Here's how bad it is. I'm a gay guy. Everyone knows this. Few would mistake me for a straight guy.
Yet, just yesterday, and this is certainly not the first time, a feminist accused me of want to rape women and/or find ways to sexually degrade them.
Male, homosexual, friends of mine who are psychotherapists (two in total) refuse to take women clients. Because that would require being in a closed door room with a woman with no witnesses.
Of course, this can only mean that I, and my friends, are liars, or crazy.
I can't speak to the other two, but in the case of Carlson I strongly suspect the sexism allegations to have been a convenient fig leaf. He's been a thorn in the establishment's side for years now, and has been cutting deeper as time went on. One way or the other they needed to get rid of him.
This is why sex-segregated work environments usually function better.
Besides the issue of malicious allegations, I think fundamentally the problem is that women are far more sensitive to things that men innately do in "playing around". For example, at my workplace there are some cops who occasionally grab each others' butts and call each other "fags". Or they insult the Muslim guys religion. It's pretty obviously not serious, and nobody gets offended - they all go out and have a beer later. As long as it's just the guys, nobody complains and it doesn't turn into a federal HR case.
Brings to mind the old joke: Men like to insult each other, but they don't really mean it. Women like to compliment each other, and they don't really mean it either.
There certainly are cases where sexual comments cross ethical lines (and quid pro quo is definitely over the line). But having mixed-sex workplaces means things can get misinterpreted and gives cry-bullies too much power.
I'm fortunate that my own line of work/department (IT) is overwhelmingly male and doesn't have any real inter-sexual issues. Which means we can actually get work done.
It is a fundamental tenet of academic feminism that all men somehow benefit from the very small number of men who actually do rape and sexually abuse women. How we benefit, exactly, has never been satisfactorily explained to me. It is, however, deliciously ironic that all women have clearly derived enormous benefit (to be fair, whether they wanted to or not) from the huge number of sexual misconduct allegations and the Draconian responses of the 'patriarchy' to them.
It seems to be a new mark of corporate integrity and modernity to fire a man for offenses such as those Janice describes here. The issues involve women, but the larger audience is the nervous consumer and the worried investor. They have to be assured that, by God, this particular company is doing its best in the name of equity, etc. Men pay the price, but so what? The question: What are men learning from these cases?
May 19, 2023·edited May 20, 2023Liked by Janice Fiamengo
I think these problems are worse in the television industry because lots of the women there are employed for their looks or other sex appeal, so the situation is already charged, similar to the Hollywood actresses and Harvey Weinstein case.
Most men are quite horrified by stories of rape or sexual assault and want to protect women from this kind of thing, so they tend to side with women when there is an accusation. Then obviously some devious women will start making false accusations to gain advantage. I was brought up around not one but two sadistic and dishonest female relatives who'd even go so far as to try to get sympathy for themselves about the awful fights which they'd started, so I've never been that naive about women, but many men do seem to think that women are a lot more angelic than men, and fall for the "believe all women" stuff.
Plus you get the projection, men who would like to behave sexually with some woman or another, and then get jealous when another man seems to have done so, or women who would actually like it if the man did something sexual to them, but can't admit that to themselves, hence projecting that the man is a "predator" or something like that.
One thing which I have noticed about these problems is that the attempts to stamp out the problem do not ever seem to solve it. Supposedly, 1950s bosses would grab women's bottoms or breasts or something, so laws to protect women were brought in, then 1970s bosses would comment on women's cleavage or ask their secretary to wear a short skirt, or something, then that was outlawed, and on and on, and as more and more things are outlawed, we ended up with a situation where even looking at a woman's body, or offering to help her in some way is viewed as sexual harassment or "unwanted sexual attention", and Shell's consensual sexual relationship with Gamble is viewed as "sexual harassment" by some standard or another. So the problem just seems to not be going away, despite all the lawyering.
Great article Janice! Always appreciate your support of mens rights. I would imagine it gets frustrating and seems pointless at times. I know I feel that way. I used to blame the misandrist feminist and narcissistic women for mens social inequalities. However, it's becoming more apparent and disheartening to realize that spineless or narcissistic men in leadership carry the greatest blame. They turn on their own gender. The worse being some men with daughters.
Women, as a group have adapted to changing roles and their inequitable power in our society. Their is no longer a pretense for equality. It's just an empty cliche. Sadly, men as a group, have not adapted to the new reality. Take the Bud Light controversy where a Trans person was put on the beer can. Men mobilized and boycotted the company very quickly and effectively. For frigging beer. It would probably be the same for something sports related. But have a movie or commercial that portrays men as subhuman or moronic and it's crickets. Even worse for a company with a male CEO to throw a male employee under the bus because of liability. A male college administrator siding with a women making false claims of rape.
Hopefully, a critical mass of men and women will evolve in the future to stand up for men. We must overcome the empathy gap in our society. It goes without saying that their are already many brave men and women today who are working for positive changes in men's rights. People like you Janice. I can only hope that men wake up sooner rather than later.
Just don’t engage with women (ever), whatever the context, apply the Mike Pence rules in all your interactions with them, and use the services of hookers if you crave sex and intimacy.
This is the only safe policy for men to institute these days.
Some people were agitated by Carlson but I agreed with much he said. Mostly, men are doing what they always have. Far greater change can be found in the lives, education, opportunities and attitudes of women. Much of this I support, but political ideologies always go too far. Men like you and I need to adjust to the new world, because it is now reality. This is difficult, and we will make mistakes as we adjust, but until we do that women cannot adjust to the new reality we create.
Like any real male abuser who likes a good feel up of a women, when it comes to taking a piece of male power for themselves, these women just couldn't help themselves.
It what sense am I disparaging women as a class? Rather I’m disparaging the attitude promulgated by many feminists and the law that men as a whole cannot be trusted to behave themselves and that because of centuries of apparent oppression, men now need to be punished by way of revenge by weaponising allegations of sexual misconduct. If it gets more men locked up, who cares whether the original allegations were true?
For what it’s worth, I adore women and will, like most men, go to extreme lengths to protect and promote their interests. But that said, I will not expose myself to the extreme risk of having my reputation and my livelihood destroyed just because I happen to be a man.
I don’t like having to institute the policies I’m advocating. I hate it. But until such time as it is safe for me to interact with women as it used to be, I have no choice.
Daphne Patai, predicted that this would happen, I am not sure if it was in her book or a short article she wrote as I can't find the reference anymore.
About Lemon, I think the distinction between "sexual prime" and "political prime" is important here. No one expects a hot 20 year old to run for president, just as no one should expect a 50 year old seasoned campaigner to be a swimsuit model. To say, as he did, that after a certain age women aren't good for ANYTHING--not sex and not politics--is grossly misogynistic.
While innocent men are being booted from their jobs based on accusations let me tell you a story.
A young man complained that a female teacher mistreated him when he was in elementary school, so the school told him to go contact the school board, who then told him to contact the local police.
When the young man went to the division where the incidents happened, the detective was gathering information against him, to use for a criminal harassment investigation.
The detective quietly told him that the Toronto District School Board itself was telling the police department to pursue criminal charges.
This is how the feminists deflect responsibility for their actions. They cry harassment and then the police have to investigate the male complainant. Toronto Police have been forced to enforce the feminist law in Canada.
A more recent case is where a male student at a Toronto University was committed to a hospital for a psychological evaluation, and later criminally charged by police in the doctor's community. Again, the feminists are aware of how to deflect responsibility for their actions.
So grateful for your essays, Janice.
Here's how bad it is. I'm a gay guy. Everyone knows this. Few would mistake me for a straight guy.
Yet, just yesterday, and this is certainly not the first time, a feminist accused me of want to rape women and/or find ways to sexually degrade them.
Male, homosexual, friends of mine who are psychotherapists (two in total) refuse to take women clients. Because that would require being in a closed door room with a woman with no witnesses.
Of course, this can only mean that I, and my friends, are liars, or crazy.
I can't speak to the other two, but in the case of Carlson I strongly suspect the sexism allegations to have been a convenient fig leaf. He's been a thorn in the establishment's side for years now, and has been cutting deeper as time went on. One way or the other they needed to get rid of him.
This is why sex-segregated work environments usually function better.
Besides the issue of malicious allegations, I think fundamentally the problem is that women are far more sensitive to things that men innately do in "playing around". For example, at my workplace there are some cops who occasionally grab each others' butts and call each other "fags". Or they insult the Muslim guys religion. It's pretty obviously not serious, and nobody gets offended - they all go out and have a beer later. As long as it's just the guys, nobody complains and it doesn't turn into a federal HR case.
Brings to mind the old joke: Men like to insult each other, but they don't really mean it. Women like to compliment each other, and they don't really mean it either.
There certainly are cases where sexual comments cross ethical lines (and quid pro quo is definitely over the line). But having mixed-sex workplaces means things can get misinterpreted and gives cry-bullies too much power.
I'm fortunate that my own line of work/department (IT) is overwhelmingly male and doesn't have any real inter-sexual issues. Which means we can actually get work done.
It is a fundamental tenet of academic feminism that all men somehow benefit from the very small number of men who actually do rape and sexually abuse women. How we benefit, exactly, has never been satisfactorily explained to me. It is, however, deliciously ironic that all women have clearly derived enormous benefit (to be fair, whether they wanted to or not) from the huge number of sexual misconduct allegations and the Draconian responses of the 'patriarchy' to them.
It seems to be a new mark of corporate integrity and modernity to fire a man for offenses such as those Janice describes here. The issues involve women, but the larger audience is the nervous consumer and the worried investor. They have to be assured that, by God, this particular company is doing its best in the name of equity, etc. Men pay the price, but so what? The question: What are men learning from these cases?
In the Canadian public sector, it’s just a complaint from a female which leads to a man getting canned. No one is there to help the man.
I think these problems are worse in the television industry because lots of the women there are employed for their looks or other sex appeal, so the situation is already charged, similar to the Hollywood actresses and Harvey Weinstein case.
Most men are quite horrified by stories of rape or sexual assault and want to protect women from this kind of thing, so they tend to side with women when there is an accusation. Then obviously some devious women will start making false accusations to gain advantage. I was brought up around not one but two sadistic and dishonest female relatives who'd even go so far as to try to get sympathy for themselves about the awful fights which they'd started, so I've never been that naive about women, but many men do seem to think that women are a lot more angelic than men, and fall for the "believe all women" stuff.
Plus you get the projection, men who would like to behave sexually with some woman or another, and then get jealous when another man seems to have done so, or women who would actually like it if the man did something sexual to them, but can't admit that to themselves, hence projecting that the man is a "predator" or something like that.
One thing which I have noticed about these problems is that the attempts to stamp out the problem do not ever seem to solve it. Supposedly, 1950s bosses would grab women's bottoms or breasts or something, so laws to protect women were brought in, then 1970s bosses would comment on women's cleavage or ask their secretary to wear a short skirt, or something, then that was outlawed, and on and on, and as more and more things are outlawed, we ended up with a situation where even looking at a woman's body, or offering to help her in some way is viewed as sexual harassment or "unwanted sexual attention", and Shell's consensual sexual relationship with Gamble is viewed as "sexual harassment" by some standard or another. So the problem just seems to not be going away, despite all the lawyering.
Great article Janice! Always appreciate your support of mens rights. I would imagine it gets frustrating and seems pointless at times. I know I feel that way. I used to blame the misandrist feminist and narcissistic women for mens social inequalities. However, it's becoming more apparent and disheartening to realize that spineless or narcissistic men in leadership carry the greatest blame. They turn on their own gender. The worse being some men with daughters.
Women, as a group have adapted to changing roles and their inequitable power in our society. Their is no longer a pretense for equality. It's just an empty cliche. Sadly, men as a group, have not adapted to the new reality. Take the Bud Light controversy where a Trans person was put on the beer can. Men mobilized and boycotted the company very quickly and effectively. For frigging beer. It would probably be the same for something sports related. But have a movie or commercial that portrays men as subhuman or moronic and it's crickets. Even worse for a company with a male CEO to throw a male employee under the bus because of liability. A male college administrator siding with a women making false claims of rape.
Hopefully, a critical mass of men and women will evolve in the future to stand up for men. We must overcome the empathy gap in our society. It goes without saying that their are already many brave men and women today who are working for positive changes in men's rights. People like you Janice. I can only hope that men wake up sooner rather than later.
Just don’t engage with women (ever), whatever the context, apply the Mike Pence rules in all your interactions with them, and use the services of hookers if you crave sex and intimacy.
This is the only safe policy for men to institute these days.
The Mike Pence procedure is starting to look very sensible; but for all men, not just married ones.
Some people were agitated by Carlson but I agreed with much he said. Mostly, men are doing what they always have. Far greater change can be found in the lives, education, opportunities and attitudes of women. Much of this I support, but political ideologies always go too far. Men like you and I need to adjust to the new world, because it is now reality. This is difficult, and we will make mistakes as we adjust, but until we do that women cannot adjust to the new reality we create.
Like any real male abuser who likes a good feel up of a women, when it comes to taking a piece of male power for themselves, these women just couldn't help themselves.
It what sense am I disparaging women as a class? Rather I’m disparaging the attitude promulgated by many feminists and the law that men as a whole cannot be trusted to behave themselves and that because of centuries of apparent oppression, men now need to be punished by way of revenge by weaponising allegations of sexual misconduct. If it gets more men locked up, who cares whether the original allegations were true?
For what it’s worth, I adore women and will, like most men, go to extreme lengths to protect and promote their interests. But that said, I will not expose myself to the extreme risk of having my reputation and my livelihood destroyed just because I happen to be a man.
I don’t like having to institute the policies I’m advocating. I hate it. But until such time as it is safe for me to interact with women as it used to be, I have no choice.
Is that really so difficult to understand?
Daphne Patai, predicted that this would happen, I am not sure if it was in her book or a short article she wrote as I can't find the reference anymore.
About Lemon, I think the distinction between "sexual prime" and "political prime" is important here. No one expects a hot 20 year old to run for president, just as no one should expect a 50 year old seasoned campaigner to be a swimsuit model. To say, as he did, that after a certain age women aren't good for ANYTHING--not sex and not politics--is grossly misogynistic.
While innocent men are being booted from their jobs based on accusations let me tell you a story.
A young man complained that a female teacher mistreated him when he was in elementary school, so the school told him to go contact the school board, who then told him to contact the local police.
When the young man went to the division where the incidents happened, the detective was gathering information against him, to use for a criminal harassment investigation.
The detective quietly told him that the Toronto District School Board itself was telling the police department to pursue criminal charges.
This is how the feminists deflect responsibility for their actions. They cry harassment and then the police have to investigate the male complainant. Toronto Police have been forced to enforce the feminist law in Canada.
A more recent case is where a male student at a Toronto University was committed to a hospital for a psychological evaluation, and later criminally charged by police in the doctor's community. Again, the feminists are aware of how to deflect responsibility for their actions.