, and begun taking it all as read.

Interestingly, this appears to have impacted on my emotional state - I've noticed a sharp decline in my mood overall, and an increased tendency to get angry with little provocation. I sometimes feel as though I am looking or waiting for something misandric to rear its head so I can confront whoever or whatever it is. In short, I think I allowed myself to start believing the confrontational rhetoric constantly being pumped out, even whilst telling myself that wasn't the case.

Now, I wouldn't entirely say that this is a bad thing - for one, it gives an indication of quite how easy it is, and a possible further explanation for why so many of these men are so angry, egging one another on and on, day after day, month after month, year after year.

But mostly it was a bad thing.

Of course, what it has meant for this blog is that, rather than look at the issues that initially bothered me (aside from rape anonymity), I began trying to define the ideological beliefs of the MRM - many of which I had originally intended to question - in essence, to re-say what other people had said. Instead of critically questioning it, I have regurgitated it as absolute truth. In fairness to myself, I've not written anything which I necessarily believe to be factually untrue, but have automatically accepted the political and ideological explanations of them with increasing vigour (I may not have posted many yet, but there has been a check-list of posts waiting to be written up).

And then, suddenly, *snap*. Something changed. It was almost like waking up suddenly. I looked at what's here and just thought "That's not right. That's not what I wanted. It's not what's important. And it's not my thinking." And I felt a sudden need to redress the balance, hence Ribbons for Prostate Cancer.

So there we have it: a lesson in being careful in getting caught up in political and idealogical movements without keeping a check on yourself.

What's my plan now? Well, I'm going to keep going, though I'll take a short breather. I thought about deleting some of my previous posts, but actually, I'm not going to - it seems like cheating, somehow. What I will be trying to do from here on in is hopefully demonstrated better in my last post: a look at one of the issues raised in the MRM, hopefully some analysis of the problems, and my own thoughts on the issue.

*Sigh*. Nothing worth doing's ever easy, is it?

Ribbons for Prostate Cancer

Ok, following my last couple of posts, I'm going to move on for the time being to something somewhat less conceptual, 'victim-y' and more readily obvious - but also something I (bizarrely) hope to be able to sound a bit more positive about in my outlook: the Cancer issue.

As I'm sure you know, a large proportion of research funding for cancers in the UK is actually provided by research charities, not the NHS or government. Particularly at the moment, with spending cuts being what they are, the need for charitable donations and awareness campaigns is very high.

In amongst all the different types of cancer, there are certain ones that are (generally) gender-specific: breast cancer, gynaecological cancers, prostate cancer, and testicular & penile cancers.

Of these, breast cancer arguable has the best awareness campaign. In particular, Cancer Research UK runs some fantastic campaigns - I for one seem to see a donation tub in every other shop, cafe or pub. I see adverts all over the internet, and regularly on television, and in magazines and papers. I see shops which join in campaigns, perhaps by offering donations when you buy a particular product. Women will regularly write opinion columns on the subject. Women's events such as Race For Life generate a great deal of money and publicity for Cancer Research UK. I've seen women wearing ribbons, badges, t-shirts, all to help keep the issue in the public eye.

And that's no bad thing. In the UK alone, around 12,000 women a year die from breast cancer, from 45,500 diagnosed. This is a very serious problem, and the more money going towards it, the more lives can be saved.

Of the gynaecological cancers, the most widely and publicly talked about is cervical cancer, and there have been many loud discussions and campaigns to encourage more women - particularly young women - to get screenings. Perhaps it is strange to think that the 20% rise in screenings in 2009 was mostly due to Jade Goody, but that's still a good thing - it got the papers and morning programmes talking about it, it got people at work talking about it, it got women getting themselves checked out.

Of the other gynaecological cancers, I'm afraid to say I have heard little, outside of what I have found on cancer research and awareness websites.

*****

I imagine some of you are now expecting me to compare men's cancer awareness and blast a disproportionate campaign or something, but I'm not going to do that. There are, in fact, good resources and good campaigns already happening. True, we're not hearing about them as much (or certainly, I'm not), but at whose door do we lay that?

I know about prostate and testicular cancer. I know that prostate cancer kills about 10,000 men each year in the UK. I know another 2,000 will be diagnosed with testicular cancer. Penile cancer only effects very few men in the UK, but is quite more widespread in Africa and Asia.

But what have I done about it? Up to now, very little. What have the men I know done about it? Well, I don't know who may or may not donate, but how many men do you know who turned blue this year? How many ran in Keep Your Eye On The Ball? Or even just bought the t-shirt?

I know I didn't. And I can't think of anyone who did. Apologies if I know you and you did, but I just cannot bring it to mind.

And that is my fault. My responsibility. And also, if you are a man, yours.

I've seen quite a few MRAs complaining that men aren't allowed onto certain women-only fund-raising events. What I don't seem to see them doing, is organising events or campaigns of their own. Perhaps I'm wrong on that, perhaps someone can point me towards one, but it seems that many of them would rather complain about what they perceive us as not having, than trying to increase what we do. There's a lot of noise blown about to do with the fact that - in particular - breast cancer gets a lot more funding than prostate cancer, despite the similar risks and fatalities, but that is because women are getting organised and trying to do something about it is a way men just are NOT. If we want our funding to increase, perhaps we should get off our collective arse and do something about it.

Of course, when it comes to medical stuff, that's just something men aren't all that good at doing. I'm the same - I'll leave twinges, aches and what-have-you, in order to see if it'll just go away. I'm generally rather reluctant to go to the doctor, and don't know if I've ever gone just for an unprompted check-up. In the past, I've not examined myself as often as I should. I found a wonderful "how can women help" suggestion on a site I'm afraid I've misplaced, so cannot link to, which basically said 'nag him'. But that does hold a particular truth to it - how many men go to the doctor, not of their own will, but because their partner made them?

A couple of facts MRAs like to bring out repeatedly are men's shorter life-expectancies, and in the case of cancer, the much higher mortality rate men suffer. But, at some point, don't we have to stop playing victim about it all, stop shouting 'unfair', and maybe look to see if we can do something positive to help change that?

Certainly I know I can, should, and will do a lot more. And I would wholeheartedly encourage you, if you currently don't, do do the same.

Misogyny in the MRM

There's a problem in the men's rights movement, and that problem is misogyny.

Now, I don't believe the MRM is inherently misogynistic - it is, ultimately, a movement concerning itself with men, not women. However, a great deal of discussion within the movement is concerned with women - particularly feminism - and sometimes the discussion goes too far down a road I am not comfortable with. There are certain sites I will not visit, certain forums I will not post on, because of what I find other men on there saying.

The thing is, I do understand why a lot of men in the movement are like this. You see, men tend not to identify themselves as a group - we will divide ourselves by just about every other identity under the sun (colour, race, nationality, religion, geography, class, accent, you name it), but 'men' are not a group, certainly not in the same way as 'women'. We just don't see ourselves that way.

As a result of this, it is very rare for men to spontaneously join the MRM - they will tend to have had something happen to them: a bad divorce; their children taken away from them; finding no support after a domestic violence incident; perhaps a false rape accusation against them or someone close to them; perhaps they have been affected by a law that purports to be 'pro-women', but in its execution becomes 'anti-men'... the list can go on, but it is these things that bring men into the movement. Something has to have happened. And this something has made them angry.

It is hard enough when nothing has happened to you. I myself have not had any particular incident push me here, so I come with no bias attached (or, certainly, as little as can be had). Sometimes, though, reading the stories and articles that come to light every single day, it is impossible not to become angry. Incensed. Absolutely bloody furious.

It is important, when this happens, to retain perspective. I am angry, but I am angry with the situation. I am angry with the politics, laws and societal expectations that allow these things to happen. Sometimes, when I read a story about how a woman did X Y Z, I am angry at the woman. But it is specifically her that I have to confine my anger to - not allow it to spill out and jade my opinion of women overall. Occasionally I may slip, and spend an evening generalising about all women in my head, but this will pass. People are too complex to accurately lump into one huge group, to judge them all based on the actions of a few.

Unfortunately, many men in the MRM seem incapable of doing this, and then we find some very misogynistic writings emerge. It is not healthy for the person doing it, and it is not healthy for the movement as a whole.

And on a personal note, I don't like being associated with these men.

Here's the ultimate problem: in order for the movement to gain momentum, it needs to become more public, its ideas more widely accepted, or at least discussed. Movements do not change societies - societies change when the number of people within them who demand change reaches a critical mass. Movements may act as a catalyst to this, but ultimately nothing will change unless this critical mass is achieved.

In order for that to happen, we need women (and non-aggrieved men) on our side. Particularly women. They are the key. After all, it's not as if women are not affected by these issues as well - whether indirectly (through, say, damage to society), or in fact directly: whatever happens to a man, he is someone's son, father, uncle, brother, boyfriend or husband. What happens to one gender directly affects the other. I predict that when enough women start seeing what is happening to men and boys in our society, and want to do something about it, things will change very, very rapidly.

So this misogynistic talk is incredibly damaging to the movement. I've lost track of the amount of women I've spoken to on discussion boards who have said something along the lines of "I was ready to listen, and then I read ***'s post. You're all a bunch of bitter, woman-hating misogynists" and *click*, we've lost someone who was starting to listen. Someone who may have come onside, started speaking to their female friends about these things, someone who would have put us one step closer to that critical mass... gone. If this carries on, nothing will ever change.

There is talk going on about what to do about it. Glenn Sacks, in particular, has been very vocal about it. But until men start joining the movement, not due to grievances, but due to other less damaging causes, I don't see it stopping. There is not enough self-policing going on, and as these men talk back and forth and encourage each other more and more, the very people we need as our allies are being driven away.

I really don't know what to do about it. It's one of the primary reasons I began this blog, actually - to try to talk to people who aren't involved, to try to talk to people who aren't aggrieved, who have perhaps never thought about this before, to introduce them to these ideas without it being steeped in this damaging dialogue. Perhaps my little bit will help, perhaps it won't, but hopefully I'll be able to look back on this and say that I drew people in, not pushed them away. Hopefully.

A video regarding the whole rape accusation business

Following my last post, I've had a couple of... heated debates... with people.

I don't want to dwell, and I have another topic which I intend to discuss tomorrow (probably before anyone reads this), but this video has been playing around my mind for days.

So, for anyone who is anti-anonymity:

Just watch.

Rape Anonymity Proposal Dropped

*Note: this post is going to be more direct and less exploratory than I intended for this blog overall. I will resume normal service soon, but I really do have to say this.*

You may not have heard, but a few days ago the proposal for rape charge anonymity was dropped by the Ministry for Justice.

Now, this is a very touchy subject, and I was not planning on talking about it for a while, but circumstances are what they are and it seems foolish not to talk about this one at the present time.

Rape is a horrific crime - I'm not going to say otherwise, and I doubt anyone else will. We should do all that we can in order to help victims of rape, and to take those who commit it to justice.

However, there is a serious problem when it comes to being accused of rape: in the eyes of society, you are not innocent until proven guilty. Once your name is publicised, you are guilty and you will not get that stain off, no matter what the courts may prove. It doesn't matter if you are acquitted, because once the suggestion is out there, you are highly unlikely to escape it. "No smoke without fire" is not a truism, but it is the unfortunate motto that the court of popular opinion carries.

Now, before I go on, I would like to make an important point. One of the primary arguments the opposition to the proposal have used, as stated in the above article, is that

"People are no more likely to be falsely accused of rape than of other crimes. Why this attempt to further discredit and discriminate against rape survivors?"

Well, here's the thing: in the public eye, rape is trumped only by paedophilia. No other crime accusation is going to cost you as much as that of rape, as I will go into below. And no other crime accusation is taken by the public on face value as much as rape; and even if one is (say, there is a high-profile murder and everyone 'knows' who did it) but then they are exonerated, everyone knows. It is trumpeted loudly, top headline on the evening news, front page in the newspapers. When one is accused of rape and it appears in your local paper, you bet it's on the front page - and it might even make the nationals. When you are exonerated? Chances are it will be buried in the middle of the local, and not make the nationals at all - nobody hears about it. And even when they do... no smoke without fire... he just got away with it...

I said no crime other than paedophilia is more reviled than rape, and I mean it. Even murderers may get excused by the public due to their motives. They may get excused to a degree by judges depending on their motives. There's even a subset of people who will send them love letters and proposals of marriage - to the extent that men as despicable as Charles Manson find themselves with fans and would-be lovers.

And, of course, there's always Lorena Bobbit. You tell me that wasn't as bad as rape and I'll show you an idiot. And she made it onto the chat-show circuit.

So, an accusation of rape sticks. Well, how bad can that be? Without going into too much detail, false rape accusations can and do lead to men losing their jobs, their friends, their families, their homes and even committing suicide. This happens more often than you would be comfortable knowing. And the kicker, the real twist of the knife, is that because rape accusers are kept anonymous no matter the outcome of the charge... they are able to do it again! There is such the thing as the 'serial rape accuser', and because she is kept anonymous even after her accusation is proved false, it means that not only does she usually go unpunished, it also means that juries in later rape cases cannot take her history of false accusation into account. That, at least, may be changing.

There are numerous arguments that groups protesting the proposal have brought forwards. I do not believe any of them justify preventing anonymity:

1) Anonymity will stop victims from reporting rape.

Anonymity for accused rapists under 18 exists, and that doesn't seem to have stopped anyone from reporting, charging and trying them. Even without that, there is actually no logic to this statement - there is no evidence whatsoever that anonymity will stop people reporting.

2) Anonymity will stop other victims of that particular rapist from coming forwards.

Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'? This is based on the presumption that one accused is already guilty. If he (or she) is convicted, and his (or her) name is released, other victims who want to come forward can do - safe in the knowledge that they will be fully believed and the rapist won't be free to come after them or anything similar - and the new evidence can be used to re-try and extend the sentence.

3) Anonymity promotes the idea that the victim is lying.

How? This one I really don't understand - protection of one person's identity does not imply guilt of the other in any sane person's mind.

4) False rape claims only make up a small proportion of all claims.

So??? Is it now ok to reverse Blackstone's formulation so that now it is "better that ten innocent persons suffer than that one guilty goes free"?

Besides that, we really don't know how many rape accusations are false. In looking at various articles published on Sunday, I came across the figures of 2%, 9% and 10%. But other studies put it as high as 50%. HALF!!! The truth is, we just don't know.

5) Why should men accused of rape have special protection over those accused of other crimes?

Because rape is not like other crimes, and has far more potential to damage and destroy lives of those implicated. There is a reason the (alleged) victim is kept anonymous - because it is not akin to other crimes, and we all know it.

6) Women don't lie.

Seriously, I have encountered this one. Women don't lie, and especially don't lie about rape. This story, of a woman crying rape on a complete stranger who wouldn't buy her a beer, begs to differ.

The simple fact is that rape is a special case, and needs to be regarded as such. I have never seen a convincing argument against anonymity for the accused, whilst I have seen very convincing arguments for it's necessity - and I promise you, I'm only scratching the surface here. The implications of this proposal being dropped disturb me greatly. The new government has set a precedent, and not a good one - when faced with a very vocal but ultimately insubstantial opposition, they have backed down. Any progress for the issues I talk about here is now going to be that much harder to achieve.

There's a great deal of information, statistics and news stories to be found at The False Rape Society's blog. I strongly urge you to have a look.

Introduction

Hello, greetings, welcome and thanks for coming here.

So, why am I here and what am I hoping to achieve with this blog? To be honest I'm not entirely sure. I can, though, explain why I have decided to set this up:

Over the last few months, I have been pulled into the world of the men's rights movement. The principle tenant of the MRM is that male gender-specific problems are woefully under-considered in modern society. They believe that feminism has pushed too far, and that men and boys are now getting a very raw deal as a result. They believe that the current situation is unfair, unethical, and ultimately dangerous.

And, in honesty, when you look at what they're talking about it's hard to disagree.

Now, I know some of you probably already think I'm full of it, and before I continue I would like to make a very important point: I do not think that men and only men are victims today. I know that women have gender-specific issues, and I completely agree that they need to be dealt with and resolved as best as possible. What does concern me, however, is how little men's issues are considered in comparison to women's issues. They do not make the news, do not fill opinion columns, do not make it onto talk shows – or, when they do, the defenders of men's rights are often talked to as if they are simply whining and ought to 'man up'. Comparative research and support funding for men's issues in relation to women's is so insignificant as to be at times practically zero. Often it feels that, if the genders were reversed, we'd be all over it in a heartbeat.

So I am going to be discussing the ideas of the men's rights movement on here. I believe that the dialogue really needs to be opened up, to become more public. I think, frankly, that far too many people are just not aware that these issues even exist to begin with. So yes, I will predominantly be talking about men's rights – though probably not exclusively.

So what will I actually be posting? Well, as I said I'm a bit new to all this, and I'm really trying to figure a lot out of it in my head – how it affects my life, what I can do, whether I agree with or believe some of what is found in the MRA (men's rights activists) blogs and forums. I'm trying to process it all, so in some ways this blog is ultimately like some big therapy session... how lucky for you all...

The upshot of that is that I'm not intending to be posting example after example of every incident that ever occurs. There are some very good fact-based blogs and sites out there already, and all I would be doing in that case is copying what they've said over again. I may (probably will) link to them, use them as a starting board, but really, this is about me trying to figure out where to go from here – how to become not an MRA, not a feminist, but what I would call a true Equalitarian. Essentially, I don't want to be telling anyone what to think, what to feel or how to behave. I want to discuss it with everyone else.

Probable upcoming topics will include (though not necessarily in this order):

• Marriage & divorce: should you protect yourself?
• Domestic Violence: where are the men's shelters?
• In a world where women work, is alimony outdated?
• Ribbons for prostate cancer
• Gender roles and the Patriarchy
• Men and mental health
• Anti-male feminists
• Anti-female MRAs
• Anonymity for those accused of rape
• Male vs female expendability
• Minister for Men – is it time?
• The continuing decline of boys in education
• Equality at work: boardrooms vs basements
• Misandry vs misogyny in modern society
• Let's talk toilet seats: the Sitzpinkler effect

Finally, one last thing, just to be clear: I am not here to play victim. I know I live a very fortunate, comfortable and privileged life. White, western, middle-class, educated, employed... I know that. That does not stop me being concerned when I look out into the world and see other people's lives being damaged unnecessarily. And when nobody else seems to be willing or able to raise these issues, to talk about them, to ask “why?”, then I feel like I have to. But I am not about to play victim here.

Please, if you do not agree with me, do not try to argue with me by pointing out how privileged my life is, nor by pointing to history. History cannot be used as an excuse for the sins of the present, and pointing out my privileges does not help those who do not share them. I want to discuss these issues rationally and logically from different people's perspectives – not play a never ending game of 'who has it worse'.

Thanks for reading and, if you're interested, please do keep an eye on things; hopefully we'll get something interesting going on here!