By the way, what you will find on feminist sites are sections such as "Bonza Blokes"; male posters discussing issues with feminist bloggers and so on. In contrast, what you'll find on MRA sites is an endless litany of 'the bitch dun took the kids and all my money'. You'll also find comments that will curl most decent people's hair - absolute hate in the coarsest language about women as individuals, as well as feminism - never reflecting on WHY feminism came into being.

You'll also find advocates of having the age of consent lowered - and blaming women for "putting thousands of men in gaol" for exercising their 'natural attraction to nubile young bodies'. (see Bob and also, link below):

http://www.the-spearhead.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1173&start=100

I have seen site comments celebrating the death of baby girls; one vented rage and hatred at little Jon Benet Ramsey. If you can find a single female site or commentator who celebrates the death or rape of boys and men - please direct me to it and I will lobby vigorously against it.

pelican: Re Arndt.

We didn't want our children cared for day to day by anyone but ourselves, so childcare wasn't something we wanted; but I understand it's vital for some other people.

Bettina Arndt is linked very strongly to the MRA groups - those groups (please read the information provided previously) are linked around the world - UK, USA, Canada and Australia. They link to each other to form a network. Actually the network is large but the membership is pretty small all things considered - seems like mostly older men.

A network is good - if they talked about legal issues; mens hurt; how to cope in positive ways; good parenting etc. However they rarely do that - individual posters sometimes offer good advice to others, but mostly they make false claims such as that DV is 50/50; they want age of consent lowered; no-fault divorce changed; low and no child support; women who report crimes gaoled if the claim is not proven (not false; just not proven - and only 1-4 % ever reach a conviction at court. Most never get reported and fewer make it as far as court). They give advice on how to harass women through the legal system.

They also spend a lot of time raging about feminism of course. There is no commitment to building anything better or doing anything different, only agitation for a return - enforced if necessary - to some 1950s ideal that didn't exist anyway.

I am all for working cooperatively; but we are never going to get that unless there is fair acknowledgment of - for example, rape and violence. Just pretending it doesn't happen and lying about it doesn't work for me. In a cooperative relationship working for a better society, there is no room for sweeping hurts under the rug and ignoring suffering.

Some people will feel uncomfortable about that; one of them is probably Bettina. Unfortunately for people who feel irked, I am more concerned about victims of crime and what they are experiencing.

Houellebecq: Trying to be relevant by making a foolish comment, as usual.

Pynchme,

I don't know what is meant by a MRA. Could you point to one of these groups in Australia.

You seem to know a lot about MRA's (whatever they are), but still haven't pointed to a single article published by anyone employed in a school or university in Australia that has said something good about the male gender.

To put the matter into perspective, imagine a male who often wrote about gender, but never had anything positive to say about the female gender, and then was employed by TWO universities as an ethicist.

Now take a look at the author's many articles on gender.

I can't find any article written by the author that says anything positive about the male gender, but the author is employed by two universities (Monash University and the University of Melbourne) as an ethicist.

Maybe you can see the full picture now, and not a half-view.

Pynchme how about some specific comment on your own recent negative comments about males and also on the campaign by some in the mothers groups to oppose shared care by playing on fears of child abuse perpetrated by males while ignoring child abuse perpetrated by women.

"Unless you've lived on my side of the fence, please don't negate my lived experience" - that cut's both ways.

So much of what you appear to believe is based around applying feminist analysis to the lived experience of men, eg negating their lived experience.

What's questioned is not generally the lived experience but rather the interpretation that's brought to the discussion.

When it comes to negating lived experience "is an endless litany of 'the bitch dun took the kids and all my money'." hit's the mark pretty well.

I agree that there are some very bitter men around, many with good cause (although that does not excuse the types of thinking or comment you mention) and if feminists had the gut's to stand up more often to those wanting a return to maternal bias and gendered outcomes in family law it would help a lot. Instead what is seen varies from active support to silence but rarely criticism of those tactics.

Most of us are not taliban or slave owners, our humanity is plainly on show for those willing to see it. Some men and some women plumb some vile depths but that does not make it so for most men.

R0bert

Pynchme
Agreed, child care is important but very little is put into policy that makes it easier for SAH parents and child care workers continue to be one of the lowest paid.

Much political energy is directed to working families and economic growth, with sadly some comments from leading feminists like "who would want to stay at home anyway" as if this option not worthy of consideration in policy reform.

While it may not appear so, I do agree with much of your comments. I would hate to be a fly on the wall of some MRA meetings - people's past hurtful experiences shape 'hatreds' as much as anything often at the expense of rational thinking.

Women have been guilty of the same after relationship breakdown, especially if they are the wronged party.

Some level of anger is natural, the danger is if the anger is used to shape policy that works against an equitable and fair outcome for women, men and children.

It is counterproductive if support for men through MRA is provided in an atmosphere of anti-women invective. Human nature sometimes works against the greater good when ego is invovled.

Part of the social evolutionary process has to include honest dialogue (as you rightly point out) but it has be a mutual honesty in ways that highlight disadvantage for men and women in relation to a whole range of areas such as Family Law, DV, Child Custody, child-care and workplace.

Matters of equity should not impact on justic for victims of DV or child abuse. This has to be first priority. Feminism has done much for men as well including moving to a more equal footing in Family Law and shared parenting.

It will be interesting to see in 30 years what form gender discussions take when the old stalwarts are no longer around, including probably most of us on OLO. From my experience as a parent, young girls and boys (Gen Y) are less concerned with equality as it is already assumed.