Men Are pigs

[Akil Todd Harvey]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=19846

Suppose someone said in casual conversation that "men are pigs." What would society's reaction be? Can we imagine anyone objecting to this statement, upbraiding the speaker for bigotry or inaccuracy or sexism? Perhaps, on hearing this slur against half the human race, most men would take it as an occasion to laugh at themselves. Perhaps most women would nod in unthinking agreement.

But isn't there something dangerous in humoring such a statement of bigotry?

Here is what I have recently observed: Statements with hostile content directed at the male gender are increasing. More and more, a generalized hostility to men breaks to the surface in the casual talk of college-educated women (i.e., recently educated). It is suddenly a proof of masculine unfairness -- and villainy, perhaps -- that most senators and all past U.S. presidents have been men. It is suddenly evidence of masculinity's oppressive nature that Europe's classical composers were men, or that the "great books" were written by men, or that the Bible refers to God as a masculine entity. Day by day, as we are increasingly bombarded by such complaints, we are imperceptibly led to understand that -- yes -- men are pigs. They have hogged all the glory and power for themselves.

Of course, 99.99 percent of men were neither great composers, great authors, presidents or senators. In historical terms, most men could not be accused of hogging glory or power. The lives of most men throughout history, in fact, have been spent in a constant and unglamorous struggle to support their families in the face of war, famine, tyranny and pestilence.

Of course, one should be careful not to say anything that will justify or excuse what militant feminists call "the patriarchy," because it is now an article of faith with such people that men control society's wealth to the disadvantage of women. Therefore, one must forget about the realities of history and the struggle for survival in ancient and Medieval times. It is sufficient to demonstrate that men are dominant, and therefore men are pigs.

Momentarily setting aside the question of male dominance, let us dissect the dehumanizing formula in question, which could be rendered as: "x are pigs." What if we substituted x for some other group? What if we said, for example, that "Homosexuals are pigs"? What if we said that "Women are pigs"? Would most men laugh and nod in agreement? (Somehow, I don't think they'd dare.) And imagine what would happen if a university professor said to his class that blacks or Jews or Asians are pigs?

But oddly, at the university today, one might form an entire discipline around the notion that men are pigs. In fact, "women's studies" might be this discipline, as it subtly extends and elaborates on the theme of patriarchal tyranny. By using sociological arguments and statistical fabrications, by looking at history with a view to blaming men, some political feminists have intellectually organized their resentments and hatreds into a coherent body of thought. They have fashioned for themselves intellectual weapons. And they are using these weapons, day by day, spreading a message of hate to other women and to that pathetic creature -- the "self-hating man."

In the 1920s a French writer named Julien Benda wrote a book entitled, "The Treason of the Intellectuals" (La Trahison des Clercs). He wrote that "Our age is the age of the intellectual organization of political hatreds." Benda said that the chief political hatreds in modern society are those of race, class and nation. But today Benda would have to add a new category to the list. He would have to add the category of sexual hatred.

Think of the devastation wrought by nationalism in the First World War. Think of the devastation wrought by racism in the Second World War. Add to that, as well, the hundred million plus lives claimed by Communist dictators in the name of class hatred. And now we have sexual hatred in our midst.

As Benda said, the modern era is one of increasing intellectualization and rationalization. We have built huge bureaucracies, we have thoroughly rationalized authority, commerce and war. In other words, we have used reason to make every human activity more efficient and perfect. Government has become a gigantic machine, commercial transactions continue to get easier and easier, and war has become a matter of destroying an entire city with the push of a button. In this context is it any wonder that human intelligence -- in this same era -- has been used to organize and systematize personal hatreds into more general hatreds, perfecting and refining the personal disappointments and resentments of individuals until they become academic disciplines and political battlecries?

According to Julien Benda, the problem began with the advent of modern materialism. He said that 20th century writers and thinkers, insofar as they embrace materialism, have been led away from genuine humanity, love and charity. He also noted that democracy involves a political struggle for power and money between contending and impassioned groups. With the French monarchists Benda said that, in terms of this struggle, "democracy is war."

And what is war except hatred?

Julien Benda blamed the writers and thinkers of his time, especially those living in democratic countries, for perfecting man's political passions. "The present age," wrote Benda, "is essentially an age of politics." Politics first, always and everywhere. That is how modern democratic plunder works. And hatreds are the raw stuff for organizing and motivating the plunderers. In this context, said Benda, "political passions have obtained the habit of discipline."

If you think that modern feminism is not an example of the intellectual organization of political hatred, as described by Benda, you should think again. Christina Hoff Sommers has written a striking new book entitled, "The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young Men."

According to Sommers a bias against boys has emerged within our society. She documents how feminist agitation and intellectual organization has created the myth of the shortchanged girl. "Inevitably, writes Sommers, "boys are resented, being seen both as the unfairly privileged gender and as obstacles on the path to gender justice for girls."

Sommers has discovered that the case against masculinity (made by misguided feminists) is full of holes, fabrications and errors. Worse yet, this new propaganda of sexual hate threatens our society with a grave crisis. Sommers notes that "some educators will tell you that it is boys, not girls, who are on the fragile side of the gender gap."

Increasingly, boys are dropping out of school. They are involved in drugs and crime. They are less active in student government, honorary societies, academic clubs and music programs. Today's boys are less likely to enter college. The only refuge for boys, it seems, is sports. And Sommers tells us that the militant feminists have zeroed in on this last remaining male fortress in a long-term effort to batter it down.

Several years ago David Thomas wrote an excellent book entitled, "Not Guilty: In Defence of the Modern Man." One of his chapters is called "The Myth of the Bad Man." Thomas shows that today's intellectual elite is creating a myth that men are violent and violence is male. A huge cottage industry has grown up to demonstrate that within families, men are a bad influence -- a necessary evil at best. "Meanwhile," asks Thomas, "why won't anyone have the courage and the honesty to confront and deal with abuse carried out by women?"

There is no balance, says Thomas, who writes of a "pattern of prejudice" in social science itself. Thomas argues that today's accepted orthodoxy holds "that all abusers are male. ..." This is especially true in the area of sexual harassment.

The organization of hatred along sexual lines is, in my view, the most troubling intellectual trend in modern thought today. The next time you hear somebody say that men are pigs -- or some similar comment -- you might want to object.

But be forewarned. Your objection might be met with an unexpected expression of blind rage.

[MikeK]

"men are pigs" , yup guilty as charged, but I'm a nice pig. Heck I like being a guy, if someone has a problem with that then oh-well, and they probably don't like the Three Stooges or Beevis and Butthead either.

Here's the lyrics to one of my current favorite CDs by Brad Paisley.

"You Need A Man Around Here"

You've sure got a real nice place
So don't take this the wrong way
But I can tell by your decorating taste
You've been alone too long
You've got more candles than a midnight mass
That fancy mirror adds a touch of class
But do you know how good a mounted bass
Would look there on that wall
[Chorus]
You need a man around here
You can't do it all by yourself
To me it's painfully clear
That you could use a little help
Someone to kill the spiders
Change the channel and drink the beer
Seems to me that you sure need
A man around here

Thumbing through your stack of magazines
I don't see a Maxim or Field and Stream
I haven't been in a room this clean
Since they took my appendix out
Well you've gotta be kidding me
Don't tell me that thing is your TV
My laptop's got a bigger screen
Baby, there ain't no doubt

[Repeat chorus]

Someone to kill the spiders
And by the way, you're out of beer
Seems to me that you sure need
A man around here
Yeah, it seems to me that you sure need
A man around here

I know the guy in that song. He also has a romantic ballad titled "Put the Toilet Seat Down" which is about a man going the extra mile for the woman he loves.

[Guest]

Suppose someone said in casual conversation that "men are pigs." What would society's reaction be?

Boars and sows are held in high esteem among the Celts. And even to this day in Ireland and Scotland, pigs are objects of affection to the degree that many foyers are graced with cute pig baskets holding flower arangements or magazines.

Much of the humor in County Antrim is agricultural humor mostly for the sexual affection among boars and sows.

Moving over to Perthshire in Scotland, one finds much Pictish art focuses on boars as strong and valient warlike animals. Boar iconography is used by Scottish clans (I think Clan Campbell uses a boar's head in its Coat of Arms). I have several rubbings of boars that have been lifted off Scottish standing stones.

So the Celtic community would view the statement as bringing out masculine qualities of strength and fecundaty and feminine values of nuturing and culinary arts.

A hearty Irish traditional breakfast consists of bacon, ham and sausage.

The Celts have a fond regard for pigs. What about your favorite culture or ethnic group?

[Akil Todd Harvey]

most men would take it as an occasion to laugh at themselves. Perhaps most women would nod in unthinking agreement.

and mike nods his head in agreement and the women on this forum sit in silent agreement? are you women thinking? how 'bout us mens?

And imagine what would happen if a university professor said to his class that blacks or Jews or Asians are pigs?

that would be tolerated for how long?

20th century writers and thinkers, insofar as they embrace materialism, have been led away from genuine humanity, love and charity.

so what is valued more, money or harmony?

Increasingly, boys are dropping out of school. They are involved in drugs and crime. They are less active in student government, honorary societies, academic clubs and music programs. Today's boys are less likely to enter college.

We have more men locked up in US prisons, per capita, than the evil empire (soviet union and their gulags) and the apartheid regime of south Africa. Is that what makes us the freest nation in the world, the freedom to lock up vast numbers of our men?

And where is the outcry of gender unfairness on the part of feminists? such unfairness rarely, if ever, makes their radar. unfairness slanted towards women never makes their agenda........

[Dana Sheets]

the women on this forum sit in silent agreement

Silence in open forums does not mean consent, agreement, or anything other than the fact that folks haven't replied.

I tend to avoid the "feminist" vs "name-your-favorite-gender-stereotype" arguments because I find that the reality always lies somewhere in the middle. In fact it wasn't long into my email life that I stopped forwarding the great variety of emails I received on how men and women are different and why one should be exhaulted over the other.

More men are in jail because we're not doing something right. What that something is or how to fix it I have no idea. I'm not sure it should be up to the feminists to try and figure out why men are in prison. People advocate for different causes for different reasons - who is one person to say where another should focus their advocacy?

Anyone can point out a problem -- that is the first and needed step. So now it is time to move onto the next step - instead of asking why more people aren't offended wouldn't it be more productive to ask what possible solutions we should consider?

When I was a student I participated in something called "Future Problem Solving." This was and still is a critical thinking competition played by elementary and secondary students in the US. I participated in the "team problem solving" competition.

http://www.fpsp.org/

The game was played in two hours and worked like this:

Step 1 - students read a "fuzzy situation" a made-up social issue usually set in the future. They are also given relevant background information on terms, practices, and available (or projected) statistics. This "fuzzy situation" was usually two pages long. For example - in the year 2050 mankind is running out of food because of growing populations covering available land mass.

Step 2 - student then brainstorm and identify 20 main problems outlined by the expository information setup in the "fuzzy situation." (For example - warfare may break over between different groups competing for food, water supply becomes contaminated from over population, inflation rises and crushes the economy because of supply/demand issues, etc.)

Step 3 - the students select what they decide is their greatest problem.

Step 4 - the students brainstorm 20 solutions to their problem

Step 5 - the students develop a rubric of 5-6 elements they use to rate how well their solution addresses the problem and grade each of their solutions.

Step 6- whichever solution got the highest points on the rubric is selected and the final answer and written up in greater detail.

Students are scored based on how they identify their problems, if their solutions address the scope of their problem, the efficacy of the rubric in grading the possible solutions, and their write-up of the final solution. Throughout the students are graded on grammer, word choice, and use of some language conventions unique to the process.

I participated in this exercise for four years. Honestly - it was one of the most useful parts of my education outside of composition, government, economics, and speech class.

So once you start with this model on the topic of "more US men are in prison that any other developed country" or "pop culture perceptions of males as slow, agressive, and self-involved has deteriorated the self-esteem of men in society" you will quickly see how complex an issue this is and why there will be no simple solutions on an internet forum.

By the way in writing this I was happy to see that FPS now has real-world community based initiatives. That is just wonderful. I always thought that social action was a natural extension of this program and I'm just thrilled to see it incorporated into the model.

[Akil Todd Harvey]

Hi Dana,

Hope you are well as sumer winds down.....

Anyone can point out a problem -- that is the first and needed step. So now it is time to move onto the next step - instead of asking why more people aren't offended wouldn't it be more productive to ask what possible solutions we should consider?

I wasnt aware that there was any agreement that this is a problem. I threw this out to identify the problem that hasnt been addressed much.......by men or women.

most men would take it as an occasion to laugh at themselves. Perhaps most women would nod in unthinking agreement.

Actually, before solving Note the operative word, "perhaps" ..... as in perhaps the something has occurred.......I was just noting the irony that no women had posted.........a question mark in a sentence is to denote uncertainty..........rather than a statement of fact or opinion......

Having been raised by an occasional lesbian and full time feminist historian of some note, I have had some many years experience defining and exploring gender sterotyping and attempting to solve these and other related problems.

We might want to recall how men were recruited actively to support the feminist cause (they thought it to be the right cause). Today, some of us men are welcoming women to re-think gender relations with men in mind (we want women to empathize with men just as they were asking us to do).

I appreciate your candor, dana, and your reflection on these issues. Many women, certainly not all, react, without thinking, to many of the arguments made by the nascent movement of men right's groups.