"SFU students up in arms over men’s centre"

[4th law of robotics]

In April, the Simon Fraser University student society voted to devote $30,000 of its budget toward the development of a men’s resource centre. The battle began soon after.

Resident feminists scoffed. Men? Needing a place to discuss their “issues?” Ridiculous. Men were the issue. Meanwhile, the SFU Women’s Centre had been fighting the good fight since 1974, and offering its small campus office as a haven.

As for a men’s centre? Declared the Women’s Centre’s website — which, curiously, offers a “Male Allies” link, as if to enlist them — well, “the men’s centre is everywhere else.”

In other words, it’s still a man’s world, even if female university students significantly outnumber male students across the country, including at SFU.

The Women’s Centre would, however, support a men’s centre on one condition, and I paraphrase: if the men used the centre to admit to their gender crimes.

“Our support,” it stated on the website, “would be contingent on that centre’s mission statement, vision, and mandate. If the centre were about challenging popular conceptions about masculinity, confronting homophobia, sexism, racism, classism, and ability issues then we would definitely be the first to promote and fundraise for such a group.”

More followed. A female student posted a YouTube video criticizing the idea of a men’s centre, in which one critic fretted that it might become “a highly masculinized space” — where, one supposes, there would be much arm-punching and farting — while another said there was the danger of it becoming “heteronormative.” (You can look it up.) Both critics were men. Or as they are known at the Women’s Centre, Male Allies.

....

The Nanaimo Men’s Resource Centre has been offering men counselling and a place to talk for a decade. Its executive director, Theo Boere, said the centre last year had more than 5,000 calls and clients, with issues that included divorce, separation from children, depression, suicide and physical and sexual abuse.

.....

Funding is a struggle. Depending on the source, women’s organizations in B.C. receive between $80 million and $100 million from the provincial government. Men’s organizations, Boere said, receive $500,000. A couple of years ago, the Nanaimo centre’s funding was slashed, and last year it received $110,000 in gambling grants. It let two-thirds of its staff go and cut its programs.

.....

http://www.vancouversun.com/McMartin+barricades+students+arms+over+centre/6669021/story.html

They've received many calls about divorce (different issues for men and women), suicide (an issue that affects more men than women), separation from children (again, an issue that affects men more than women), physical/sexual abuse (an issue that also affects men but for whom there are virtually no resources, go find a men's shelter if you don't believe me), and so on.

And yet people are outraged because men have no need for such a center.

Oh and women receive about 180 dollars for every 1 dollar dedicated to men.

Would any sensible person describe this situation as male privilege? Men get to fight constant attacks to begrudgingly get 0.6% of the funding to address issues that primarily affect them. And all the while people are telling them they have no issues worth even considering.

Privilege.

Ha.

[Cayenne]

1. Male privilede makes young men invulnerable

Besides a mens' center with peer group therapy might lower the high suicide rate young men face. Can't have that.

[4th law of robotics]

2. I wish we could get to the point where

addressing male issues isn't automatically assumed to be an attack on women.

But apparently for some people this is always going to be a zero sum game: so wanting men to do better necessarily means women need to do worse and vice versa.

[lumberjack_jeff]

3. I think of particular interest is the idea that a men's center would become heteronormative.

If I had to pick one thing which this group should be proud of, it's the conclusive proof that this isn't the case.

[4th law of robotics]

4. No concern about the culture that might develop at the womyn's centre

only the men need to be watched to keep them from becoming mean and bigoted.

Women are apparently naturally free from such failings. Men are only civilized when in the presence of women. Their natural state is just awful.

Which is why no rad-fem group has ever been less than unwelcoming to people who are different from the norm. Like say transexuals.

[Behind the Aegis]

5. Not very surprising, but very sad in my opinion.

Unlike other majority groups, whites and heterosexuals, there are real issues that affect men differently than women and other concerns where an all-male environment can be helpful. Although this type of bigotry/bias is discouraging and disappointing, it doesn't negate the concept of "male privilege." Just as it is wrong to say that men's groups are really just ways to exclude or even hate women, it is as wrong to say that resistance to these groups demonstrates male privilege is non-existent.

[4th law of robotics]

9. I keep hearing about this ubiquitous male privilege

but when I ask for specifics I get vague responses. Or at best "well most politicians and CEO's are male".

Which is true, but that also doesn't do much for the 99% of us who aren't wealthy and powerful.

Remember: the 1% makes rules to benefit the 1%. Not to benefit others who have similar genitals.

[Upton]

6. What can you say?

It's the same attitude we see around here from some DUers who see no need for a Mens Group.. and this is some real crap:

The Women’s Centre would, however, support a men’s centre on one condition, and I paraphrase: if the men used the centre to admit to their gender crimes.

Well, that's nice of them..

Admit to gender crimes? What crimes would those be...being born male? Must be like acknowledging your "male privilege"..I see demands for that from time to time...

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

7. Oh great....

....that line will give some people here "ideas", if they haven't had them already.

[lumberjack_jeff]

11. It's very much not a new idea.

But thanks conjuring up the memories.

[hifiguy]

8. For some, male guilt is always,

always collective and universal. 100% of the time, 24/7/365. Just look around DU for proof.

[4th law of robotics]

10. So they can have a men's center . . . if it's actually a women's center

also the jewish students may have a jewish group . . . but only if they admit Christ is the only true savior and confess to their collective guilt over killing him.

Oh and blacks can have their group if they acknowledge that only whites have real issues and they apologize for being responsible for all our social ills.



/the fact that the women's center feels they are in the position to grant permission to men to have their own space really says a lot about them.

[lumberjack_jeff]

12. "the fact that the women's center feels they are in the position to grant permission..."

It says a lot about education.

[Hemp_is_good]

13. It says more about the power women have in academia

never is thought given to one of these places as a pressure valve for young men.
Never is it considered that if they had a place where they felt safe, where they could vent and open up, that the entire gender "war" situation might improve.
I could see some place like with with a gym with counselors / personal trainers who would help guys talk through their problems while working out or stretching in some fashion. Lord knows i could have used a place like that in College when my first GF broke up with me (it was a REALLLY bad breakup. she slept with a very good friend and dumped me the next day) and I was seriously depressed.

Even since then it'd be nice if there were places specifically for men to go to get mental and emotional help.
I'm sure there must be some, i'm just unsure how to find them.

Oh well.

[4th law of robotics]

14. "Even since then it'd be nice if there were places specifically for men to go to get mental and ...

"Even since then it'd be nice if there were places specifically for men to go to get mental and emotional help. "

Don't be silly. Men don't have any emotional issues. Men are rocks. That's why we have no need for men's centers or to spend even a penny on men's mental health or wellbeing.

All this money would be better spent on women and women only.

Even suggesting men may have issues that are not being fully addressed at the moment is highly offensive and proof that you hate women.



/ignore the fact that men suffer from depression and suicide at rates far higher, physical and sexual abuse that may be comparable, and suffer disproportionately from our legal system than women while having virtually no resources dedicated specifically towards helping them.

[loli phabay]

15. wondering what the hell a gender crime is and is it a conspiracy charge or do you have to be present

and actively involved in the commission of the crime.

[4th law of robotics]

16. It's like original sin in the Catholic dogma

everyone (although just males in this case) is born with all the sins of their predecessors (in this case just their male predecessors).

Nothing they personally do or avoid doing has any bearing on this. Some are worse criminals than others based on their actions but you're already starting out birth as a monster simply for choosing to have a Y-chromosome (the most evil and oppressive of letters; it kind of looks like a stick figure of male genitals).

Beyond simply being loony it's kind of a dangerous philosophy. There are some (not many thankfully) people who may take this to heart and say "fuck it, if I'm already a horrible person in their eyes for something I didn't do why should I regulate my behavior?".

The Catholics found that the hell and damnation sermons were good at getting up attendance. . . to a point. After a while it generates a certain fatalism that leads to apathy so they had to tone back a bit and re-emphasize confession (a loophole) to give people some hope.

Right now I think radfems are making the same realizations, hence the loophole they're offering: if you confess your sins we'll consider forgiving you . . . maybe.