Such an ironic juxtaposition is not without precedent: near the end of her career, Susan B. Anthony lamented that while men were more or less ambivalent about women's suffrage, most women opposed it.
Similarly, a 1987 Baylor University study found most men comfortable with the idea of having a woman for a boss, while most women are not.
These facts suggest that, throughout history, most of the feminists have been men. Does this mean most of the men's rights advocates will be women? Given the weight of historical precedent, it would be a fair bet but for one hitch: most women expect men to fix all ills of society. Consequently, as men, we are on our own. As usual.
With this in mind, let's look at what our elitist friends had to say in Newsweek's "White Male Paranoia" article:
Now, this is a very interesting idea: do we gain great advantage over women by having pictures of dead guys on our currency? Who knows to what depths of social-disadvantage we middle-and working-class men would sink were it Martha's mug, rather than George's, on our bottom-dollar.
Before we count our blessings, however, let's ask, who voted all those (richer-than-thou) white men into America's Congress? Women! In general elections, female voters outnumber male voters by almost 10 million. And who do they vote for? Joe Biden and Bob Packwood!
I am wont to wonder whose faces we'd find in Washington were most voters men: Christina Hoff Sommers as Senate Majority leader? Dr. Ruth in charge of Health and Human Services? Christie Hefner, Secretary of Education? Dennis Miller as White House Press Secretary? Michael Crichton, Vice President, and George Gilder for President?
Regardless, the fact is most of the men in Congress are well-off, usually charismatic, and powerful, everything the rest of us are not. They're not like us, don't represent us, have sex with an astounding assortment of "liberated" women, and the ones who benefit most from their installation are the women who put them into office in the first place. One of the few characteristics these (primarily pro-feminist) patriarchal politicians share in common with most men is their gender, and that is a poor basis upon which to make the kind of over-simplified generalizations promulgated by Newsweek's writers. Even worse, however, is what women are saying:
Given the extent to which women use Child Protective Services, the Courts and highly feminized schools to emasculate boys, this is not an incredible statement. Ironically, where genuine masculinity is lacking in the lives of boys, violence follows. Consequently, as these "shallow, bald, middle-aged men" die off, the civilization built upon their bones will crumble into the ruins of what George Gilder calls the sexual suicide society.
A sadly farcical footnote to this is that these "shallow, bald, middle-aged men with character disorders" are the way they are because that's what it takes for men to attract women -- as Warren Farrell observed in Why Men Are The Way They Are, women desire nice-guy Alan Alda because he's a successful nice guy, not because he's nice.
Yes, women get to watch men die. That's because American women get just about the best health care in the world. It's far superior to what the providers of that health care -- American men -- get. Women should enjoy this while they can because, eventually, when men wise up to the fact that all the thanks we're going to get for our hard work and sacrifice is the glee women take in watching us die, this may change.
One would presume a publication such as Newsweek would have access to the Statistical Abstract of the United States. Read on.
Okay, one at a time.
There are 400 (surprise!) Forbes 400. Of them, 330 are white guys, which leaves approximately 82 million white guys who are not members of the Forbes 400.
In 1990 there were 435 members of the House and 100 Senators, and 412 of them were (primarily pro-feminist) white guys (elected by women), according to Newsweek. Again, this leaves approximately 82 million white guys who are not so privileged.
Fifty state governors, 46 of them (primarily pro-feminist) men; 773,000 college faculty - tenured and untenured - I don't have the number of tenured faculty, but this indicates a maximum of 541,100 of them could be (primarily pro-feminist) tenured male faculty; 279,000 editors and reporters, for a maximum possible of 251,100 (primarily pro-feminist) male editors of daily newspapers, and I don't know how many (primarily pro-feminist) TV news directors, but it really doesn't matter because the point is that the sum of all of the above numbers (which are taken from the Statistical Abstract of the US, which explains why they're so raw) amounts to less than one percent of the American white male population.
Which raises the question, how do the remaining 99+ percent of white men benefit from any of this? Do they derive benefits that American women (of any race) do not? Do most white men have wives in these fields who bring home fat paychecks? No, but American women get far more money and derive far more social utility from the placement of these men than the 99+ percent of American men do. Yet the elitist chaps at Newsweek feign amazement that white men would think themselves worthy of victim status:
More than 80 percent of the homeless are male, men account for most on-the-job deaths and injuries, and white males have the highest suicide rate of all, killing themselves almost twice as often as black males, almost four times the rate of white females, and nine times the rate of black females.
And even as pop-feminist media moguls (justifiably) decry the rape in Bosnia, men remain the primary casualties of war. Despite these facts, Newsweek's writers predictably conclude on a sour note:
What doesn't figure is that Newsweek's presumably bright writers would know that, (a) men today are not responsible for what men did 100 or 1,000 years ago; (b) men did not start the women's movement, but they comprised the majority of both active and passive supporters of women's rights (read your histories, boys); (c) it was out of a sense of fair play that powerful white men in the 1960's (most of whom are now elderly, retired or dead), acknowledged the justice of the feminist cause, and it is to those men (and the feminists who appealed to them) that women today owe the rights they now take for granted; (d) pop-feminists are not interested in equality: just read Catharine MacKinnon, Marilyn French, Robin Morgan or June Stephenson and you'll see what I mean.
The white men who are "beginning" to say, "only fair play is fair play," are the same guys who grew up with the modern women's movement. For many of these now verging on middle-age white men, women's rights made as much sense as men's rights, and they were appalled by the apparent anti-female sexism of generations past. But they thought that equal rights meant ... equal rights. And what is getting to them now is that pop-feminists want more than equal rights for women, and male elitist snobs like the writers at Newsweek agree, and misuse their formidable power to oppress their middle- and working-class brothers in the name of an anti-male, misandristic agenda.
Send Editorial Comments to The Backlash!
Please report all problems to The Web Master