So I was interviewed a while back by All Things Considered for a segment on men’s rights activism. The segment, part of their “Men in America” series, will be running today. All Things Considered starts at 4 PM — at least in my time zone (Central); you’ll have to do the time zone math to figure out when it starts for you.
You can listen online here. The segment will also be archived on the “Men in America” web page; it should go up sometime this evening.
Hopefully the segment will include some comments from me. But you never know. Should be interesting regardless.
EDIT: The transcript is up here; audio will be posted on the same page at 7 PM eastern. They included a couple of quotes from me.
I haven’t heard the segment yet, but reading the transcript i have to say the piece is pretty poor, giving MRAs in general and Warren Farrell in particular way too much credence. More on this later.
There’s a couple of people insisting that the comment Cloudiah quoted is satire/sarcasm. I’m too lazy go through hundreds of comments to see if the OP came back to clarify his position. It’s a masterful attempt at trolling because it’s completely plausible it’s for real.
I too think/hope he’s kidding, but the fact that we can’t quite be sure is pretty telling.
Lol yup!
To be fair, if I were going to write a comment impersonating one of them in order to demonstrate the ridiculousness of their position, that’s pretty much what I’d have written.
Yeah, Farrell’s prescription for dealing with the anguish of men is definitely that women should put out more, even when they don’t want to, and most especially if some dude has taken them out for a slice of pizza. Because we all know the best, most human rights-y way of solving one group’s anguish is to cause more anguish for another group. I learned that from Martin Luther King, Jr. in his “Send White Folks Some Bloody Feathers to Tell Them How Terrible They Are” speech.
MRAs are so hard to satirize, because no matter what ridiculous thing you say, you can find a prominent MRA to agree with you.
I heard the segment on my way home. I agree that it gave MRAs too much credit. Sure, Warren Farrell and Paul Elam can talk all they want about how concerned they are about the suicide rates of men, or male victims of violence, or toxic masculinity, but what do they actually do about these things? Blame women. And that’s not activism. That’s why the movement isn’t catching on like feminism did. Because men can see with their own eyes that the women and feminists in their lives love them and care about them in their personal lives AND in their activism, which is in direct conflict with the idea that feminists are out to get them.
I really do loathe it when, in the name of neutrality or whatever, journalists/reporters will say “but they raise a few good points!” Sometimes the two sides of the argument aren’t equal in legitimacy. Like when accredited scientists will present facts, and then they bring in a credential-less cretin to “refute” the facts.
Ergh.
I’m only seeing a five-minute clip on the site.
@leocigale
But they do raise good points and that’s what make this really hard to get a handle on. Mixed in with all the bullshit,hate and stupidity MRM do raise real concerns. of course the do not do more then that.
enough with negative already, the report was about as good as it could be for the few minutes it aired. both sides got to speakers, David can off as a guy who knows what he is talking about. The way I look at is the more real media that looks at the MRM the better. Because this means it will be exposed for what it is or if their are any MRA who are really concerned with men issues and not just hate might get a platform, if the exist that is.
* sorry two speakers
Since the GOP attacked them, NPR has progressed to leaning so far right I can hardly stand to listen to it. This story was no different. They gave more airtime to Elam, and spoke about his history and evolution. It sounded, to me, like they were subtly humanizing him, and promoting that POV as valid. I’m sorry, NPR, but when the goddamned SPLC starts paying attention, there’s an undeniable and serious problem.
I read you every post, David, and I listened to this, and you did great, but this story left me as disgusted with NPR as ever.
I expected better of NPR, though it sounds like I shouldn’t have.
Crap! I missed this post! I’m an NPR junkie and would’ve lost my shit in excitement if I heard David futrelle on all things considered! Will listen to archives! Congrats David! I was just explaining to my mom why you changed manboobz to whtm. Being on NPR is a pretty good reason!
Regarding all things considered giving MRM more credence than deserved, I think it may be where they just don’t know better. I gave the movement the benefit of the doubt at first before figuring out what they were really about. Kind of like the CAFE concert managing to fool a few bands to play before they realized what “equality” concert really was.
Then again, I’m not a journalist for NPR doing a report so that’s probably not a good excuse for them.
….the one anti-woman thing they quoted was from a woman.
There’s something ugly in that.
As a white male, I can tell you it has been an uphill struggle all the way. Having to constantly prove your ability. Having to watch how you dress, how you speak, and who you associate with. Looking out at the world and seeing that the potential for financial and social advancement is limited. And don’t even start about political opportunity.
Minus the “as a white male” part, words that could be spoken by basically anyone! So… this guy is lamenting how being a “white male” doesn’t elevate him above the rest anymore? That now he has to deal with all the issues that everyone else has always had to deal with?
That “white male” comment has got to be a joke. But it’s really not far off from stuff that MRAs actually say all the time.
I hope it’s a joke. Hearing it all the time as a serious statement is terrible enough. However, if I were to be PAID every time I heard it…well I’d be a very wealthy lady indeed.
For those of you that didn’t want to wade through comments, the guy that wrote the “white male troubles” comment (John Holenko) also wrote:
So you think that fathers at work are paying for their stay at home wives? What do you think is being paid for? How many children have you stayed at home to raise? You must be one of those who think money=value. Too bad. You should be made to stay home with a couple of children. For about 16 years
In response to (EqualityEd):
Your perspective is a bunch of tired cliches as if everyone didn’t have to watch how they dress, speak or perform their duties well to get ahead in life. Women aren’t limited in financial investment but they do make choices that leading to lower incomes that are usually subsidies by men’s greater financial contributions to the family. We have 30% stay at home mothers to 6% stay at home fathers. Who is paying for who?
It’s not cool to be indifferent to men’s issues but we can blame the bias against men in the media and our culture for leading you to think being conscious means ignoring male suffering.
Well most of what Elam and the others say are just flat out lies. Rarely do I hear anything positive from the MRM about women. Their number one thing seems to be to sit around and whine about terrible women are and seem ready to circle jerk around campfires about the evils of femininity.
@Save The Queen
Did every world religion do a complete switchero while I was taking a nap and supplant male leadership with women?
I’m clinging to hope that the comment you’re referring to could be satire — but sadly, I have heard this particular point about religion brought up more than once as if it were A Thing. If the comment is sincere, I would bet money it’s coming from a Christian (and I say this as a devoted Christian myself).
I’ve had more than one exceedingly frustrating conversation with guys who insist that the church has become “feminized”. There’s a particular author who has written several books and a whole website about the idea. And while he doesn’t stoop to the violent and obscene rhetoric that most MRA’s do, his ideas are roughly the same, and just as offensive.
Basically, the argument goes, more women than men show up to church on Sunday (it’s currently about a 60/40 split in the U.S.). Therefore, something must be driving men away from church. Obviously, this means that the church has been feminized.
When pressed on what “feminization” means, it’s usually said to manifest in: a) decor; b) singing — either singing too much, or the songs are too girly and not enough like a battle song / sports rally; c) the sermon is too long; or d) the sermon is about “girly” stuff, like love and compassion, and not about — I dunno, punching demons in the face. These dudes have very elaborate conspiracy theories about how modern pastors and worship song authors are catering only to women, on purpose, thus alienating men. (Note: I’ve personally known lots of pastors and worship song authors, even ones who were women, and never met one who did this. I’ve met a few who catered specifically to men, though…)
Nope, it doesn’t matter to these guys that men make up about 95% of pastors and a super high proportion of elder boards/denominational government. It doesn’t matter that, as a rule, the more patriarchal the overall culture is in a country, the *more* women outnumber men at church. It doesn’t matter that there are lots of congregations that literally don’t allow women to talk from the platform. It doesn’t matter that men have been making all the decisions, because they’re “clearly” under all kinds of pressure from their wives and mothers to do church women’s way. More women attend, ergo, they must be secretly running the show somehow.
It’s maddening stuff.
(And yes, #NotAllChristianMen, but still. Gah.)
Aaaaand the blockquote monster got me. The first sentence after addressing Save The Queen is their quote.
ROFL!
Ugh, the feminization of the church. I heard so much of that in neo-reformed circles. It suuuuuucks. “There are lots of women in the church, and obviously That’s Bad.”
I am about 120% sure that if the church were 60/40 male, they would be talking about how women should humble themselves to learn from men and accept the masculine nature of the church.
Wow, the comments are full of ‘financial abortion’ talk. Sorry; ‘shared parenting rights after conception’. Why is ‘people have rights over their own bodies’ such a difficult concept? Honestly? You can’t share a womb, that’s just science. Gah. My poor brain.