Wednesday, October 28, 2009

How about you "Man up" these OK?

Yeah I know that's an aggressive title but I'll also add that no matter who you are feel free to substitute "these" for whatever body parts you want. Testicles, ovaries, breasts, hell your two middle fingers if you want to go classic. Point is I think that "Man up." needs to be removed from the vocabulary just like using the word dick to describe an unlikable person or pussy to describe a coward.

Tonight I read this post at Renee's place. She does a good job of critiquing an Onion story about boys are forced into specific gender roles via Halloween costumes (a phenomenon that is rarely touched on) and also touches on how males that don't perform these roles properly are rendered invisible. Go check it out. My purpose here is about a phrase she used in her post.
It takes the form of telling a child not to cry, or to man up in the face of fear, even withholding of affection. (emphasis courtesy of me)

Oh how I've grown to despise that phrase. Now just to be clear Renee isn't telling those boys they need to man up by conforming to someone else's image of being a boy/man but is pointing out how that shaming language like that is used to make boys and men do things they would normally not do or to not do things they would normally do.

That line invokes fear. Fear that can be used to cause shame. Shame that can be used to take power over males.

This fear can override a boy's better judgment. Want a boy to do an insane stunt that he knows will likely severely injure him if not kill him. Tell him to man up and do the damn stunt anyway. This shame can be used to cause a man to go against his personality. Want a man to think that he is not aggressive enough with the woman in his life (and if that partner is not a woman...well that's a post all its own)? Tell him to man up and put her in her place (most of the time this would not include the escalation to violence but it can). This power can lead a man beyond what he has set as his reasonable limits. Want a man to perform a sex act that he would normally not do? Tell him to man up and don't be scared to slap and choke her if she says she wants him to.

Now I know a lot of people would just say that its his responsibility because he did those things and that the problem is that he gave in to that shame and fear which granted his teaser those powers over him. True but at the same time there is the very real problem of people using these tactics for they are proof that people have their idea of what it is to be a man and they are willing to impose this image on men and boys in order to get what they want. And for those of us who don't dance the dance they want us to dance and dance it to their tune this can be very problematic.

Take my fingernails for instance

Yes that is a picture of my left hand about a month ago. Part of the male gender role is that we are supposed to be dirty and not care about things like taking care of our fingernails. That's for women in salons for 3 hours every two weeks right? So you can imagine the time I've had with the fact that I actually put some effort into taking care of them. Over the years I've had commentary ranging from, "Men aren't supposed to have long nails". to "Those are an instant hysterectomy. Cut 'em!" to "I'm gonna hold you down and cut them for you." and my personal favorite, "How are you supposed to get pussy with nails like that?"

So by simply not obeying one rule of manhood I'm effectively declared to be not a man. This is a big problem. For people to try to label my gender (and in some cases question my sexuality) based on a single act stinks of trying to get me to conform to their idea of what a man is supposed to be. And I can only imagine that it is only worse for men that go outside the norm even farther than I do. A lisp in the voice? The occasional dangling wrist? A fondness for skirts and makeup? Wearing an angel costume for Halloween? Having sex with men? The list goes on. Pushed out of the man camp and used as a target for ridicule, insults, and abuse in an effort to protect their precious image of what a man should be.

One thing I've learned about being a man is that you have be a man on your own terms. If for you that means hunting deer at 6am then knitting at 6pm then dammit do it. If for you that means having sex with your boyfriend at 8pm then playing video games together at midnight then dammit do it. If you wear flannel, jeans, and boots for your day job then wear heels, hot pants, and a halter top at the club at night then dammit do it. There doesn't have to be a set script for being a man and frankly I'm tired of playing by it.

(Edit: Found a nice post at Good Men Project that I think fits nicely here.)

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

An entire genre one sample does not make

I've never seen or read any of the True Blood material but judging by this it seems that this one variation is clouding everyone's minds about what vampire fiction has been, is now, will be, and can be. In that post True Blood is described as vampire fiction that is geared toward women. In and of itself there's nothing wrong with that but it also sounds like he is trying to say that all vampire fiction is oriented towards women and men have no interest in it. I beg to differ.

Dudes just don't dig bloodsuckers, since vampires pretty much look like girls. We prefer zombies, because we love chainsaws, flamethrowers, and samurai swords.
Maybe he is trying to invoke homophobia or something but there are plenty of men who don't need massive explosions, severed limbs, and fountains of blood and gore in order be entertained. There is just as much (maybe more depending on who you ask) thrill in watching ones pray from a distance, planning your move. Slowly and surely making your way towards them. Walk behind them for what may feel like hours, enjoying the hunt. Time enough to build anticipation for the kill. At some point you may even find an opening to strike up conversation before seeing her on her merry way. She is on her street, nearly home and no one is around. Now is your chance. Rush at your target so quickly all she detects is a light breeze. Her fate is sealed. There is nothing behind her but a chill in the air. She turns to continue home but the path is blocked by the last thing she will ever see. A cold stare that let's her know death has come and death will not be denied.

Sure you could take a knife and carve her to pieces or you could take her in your arms like a lover and with a slight pinch drink her very life away. Or perhaps you wish to have a companion on your journey through the dark. Just remember not to drink too much or you will have to hunt again...

As for looking like women a lot of men who want power will not let the feminine like appearance of the vampire deter them. Jean Claude from the Anita Blake universe is described as a Frenchman (if I recall his nationality right) with pale soft skin is more seducer then brute. While that may sound like a sissy bear in mind dear Jean Claude is a few hundred years old, has a clan of werewolves at his beck and call, and can turn a person into his eternal familiar (a person that has increased abilities but has the bonus of not being a vampire meaning they can operate during the day and act in their master's/mistress' stead.

But as to why men are draw to vampires he almost answers his own question:
Women love bad boys - they're exciting, and the chance to change him, to break him like a horse, must be an irresistible challenge. If self-destruction weren't seductive on some superficial level, then no one would ever need rehab.
Simply knowing that women love bad boys is enough motivation for men to want dark seductive powers and control of the night. While that woman is trying to break his wide side he is trying to bring out her dark side.

Zombie movies indulge male power-fulfillment fantasies. We enjoy pretending to be dragon-slaying knights or bad-guy-perforating cowboys or Bruce Willis, saving our ex-wife from a skyscraper full of terrorists.
And what is more powerful than having command of what normal people don't know about, religious people fear, and other dark being hate? Its one thing to go in guns blazing and kill all the enemies. Its quite another to slip in under the cover of dark, kill everyone, and come out unscathed. A certain finesse that Bruce Willis could only dream of. Such abilities are desirable enough on their own but add the fact that women find these things attractive as well?
...the men are disposable
Well at least he's got something right here (but that is a different post for a different day).

But finally this:
A vampire is a monster, who looks, acts, and talks like a man. Who is passionate, romantic, and tortured. To surrender to this character is to play with fire. The vampire, in many ways, is the prototype of the bad boy.
almost makes me wonder if he is even familiar with female vampires. A being with an almost insatiable sexual appetite that is more than enough for any man. Wild, bold, and uninhibited. This unholy creature disguised as a woman could just as easily take a man to heights of ecstasy that he has never dreamed of as she could drain his life away. But many a man is willing to take that chance.

Or maybe I'm only going off on this because I'm not the stereotypical guy. Whatever the reason I have say this Bill sounds a lot like Angel (wait for it.....mmmmmmmmmm....Angel) and therefore may be interesting. But by all that is holy True Blood is not the only source of vampire fiction out there.

(Edit - 10-29-09): I seem to have forgotten a big point here. I speak of the things that draw men to vampires and actually make a bit of an assumption. I presume that the only thing that can draw men is sex appeal to women or having power to exercise over women when that is not the case.

In addition to those things there is one other big attraction. A new sense of freedom. For the most part men live by day and rest by night and even those that rest by day and live by night are more than likely working by night than living by night. To become a vampire would allow a man to leave that world behind and enjoy the nigh in ways he never could. To rest by day and actually live by night would open a whole new world (....and close the old one for to rest by day also means rest by day because going out into day would be fatal.) Hell I could probably entertain myself for a few years alone on the concept of never needing oxygen again.

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Okay its been a while...

It feels like I've been out of the office lately I know but I've been busy with two things.

1. My local volunteer fire department has an annual haunted house every year and I've been spending a lot of my free time working with them on it. I'm not a member of the department but it gives me something to do for Halloween in a place that has almost nothing going on for this fun time of year. Hey I'm in the Bible Belt (and in the same state as this) what can I do? But speaking of something to do for Halloween I do have something planned for that night. Which brings me to...

2. My steampunk costume. I've never done any steampunk stuff before so this is my first try and I have to say for a first try its coming pretty well. Unlike many people (or at least what I see) that usually dress up as nobles, ship captains, inventors, and pirates I've gone with something of a collector costume. You see I figure that all the parts for those nice weapons, ships, and stuff don't just fall out of the sky (well unless pirates use nice weapons to shoot a nice ship down out of the sky I suppose...). Those things have to come from somewhere and that somewhere might be a bit more dicey than a big brained inventor can handle. That's where I come in. With a pouch for tools, protective goggles, a headlight, and several pockets for carrying goods I the guy you call to get you the things you may not be able to...acquire on your own. I will have to remember to take a pic of the finished product.

Well that is what I've been up to for the last 2 weeks or so and will be up to for the next week or so. But don't worry I'll be back soon (like in an hour or so depending on how late I'm up) with my song title link post.

Take it easy.

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

A lesson in Female Anatomy

I just picked up a quick lesson in female anatomy. This made me realize that sometimes its easy to not be mindful of an anatomy that is not yours. I have a good understanding of male anatomy for it is the anatomy that I have but I have no problem saying I don't know female anatomy that well. Just go check it out.

I suppose I'll have to change my name to No One

Karl Lagerfeld has concluded that no one wants to see round women in the fashion world. I would like to counter that Karl Lagerfeld does not know what the fuck he is talking about.

It wasn't that long ago that we were hoping that the standards of beauty were changing but low and behold we have some who want to maintain the old ways. The old ways of beauty that say that models must be a certain shape or they are not beautiful (and I say it like that because no matter which side of the scale we're talking about no one body shape/style should be presented as the standard). The old ways of beauty that lead people to having body image issues. The old ways of beauty that lead to people take on extreme or even potentially dangerous dieting or exercise routines. Those old ways are firstly not healthy for the people that take them up in order to please other people and also doing a disservice to assume that everyone only appreciates a certain specific body shape.

Now I'm sure there are people that would like to defend him by saying that he is only catering to a certain niche of the industry by only working with thin models. Well I can give you that but such a defense does not explain why he thinks that all models should maintain the the body shape that fits his niche much less the presumption that people only want to look at thin models.

To say that thin women are the only ones that people want to see is fat hatred and undermines people's tastes in women.

Damn shame. I really like my name.

Edit (10-28-09): It would seem that I may not be getting my point across as intended. Renee (under the handle womanistmusings) does a nice job of extracting a more precise explanation of what I was trying to say in the comments. Things like this are what make blogging worth it.

Really? They could not find a single one?

Okay most people are aware that blackface is not entertainment. Well it would seem that there are some that think that blackface is high fashion.

French Vogue magazine apparently decided that a European woman in blackface was some sort of high fashion.

The history of blackface is well documented and can be found literally by typing "blackface" into a search engine so it is puzzling, sad, and enraging that someone would do this on such a large scale.

My only question for French Vogue is this: You mean to tell me that out of the entire fashion model industry you could not find a SINGLE black woman to pose in those photos? Couldn't call Tyra Banks out of retirement? Couldn't look Grace Jones up? Couldn't even have a modeling contest and have the prize be the opportunity to be in that issue?

But I'm sure such a high end fashion magazine with a great following could have very easily found a black model for those pictures. So that leaves me thinking that they specifically wanted to have a European woman in blackface instead of finding a black woman. So I suppose the real question is, "How in the world could they have concluded that blackface is anything other than racist?"

Saturday, October 10, 2009

Male Survivor needs your help

Saw this atToy Soldier's place:

I know you all are aware that 2009 has been a very hard year to all non-profit organizations. Here at Male Survivor it has not been any different. Our donations have decreased and some of our members have not been able to renew their memberships. We have tightened our financial belts and continued to look for other sources of support.

Part of that focus has been to put together a team that is working on finding funding for the website, the conference and the Weekend of Recovery program. If you have any experience in successful grant writing and are willing to donate your time to us, please contact me at and I will put you in touch with the development team to work on that project.

Even with the belt tightening, we also need to ask you for your financial help now. Please consider making a donation to Male Survivor. Currently you may do so through the Supporters/Donor tab on the home page or at Or there is now a donate button available to make it easier to donate when you first arrive at the site. Gifts of any size are needed. Please do not think that you cannot make difference. If you are able to donate $8.34 per month, that is $100.00 a year. Your donation can be set up to charge your credit card or bank account automatically each month. Every donation counts.
There are other ways you can help as well. If you have a personal contact at a charitable foundation and are willing to make a personal introduction for the development team, that introduction will help. If your employer supports non-profits, ask if they will consider a gift to Male Survivor. Some companies (Wal-mart and Bright House Networks are examples) have a program where they will financially contribute to non-profits that their employees support with their time. If you have gift cards to office supply stores, grocery stores or others, send them to us and we can use them to buy supplies. If you have a company who gives in kind services, we may be able to use that for the conference, Weekend of Recovery or administrative parts of Male Survivor. Many credit card mileage programs will allow you to make donations using the points you have accumulated. As you can see, there are many ways to help.

Please consider making a donation today. Donations can be to the general expenses of Male Survivor or designated to the endowment fund or to the Memorial Fund which supplies scholarships to the Weekend of Recovery program.

Thank you for continuing to support Male Survivor.

Sexual violence on college campuses is a serious problem... why lie about it?

Under the Clery Act the Campus Violence Prevention Program of University of California*, Davis, reported 48, 68 and 69 forcible sex offenses in 2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively. However due to concerns raised by a member of the staff in April of this year the values were reviewed and it has been determined that the number of reports was artificially increased by a little more than double their original numbers of 21,23, and 33 respectively. It appears that they were falsified by the Campus Violence Prevention Program's (thankfully former, she retired in June of this year) director Jennifer Beeman.

What kind of damage has this caused? Well consider that UC Davis receives the largest share (other schools in the UC system receive portions of it as well) of an almost $1 million dollar grant from the Justice Department that is meant to provide services for victims and to maintain a statewide response to violence on all UC campuses. This means that funds could have been going to UC Davis based on it "high number" of reports when that money could have much better spent going to other places whose numbers might not be as high but are at least real. And it looks like former director Beeman might have been putting some of those ill gotten funds into her pocket.

UC states that Beeman was the one and only person responsible for reviewing cases and reporting statistics. A second person was not involved to verify the data because of get this, the director's concern about privacy laws that require confidentiality for the identities of clients who report cases. Now I'm all for confidentiality but for one person in a program to have all the responsibility for verifying and reporting statistics? On data that may have an effect on how much funding that program receives no less. Thankfully UC Davis has created a new panel to review future statistic which will consist of That panel will include a uniformed command officer from the UC Davis Police Department, a Clery Act specialist from the Office of Student Judicial Affairs and an attorney from the Office of Campus Counsel (hey multiple people, imagine that).

Now this is not good obviously. We all know that sexual violence is a serious problem on college campuses and apparently Jennifer Beeman saw an opportunity to profit from it. In order to stop and prevent it the flow of data, statistics, and reporting must remain true or else you end up with people going around reporting false data. This could lead to other places not getting what they need and also contribute to unnecessary hysteria among the student body.

Tip of the Fro to Robert Franklin.

* - UC Davis’ Campus Violence Prevention Program provides victims of sexual assault, stalking and domestic violence the opportunity to report in confidence and be connected to health care and other support services without necessarily filing a police report.

Friday, October 9, 2009

5 Minus 5

Now that I've managed to finally watch that entire clip I commented on earlier I have to say that that was some offensive shit. Given that they donned blackface to imitate a performance artist this was basically a Minstrel Show. I'm glad Harry Connick Jr. laid into them like he did and gave them a 0. If it were me I would have (assuming the highest a judge can give on that show is 10) given a -20 to ensure their total score could be no higher than 0. Its sad that the second judge Jackie gave them a 7 because they were cute and had great choreography. It seems like the third judge gave a 1 because he thought it was a bad performance but not because of the racism. Lastly it most certainly does not help that the crowd was actively cheering them on and that the judge was calling them the Jackson Jive.

And to make it worse these five did the exact same routine on the show 20 years earlier and won the competition that night. That is not good.

Even without the history of racism and blackface behind this when will we get past the point where we can have comedy that does not require someone to be made fun of because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.....?

More men with breast cancer some forward

Last week I brought up the issue of several marines and relatives of marines who have developed breast cancer after living at Camp Lejeune marine base between the 1960s through 1980s. Since the initial break of the story the number of people who have come forward with breast cancer has doubled to 40.

This video is of more people speaking. One man states that he has no history of breast cancer in his family and does not drink or smoke. Diagnosed at the age of 39 the man says that his exposure came as a result of his pregnant mother coming in contact with toxic levels of chemicals during the 30 year span of the 60s through the 80s.

Today the water is clean but does acknowledge that at one time the water was contaminated yet the Marine Corp. has stated that several scientific studies have found no link between the cancer that has stricken these men and contaminated water. This means that currently the marines and their families are not eligible for benefits.

Senators Richard Burr and Kay Hagan of North Carolina have sponsored and co-sponsored a bill that would give benefits to veterans and and families of veterans that may have been exposed to the contaminated water.

For those interested the site The Few The Proud The Forgotten has been started as a source for those diagnosed to tell their stories. There is also a multimedia section for stories related to the contamination. If you or any of your relatives have every lived at Camp Lejeune during that time span you may be at risk.

As it stands a great disservice is being done to lots of people who have literally put their lives on the line to keep us safe. Such a thing should not be allowed to continue.

A question about "Hey Hey It's Saturday" and Blackface

According to this country singer/actor Harry Connick Jr. was serving as a judge for the Australian talent show "Hey Hey It's Saturday" when one of the performances was of a group impersonating Michael Jackson. As part of the act each member of the groups dressed wigs, a single glove, and blackface. Yes I said blackface.

For those who may not know to be in blackface is to cover one's face in black or brown makeup in order to appear to be African American. This practice dates back to a time when it was common place for whites to don such makeup for the sake of "acting black" for the entertainment of white people (look here for more).

Thankfully Connick Jr. spoke up and let the performers and audience know just how offensive the skit was. He also commented that if he had known about the skit before time he would have turned down the opportunity to be a judge on the show that night.

That kinda worries me.

Imagine if he had turned down that offer and someone who would not have spoken up had ended up on that panel that night. More than likely this performance would not have had the spotlight put on it like Connick Jr did. That means that more than likely this racist act would have been performed, the crowd would have cheered, the judges would have critiqued, and show would have went on as planned. That is not a good thing.

Daryl Somers, host of "Hey Hey It's Saturday", said in apology to Connick Jr.:
"It didn't occur to me until later -- I think we may have offended you with that and I deeply apologize on behalf of all of us. Because I know, your countrymen, it's an insult to have a blackface routine."

I wonder if it "didn't occur to him until later" because he didn't think that as a white man Connick would not have said anything?

Most of time in these talent shows someone (producers, hosts, directors, etc...) knows what the performers are doing ahead of time if for no other reason than to check for offensive content and make sure the show stays age appropriate (at least in the States anyway). Imagine if say, Morgan Freeman, had been on the panel. Assuming someone had knowledge of what that group was going to do would they have somehow realized sooner that such an act was offensive? And if so would they have taken them out of the lineup? If it played out like that we would be spared a racist act but at the same time they would be spared a quick bit of education on the offensiveness of blackface.

So while the fact that this performance happened means there are still people out there who lack proper education on racism the fact that it did happen might have hopefully helped education some people on racism.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

I love it when they don't pay attention

A few weeks ago Nike released an ad for a new line of football padding. The ad is of athlete Adrian Peterson running a play wearing the padding. At the end of the ad Peterson goes into the locker room and his skin starts to look like scales. Now there has been some question as to whether this was meant to exploit black male athletes and treat them like animals.

I myself have on the fence because while the exploitation of the physical performance of black men dates back several hundred years to the slave trade it is also true that companies have been over exaggerating to sell products since lord knows when. So I'm left wondering was this ad meant to portray Peterson as an animal or was this an attempt at Nike to say that their new line of padding is armor that can protect football players on the field.

But nevermind that for now because the real reason behind this post (and its title) is to simply poke fun at people who don't pay attention. Now I don't exactly see eye to eye with factcheckme but she had a discussion on it (you can also see the ad there). I go in and I post:
I’ve been thinking about this ad for the last few weeks and I’ve been trying to conclude (for myself anyway) if its really racism or is it the same over exaggerating that advertisers have been using for ages.

On one hand it is certain that black male athletes have been exploited and treated like race animals over the years but on the other this is an ad for sports padding and it could be Nike simply chose to over exaggerate by pretending that the padding is armor. I’m still on the ropes about that one.

Her response:
well, thats the thing about being a white guy, danny. you DO NOT GET to declare things unoffensive to blacks, or to women.

I know I know I know. The responses were racing through my head:

"You I've had people tell me that I don't act black but at least they know I'm black. To have someone just straight tell me I am not black? That's just presumptive."

"Do you not bother with learning about anyone or just the ones you've decided you don't like because they don't share your extreme and wrong positions?"

"Does this mean that trying not to make assumptions about people is not a part of YOUR feminism?"

"Telling me what my race is so you can speak on my experience and pat yourself on the back. This sounds like silencing."

"Damn I know I don't speak for all of them but I thought that being 2/3 of the demographic of people that are the subject of the post (black,male,athlete) would at least mean that my thoughts would count for something."

"I thought I could say something about this ad but its a good thing a feminist was there to put me in my place."

But in the end I just chose to keep it simple:

Well at least you’re half right…

But don't worry factcheckme you're not the first to tell me what my race is just to back up your biases and prejudices and I doubt you will be the last.

And thanks for bringing up this ad. Didn't see too many people talking about it.

Well it would seem that after about two days I have finally seen just how much of a coward factcheckme is. It would seem that my comment telling her that she is half right has been lost in the Ether of Moderation. So in the end we have a feminist that not just refuses to pay attention to detail after claiming to look over a site but we also have a coward that cannot own up to the fact that she made an assumption about my race for the sake of trying to shut me down with prepackaged arguments. I find it a bit sad that someone that doesn't think she should spend time educating other people can't even make use of knowledge that is handed to her.

I am so glad all feminists don't act like this one.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Unless we're talking about the body part...

or nicknaming someone named Richard why is the word dick coming out of our mouths?

I was watching the second episode of the new show Trauma last night and I noticed two things:

1. The FCC has apparently given the green light on language that would have never passed before. This summer in the series opener of the medial drama HawthoRNE Jada Pinkett's character calls her on screen daughter a bullshit artist.

2. In this one episode there were three instances of calling men dicks in reference to jerk like behavior. And its a 9pm show (right after Heroes). It would seem that it is okay to refer to unlikable people as dicks.

Just so we're on the level here to call someone a dick is to call them an unlikable person who is full of themselves or someone that is just plan old mean to people.

So why is it okay to associate such things with a male body part?

I suppose the first question is to ask why is it even being associated with a male part to start with. Perhaps its because those traits have been associated with the male gender in general. To be unlikable is to be male? To be mean is to be male? To be a jerk is to be male?

As for why it is okay to associate such things with a male body part and by extension the male gender I suppose its because people have allowed such an association to slide. Well I think I'm done with that.

Yeah I think its high time to remove that reference from the vocabulary.

Monday, October 5, 2009

Why am I not a feminist?

Some who read this blog may draw the impression (or conclusion in the case of those that nitpick for only the things that suit their prejudices) that I am an anti feminist. I am no such thing. If you want to place me on the feminist spectrum of 10 (staunch feminist) to -10 (staunch anti feminist) I am at 0, the non-feminist. Now I know there are some who would chomp at the bit to say that, "If you're not a feminist then fuck you!" It sounds like they have a presumption that to believe in equal treatment makes one a feminist as if that is the one true title and to not take up that title automatically means you are against equality and hate women. I don't take up the title and I don't hate women or the idea of equality. And here is why.

That is a post by Pelle Billing he put up today in which he questions what people will think of feminism 50 years from now. Reading that post and things like this:
Feminism’s belief that women do not have agency and are constant victims of “structures”, while men have nothing but agency and cannot be the victim of structures,...
has me thinking about bit differently. Its not the base ideals of feminism itself that support this its the people who put feminist theory into practice who take this stance and others like it that cause problems. Now there are certainly feminists out there who assign agency based solely on the gender of the people involved rather than who did what but this, as far as I can tell, is not a part of the base ideas of feminism.

So do I think that women and men should have the same access and opportunities? I most certainly do. However unlike those who believe what I was just talking about above I also think that men and women should to the same level of responsibility and accountability. Now this is not some excuse to just right off the entire movement as a bunch of man-hating power trippers because they aren't (well all of them aren't anyway). There are feminists out there who have done a lot of good things in the last several decades and I'd like to see those good things continue. But at the same time there are feminists out there who actually would like to see women prosper and men fail and I can't get down with that.

So I'm sure you're probably reading this and thinking, "But Danny just because there are bad feminists out there that doesn't mean you can't be a feminist on YOUR OWN TERMS." That is true if I really wanted I could just as I am a man on my own terms but the thing is to me titles like feminist, MRA, etc.... don't matter to who I am that much. If they are a part of your identity and you want to scream it from the mountain then by all means do so. The title just doesn't hold that much value to me (unlike being a man).

I'm sure I need to do some more thinking on this and I'm sure I'll come back to this subject one day.