SPEAKOUT: Feminists at CC seek dialogue
By Tomi-Ann Roberts
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
I would like to address several errors in recent media coverage of the controversial publication of a satirical flier at Colorado College, and present some perspective from the college's Feminist and Gender Studies Program.
Our program's bathroom publication, the Monthly Rag, is itself something of a parody, if you note its title, which emphasizes the idea of women being "on the rag." It is meant as a playful, informational flier regarding "taboo" subjects related to women's bodies and sexuality. It is one of several bathroom fliers sponsored by groups on campus. In the issue that was taken down in many bathrooms and replaced with the Monthly Bag, our flier has a point of historical fact with "Did You Know" as its heading. In it the term vagina dentata is explained. (The vagina dentata, or "toothed vagina," appears in the myths of many cultures, representing castration fears.)
Contrast this to the Monthly Bag's own "Did You Know." There, the point of educational fact is: "The Barrett .50-caliber sniper rifle has an effective range of 2,000 meters."
These two "Did You Know" segments are decidedly not equivalent. I daresay that speaking freely on these matters in public forums would get you different "punishments" indeed. Say, for example, the Bag writers were in an airport, and they spoke out loud about the vagina dentata. They might get some disgusted looks from other passengers. Some might even tell them to shut up. But let's say they spoke out loud in the airport about the range of a .50-caliber sniper rifle. They'd be taken out by security.
The media claim the Bag authors, Chris Robinson and his unnamed associate, were subjected to a punishment. Untrue. My understanding of the word punishment is that it's inflicted on someone, and it either hurts - physically or mentally - or it removes privileges. The outcome of the Student Conduct Committee "inquisition" was that the authors of the Bag were not punished by the college. They were given a suggestion that they dialogue with the campus community about their strong feelings around masculinity, feminism and gender that led them to post the Bag in the first place. Not a commandment to do so, but a suggestion, which they were free not to take.
If you post an anonymous, hostile parody of a publication intended to educate about the experiences of a historically marginalized group, then get ready for folks to fight back. What we want is dialogue. That's not what the Bag was. A community has the right to ask its members to take ownership of their opinions and to share them in a way that is respectful of others. No idea at CC has been "banned or forbidden," as Robinson claims. All he and his friend have been asked to do is take responsibility for their ideas, and be brave enough to allow others to disagree with them.
Why is the Feminist and Gender Studies Program being held responsible for this debacle? The Rocky's Vincent Carroll writes that the problem with the Monthly Bag is "who it offends. It commits the mortal sin of poking fun at the work of activists associated with the Feminist and Gender Studies program" ("CC's free-speech fears," On Point, April 8).
Excuse me, Mr. Carroll, but did you ask any feminists if they were offended? No. The response by CC President Richard Celeste and the decision to put the incident through the Student Conduct process were ones that were made entirely outside of our program. In fact, many of us disagreed with the conduct process as the appropriate way to handle it.
Most of us wanted to take the opportunity to open up a campuswide dialogue about why some white men feel silenced; why our publication offends some; or what gendered experience is about in a "post-feminist" world. That's not how things went down. But it is certainly not the fault of anyone in or associated with the Feminist and Gender Studies Program. We still invite Robinson and anyone else who would like to talk openly about these matters, to do so with us. But please stop fabricating a story about humorless, offended feminists silencing men's free speech. Stop using us as the scapegoat for a mean-spirited "freedom-quest."
Tomi-Ann Roberts is the director of Feminist and Gender Studies at Colorado College, where she is the Winkler Herman professor of psychology.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
April 16, 2008
12:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
p_myers661 writes:
Aha. I assume the free speech clauses on the Constitution only apply to you and your friends Ms Roberts.? Look again. The ravesty of justice was extreme and the resultant decision to impose no "punishment" were in now way influenced by the fact that those evil men were represented by an organization that does take legal actions against groups like yours which thrive on intimidation and threats. I hope you try this kind of nonsense again. Next time you might find out that you can't interpret the Constitution and it's provisions aren't your private property.
April 16, 2008
5:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
Oh_Wise_One writes:
Celeste, the resonse by Mr. Carroll went right over your head. Let me sum it up for you- PC or policitical correctness, is ruining our country. /end
April 16, 2008
7:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mike_In_Hartsel writes:
"What we want is dialogue." When has that ever been the case? What you really want is the world according to feminists. Feminists and Gender Studies Programs, like all of the other PC programs, are designed to impose your view of how things are to be upon those whom you feel have oppressed you since time immortal, namely beastly white men.
You consider free speech to be a one-way street that runs in the direction you want.
April 16, 2008
7:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
RS writes:
The selective citing of provisions from our Bill of Rights is very telling in these incidents. Exercising rights of the First Amendment, concerning subjects of the Second Amendment, are NOT offensive to most of us. Applying double standards regarding who may use their rights under the Bill of Rights is EXTREMELY offensive to most of us. Privilege feminism is also offensive to many of us, but none of the people offended by the statements of these groups are seeking to eliminate their rights under the Constitution, even as these same groups seek to limit the rights of others by advocating for laws unconstitutional laws. Colorado College made clear they no longer need nor require the tuition dollars of the more principled potential students they may have formerly attracted.
April 16, 2008
8:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
kathyM writes:
Feminism has devolved from a movement to promote equal rights for women into a pseudo-scholarly fascination with genitalia. That's why I jumped off the feminist train before it went off the tracks.
April 16, 2008
8:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
Ms. Roberts: If you truly need to engage in dialogue to discover why some folks are offended by the content of your publication then you might consider spending time outside of your airtight echo chamber. You are clearly a radical feminist who delights in offending folks and this society is under no obligation to quietly accept your feminist contrivances.
April 16, 2008
8:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
SASQUATCH writes:
"Feminist and Gender Studies Program?" Hello? Is that to what a college "education" has been reduced? Is that a serious academic pursuit, a legitimate area of academia? Do you at CC have a program in Masculinity and Testosterone Studies? How about Scrotum 101? How long does it take a human to purge him or herself from such pathetic nonsense after graduation (escape from the asyulm)?
Affirmative action, Title IX, PC, diversity, gun free zone, equal opportunity, liberalism, etc. has extracted a heavy toll on higher education. Whatever happened to VERITAS?
April 16, 2008
9 a.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
"why some white men feel silenced"
At no time in the original story or in either of Vince Carroll's columns was race mentioned.
Why does Ms. Roberts feel the need to bring race into her hostile diatribe?
I have my own thoughts on her intent, but since she decided to go there why isn't she hauled in front of a Student Conduct Committee to explain her injection of racism to this story to help determine her intent. Is she a racist and a feminist? What drives her anger and hostility against white people? Why does she so despise human beings with penises? Did she have parents who abused her in some way with these kinds of hostile rants as a small child?
Ms. Roberts is a piece of work.
April 16, 2008
9:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
"why some white men feel silenced"
At no time in the original story or in either of Vince Carroll's columns was race mentioned.
Why does Ms. Roberts feel the need to bring race into her hostile diatribe?
I have my own thoughts on her intent, but since she decided to go there why isn't she hauled in front of a Student Conduct Committee to explain her injection of racism to this story to help determine her intent? Is she a racist and a sexist? What drives her anger and hostility against white people? Why does she so despise human beings with penises? Did she have parents who abused her in some way with these kinds of hostile rants as a small child?
Ms. Roberts is a piece of work.
April 16, 2008
9:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
GWM writes:
Well said KathyM and good for you.
April 16, 2008
9:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
Ms. Roberts: After reading Mr. Carroll's piece this morning I have concluded that the term "Feminazi" attaches perfectly to you. For you to say that the 2 young men in question were not punished is laughable. Do you not believe in the 1st Amendment?
I have also read some your writings. I find you to be angry, hate-filled, and mean-spirited. It is not every man's fault that you apparently did not have a date to the prom. Get over it lady.
April 16, 2008
9:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
SASQUATCH writes:
"Feminists at CC seek dialogue"
You don't need dialogue, Roberts. What you really need is just 15 minutes with Renzo Cessana.
April 16, 2008
10:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Jimminy writes:
My,my,my.....it's human nature for any group to attack individuals of another race,culture,or gender.Roberts in her role as a spokeswoman for the feminist community is only doing what comes naturally.Just like the Reverend Wright,or Ahmadinejad,or Warren Jeffs.
April 16, 2008
10:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
olsonmt writes:
Tomi-Ann, you are a fool. Your life's work is all for not, and has zero value beyond your ivory tower. In fact, it has made you more of a racist, sexist oppressor than the white men you loathe.
April 16, 2008
10:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
gr8fuldude writes:
The more I see and hear of women like Ms. Roberts, the more I am grateful (no pun) that my wife was born and raised in Asia and has no inbred hatred for men as Ms. Roberts obviously does.
April 16, 2008
10:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
mondomanda writes:
The posts preceding mine are sadly vitriolic. Why do feminists threaten you all so? I would think you would be more concerned with the percentage of women who get sexually assaulted (between a quarter and a third, according to the FBI, that notoriously feminist agency) than with women (and, yes, men) who work to end violence against women (and against men, most of which is also perpetuated by men). "Feminazis" are not the ones raping your daughters or underpaying them at work, men are. Don't you want your daughters to be safe, and to make as much money as your sons? Those of us who consider ourselves feminists may or may not work in "ivory towers" but we all work outside in the real world, where we aim for a society in which no one is assaulted, no one is demeaned, and no one is treated badly because they belong to a group - gender or otherwise - that targets them for poor treatment. You all seem to think that raising critical questions about traditional masculinity constitutes an attack on men. Actually, traditional masculinity is pretty bad for men in some ways; it plays a direct role in the fact that men live shorter lives than women, experience more untreated injuries and sicknesses, and so on. Feminists care about this because most of us care about men; we want you to flourish, we just want to live in a society where all of us flourish equally. (But of course now you'll just say all sorts of terrible things about this post and me and refuse to even consider the possibility that these ideas are valuable...shame.)
April 16, 2008
10:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
olsonmt writes:
It is impossible to consider the possiblity that your ideas are valuable, mondomanda. It is impossible because your ideas include the statements such as "men are the ones raping and underpaying your daughters at work." What a horrible generalization and sexist statement. Traditional masculinity is not a necessary condition for rape and masculine men are not all rapists. Social devience comes in all temperments, sexes, races, etc. I would not call rapists manly men. To say that men are the ones underpaying women belittles the of women in managerial and executive positions. There are many studies of wage variances between men and women and there are many causes. Reducing them to an intentional suppression of women is naive and simplistic. Historically, men have a shorter life expectancy in large part because they have been employed in the most hazardous professions. The professions expose them to workplace injuries, carcinogens, stress, and violence. You are lucky to live in such a wealthy and safe society where you can have dreams of locking arms and singing cumbaya. A society where traditional masculine virtues have no value to you.
April 16, 2008
10:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
gr8fuldude writes:
Uhm, Mondo, you must not have heard of Carrie McCandless and any of the other recent breed of female teachers who use their position to find their prey (And before anyone flames me, this is NOT to negate males who do the same, but rather to clarify Mondo's generalizations about feminism)
April 16, 2008
10:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
mondomanda:
Why does your spokesperson, Ms. Roberts, inject her racist views into the feminist debate "why some white men feel silenced"?
One can only conclude that she through that line at there as a pejorative, since race had no bearing on the "dialogue" she seeks. Her racist remark makes it much easier to see that she is also a sexist.
We don't have vitriol for women who raise legitimate issues, like some of the ones you bring up. But your post is loaded with presumptions that all of us share your world view, just like Ms. Roberts when she condemns all those who disagree with her as hateful, but her hate she spews as righteous.
Underpayedg at work? Hah? Maybe in your grandmothers era, but doesn't happen much today. Most wage disparities have to do with women taking time off work to raise children. Yes, if you take time out of a career you don't get to progress along at the same wage and experience level as your peers who stayed on the job. It is a choice women make, and have been able to control since birth control pills were introduced. And if the mother doesn't choose to take time out of work to rear her young, I know many men who would relish the roll of homemaker while their wives went back to work. It is a choice families make. Don't lay the disparity on some antiquated notion of sex discrimination.
Also, the sexist condescending health issues you raise are just to make yourself feel better about your gender. Men relish their rolls in society, and take on many of the stresses that are necessarily encountered in life to protect the women in their lives. It seems as though women are wanting to act more and more like men these days. And what, with videotaping their assaults on other women maybe the female gender actually seeks to be more like men, not women. Sad, but it's a result of the feminist movement.
Men share your desire and want us all to flourish equally - but differently, since there are differences beyond physiological ones that you and radical feminists like Ms. Roberts refuse to accept. Your ilk wants to make men more like women. Most all of us are quite happy being men, with all of our faults, flaws and assets. And we want you to be quite happy being women, with all your faults, flaws and assets.
April 16, 2008
11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
olsonmt writes:
Social Engineering 101
aka Neurterology
April 16, 2008
12:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
nativegirl writes:
DoubleChubbyChuck - LOL!!!
Feminists are a humorless bunch.
April 16, 2008
12:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
p_myers661 writes:
Mondo
As the young would put it: in the areas of female oppression and discrimination you have absolutely no "street cred."
I grew up in the era where the help wanted ads were divided into help wanted men, help wanted women. My first summer in college I applied for a job working for an oil company geology department. After passing their skills and knowledge test(including interpreting well logs and filing reports) I was informed that the job was for a man and shown the door. He apologized and told me he'd asked for permission to hire me because my scores were so high. Management refused.
The Monthly Rag, if published by men, would be insulting and crude and attacked by your ilk. Not only are you, as noted above, humorless. You have a mindset that the world owes you and your chosen group of women a permanent apology. This takes the form of preference in hiring, control of the actions of others including censorship of thoughts you "sense" to be behind them and, finally, authority over society to determine how people view men and non-feminist women.
Nonsense is your only sense. Women have equal opportunity in our society. They may take advantage of it or not. Neither men nor women have equality of outcome. Stop whining and work for the betterment of all not the oppression of those you dislike.
April 16, 2008
12:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
mondo, Seems you upset the boys here. The world wide sex trade exists for the needs of men, although it is men who have to pay for sex, so sad. And so many of them prefer little girls to grown women. pitiful.
And only men can weaponize their genitals. Men have a lot to be ashamed of in their fellows. Harems, rape, and so on, but golly let us not loose our sense of humor here ladies. I mean if the men were getting molested say 7 or 8 out of 10, before they grow up, wouldn`t that make them a little less fun loving and angry? No?
Of course the female teachers would be brought up, right along with the men who kidnap, rape and kill little girls, and sometimes boys. All things are equal to some men it seems. And of course it is equally offensive to write about a castration MYTH, got that word boys, MYTH? and make it equal to writing about a sniper using a rifle. Try the womans airport test guys, see how far that sniper talk gets you.
But we femanizies, we old hag bitches must keep our sense of humor and fun, and see the silly side of harmful mens actions, and we must concentrate on the good men in the world, like the men in my family, who all proudly say they are "Feminists".
Maybe being the father of daughters helps, it couldn`t hurt.
April 16, 2008
1:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
jconder45 writes:
>me2: I mean if the men were getting molested say 7 or 8 out of 10, before they grow up, wouldn`t that make them a little less fun loving and angry?
So 7-8 out of 10 US girls are molested? Got any substantiation for that from a *credible* source? I thought not. Just something you pulled out of your posterior, isn't it?
April 16, 2008
1:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
jconder45 writes:
The most privileged class of persons on this earth are white affluent American women.
April 16, 2008
1:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
gr8fuldude writes:
Conder -
Try telling that to this bird:
http://www.vanityfair.com/ontheweb/bl...
April 16, 2008
1:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
jcon, you are cherry picking my post, sorry for the pun, got to keep up that old sense of humor you know.
That 8 out of 10 is so well documented that I think you are a big boy and can find the info yourself.
The molestation rate for little boys is also appaling, and it aint women getting these boys, and not always priests. Funny? yes! Can`t get cranky here now can I?
April 16, 2008
1:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
gr8fuldude writes:
me2 - So in other words, you want us to do your research for you, or you just cannot back it up.
Either way, I think it safe to say you're surrendering the point.
April 16, 2008
1:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
jcon, check out "Darkness to light" I am so sorry it is only 1 out of four girls molested before the age of 18. I guess that makes everything I wrote dismiss able to you. But don`t you like the "weaponize their gentiles" quote? I think it is great. hey a rate of 25%, and that is the known cases, that pretty laughable isn`t it? Nothing to make us gals mad or anything. If 75% escape that is wonderful. It is also one out of every six boys. Lovely isn`t it that girls and boys are not molested equally?
The most privileged class of persons on this earth are the rich male Saudi Arabians. Followed somewhere down the line by the while male Americans.
If you are born a healthy white male in America, you have won the human lottery and everything else is gravy.
April 16, 2008
1:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
jconder45 writes:
me2- Well, it does show you were rather careless with your statistics, doesn't it? The difference between 8/10 and 2.5/10 does seem to be somewhat significant, no? Yes, 2.5/10 is not acceptable. .00025 out of 10 is not acceptable.
April 16, 2008
2:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
jconder45 writes:
me2- If you are born a healthy white male in America, you have won the human lottery and everything else is gravy.
Yeah, that's why men's life expectancy is so much higher than women's in the US. It is, isn't it?
April 16, 2008
2:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
gr8fuldude writes:
me2 - That's more like it. The stats are still appalling, no matter how you look at it. If it were only one child (of either gender) within the entire nation, it would still be a tragedy.
Rather than blaming the male gender though, why not focus on the real issues, specifically the inability to rehabilitate this crime and the ineffectiveness of the so-called criminal justice system to adequately deter offenders? To blame the male gender is much like blaming MLK for the crimes of any black.
April 16, 2008
2:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
gr8ful, never use the word surrender to a feminist. Where is your sense of humor? Feminists never surrender, cede a point or give up an argument. If we did you guys would have no one to make fun of.
As for street creds, oh gang banger poster, been there, done that, lost the jobs, and the chance to go to college, which I rectified later in life, after the feminists paved my way for me.
Me and mine owe much to feminist actions, and we can laugh at their extremes, they at least, have what they think are our best interests at heart.
The publisher of Hustler mag wrote an article on why men fear women. It was over 25 years ago and still the best I have read on the subject. Fear turns to control and force and eventually if we get to uppity, to violence, from some men. Not all, just a tiny handful of the ones who probably take a break from molesting children to protest womens movements.
When I was a little girl, we did not even know the words to explain we had been molested. Did the men of the world change this? No, it was the women. Little girls were afraid to say no, didn`t think they had the power or right, now many know they do. As for income, that is improving daily, again, not from the actions of men but from the constant protesting of women. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, the quite little wheel
just gets the shaft.
April 16, 2008
2:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
jconder, men all over the world have a lower life expectancy than women. True of all mammals. What does that have to do with being the most privileged people on Earth?
Privilege and biology don`t mix.
I think many of you resent women, and resent any gains we make. Maybe you see this as a zero sum game. Oddly enough many women, myself included, want a win/win for all good people.
April 16, 2008
2:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
gr8fuldude writes:
me2 - I mean this in the deepest of compassion, but it sounds like you have some longstanding reasons for your views. I sincerely hope that you can heal if you have not already. Childhood trauma reaches farther than is possibly imaginable.
April 16, 2008
2:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
jconder45 writes:
me2- Ah, so life expectancy is just "biology" and has no sociological implications? How conveeenient.
In the same way, of course, women's lower math and science scores means that they were discriminated against, but their higher verbal communication scores means that they are naturally superior to men in verbal communication.
Got it.
April 16, 2008
2:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
olsonmt writes:
Gross generalizations are only acceptable when you are talking about white men (or white Grandmother's in Obama's case). Make generalizations about women or a minority group and you are quickly labeled a sexist and/or racist (unless of course you are part of the afformentioned group). Feminists, I think I can tell you why men care enough to waste their time posting here. We are sick of being told how priviledged we are and how guilty we should feel. None of us would condone violence against women or discrimination against women. Focus on the real issues and stop painting us all with one big brush.
April 16, 2008
2:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
gr8ful, I resent men for their action toward women and girl children, but I do not resent men in general. I suspect many of the male posters here, especially the one who thinks white women are the most privileged in the world, actually resent women who speak up.
The original letter was well written, made it clear to me that the groups blamed for the controversy were not in on it. Then the men jumped in, as usually, and made their comments, which follow this pattern: insult, demean, and bring in that old pc crap.
A couple of women stayed on for awhile, but usually these posts on feminists are all done by men, maybe one or two women stick it out for the long haul.
I wrote so many cute things, got no response on them. But miss a statistic and here comes the old gang to "correct" me.
This thread is a microcosm of what women put up with all the time.
And each and every one of you has played your part.
Thanks for your deepest compassion, and yes I do have personal reasons for my views. And I do thank you. This is where the dialog part comes in. Why do men resent women, and why do women resent men? Do any of us have valid reasons?
Men are getting shafted in the child custody arena and this concerns me. Men are not going to college in the numbers they did say 10 years ago. Why? Is this from feminist gains or has the interest of men changed.
You know, a real conversation would be great on these lines.
Love, Sharon B.
April 16, 2008
2:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
jconder, men have that XY chromosome problem. You bet we feminist would like our men to live longer, for their sakes and for their families.
For that reason I tell all my feminist friends to marry younger men.
April 16, 2008
3:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
gr8fuldude writes:
Sharon - I think you make some very valid points, but I think BOTH genders tend to put logic and reason aside when emotions come into play. For further proof of this, see today's story about the woman divorcing her hubby, who chose to air her grievances on Youtube. Deserved? Maybe, but probably not the wisest legal course of action.
I very strongly agree with your dislike of sex offenders. I used to be a teacher, and one of my students had no father in her life for that very reason. Long story short, my wife and I was later named her legal guardians, and was in her wedding last year. She's now pursuing her doctorate, so I can appreciate your desire to see women succeed, although I think Ayn Rand has done much more to ensure this outcome than Gloria Steinham ever could.
Your point is extremely valid though, in that sincere and respectful discourse on this topic goes a long way.
April 16, 2008
3:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Jimminy writes:
See what I mean? Violence against women is the result of feminism,which is the result of violence against women.Just human nature,folks.Don't get your unisex knickers in a twist.
April 16, 2008
3:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
braveroo writes:
me2: I fully agree with you. thanks for the thoughtful and humorous posts!! way to do mondo.
Many posters had minimized the impact of discriminatory practices in earlier posts, For example, that the wage gap does not exist anymore (not true, check 2007 government statistics and a wealth of economics research). Not only does the discrimination exist in pay, it also exist in the realm of promotions, leadership opportunities, etc. Yes, some does take time off to care for children, but why are men not taking time off to care for children equally often? Aside from the fact that we do not lactate, we can do everything that our wives and partners do. Our work system is unfriendly to the mothers who do take time to care for children and do not give them affordable childcare to return to work earlier, or provide obstacles when they do return. Meanwhile, these mothers are earning ** 0 ** social security wages for all the hard work. (now imagine when our parents get sick and someone needs to go to half time work to provide care... who does it? yeat again the women, most of the time)
And top of denying the discrimination, some "coalition of dudes" suggesting that I should turn my partner upside down for some wheelbarrow sex. Now, that's making me feel embarrassed to be a man.
April 16, 2008
3:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
braveroo, thank you for a good post. You should never feel embarrassed to be a man. And remember that no sex is bad, if it is good.
Goddess, jimminy, what are you trying to say? That men can`t learn and change? Balogna, we feminist gals have raised a generation or two of fine, decent, non-violent men. Just give us more time.
April 16, 2008
3:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Jimminy writes:
Braveroo-don't feel embarrassed about being a man.We are what we are,we do what we do.Admit it,guys...most of us will recite The Feminist Manifesto from memory if we think it'll get us a squeeze.
PS that "wheel barrow sex" bit sounds intriguing.If you can get it past the Hall Monitor,tell us a little more.
April 16, 2008
4:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
gr8fuldude writes:
I think he's referring to a "venus butterfly" if you were an LA Law fan...
April 16, 2008
4:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
rabbit writes:
Ms. Roberts:
You state that Chris Robinson was not subject to punishment. Absolute rot.
First, a letter stating that Chris Robinson has been found "responsible" (i.e., guilty) of violating the college's conduct policy on violence has been placed into his official college file. This letter could have serious ramifications for Robinson's future, whether employment and education.
Second, the "suggestion" that Robinson conducts a forum finishes with the following sentence...
"Please make sure this forum happens before the end of Block 8."
Yikes. Any student knows what that when the Dean of Students says "Please make sure" then it's an order, not a suggestion. And being forced to conduct a forum, where Robinson is likely to come under intense public criticism, is severe punishment.
April 16, 2008
4:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
We should end this on a higher note, please. Did you all know that in the Middle Ages, a council of noblemen met to determine if women were human or animals? They decided we are human because they didn`t want to be charged with bestiality.
April 16, 2008
4:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Jimminy writes:
Heavens,Me2.Sometimes you gals get it right.Sometimes not.I'm feeling a little indulgent,so I'll tell you a secret.All that nicey-nice non-violent honest caring human being razzamatazz you're getting from those men that you admire represents real masculinity about as much as "Girls Gone Wild" represents true femininity.It's like I told Braveroo...Some of us will say anything if it'll get us a squeeze,and that particular talent comes from the instinct to listen politely to Mom so she'll go pay attention to something else.No flame,just fact.
April 16, 2008
5:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
jimminy, those are Navy men you refer to. They are not violent to women and children. Sorry you need subterfuge.
April 16, 2008
5:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
braveroo writes:
hi Jimminy, The "coalition of dudes" and wheelbarrel stuff might have been misread-- if you go to thefire.org and look at the Monthly Bag that the kids posted, it referred to this particular sex position. What I meant was that I think there are real discrimination issues at stake (sexism) and the type of "rugged masculinity" (that we only care about guns and sex) is a misrepresentation of what masculinity is / should be. I hope that as men we realize that this type of portrayal do us no good. Like what me2 said, why are more guys failing out of school? getting into jail (especially minority guys)? Are we giving our sons a fair shot when we show them this narrow definition of what it means to be manly?
All in all, I think Dr. Roberts comments were informative and reasonable.
April 16, 2008
5:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
jconder45 writes:
me2- Did you all know that in the Middle Ages, a council of noblemen met to determine if women were human or animals?
Glad you're not hung up on the past or anything.
There are parts of the world where women are treated as subhumans, and I deplore that. The US is not one of them.
April 16, 2008
5:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
olsonmt writes:
Some people won't be happy until we're all the same. What a boring world that will be! Colorado College in general, feminists in general, the PC crowd in totality want to control how you and I feel and act. Newsflash! Men and women are different! Women can do things men can't do (like give birth and lactate as mentioned by someone above). Dare I say men can do things women can't do. These differences are not absolute or mutually exclusive, and they are a function of evolution and adaptation and genetics, and yes, socialization. Maybe some men are interested in the Monthly Bag's articles on sniper rifles and chainsaws. The fact that it is a retort to a feminist rag only makes it more intersting. That doesn't make us bad boyfriends, fathers and husbands nor does it make us rapists, pillagers, or oppressors of women.
April 16, 2008
6:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
olsonmt writes:
My wife has a masters degree and tells me she's a feminist. She decided years ago to quit work and stay home with our children. Is she really a feminist? She's looking to go back to work soon. Are any of you hiring? She wants to earn as much as she would have had she had 10 years of continuous employement in the field. Any takers?
April 16, 2008
6:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Hazardous_T writes:
If colleges taught practical things such as communication and job skills rather than the liberal art of being a victim it might actually help women and so called minorities improve their lot in life.
People like Tomi-Ann Roberts don't want equality they want dominance.
April 16, 2008
7:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
kathyM writes:
p_meyers, You rock! Well said!
April 16, 2008
7:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Hazard, Of course we want dominance. And I paid a pretty penny for the leather whips and black lace outfit with the 5 inch heels. Well, I`m out of here, way too much male angst for me. Couldn`t lighten this thread with hydrogen.
April 16, 2008
8:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
me2:
"The original letter was well written"
Really? Including the barb about "why some white men feel silenced"? Exactly how does race play into the gender debate unless Ms. Roberts meant to imply racism was a part of the issue? And by exposing herself as a racist, Ms. Roberts also exposes herself as a sexist.
Let's see, make unfounded accusations against white men, it's just dialogue. Make unfounded accusations against women of any color and it is hate speech. We're not angry at women, we're just angry at feminist AND race-baiters who call everything they disagree with hate speech and try to silence it, while demanding free speech to light into diatribes against men and whites. We hate double standards. Is that so hard to grasp?
April 16, 2008
8:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
braveroo writes:
hey me2, it think even laughing gas won't work either! I am out of here too. take care, B_roo
April 16, 2008
9:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
PACE2008 writes:
I didn't double check the statement in the original email. If it is true that the publishers of the "rag" weren't the ones taking issue with the "bag", then both sides are honoring the greatest freedom that we have in this country, and that is the first amendment.
Some of the generalizations that some on this thread have made about "men" are offensive to men, but I accept that their opinion is theirs.
April 16, 2008
10:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Jimminy writes:
Braveroo-your 5:29 post raises an extremely interesting point about socialization of boys by their fathers,and I'm going to infer that you're somewhat in agreement with the the feminist contention that men tend to teach their sons bad attitudes about the other gender.I'd want to point out that the trend over the last two generations has been for men NOT to teach their sons anything,because men,especially minority men,tend not to live with their children.Our society has embraced unwed parenthood,whose consequence is the female-headed family with different fathers,only one of whom (at most) can be in residence at a time.Even boys in intact families suffer from the lack of male socialization,since economics have for many years required nearly all mothers,married or not,to work,so the boys go into day care,which is staffed almost exclusively by....single mothers.Me2 is right when she says that feminists have been raising our children for a couple of generations now.If boys are learning bad attitudes towards women,feminists are doing the teaching.In fact,I'd suggest that only a dad can teach his sons how to make and keep their women happy.
April 16, 2008
10:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
kathyM: "Feminism has devolved from a movement to promote equal rights for women into a pseudo-scholarly fascination with genitalia. That's why I jumped off the feminist train before it went off the tracks."
Well, don't you think it's fair to say that feminism has evolved over the years into many different incarnations and continues to do so? So maybe your last perception of it - the one that made you leap off the train (to where, I wonder?) - is a bit dated. Why not revisit from time to time to get an update...
me2: "Did you all know that in the Middle Ages, a council of noblemen met to determine if women were human or animals? They decided we are human because they didn`t want to be charged with bestiality."
--falls off chair laughing--
April 16, 2008
10:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
jconder45 writes:
me2: yeah, we should all take your attitude- "8 out of 10 or 2.5 out of 10, what's the difference?"
April 16, 2008
11:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
kathyM writes:
mytwo, I leaped off the train so I could stay in the land of logic and reason. I have absolutely no interest in pondering the various meanings of genitalia, how to look like a man below the waist, and the number of ways to bash men. I do, however, have interest in making sure that my daughter has more opportunities than I or my mother did. I can't see how to accomplish that goal by reading women's studies contributions like these:
Stripped: Inside the Lives of Exotic Dancers
Rape on the Public Agenda: Feminism and the Politics of Sexual Assault
Male Bodies, Women's Souls: Personal Narratives of Thailand's Transgendered Youth
The Matrix Reader: Examining the Dynamics of Oppression and Privilege
Nature Ethics: An Ecofeminist Perspective
Why are women's studies programs are so irrelevant, shrill, and non-scholarly? Check out Professing Feminism: Education and Indoctrination in Women's Studies by Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge. (Both are Indiana University professors and as far from bible-thumping conservatives as you can get.)
I've done just fine for myself and my daughter, thank you--without today's irrelevant and hateful feminism.
April 17, 2008
4:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
p_myers661 writes:
me2
I don't know how old you are but I'll bet my 57 years, next week, are a lot more than yours. I went to the Colorado School of Mines in 1969. I was one of 27 female students on campus. One professor actually announced in his class that the only reason a girl would go to Mines was to get a rich husband so our highest grade would be a C. The professor who taught the study group on how to use a slide rule refused to permit women in his class. We might attend, but we would not be allowed to ask questions,, nor would we receive any of the materials the men got.
s a good experience because when there are only 27 females on campus you have the opportunity to get a real perspective on how young males think. (or what passes for thinking) I would compare the experience to watching an old science fiction movie with a group of students from Mines. We watched The Invisible Boy and the room comments was better than the movie.
You appear to understand that the original movement was to break through such barriers. Look at the actions at CC and understand that it is things like that which have turned the majority of women against the feminist movement and groups. The barriers are down, the laws are in place and the opportunity is there.
We don't need people seeing enemies that aren't there. We have enough real ones. Time to see if we can do what no group has ever done; dump the extremists.
April 17, 2008
7:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Alive writes:
I think there would be fewer lesbians if hoo-hoo tasted like bacon. I hope nobody is offended by this indisputable fact. Goddess bless.
April 17, 2008
8 a.m.
Suggest removal
SASQUATCH writes:
"SO MANY LESBIANS...AND SO LITTLE TIME."
Renzo Cesana
April 17, 2008
12:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
bmmg39 writes:
"These two 'Did You Know' segments are decidedly not equivalent."
Yes, because a gun can be used to shoot a man or a woman, whereas the "dentata" item makes light of only MEN being sexually mutilated. What, may I ask, does that have to do with feminism? I like to believe that most feminists, just like most people, understand that you don't need to be male to be offended by the idea of "vagina dentata." What if the second "Did You Know" dealt "humorously" with women's vaginas being destroyed? The creators of the first "Did You Know," I suspect would no longer be laughing.
As usual, a group of women write something hateful towards men, without an outcry. A group of men respond, and the College takes action. Typical.
April 17, 2008
1:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
Chris writes:
You suggest that the two "Did you know" points would be punished differntly in public at an airport is totally wrong. I have had several conversations with friends concerning the range of firearms in the airport (within earshot of security even) and have never been arrested or taken down. You suggest that the individuals were not punished, yet the individuals had to stand in a monkey court and defend themselves and were STRONGLY suggested to dialogue on the issue, yet I do not see any of the authors of the Rag being hauled in front of a monkey court and being advised to dialouge on the repulsiveness. YOU need to under stand the freedom of speech is not selective. You must understand there are several well regarded and not so regarded magazines and newspapers that discuss and hav "did you know" factiods on ranges and damage potential of weapons. No you and most LIBERALS are the intolerant individuals of speech, satire, and parody. If it dosn't conform to your views you cry wolf and do what ever it takes to stifle other view points and free speech.
April 17, 2008
3:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
A few years ago the NOW organization was demonstrating at the Masters. I know this is wrong but there was a guy in the background holding up a sign that said "Iron My Shirt". OK I know it was wrong but it was still funny.