The post was entitled "What's so scary about smart girls?" and linked to a New York Times article.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/05/11/opinion/sunday/kristof-whats-so-scary-about-smart-girls.html?smid=fb-share&smv2&_r=0&referrer
It looks a good article to me. No major objections from me on first glance.
Strangely enough, a certain Men's Rights advocate took umbrage to this and the following conversation ensued. I think it's interesting because it serves as a pretty typical example of what I've started to term "MRA logic".
---
"Population Matters" Population Matters' values guide us in all of our activities.
We support the individual right to make personal lifestyle choices whilst recognising the responsibility to consider the societal and environmental impact of those choices. We recognise that, whilst there are some societies where men and women have equal rights, there are many where that is not the case. We support human rights, particularly women’s equality and reproductive rights, and oppose all discrimination or coercion. We advocate a rights-based approach to family planning provision. Research shows that educated women tend to have fewer children.
Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 10:46 · Edited
"Redacted" they don't like educated girls because they don't make good domestic slaves when they can count and write and answer back and demand their rights
Like · Reply · 19 hours ago
"Redacted" stick it to boko haram by giving a girl a student loan! http://www.kiva.org/lend...
Kiva - Loans that change lives
www.kiva.org
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 14:15
"MRA redacted" I wanna stick it to the part of Boko Haram that burned alive a school full of boys, and the part of the cultural consciousness that views the pain of humans with vaginas as more important than that of humans with penises.
Who do I educate to do that? Looks like I educate the New York Times...
Like · Reply · 13 May at 21:54
"Population Matters" The killing of boys and men has been well reported. Boko Haram is not known as a terrorist group just for kidnapping and enslaving girls.
Like · 13 May at 22:43
"MRA redacted" Not what Im talking about and you know it.
Like · 13 May at 22:51
"MRA redacted" You should get an award for your sensational ingenuineness. Why would I possibly object to the fact of people's tragedy being publicized?
Try being intellectually honest next time you reply. You know what I object to. Sexism.
Like · 1 · 13 May at 23:03
Population Matters Are you suggesting it's wrong for the international media to report on the fact that hundreds of girls are still alive and kept in enslavement by terrorists while their own country does nothing to recover them? Boko Haram has killed scores of of people - men and women. It has killed male students. Girls, it keeps for enslavement. There has been plenty of press coverage of Boko Haram's atrocities. Surely you appreciate that, unlike the victims of bomb attacks and school massacres, these girls can still be rescued.
Like · 4 · 13 May at 23:04
---
Let's be clear, that article did not exhibit sexism. It called it out, and set out solutions for how it could be reduced. Just because one (possibly the best) solution to the Boko Haram problem (and as it happens, overpopulation) focuses on girls, this is because it gives the biggest result for the smallest investment. These results benefit men as well. This inability to recognise synergistic solutions which are "win-win" for both genders is a real blind spot for men's rights advocates. According to them, men's rights can only be advanced by actively infringing on women's. Because Gender Wars are what we need.
I could rant about how this is a clear example of how a patriarchal society harms men as well. I could rave and rant all day about how much I disagree with them, but instead it would be more productive to perform a couple of little thought experiments.
* Why might BH attack girl's schools and abduct / convert / enslave / sell / marry off all the students?
In patriarchal societies such as Islamic ones that BH promote, girls are possessions. Virginity is a commodity. The girls should only learn from holy books. Western education is verboten. These girls have been exposed to it, but that doesn't matter as they will have no power and can't do anything about it.
A girl is only good to be married off young to an older man where she must always remain in his service. She is allowed no freedom, but she has value in that she grants a man more status. Therefore the girls should not be wasted but traded or enslaved to men.
*
* Why might BH attack boy's schools and kill all the students?
In patriarchal societies such as Islamic ones that BH promote, boys will become men, who are the rulers, the doers and the thinkers. But Western education is verboten. And these boys have been exposed to it. If we let them live, they may one day have the power to oppose us.
They are already becoming more aware that there is more to learn than contained in the holy books, and that maybe strict Islamic doctrine is not the only way. They will probably not agree with us or support us in our goals. They may even oppose the idea that women should be owned, and so not want to be part of our women-owning society, especially now that we've attacked their school. But men MUST own women. These "men" will have no status in our world. They will be worthless. If they doubt our doctrine, better to resolve this now while we still have the chance.
*
I realise this is just a sketch of the types of idea that may occur to these terrorists, and I apologise if it appears a little shocking. But how else can I demonstrate this backward bronze-age thinking and its necessary corollaries? It is a perfect example of how such notions can harm men in different ways, that are on occasion no kinder than they treat women.
If the FB commenter above was hinting that the NYT are feminist stooges, this is a matter for NYT editors and it it's them he should be complaining to. Pressure groups and activists are always going to try and influence the media into covering stores that promote their ideas. The real damage come when the stories are factually incorrect or misleading, which doesn't seem to be the case here. It may just be that feminists have gotten pretty good at influencing people. This may be a point - but the answer is of course skepticism, not censure. Only if the story stands up to scrutiny should it be considered seriously.
It seems to me that the true root of all this MRA frustration is their lack of a cohesive and engaging, positive campaign for their own ideas. But instead of embracing feminism and using it to piggyback synergistic solutions, they are intent on fighting it. The problem is, I can't see how that will ever constitute a working model for the advancement of men's rights.
Oh, and by the way, for balance here's a link to an article describing one of the dreadful incidents where BH attacked and burned a boy's school:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-26338041
To me, the answer to the Boko Haram problem is to do away with its causes and enabling factors. BH's origins cannot be separated from religion. Of course there are socio-economic factors at play, (civil strife caused by high birth rates being one of them) but Islamism also performs a vital role in sustaining and driving further activities. Education is key, but not the only key. Of course we need to educate everyone, but it's been shown that well educated Muslim men can be amongst the most radical if left to stew in patriarchal ideas.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/274292.php
Whilst Muslim women can also be radical, in patriarchy they tend to not have the power to do anything about it. So education alone may not be the whole solution. A concerted effort is needed to fight radical political Islamism and the associated oppression of girls leading to early marriage and multiple births, thus cementing patriarchy. These noble empowering efforts, if successful, will surely lead to better lives for men and women alike in Africa and around the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment