Original post here.

Well, it all went as expected pretty much. She blamed everything on patriarchy. It was laughable how much of a go-to answer it became. Now, I'm what you might call a bit of a conspiracy enthusiast, so I get the whole idea of patriarchy to some extent. I do believe groups of men (and women) control governments from the shadows, but to say a super elite class of wealthy banksters with ties to royalty and secret societies is representative of male dominance over women is fucking bonkers, even for me.

She said women represent over half the population and own less than 1% of the world's land. I don't know where she got that statistic or whether she needs reminding that the Queen of England is a women who's Crown land includes Canada, Great Britain and Australia -but when 0.001% of the population control most of the world's wealth, I don't care if all of them are men. This is not a patriarchy. This is a plutocracy, an oligarchy, a corporatocracy....

Whatever you call this system, I said -a lot of women benefit from it. She looked at me all puzzled and tilted her head to ask "how"? I explained extra protections in divorce, child custody, paternity rights, definitions of rape, etc... She said nobody benefits from patriarchy and that these are structural problems, stemming from it, blah, blah, blah... dodge, dodge, dodge... Twisted, fucking nonsensical logic

She said feminism was about gender equality and helping men by deconstructing gender norms, teaching them not to rape, exposing and destroying the patriarchy, but she said nothing to my rebuttal of male homelessness, suicide and school drop out rates and feminism doing nothing to bring awareness to that. She admitted feminism did nothing for black women back in the civil rights movement and that men might be better off getting advice from other men, but insisted it be through feminist framework. She said "we don't need a MRM, we need feminist allies." WTF?

I asked if she supported a gender neutral definition of rape and to my surprise, she said no. "To be frank, it just doesn't interest me." WOW. I couldn't believe it. She said we can't have a gender neutral definition because it's like comparing apples and oranges. Now, men and women are sexually dimorphic and I understand she was talking about violent rape (as if only men are strong enough to force sex or use a weapon), but I wasn't even talking about violent rape; I was talking about disagreements between consent being given, where two people who don't remember the night before and maybe had too much to drink now dispute the circumstances. I asked, in those cases wouldn't both parties be victims and also perpetrators of rape? She said she couldn't speak on hypotheticals, deferring to excuses such as "I'm not a lawyer."

I spoke with Director of Father's Resources International, Heidi Nabert yesterday and I'm interviewing National Post's Barbara Kay tomorrow. My assignment is due April 13, so I'll keep you all posted. Thanks for reading.

TL;DR I'm a journalism student writing an article on feminism and the MRM. I interviewed my feminist professor and found, despite thinking her to be sane and logical, she is a hypocrite who says feminism is about gender equality, but offered nothing to show how feminism is helping men