I tried raising this issue privately with GirlWritesWhat, but unfortunately I never received a response from her.

Now, let me get straight to the point:

Like most of you, I believe that men have issues particular to their sex. These issues are being inadequately addressed, both by feminists and by society writ large (which encompasses our "pop culture" and our legal system).

However, why must you DENY the existence of a patriarchal society in order to ADMIT the existence of discrimination against men?

In other words, why is it so important to the Men's Rights Movement to argue that women have already achieved "equality" or, alternatively, that the inequality that exists today is slanted against men? Frankly, it seems irrelevant to me.

For example, I don't know if any of you have studied the Hutu and the Tutsi of Rwanda, but let's say that the Hutu were systematically discriminated against for years and years. Recently, the Tutsi became the victims of widespread discrimination and abuse.

Is it necessary, in correcting the discrimination against the Tutsi, to allege that the Tutsi are "more wronged" than the Hutu ever were? Why is it even relevant? I mean, isn't it possible to legitimately redress the wrongs committed against the Tutsi without asking whether the Tutsi are "worse off" than the Hutu ever were? If you're saving the lives of Tutsi or Hutu or whomever, who really cares which side boasts the higher death count?

I don't know if you're understanding the point that I am making, but think of it this way:

I'm a man but I'm also a feminist in the old-fashioned sense that I support equality between the genders.

I don't subscribe to the idea that a "patriarchy" is responsible for all of the problems in society, but I think that we do live in a patriarchal society, at least to some extent. Now, leaving aside the question as to whether the patriarchal underpinnings of our society hurt men as much as they hurt women (I would argue that it's an open question), it still doesn't refute the fact that inequalities exist in our culture and that some of these inequalities have an adverse impact on men.

Women have suffered (and continue to suffer) from assigned gender roles, but men, too, have suffered from gender roles, including the concept of the "disposable male." To me, it's irrelevant as to whether the suffering of males exceeds the suffering of females or vice versa. Suffice it to say that men's issues exist and should be addressed, legitimately. Period. Suffice it to say, too, that feminism is inadequately addressing the issues of men, irrespective of whether women are "more oppressed" than men, etc.

Now, you might argue that it's a "zero-sum game." In other words, if one side is comparatively more "oppressed" than the other, then any "issue" or "complaint" of the less-oppressed side is illegitimate.

However, this just doesn't make sense to me: I can help save the lives of innocent Hutu while also allowing for the possibility that the Tutsi have faced greater discrimination in the past (and potentially in the future).

In the case of men and women, it makes even less sense to me because if you're talking about EQUALITY between the genders, giving women extra rights over men is not doing women any favors. It could lead to the breakdown of the family, the prevalence of violence in society, etc. Moreover, giving men extra "rights" over women doesn't make the lives of men any easier (I refer you to the "right" of being conscripted to serve in the armed services, the "right" of being expected to serve as the primary breadwinner, etc.)

I guess what I'm saying is, it doesn't REALLY benefit women to take away rights from men or to discriminate against men, just like it doesn't really benefit men to discriminate against women, either.

And here's what I think:

  1. Men are struggling with certain forms of discrimination. They are also struggling with combating their "gender role" and it's having an adverse impact on men, on families, on women, and on society. The emasculation of men is hurting society.

  2. These issues need to be addressed.

  3. Men should be encouraged to discuss areas of their lives in which they have received unequal treatment and/or have been the victims of discrimination, abuse, and/or harassment.

  4. Men should be encouraged to voice their issues in a safe forum (just like women), without the fear of being called "whiners" or "wimpy" or not manly.

  5. Feminists should recognize that by chiding men for "complaining," they are unwittingly bolstering the assigned gender role of men in the very "patriarchy" that they rail against, namely the role of the "stoic" male, hardworking, never complaining, never stepping out of line, always acting for the best interest of the "weaker" sex, etc.

  6. This whole argument as to whether women have it worse off than men or whether men have it worse off than women, etc., is totally irrelevant to any of the points I raised above.

Lastly, I will leave you with this thought:

If African Americans are less discriminated against than Asians, does that mean that discrimination perpetrated by Asians against African Americans is okay as long as the Asians are "worse off" comparatively? How in the world does that make sense?