aqvarivs, I'm working my way through "The Myth of Male Power" at the moment. There is plenty of good stuff in there but much of his writing looks like most a bit of the feminist writing I've read. My overall impression is that he uses techniques like comparing dissimilar situations, focussing on worst case scenarios etc. Not as bad as many others "gender" writers but I'd prefer a different approach.

The second half of the book looks better in this respect than the first so far.

His basic arguments are good, some of the material he uses to support them seem out of balance.

R0bert

so just more and more of gender war

and as Garner and myself tried to tell you - the fems are simply larfin all the way to the bank

but I'm out of this thread - cancel my email alert - mission complete, I was right re garner and Hitler was right re people dont think

catch yers

R0bert,
I thought this was a very good article considering the views and personal experiences on both sides.

http://archive.salon.com/mwt/mothers/2001/02/06/farrell/index.html

It's kind of an intro to Warren Farrell and his work for gender equality.

aqvarivs, I loved the closing comments of that article - thanks.

"Warren Farrell, masculinist, believes that there should never have been a women's movement that blamed men for the ills of society. There should not be a men's movement blaming women. There should only be a gender transitional movement that encompasses both genders. Sadly, he says, 30 years of feminism have made the men's movement necessary. 'But as soon as things get anywhere near balanced -- if I live that long -- when men start blaming women, I will be on their backs just as hard and as strong as I am now that it's the other way around.'"

I like that term "gender transitional movement" - that's what I support. Something that lets us all move onto a healthier balance, that does not take a simplistic view of the issues faced in the past but recognises that we are now equipped to move forward.

Thanks

R0bert

I have read all Farrells books, but I much prefer David Thomas's book.

http://www.ukmm.org.uk/issues/suppression/nl.htm
Neil Lyndon's case

Someone wrote that they thought that Christina Hoff Sommers book "Who Stole Feminism" was the scariest book written. However after reading Melaine Phillips "The Sex Change Society" I'd have to say that this is the scariest book I have read by far.

I have so far resisted temptation to buy and read "Women who make the world worse" Kate O’Beirne.

JAMES - until about 8 years ago my lived experience of mainstream Western culture was around zero to nil. (And before you start wondering aloud, yes I am white and anglo).

All I knew about feminism was what the sites you frequent say and what I'd heard from disgruntled blokes in bars.

Then 5 years ago I was researching for something else entirely but which necessitated a working knowledge of feminism.

Since then I have read literally hundreds of books and papers on the subject as my various bibliographies on different papers attests. I've gone up and down the country talking to people in everything from CWA meetings to High Schools to Rotary clubs about male suicide, mental health and feminism.

If you look at any of my posts you'll see I have never claimed to be a feminist (I have never claimed to be female either but someone here once "guessed" I was ). I do not - repeat NOT - have an agenda. All I have ever pushed for was that you read primary sources not secondary ones. In other words: not what other people say about feminism but what feminists say.

I thought that you were trying to do this when you started quoting Patel - and agreeing with her. (Yes, she is a feminist).

As to there being so many different kinds: well, hey, there are all different kinds of Christians too. Some are rabid, foaming-at-the- mouth zealots, some wreak havoc, some are saints, some do good. Some have changed the course of history for the better, some for the worse.

If this were a forum on Christianity as many people would be rubbishing it and pointing out the harm and the evil it has perpetuated as people getting hot under the collar in its defence. But they would all have knowledge of what they were talking about.

To extend the above comparison: arguing about feminism when familiar only with other people's opinions of it, could be likened to a Muslim with no knowledge of the Bible arguing about Christianity.

That's all.