How did a movement founded on equality become, in some quarters, a movement that appears indifferent (or even hostile) to the suffering of half the population?
I am increasingly troubled by the moral contradictions of contemporary feminism.
Consider the argument that resources should not be directed towards male victims of violence, boys' education or men's suicide prevention until every woman and girl is safe.
What kind of moral framework gives 100% weight to female suffering and 0% to male suffering?
Consider the realities:
🔹 SUICIDE: 76.5% of Australian suicide deaths in 2024 were male. That's 2,529 fathers, sons, brothers and friends. In the United States, 80% of suicides are male.
🔹 EDUCATION: Across the OECD, boys lag significantly in reading, writing, and other areas of literacy. Young men are behind in school completion, and in higher education attainment.
🔹 VIOLENCE: US CDC research found that 44.2% of men experienced intimate-partner contact sexual violence, physical violence and/or stalking during their lifetimes.
🔹 JUSTICE: US federal research found that women received sentences averaging 29.2% shorter than men after statistical adjustments.
🔹 FATHERHOOD: Fathers continue to confront serious barriers to equal recognition and involvement in their children's lives.
These disparities have multiple causes. Feminism did not create them all.
But feminist theories, advocacy and institutions have helped shape education, domestic violence policy, family law, public funding and cultural attitudes.
With influence comes accountability.
The feminist-influenced Duluth Model, for example, has been criticised for its male-perpetrator/female-victim assumptions and inadequate recognition of other patterns of domestic violence. The Duluth Model has shaped public policy and billions of taxpayers’ funding, but empirical evidence contradicts the flawed assumptions of this model.
When boys fall behind, men die prematurely, or male victims struggle to access services, where is the urgency?
Where is the compassion?
Where is the equality?
Some feminists genuinely champion universal human dignity. They deserve recognition.
But any ideology that dismisses male suffering, stereotypes masculinity as inherently harmful, or treats boys as collectively responsible for historical injustices deserves serious moral condemnation and being overturned.
The greatest danger isn’t merely hostility towards men. It’s the institutionalisation of indifference to male suffering.
We don't need fewer rights for women.
We need equal dignity, equal compassion, equal protection and evidence-based support for EVERYONE.
A boy's life is worth no less than a girl's. A father's suffering matters no less than a mother's.
Equality must mean exactly that. Equal.
#MenAndBoys #GenderEquality #MensMentalHealth #BoysEducation #Fatherhood #MaleVictims #InternationalMensDay #CelebratingMasculinity
By Celebrating Masculinity.
(From Digital Anvil.)
retrotimetunnel.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment