Friday, May 29, 2015

Are men becoming collateral damage in the battle for gender equity?

A good piece about how, "in order for women to be raised up, men have to be put down," in this modern age of ultra-feminism. We do undoubtedly need gender equality in our society, but we seem to forget whose rights are we trampling upon in achieving that. We need to be careful of how we are achieving our goals.

Primary problem with Western neo-feminism culture is that man & woman are not considered as 2 halves of the same species / human race. They are considered as 2 opposing forces. Modern neo-feminism teaches society that men are nothing more than garbage with their brains good for only one action only (in the bed) & they are good for nothing else.

Yes, there are men who are abusing women. And I am not talking or even defending their actions. But actions of a few are defining the whole half of a human race.

When society talks about men & male violence towards women, they forget to think about women & female violence towards men. Be it being portrayed in comedy movies like "Horrible Bosses," where Jennifer Aniston's character is sexually harassing & blackmailing her assistant, or news stories after stories coming out from North American schools where female teachers are sexually abusing their male students.

Islam teaches woman & man are equal, but both in their own places. Just like all fruits are equally required for our body to function properly (apples & oranges are 2 different fruits, but they are both needed by the body), both male & female halves of the human race / species are required for the proper functioning of the society. Similar to functions of the fruits, both of these halves of human race have different functions but both equally important.

If Islam has made woman in charge of the house & man out of the house (except in some special conditions), then it doesn't mean that man has more power in society over woman. Or, in a witness stand, if one man's testimony is enough versus 2 women's, then it doesn't mean that women are somehow below men or women are somehow more retarded than men.

Similar to these rules, in a home, husband is made to be the head of the household, since only one person can make decision in any organization (usually one CEO in organization) but the wife is not barred from giving her sincere advice to help her husband & her family, & husband is required to listen to her advice, even if, in the end, he makes a decision seemingly contrary to her advice (just like a CEO takes suggestions from his/her corporate team, but may not follow through on all of the suggestions).

Islam required both males & females to get education but it doesn't mean both of them need to be out of the house to use their education, to bring home the turkey. An educated mother is far more important to raise proper citizens for the society than an educated mother who is leading a billion-$$$ multinational corporation, all the while, ignoring her kids.

Other religions, like Christianity, considered woman akin to dirty distractions who takes away the focus of man from his work (that's why, Catholic priests used to not marry ... but they still had biological needs, which they fulfilled by sexually abusing young boys).

The Western feminism took woman out of the house but it didn't reduce the woman's workload at home. Whereas, man are still implicitly considered to not do anything at home. So, woman is doing the double the work in the Western society (outside & inside), whereas, man is only doing half (outside). Now, Islam didn't stop husbands from helping their wives in the household work or in raising their children.

In this race of showing sympathy to women's cause, the Western world is quickly beating down men. For instance, paternal rights to their children after a divorce. Maternal rights are strictly upheld, while paternal rights gets trampled upon.

Man & woman are not two opposing & competing forces in a society. They are both essential in forming a healthy & strong family unit & the whole society. One half of the human race (man) need not be put down so another half (woman) can come up, to achieve gender equality.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Fraternity culture doesn’t have a fig leaf to hide behind these days.
 
I’m not making an apology for brutish, sexually violent behaviour. In recent reports from postsecondary campuses, some fraternity brothers ... sound like Neanderthals in fine wool sweaters.
 
At the University of Oklahoma, members of Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity were caught singing a racist song. At Penn State, 144 members of Kappa Delta Rho participated in private Facebook postings of “nude females that appeared to be passed out or in other sexual or embarrassing positions,” according to police. One of the members, disgusted with the postings, reported them to authorities. The women were not aware that their photos were being taken. The fraternity has been suspended, & an investigation is reportedly under way.
 
And these stories are just the latest additions to a heaping pile of dirty frat laundry, much of it inadvertently aired by social media & surreptitious smartphone video.
 
But in the need to ensure there are safe places for women to be educated – which is crucial – isn’t it worth asking if there can be safe places for men to gather without suspicion of being a cabal of misogynist terrorism? In the heated discussion about rape culture, the feminist voice is loudest at the moment, which makes many young men feel that their every move, every thought, is policed. Some might even suggest they’re victims of misandry, if they weren’t sure their complaints would fall on deaf ears.
 
A witch hunt, you say? Well, I won’t use that loaded term, because it only serves to ratchet-up the gender wars when what we need is a little calm.
 
Earlier this year, when I was at Dalhousie University in Halifax to look into the dentistry faculty’s ordeal, in which a group of final-year male students posted sexually violent content to a private Facebook page, I came across a story about an altercation between female students & a fraternity last year. It spoke to the heightened tension between men & women in the fraught sexual culture on campus. Kappa Alpha fraternity at King’s College, which is connected to Dalhousie University, was criticized by a group of female students for being exclusionary.

I became aware that a lot of the first year [female students] in the first couple of weeks at school were being targeted by frat members while they’re learning their limits with alcohol & being invited to frat parties,” Bethany Hindmarsh, one of the students who wrote a letter to the King’s Students’ Union (KSU) about the fraternity, told me in an interview. While Hindmarsh & others canvassed opinions about the fraternity on campus to start a conversation about gender-equality issues, she says, one of the Kappa Alpha men reportedly threatened the KSU president, warning her not to interfere with their club. Several of the women were called “feminazis” by men & received sexually violent hate mail, Hindmarsh told me.
 
In an effort to unravel the he-said, she-said conflict, I also talked to a current Kappa Alpha member, Ari Flanzraich, who reported that the fraternity had meetings with King’s equity board in the wake of the women’s complaints. “Nothing came of it,” he said of the discussion. The complaints about the fraternity “were largely theoretical & broadly social [about the idea of exclusion].” He acknowledged that the “default patriarchal white-hetero-capitalist” society prevails & that it needs to change, but he feels the “anti-frat idea” is unrepresentative of what the men in Kappa Alpha at King’s uphold. “We’re open to talking. There is no personal animosity. What often goes on in fraternities in the States is despicable. We have no interest in that.” The King’s chapter of Kappa Alpha, which consists of approximately 15 friends, was set up as a literary society, he says.
 
Asked how rape culture pathologizes male thought & behaviour, he was cautious about making a comment for fear of how it might be misinterpreted. “As soon as I open my mouth, I’m judged,” he said. “I don’t walk around thinking of myself as a sinner,” he finally confessed, after some hesitation, adding that men are expected to constantly “be vigilant of their potential slippage” from politically correct actions & comments.
 
He’s right, of course. And that’s because part of the cultural discussion about fraternity culture centres around how aware men are of internalized (and normalized) misogyny.
 
But in the effort to bring about a harmonious culture of gender equity, how helpful is it to alienate all men, given that their collaboration is part of the solution? Sometimes, the cultural equation seems to be that in order for women to be raised up, men have to be put down, which is just as reductive as women being defined by their biological function – something early feminists found understandably demeaning & offensive.

No comments:

Post a Comment