Male Studies* - it's Feminist Approved(TM)!

*Now with no yucky MRAS!


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/fashion/masculinities-studies-stonybrook-michael-kimmel.html

Interesting article, but it does appear to be a trojan horse for feminist propaganda.

the event included academics, students, activists and a few prominent feminists, with the goal, as Dr. Kimmel put it, of “engaging men and boys for gender equality.”

'Gender equality' is usually doubletalk for gynocentricism - the 'Animal Farm' version of equality.

Why does it include feminists? Women's Studies didn't include MRAs. Why should it? Why do we need their approval to start with?

“Men’s life expectancy increases by three to four years,” said Gloria Steinem, who was on stage during the event’s opening gala, if you eliminate causes of death attributed to masculinity, such as death from violence, death from speeding and death from tension-related diseases.

She has no authority on the matter. We don't know if male life expectancy is biological or not. Men lead far riskier lives. Is that bad? Who else will take the chances if we don't? How long a life will we all lead if men refuse to go down a mine, up a power pole or inside a construction area?

“What other movement can offer men three or four more years?” she added.

Any movement can offer it - offering things is easy. Deliver? There's the kicker.

From http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/31/why-did-workplace-deaths-fall-in-2008/
Just believe in me and you'll live longer? I've heard it all before.

"It’s safe to say that without women’s studies, we would not have many of the gains that women have made over the last 45 years"

It's not safe to say at all. Women's Studies was completely irrelevant to workplace harassment, for example, which my aunt was involved in dealing with. Her degree had nothing to do with it - in fact, I'd love to know if the graduates EVER did anything beyond bitching about how awful men are, and painting canvases with their bodily waste.

“Our job was to give people new ideas and to persuade them that they were true”

Yes, but they weren't checked, they weren't treated sceptically - they were preached, and then believed blindly. That's not how academia is supposed to work. Where's the critical thinking?

a small but vocal group of champions of male studies (not to be confused with “masculinities studies”) views Dr. Kimmel’s work as insufficiently pro-men.

This is inaccurate. We see it as pro-feminist - it has nothing to do with advancing the cause of men.

It's sort of like "Jews for Hitler". Isn't it nice that they gave us all these gold stars and want to move us to a shiny new home - apparently, the showers in that place are really something!