Gender discrimination is a serious issue. Feminism is an important social movement and the issues facing females of wage disparity, media objectification, of masculine hegemony, and many more are real, relevant and serious. It is not surprising there are many institutions, such as Simon Fraser University’s Women’s Centre which cater to these needs and provide women with a safe environment in which to discuss, seek help, and campaign. However, the feminist movement was founded on a call for gender equality and in modern society there are serious issues facing the male gender as well: false rape accusations, vilification as abusers, child-custody discrimination, and many social problems which affect men on average more than women. It seems to follow then that at an institution like Simon Fraser, which sees the need to provide women a safe-haven to discuss issues without fear, should also have a centre to cater to men. This is exactly what has sparked a debate, however, as many people feel that a Men’s Centre would be a waste of money or that men don’t need one the way that women do. This view is sexist in the purest form and one which is flagrant disregard of the principles upon which feminism was founded.Many opponents argue that male issues are not relevant enough to warrant a $30 000 expenditure (the same that the Women’s Centre gets). However, without detracting from the severity of women’s issues, men’s issues deserve respect and consideration. Men are roundly vilified in society as either malicious sex-crazed abusers or drunken idiot manchildren. Just flip on any popular sitcom and you’ll either see bumbling patriarch trying to sneak beers and television past his cunning and intelligent wife, an anthropomorphic phallus, Tyler Perry presenting a six-packed Romeo who wants nothing more than to rub his girlfriend’s feet, or a kind-hearted and intelligent thinker (an impotent weenie). Even during the commercial breaks, when you see a woman making a fool of the stupid, sex-crazed quintessential man wrapped around her finger, who’s really being more objectified? Males who work with young children are constantly looked at with suspicion, as though a man who cares about children simply must be Humbert Humbert in disguise. Rape is seen as something which only men do to women, and a woman forcing herself upon a man is blockbuster comedy in Bridesmaids or Horrible Bosses. In fact, it was only in January 2012 that the FBI changed its definition of “rape” from “the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly against her will” to acknowledge rape against men. False rape allegations have the potential to ruin a man’s life and yet some claim that false rape allegers should not be penalized for fear of preventing real victims from coming forward; a 2005 study by the British Home Office reported as many as 8% of rape allegations against men are found to be false. Men are often seen as violent and irresponsible. Mothers routinely get child-custody over fathers, and yet 61% of child abuse is committed by biological mothers (25% by fathers). Furthermore 20% of non-custodial mothers pay child-support, and among this number 47% default on support, while 61% of non-custodial fathers pay support and only 27% default of support (despite the well-known image of the dead-beat dad). What if women had higher insurance premiums because they were seen as worse drivers? What if there were parking lots in which minorities were not allowed because they commit more violent crimes statistically and whites wanted to feel safe? These are the kinds of vilifications against men which are completely socially acceptable, and even ironically lauded for their “feminism”. These are only a handful of the serious social issues facing men, and ones which are constantly swept under the rug or dismissed as problems which men are told to “man up” about.There are also people who believe that while men’s issues are relevant, men would not go to a Men’s Centre to talk about serious problems. Critics at Simon Fraser actually said that the centre would be used for “douchebags to play PS3”, and that it’s unreasonable because “no men take gender studies courses”. What if the Women’s Centre was dismissed as a place where “ditzes” go to do their nails and talk about boys, or if interest in technology-outreach for women was called unreasonable because fewer women take Engineering courses? While it is true that there definitely is a stigma against men talking about their feelings (and when they do the horrendous phrase “no homo” is often invoked), this invokes even greater reason for a centre to exist. What advocates of the centre at Simon Fraser are looking to do is break down the social conventions that say that men aren’t allowed to show pain, that men aren’t allowed to talk about their feelings and that men aren’t allowed to feel vulnerable. The centre could be a safe environment in which men do not have to live up to society’s unreasonable expectations of them, where they are allowed to feel and be honest, to be human. Alcoholism, drug abuse and suicide are all higher among men than women, and if men were encouraged to be open with and seek help for their problems, these might not be as big of issues. The centre would be a major step in changing attitudes, and making real social change.The Men’s Centre would not undermine the women’s equality movement. In fact, it would further it tremendously. We live in a society where men are constantly told that emotional honesty is weakness, that they have to be hard and stoic and callous, or else they’re mocked by their peers, the label of “gay” being pejoratively cast like vitriol. This is a wildly unhealthy atmosphere for men and women alike. Boys are taught to act in a manner that leads to many social problems facing women including sexual objectification and violence. Men’s rights are women’s rights and, in a union that should be appreciated, they are gender rights. In order to effectively tackle gender equality, it requires working on both sides of the equation, and a Men’s Centre would be a strong step forward.
Point: Simon Fraser University Should Fund the Men’s Centre
Note: This article is hosted here for archival purposes only. It does not necessarily represent the values of the Iron Warrior or Waterloo Engineering Society in the present day.
Gender discrimination is a serious issue. Feminism is an important social movement and the issues facing females of wage disparity, media objectification, of masculine hegemony, and many more are real, relevant and serious. It is not surprising there are many institutions, such as Simon Fraser University’s Women’s Centre which cater to these needs and provide women with a safe environment in which to discuss, seek help, and campaign. However, the feminist movement was founded on a call for gender equality and in modern society there are serious issues facing the male gender as well: false rape accusations, vilification as abusers, child-custody discrimination, and many social problems which affect men on average more than women. It seems to follow then that at an institution like Simon Fraser, which sees the need to provide women a safe-haven to discuss issues without fear, should also have a centre to cater to men. This is exactly what has sparked a debate, however, as many people feel that a Men’s Centre would be a waste of money or that men don’t need one the way that women do. This view is sexist in the purest form and one which is flagrant disregard of the principles upon which feminism was founded.
Many opponents argue that male issues are not relevant enough to warrant a $30 000 expenditure (the same that the Women’s Centre gets). However, without detracting from the severity of women’s issues, men’s issues deserve respect and consideration. Men are roundly vilified in society as either malicious sex-crazed abusers or drunken idiot manchildren. Just flip on any popular sitcom and you’ll either see bumbling patriarch trying to sneak beers and television past his cunning and intelligent wife, an anthropomorphic phallus, Tyler Perry presenting a six-packed Romeo who wants nothing more than to rub his girlfriend’s feet, or a kind-hearted and intelligent thinker (an impotent weenie). Even during the commercial breaks, when you see a woman making a fool of the stupid, sex-crazed quintessential man wrapped around her finger, who’s really being more objectified? Males who work with young children are constantly looked at with suspicion, as though a man who cares about children simply must be Humbert Humbert in disguise. Rape is seen as something which only men do to women, and a woman forcing herself upon a man is blockbuster comedy in Bridesmaids or Horrible Bosses. In fact, it was only in January 2012 that the FBI changed its definition of “rape” from “the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly against her will” to acknowledge rape against men. False rape allegations have the potential to ruin a man’s life and yet some claim that false rape allegers should not be penalized for fear of preventing real victims from coming forward; a 2005 study by the British Home Office reported as many as 8% of rape allegations against men are found to be false. Men are often seen as violent and irresponsible. Mothers routinely get child-custody over fathers, and yet 61% of child abuse is committed by biological mothers (25% by fathers). Furthermore 20% of non-custodial mothers pay child-support, and among this number 47% default on support, while 61% of non-custodial fathers pay support and only 27% default of support (despite the well-known image of the dead-beat dad). What if women had higher insurance premiums because they were seen as worse drivers? What if there were parking lots in which minorities were not allowed because they commit more violent crimes statistically and whites wanted to feel safe? These are the kinds of vilifications against men which are completely socially acceptable, and even ironically lauded for their “feminism”. These are only a handful of the serious social issues facing men, and ones which are constantly swept under the rug or dismissed as problems which men are told to “man up” about.
There are also people who believe that while men’s issues are relevant, men would not go to a Men’s Centre to talk about serious problems. Critics at Simon Fraser actually said that the centre would be used for “douchebags to play PS3”, and that it’s unreasonable because “no men take gender studies courses”. What if the Women’s Centre was dismissed as a place where “ditzes” go to do their nails and talk about boys, or if interest in technology-outreach for women was called unreasonable because fewer women take Engineering courses? While it is true that there definitely is a stigma against men talking about their feelings (and when they do the horrendous phrase “no homo” is often invoked), this invokes even greater reason for a centre to exist. What advocates of the centre at Simon Fraser are looking to do is break down the social conventions that say that men aren’t allowed to show pain, that men aren’t allowed to talk about their feelings and that men aren’t allowed to feel vulnerable. The centre could be a safe environment in which men do not have to live up to society’s unreasonable expectations of them, where they are allowed to feel and be honest, to be human. Alcoholism, drug abuse and suicide are all higher among men than women, and if men were encouraged to be open with and seek help for their problems, these might not be as big of issues. The centre would be a major step in changing attitudes, and making real social change.
The Men’s Centre would not undermine the women’s equality movement. In fact, it would further it tremendously. We live in a society where men are constantly told that emotional honesty is weakness, that they have to be hard and stoic and callous, or else they’re mocked by their peers, the label of “gay” being pejoratively cast like vitriol. This is a wildly unhealthy atmosphere for men and women alike. Boys are taught to act in a manner that leads to many social problems facing women including sexual objectification and violence. Men’s rights are women’s rights and, in a union that should be appreciated, they are gender rights. In order to effectively tackle gender equality, it requires working on both sides of the equation, and a Men’s Centre would be a strong step forward.
Kristine Totzke
First off, you need to provide sources for all those statistics you provided. Also, please consider the way any statistics can be framed.
Here is just one article that debunks and critiques the statistics commonly used by advocates for similar groups:
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/michael-laxer/2012/10/lies-our-fathers-told-us-mens-rights-movement-and-campus-based-
To me the heart of the debate is this: to prove the legitimacy of providing such a service and dedicated space. I don’t doubt that men face issues in our society, but it is not clear to me, and others, how dedicating a space on a university campus will rectify or address many of these issues you present.
Many of the issues you present (like child custody battles, parental abuse of children, etc) are not the current issues that concern even a sizable minority of men in the university setting. You need to present research on issues that actually affect men in university settings. For example, are there statistics and surveys showing that men feel unsafe on university campuses? What are the rates of sexual assault committed against men? THEN talking about providing a room on campus for men makes complete sense.
I agree with your point that “alcoholism, drug abuse and suicide” are things that men, also women, face, but how exactly would a Men’s Centre help with these? The Women’s Centre on campus doesn’t even address these because they are so outside of the scope and reach of FEDs services. These are things that Health Services and Counselling on campus are there for and able to effectively provide services and resources for.
I concede with your overall argument that everyone should have a platform to talk about their issues. At Waterloo, we are given several platforms to talk about our issues, concerns and organize around them. Specifically, there are a number of clubs that people may join that provides like-minded individuals a way to do this. A club seems to be the logical step for people who want to discuss issues facing men. I’m not sure why this option has been left out of the equation.
There are different solutions to different problems and we need to not think of terms of “Well, they have one so we should have one too.” If the issues facing men are so wide-ranging, complex and are only recently being addresses then it makes sense that more thought, planning and research needs to go into how to adequately address these unique issues in the university setting.