Title : "To the feminists who have such interesting ideas for how boys and young men should adapt to the current times, thank you for your opinion."
link : "To the feminists who have such interesting ideas for how boys and young men should adapt to the current times, thank you for your opinion."
"To the feminists who have such interesting ideas for how boys and young men should adapt to the current times, thank you for your opinion."
"You are mostly wrong and more than a little bit presumptuous that you have something of value to contribute to the shaping of young men. Arrogant, actually. You have zero understanding of the challenges, the pressures, the id, the ego, the essence of what it means to be male. Zero. You have only your perspective on what a feminist would want a male child to become. You would be wise to consider your own reactions if men were to offer suggestions on how to prepare girls and young women for the rigors of the real world."So says the highest-rated comment on a NYT op-ed by Jessica Valenti, "What Feminists Can Do for Boys/We fought for young women in the patriarchy first. But budding patriarchs could use some help too."
The second-highest-rated comment is:
How 'bout not referring to them as "budding patriarchs"?For decades, I've heard feminists say they don't care what happens to boys — their focus is on girls — and if their work in support of women and girls has an impact on boys, well, that's fair play turnabout of millennia of subordination. I have been on the receiving end of sharp words from feminists who don't even want to hear the argument — the one Valenti makes here — that you should at least be interested in boys doing well because it's relevant to whether girls do well.
You know, just for a start?
(Deep Thought: I'd love to elucidate for you how odiously sexist this term is, but it is so vile as to preclude any parallel which wouldn't be censored by the moderator, correctly, as hate speech.)
I never comment, but when I see someone attacking children...
By the way, the term "budding patriarchs" is in the subheadline is probably wasn't written by Valenti.
Long-term readers of this blog will remember that I got into an on-line squabble with Valenti and her supporters after I criticized her for posing happily in front of the well-known woman abuser Bill Clinton, when she and other bloggers were assembled to be massaged into blogging in the interests of the Hillary '08 campaign. I haven't kept up with the writings of Jessica Valenti over the years — it says in the NYT she is "the author of six books on feminism" — so I don't know if she's ever called Bill and Hillary to account for what they'd done to women.
Anyway... this new column doesn't have much to say about how feminists can serve — serve?!! — the needs of boys and whether they'd be any good at it. She thinks of not expecting them to be "strong and stoic" and breaking "the silence" about male victims of sexual assault. She's more expressive about what she doesn't like: the "misogynist huckster" Jordan Peterson and "dangerous online extremist" "incel" support groups.
Thus articles "To the feminists who have such interesting ideas for how boys and young men should adapt to the current times, thank you for your opinion."
that is all articles "To the feminists who have such interesting ideas for how boys and young men should adapt to the current times, thank you for your opinion." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article "To the feminists who have such interesting ideas for how boys and young men should adapt to the current times, thank you for your opinion." with the link address https://usainnew.blogspot.com/2018/07/to-feminists-who-have-such-interesting.html
0 Response to ""To the feminists who have such interesting ideas for how boys and young men should adapt to the current times, thank you for your opinion.""
Post a Comment