The adventures of Spotted Dog and The Enforcer!

LOVE.

Maybe it's more like the Romans whining that the people they conquered just don't understand.

Completely free of the actual covo, this from Andi made me think of Spike.

"I came, I conquered, I felt really bad about it."

I won't generalize about all men, but ime most guys who want to talk about men's studies are crybaby sore loser knobwanks whose fathers probably have a good reason to be tough on them, what with the whole knobwank thing. There are guys who research masculinity and whatever, but they're usually not the ones going all Orly Taitz.

Any and all kinda ~ma you need, Sox.

I won't generalize about all men, but ime most guys who want to talk about men's studies are crybaby sore loser knobwanks whose fathers probably have a good reason to be tough on them, what with the whole knobwank thing. There are guys who research masculinity and whatever, but they're usually not the ones going all Orly Taitz.

I just don't understand this.

Almost every man I met who studied Men's studies showed how patriarchy did and does wrong to men as well as to women.

These conventions aren't supposed to be the place where the Great White Males are gathered up and congratulating each other for dominating the world.

What Erika said. It maybe shouldn't be that way, but IME it's exactly that. See also Men's Rights Associations.

So many tons of ~ma to you, Sox. Health~ma, just-stress~ma, coping and calmness~ma. Anything you need, as much as you need.

The thing that bugs me about the men's studies programs is that feminists have been saying, just about since the dawn of feminism, that it's not just about women; that patriarchy hurts men too. I started reading Gloria Steinem at seventeen, and ran out and read everyone she'd read and everyone she recommended, and I know that's a theme that feminist writers have been going back to over and over and over. With sympathy and empathy and careful scrutiny of how our society functions and what the cost of patriarchal gender essentialism is to boys and men as well as to women and girls, how it constrains and diminishes everyone.

That's been crystal clear since the beginning of feminism, and it was a large, loud part of mainstream feminist discourse by the 70s when the Steinem crowd and Ms. Magazine rose to prominence. And it's just a little crazymaking for feminists to see, once every few years just like clockwork, another group of men who haven't listened to anything but the media's selective filter of What Feminism Says pop up and say, "Hey, you know what, patriarchy hurts us too! We should look at that in some depth!"

It doesn't bother me that the boys want their program. Whatever.

I think there's academic value in a well-crafted Male Studies program, in the sense of What It Means to Be a Man? Shir has gone into the details far better than I can on that point. (Though I'd add an exploration of how men cope when they don't -- or can't -- meet societal expectations.)

But that doesn't seem to be the sort of thing proposed in the symposium that Vortex linked. That symposium strikes me as a bunch of old fogies whining because they aren't allowed to chase their secretaries around their desks anymore.

OK. I also stand behind what JZ just said.

I just don't understand this.

Almost every man I met who studied Men's studies showed how patriarchy did and does wrong to men as well as to women.

This may also be a difference between US and non-US academic culture -- it's absolutely true that there's legitimate study to be done of gender issues from all sides. It's just that the specific history of the phrase in the US context is more closely tied to a not-really-academic but rather conservative-punditry-driven movement to say that the white straight guys are being oppressed and excluded from the discourse (and, frankly, also to a lot of hyperprivileged knobwanks saying "Women's studies? Oh yeah? Well WHAT ABOUT MEN'S STUDIES? Huh? Have you thought about the mens?" as if they were saying something incredibly funny and original).