An excerpt from this article: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/why-is-discussion-of-boys-and-men-opposed/?utm_source=feedly&utm_reader=feedly&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=why-is-discussion-of-boys-and-men-opposed
This past week Professor Janice Fiamengo of the University of Ottawa was heckled (at Queens University) and, the next night, forced to stop speaking (at the University of Ottawa) because of the topic of her lecture: boys and men in contemporary society. Why is the topic considered dangerous enough to be met by violent protesters?
I can think of topics that are supportive of, say, racism or anti-semitism being protested, given the history of harm done to racial and ethnic groups. But such talks would most certainly not be about promoting such attitudes and would most likely take up the history of such attitudes. I can also think of lectures on topics such as pro-abortion being anticipated with angry protests against the practice being promoted. But in a university setting, it is never or should never be a matter of promoting any attitude or practice (except, perhaps, being open to every topic for discussion). At universities, every topic must be open for discussion. This is what makes the university different from a soap-box or a political speech: any topic, no matter how difficult to consider, must be allowed to be openly presented for discussion and debate, without worry that the speaker will be shouted down or prevented from speaking. The university extracurricular lecture format has traditionally provided for this. Of course, no one is required to attend such a lecture.
Now consider the topic of boys and men as such: male studies and why they are needed. Why is the topic opposed? What are the psychological reasons for individuals to pre-empt discussion of the topic? Why may it not even be broached without a speaker being insulted, jeered at, or the event cancelled because the safety of attendees becomes an issue (when a fire alarm is set off, although there is no fire.)
My question is, Why does the topic itself, Boys and Men, cause individuals to attend an event that promises to deal with the topic in order to ensure that the topic cannot be discussed? Why are individuals drawn to places where they will be made angry? Or if they are already angry, what sort of anger wants to have its heat further inflamed? What sort of individual hate needs public demonstration?
These kinds of events only further cement my resolve to dismantle radical gender feminism. This first time I was exposed to this cult was when Warren Farrell was holding a speech and was being protested. Read about that HERE. I was appalled and couldn’t believe what I was seeing. It’s truly amazing to actually see how horrible these people are.
I cannot have my children growing up in a society where this ideology persists. I cannot have my son attend a university where he is feared just because he is male and is supposed to be taught how NOT to rape. I cannot have my daughter grow up hating men simply because they are born male. I already know she sees the positive role model in me and I refuse to have her growing up thinking all men are part of this imaginary system they call patriarchy. I am going to teach my son and daughter how to see through their ideology. Radical gender feminism is truly hateful and destructive to modern male female relationships, the family and our future as a country.
“Education is best served when the whole range of ideas are presented to the person and the individual is allowed to make up his or her own mind, and that individual is given the tools with which to make that decision – in other words, an ideal educational situation would give a student the criteria by which to judge……and then that student or that adult need never fear exposure to any idea because that person will be able to sort the data out” – Frank Zappa
Watch it HERE. Start at 28 minutes:
