Copyright 1995 by R.F. Doyle
Some background is necessary to explain the situation fully. Since its modern inception, the men's/fathers' movement has had grave philosophic problems. It has a wide -- too wide -- political spectrum. On the left we have the modernists, with hedonists at the extreme. On the right are the traditionalists, with "mossbacks" and hard core religionists at the extreme. Both the fathers' and men's aspects of the movement have largely the same philosophic breakdown, but with different practical concerns, such as the latter's debate over no-fault divorce, and whether cohabitation should be a consideration in custody. We can call the two camps of the men's aspect gender liberals and gender conservatives, to avoid confusion with the usual connotations of those terms. The former minimize gender distinctions, and tolerate (if not engage in) homosexuality. The latter celebrate gender distinctions and oppose (if not abhor) that "lifestyle." Political incorrectness can be defined as opposition to either extreme, especially to the left.
Some gender liberals feel that minimizing the differences between the sexes is the best way to overcome pervasive misandry. Gender conservatives consider surrender of both masculinity and femininity too big a price to pay for male equality and dignity. Both are philosophically legitimate positions. Gender liberal extremists, when they aren't fixated on "sexuality problems," rail against their manhood as many feminists rail against their womanhood. Their desperate attempts to change nature itself makes them hard to distinguish from feminists, and opens to question their inclusion in the men's movement. I believe gender liberal moderates have earned a legitimate place in the movement due to their opposition (even if belated) to misandry. Moderates in both philosophic camps need each other in order for a movement representing the interests of men to have even a modicum of political clout. Failure of rational elements to cooperate means continuing disaster for all men. I invite your thoughts on the matter.
A small struggling David confronting the Goliath of misandry, The Liberator attempts to maintain editorial moderation, while publishing rational, non-extremist opinion from both camps. Granted, we may have tilted slightly to the right, but only when commonsense seemed to be in that direction. For example, two months ago we deplored the insanity of a local lawsuit to permit a girl to wrestle on a high school boys team (she recently won, by the way). We have tried very hard to serve the many factions within the men's/fathers' movement, to emphasize commonality throughout, and to promote cooperation. As our grant rejection demonstrates, that is very hard to do, perhaps impossible. We will keep trying.
Reprinted with permission from -- MDA -- The Liberator.
Send Editorial Comments to The Backlash!
Please report all problems to The Web Master