Killarney

In my experience, some men feel very threatened by women engaging in calm, rational and informed debate.

Take for example, earlier comments made by Phanto, ConservativeHippie, and dane (to both this article and my previous one "Good blokes or smug thugs") - I calmly contested their claims and they vanished from OLO.

I do not agree that my debating style is a dead end. The challenge, I think, is to keep the discussion going. Over the past week or so, I have learnt things, and shifted my view on some issues.

Although I too get frustrated, I don't see any benefit in screaming. When men and women scream at each other, no-one listens.

Dr Russell, I think you're mistaken in saying that feminism hasn't been influential in creating the circumstances described in that news article. The media doesn't exist in a vacuum and feminist advocacy groups have been very adept at working with media organisations, facilitated by a large increase in female participation as media workers. The message that has been sold is that bad things done by a man are reflective of a risk presented by all men, while bad things done by a woman represent an unusual circumstance in response to some terrible life event.

This is the "priming" I mentioned. It may not affect everybody, but there are people for whom it fits nicely into their own preferred narrative. In political terms, it is a great "wedge", because it lends itself to an easy smear of those who might disagree: "you don't care about protecting our [insert class of victim here]". It leads to seriously distorted outcomes like men not being allowed to sit next to children on aircraft, or the coach of children's sport who doesn't dare touch any of his young charges, even to comfort them if they are hurt.

However, whether feminism is to "blame" or not is somewhat a moot point. Do you think that man or any of the men he tells the story to and any of the other men who have experienced something similar or know a friend who has are going to be avid supporters of a feminist model in which maleness is seen as a pejorative attribute? There are many more Killarneys than Sarah Russells, I'm sorry to say. You've already experienced the typical denigration such people use to attempt to control other women and shut down any attempts to discuss gender topics with any seriousness or empathy.

I agree with you that empathy is the key, but feminism first has to address the mistrust that has been engendered.

Perhaps it is time for some "Female Champions of Change" to do just that?

Gawd, plurry awful punctuation. Please amend as necessary...

"In my experience, some men feel very threatened by women engaging in calm, rational and informed debate.

Take for example, earlier comments made by Phanto, ConservativeHippie, and dane (to both this article and my previous one "Good blokes or smug thugs") - I calmly contested their claims and they vanished from OLO."

Who are you trying to convince with your triumphalistic humbug? You come across as a very dishonest and manipulative person. At least three times you have said you were going to act in a certain way and then acted in the complete opposite.

You argue absolutes and then contradict yourself with exceptions which make your absolutes pointless and lacking in integrity. You seem not to accept any argument unless it is backed up by 'research'. Common sense and logic seem foreign to you.

<while ignoring and devaluing women's experience.
.
Posted by Killarney, Saturday, 9 May 2015 6:04:53 AM

I think Killarney demonstrates why there will never be equality, firstly is an attempt at guilt tripping, and then there is the implication that only women's experience is important and valuable, and that the experiences of men are not important enough for feminist to consider.

<the disaffected-male point of view on this forum regarding the twisted
<analysis of DV research to favour the male DV viewpoint.

Posted by Killarney, Saturday, 9 May 2015 6:04:53 AM

Feminist research that is false or wrong

Lenore Weitzman published her book the Divorce Revolution where she created the myth;

<women's standard of living decreased by a whopping 73 percent while
< men enjoyed an increase of 43 percent caught the attention of
<pundits, legislators, and judges.

<The only problem with this statistic, in fact, is that it turns out to be wrong.

Researchers/critics who challenged her findings were ignored.

>Publication of the "other side" of the violence study provides a
<sharp illustration of how social science is manipulated to fit a
<particular agenda.

<"It happens all the time. People only tell one half of the story,"
<says Eugen Lupri, a University of Calgary sociologist whose research
< shows similar patterns of violence against men.

<"Feminists themselves use our studies, but they only publish what
< they like.
http://www.franks.org/fr01060.htm

Then there is what is known as "Maternal Gatekeeping", where mothers discourage the fathers involvement in child rearing.

Cathy Young who writes for Reason/Salon magazine wrote an interesting piece, about research and how one must be careful of it and especially the conclusions.

Whilst trying to find the article, I came across this one,

<Team players or tools of the patriarchy?
http://www.salon.com/2000/07/06/crusade/

And yet the enemy ranks are filled with women who are not just a ladies’ auxiliary but, in some cases, the most dedicated warriors — many of whom consider themselves feminists