Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Sep 29, 2012 in Guest Contributor, Society | 20 comments

Why Do Men’s Activists Bring Up The Draft?

A while ago, I stumbled on a video from TheTruePooka attacking MRAs such as myself for “blaming feminists for the male-only draft.” This leads me to wonder if maybe there is a problem with people listening when a woman speaks.

Very few MRAs, myself especially, actually blame feminism for something that’s been happening throughout most of history, and we don’t even lay blame on feminism for being unable to change that situation. I certainly never have.

Feminists DO, however, get criticized by MRAs for their marginalization of the draft and their dismissal of it and other traditional male obligations when they are offensively speaking about so-called historical “male privilege” and “patriarchy.” So let me try to spell this out for everybody so we can clear the air a bit.

So, Pooka, it wasn’t even 90 seconds into your video when you drop this astounding strawman: “Lately the people who are putting this argument forward are saying it with an implied hostile tone that suggests that America’s male-only draft is the fault of women, especially feminists.”

Now, I’m not going to say there isn’t a hostile tone involved, but I could have stopped watching right there. This is what I don’t get at all. I mean, I’ve had people in the comments of my “Feminism and the disposable male” video accuse me of blaming feminism for male disposability. I’m as perplexed by how they can possibly draw that conclusion from a video in which I clearly state that “male disposability has been around since ‘the dawn of time,'” as I am by how the primary reason MRAs bring up the draft escapes so many people.

Now, some MRAs do criticize feminism for not having pushed for an equivalent female obligation to society to the one that acted as the primary justification for universal male suffrage, and for the lowering of the voting age to 18. Many of them feel that the suffragettes should have kicked and screamed a lot harder for such an obligation, especially since when suffragists were agitating for the vote for women, huge numbers of male soldiers fighting and dying in World War I on behalf of countries with universal male suffrage did not have the vote, because they were under the age of 21. Suffragette leader Christabel Pankhurst even took a break from agitating for female suffrage to hand out white feathers to teenage boys to shame them into enlisting in a war that killed millions, many of whom did not have the vote.

To her credit, she also advocated mandatory “war work” for women, but was somehow less successful in that effort, which she seems to have effectively abandoned once women had the franchise. Huh.

And this is where we come to the real issue, Pooka. The real reason MRAs being up the draft. It’s not to blame women, or blame feminists. It is simply, and plainly, a refutation of the feminist concept of historical male privilege and female subjugation. From the website “great war fiction”, regarding Britain’s white feather campaign:


What is significant about the involvement of the suffragettes is that it makes explicit what was otherwise unspoken – women were claiming the right to inform males of their duty, and were demanding that they fulfill the obligation implied in the restriction of full citizenship and the franchise to males, the obligation to defend their womenfolk.

In other words, the white feather girls and the suffragettes understood that men had political franchise and women did not *because men had a duty to go to war to protect women.*

I find it strange how the suffragettes seemed to have forgotten that men and men alone had been burdened with this obligation–to protect their womenfolk and act as cannon fodder in the interests of their governments, according to their individual will or against it–long before universal male suffrage was a twinkle in anyone’s eye. But there you have it: Men had the vote and women did not, so men had better be prepared to suit up and do their duty.

When the US government began sentencing draft dodgers to life imprisonment, years in penal labor camps, and death, a group of anarchists challenged the constitutionality of the draft. Their challenge failed. In the Court’s decision, it was stated that:


It may not be doubted that the very conception of a just government and its duty to the citizen includes the reciprocal obligation of the citizen to render military service in case of need, and the right to compel it. … To do more than state the proposition is absolutely unnecessary in view of the practical illustration afforded by the almost universal legislation to that effect now in force.

In other words, men enjoyed the rights and privileges of citizenship granted by government *because they paid for it through the reciprocal obligation of the draft.* And the court considered this bargain to be so self-evident, it need do no more than state it.

As late as 1917, the US government was executing men who refused to fulfil the obligation they owed in return for the right to full legal person-hood in the eyes of the state.

Millions of men did.

Three years later, women won the vote. Without even the obligation to do “war work” like sewing uniforms, or community service like picking up litter from the sides of highways.

Do you get that, Pooka? Three years before women won the vote, the “privileged” class was still being sentenced to death for refusing an obligation that women have never been burdened with. An obligation they bore in exchange for full, but conditional, legal personhood in the eyes of the government.

That was the “privileged class,” Pooka. The “oppressed” class got the vote 2 years after the end of a war where thousands upon thousands of young men died without franchise. And before you argue that women were not “allowed” to make this bargain with the state, I’ll remind you that men were not “allowed” to refuse it.

And I think what really gets me is in your video you claim that Selective Service: you just came to accept it as “part of becoming an adult.” Not for women, only for men.

Now, it would seem to me that a class of people who get something valuable for essentially nothing, for the grand accomplishment of turning 18, might be viewed as privileged, and the class of people who, if they had the temerity to decline the bargain–the whole draft in exchange for citizenship and political franchise thing–got the gallows, are the ones who might have had some problems with society’s conditional view of their personhood.

You spend the rest of your video beating what is largely a strawman, expounding on feminism’s struggle to win women the *right* to serve in the military and in combat. Up until 1973 in the U.S., that was never a right for men, Pooka. It was an obligation that hung over the heads of young men since before the feudal age. Like the *right* to earn income women won over the last century was and still is an obligation for men. Like the *right* to financial independence feminists worked so hard to achieve for women was and still is an obligation for men.

This is why MRAs bring up the draft, and when discussing the draft–or Coverture, or traditional gender roles, for that matter–MRAs seem actively hostile to feminists and resentful of the new position women enjoy in society.

Because oddly enough, for all of feminism’s successes, they haven’t been that interested in acquiring obligations for women, and society isn’t especially interested in imposing them, either–which kind of smells like Female Privilege. The social and legal obligation a man had to provide for the material needs of his family is one feminists don’t seem to want to impose on any those women who choose to make families on their own, or choose to take the leadership of those families by expelling the fathers of their children. On the contrary, organizations like N.O.W. support or ignore the continuation of paternal obligation while simultaneously agitating for continued erosion of paternal rights—that would be the family equivalent of reinstating the draft while revoking male political franchise.

And now we live in a system where the government will deny a father the right to involvement with his children if the mother wants it badly enough, while simultaneously requiring he provide for them, and jailing him if he fails.

Feminists still call this system “Patriarchy,” and describe it using terms like “Male privilege” and “female oppression”, because the top 1% of society happens to be mostly male. Of the thousands of men who were sent to war without political franchise, two years before women were handed their right to vote for nothing, they apply the minimizing and insulting phrase “patriarchy hurts men too.”

That’s why MRAs bring up the draft, Pooka. Not to blame women or feminists for America’s male-only draft, but to remind them that getting the vote without being required to die for it if necessary is not f***ing oppression, and neither is having to wait a mere 50 years longer to be handed something that men were still required to pay for with their lives. That having to trade your autonomy or your life for your political franchise *is not privilege*–it’s a sh** deal. So sh** a deal I wonder how many men would have taken it if Uncle Sam hadn’t been willing to run them up a gibbet if they refused.

And the fact that feminists can incessantly moan about the oppression of women, partly based on the fact that since the beginning recorded history, women had to wait less than 1% longer than men did for their own, obligation-free political franchise, and can be taken seriously by anyone, is the very definition of “social privilege.”

A social privilege to not be called on their bull***t even when their advocacy tramples on the rights of others. For crying out loud, we live in a society where a woman whose sole claim to notoriety derives from her complaining that the government–of a country that supposedly values the separation of church and state, no less–won’t force the Catholic church to subsidize her sex life, where that woman is given the podium at the Democratic Convention, all while the sisterhood bitches and moans that women have no voice in society.

The very fact that society is willing to indulge this level of cognitive dissonance simply because the lunatics spouting it claim to represent women as a group is a testimonial to Female Social Privilege, Pooka. As is the fact that after less than a year of doing this, I have the largest following of any Men’s Rights Movement channel on Youtube.

I watched the video you made about stalking and harassment. The fact that you were prepared to take a punch from a 300 pound man to protect your wife: that’s Female Privilege, Pooka, and it’s a privilege you almost certainly would not have enjoyed had the situation been reversed. As is the fact that you–someone who claims to be sympathetic to men’s rights issues–could spend an entire video talking about stalking and harassment *of women*, as if it is solely a problem that women have to deal with. That’s also about female privilege, Pooka.

You effectively erased and ignored male victims of stalking in your video, and while most victims of this kind of harassment are women, “most” is not “all.” The very fact that you would DO that and not realize someone might call you on it shows the privileged position women hold when it comes to society’s desire to protect its members. I have an acquaintance with an 18 year old son who could tell you a thing or two about being stalked and then screwed over by the system, if you wanted. At least you and your wife weren’t facing felony charges despite a mountain of phone records, alibi witnesses, and email and voicemail evidence proving you were the one being harassed, simply because your stalker was a young woman and you were a young man.

“Male privilege” is a load of s**t, Pooka, because none of those perks that men enjoyed through history, none of those perks and benefits came for free, just for having a penis. They were bought and paid for.

So guess what? Whenever ANYONE whines about “male privilege,” or kvetches about how women didn’t get the vote the same afternoon men did, I’m gonna bring up the f***ing draft. And the very fact that you could see that as an attack on feminism so egregious that you’d feel compelled to defend those feminists by beating strawmen, and complaining about how women don’t have the right to choose to serve their country, when for most of history men didn’t have any choice about the matter once their government called them to serve?

Well, I’d tell you to check your privilege, but that would be stupid, wouldn’t it?

SO let’s review: almost no one has ever said feminists are responsible for the draft. What they do take issue with is the constant whinging about women not being handed the vote as soon or even sooner than SOME men, without acknowledging historical realities that for men, the vote always came with an OBLIGATION. An obligation society never demanded, and still does not demand, of women.

Feminists demand rights and privileges for women, but do not accept obligation. Instead, they kick the s**t out of men and call them privileged even when men had to pay for that privilege with life and limb. Clear enough?

Below is a a video version of this essay, with some non-related introductory material on how to help your fellow MRAs, and some more such stuff on the end:

A Voice for Men’s fundraiser:

Donate to Family of Men/Men’s Alternative Safe House (Calgary):

Pooka’s video:

Great War Fiction on the White Feather Campaign:…

Feminism and the disposable male transcript & video:

Additional info:

frame src=”” frameborder=”0″ width=”538″ height=”300″>
Note: I am once again pleased to have created and provided the above transcript for my friend Karen, aka Girl Writes What. By the way, “MRM” is “Men’s Rights Movement” and “MRA” is “Men’s Rights Activist” (or Advocate)–

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2012 The Moderate Voice
  • Unfortunately I was stalked by a young woman when I was 19. She was 19 as well and I refused her advances because I was already dating someone (who eventually became my wife). The stuff that woman did (leaving hundreds of letters under my dorm door, telling people what we did sexually (when we had no contact), showing up at football practice with my name written many times on her clothes, and many other incidents freaked me out. When I told campus police and city police, they essentially told me:

    Dude! You 6’3″, 270+ pounds! What are you worried about??

    They laughed at me. So they basically were advocating me being violent towards her to stop her? INSANITY! Unfortunately it took my girlfriend and parents coming to a game during Family Weekend and the stalker woman verbally and physically assaulting my girlfriend and mother to cause the law to act. And they quickly neutralized the situation (she had a mini-shrine in her dorm room to me…. talk about being freaked out).

    So this incident had nothing to do with feminism or feminists. It was men that gave the female stalker much leeway and admonished me about not “manning up”. It’s way too easy to dismiss MRAs as disgruntled men and male chauvinists until you dig deeper and see the real. And once again, my situation had nothing to do with women expect for the female criminal involved.

    Not necessarily to your point about the draft but a point nevertheless. LOL!

  • Dude, we live in a world where if you HAD used your physicality toward that woman in any way, even just to push her away or fend off any blows she might throw at you, it is almost 100% certain YOU would have been taken away in handcuffs and charged with assault.

    That’s the way it works, and this is why men’s advocates call out both feminists AND traditionalist conservatives, because they are both on the same card with this: with the conservative traditionalists, women are weak and not to be taken seriously and men are violent and must be dangerous; with feminists, women are not weak they are EXPLOITED and OPPRESSED but they still believe men are violent and must be dangerous. From the men’s perspective it is NO DIFFERENT, except the feminists keep giving us this incredibly insulting–not to mention completely wrong–crap about “male privilege.”

    Female privilege runs rampant throughout this society, and feminists embrace it constantly even while denying that it exists. What that young woman was doing to you was exercising FEMALE PRIVILEGE, which feminists say does not exist.

    Men’s rights advocates SHOULD be on the same page with feminists. They SHOULD be. Our experience over the last 20, 30 years (ever since Warren Farrel wrote the groundbreaking book “The Myth of Male Privilege” and was expelled from the National Organization for Women partly in retaliation for it) is that feminists vehemently deny the existence female privilege, continue to insist that women are oppressed, deny the realities of female violence and female privilege. If anything, they ratchet up female privilege with things like the “Violence Against Women Act” which is sexist on its face and while in places it uses gender-neutral languag it DE FACTO recognizes females as the majority of victims of violence even though ALL available social science research shows that men are the victims of violence at twice the rate that women are and in terms of domestic violence, men are generally at near-parity with women.

    As Patricia Pearson noted more than ten years ago in her groundbreaking book “When She Was Bad: Violent Women and the Myth of Innocence,” society, including the legal system, consistently underplays, ignores, or outright excuses female violence. It’s worst of all in the legal system, where it’s been repeatedly shown that the #1 negative factor on conviction and sentencing is not your race: being black gives you about 5 times the rate of incarceration, which everyone recognize is rooted in race, but what BEING MALE GIVES YOU ELEVEN TIMES the rate of incarceration: if you’re busted, Tyrone, the #1 factor against you won’t be your race, it will be your sex.

    To quote the Amazon review: “Women commit the majority of child homicides in the United States; more than 80 percent of neonaticides; an equal or greater share of severe physical child abuse; an equal rate of spousal assault; about a quarter of child sexual molestations; and a large proportion of elder abuse… The rate at which infants are murdered by women in the U.S. is higher than the rate at which women are murdered by men.” With carefully researched facts, fascinating case histories, and incisive argument, Patricia Pearson succeeds in demolishing the myth that women are not naturally violent. When She Was Bad considers two different issues: (1) how we see violent women–that we either excuse their behavior with a “syndrome defense” such as battered woman syndrome, or else see them as the passive partners of violent men; (2) how we see aggression itself–that we perceive it as physical and blatant, thus missing the ways in which women more commonly use verbal assaults and indirect strategies. Ultimately, Pearson argues, the failure of women to take responsibility for their violent behavior undermines the good that can come from aggressiveness, and sabotages the credibility of female police officers and soldiers.”

    Pearson, by the way, considered herself a feminist when she wrote that book and last I checked still does, but she was attacked and ostracized by many self-proclaimed feminists for daring to publish on that.

    If feminism is about equality–and I’m prepared to believe it is–it’s time for feminists to acknowledge that equality means equality of responsibility and accountability. When they fully embrace that, they will almost certainly find that they have great allies in the men’s movement. Until they do, however, they will remain at loggerheads.

  • ShannonLeee

    Makes we wonder about black woman privilege. Does female privilege cancel out the racism experienced by the black community or does AA give them double privilege? snarky remark? Yes, but it brings across my point quite well.

    As for the draft, no one gets drafted and plenty of women volunteer. I do get your point about how men have been drafted in the past, while feminists where fighting for equality yet not for the right to be drafted, but as women have gained their right, they have also evolved there ideas of their own social responsibility.

    I think it is wrong to boohoo the activists in the past for fighting for their rights without also fighting to make sure they were pulling their own weight in war. There is often a progression to these things and I think today’s woman is pulling her own weight.

  • slamfu

    “As for the draft, no one gets drafted and plenty of women volunteer.”

    Um…you know the only reason you haven’t been drafted is because no one in power has decided to do so right? If they did, you are now in the military. Dean’s point is well taken, that the draft is a very serious obligation this is clearly defined along gender lines. A bunch of guys you’ve never met can make a decision to go to war somewhere, and they can compel you to serve and if necessary die in that war, and you will have no say in the matter. Its actually a pretty big deal, and just because it hasn’t happened since Vietnam, which in my mind was the most avoidable war in our history until Iraq II, doesn’t meant its not still a very real and legal tool in the governments woodshed.

  • ShannonLeee

    The draft will never happen again because the military wants an all voluntary army. The world has changed since Vietnam. How we fight battles has changed and will continue to do so. Our next major war will most likely be more like a star wars clone war than a d day military attack.

    The draft would also be political suicide for any president. Times have changed folks.

  • ordinarysparrow

    The draft ended in 1973…..

    The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) was a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution designed to guarantee equal rights for women. The ERA was originally written by Alice Paul and, in 1923, it was introduced in the Congress for the first time. In 1972, it passed both houses of Congress and went to the state legislatures for ratification. The ERA failed to receive the requisite number of ratifications before the final deadline mandated by Congress of June 30, 1982 expired and so it was not adopted.

  • zephyr

    Without going into this idea of “female privilege”, I’ll just say it’s ripe for debate – something I don’t time for I’m afraid (I have time for nothing these days it seems). I will say this though: No draft anymore, but when there was a draft it was devised by men, not women. Those who were imprisoned for not playing along were imprisoned by men. The wars that required a draft were started by men, not women. And so on. Now.. if ever there is another draft (unlikely) then it should be all inclusive – men, women, rich, poor, connected, unconnected, privileged and influential, destitute and ignorant. Of course it never did work that way even when there was a draft.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    First, I have to say that I don’t have a very good idea what all this is about, and I say that sincerely. I have never encountered anything remotely similar to what is being discussed here. And I certainly have absolutely no idea what “male disposability,” or “suffragettes,” or “white feather girls,” etc. are. I finally found out what the acronym “MRA” stands for at the end of he piece.

    Second, just because I have apparently lived in a sheltered environment and never had an idea that, whatever these words mean, these things even existed, doesn’t mean that they don’t or that they are not as bad as I gather from the post.

    But I do want to say that I am one of those naive folks who would oppose the draft for women. I have explained the reasons before and it has to do more with background, culture and upbringing than with anything else.

    While I believe that women should be able to voluntarily serve in our Armed Forces, I have mixed feelings about women wanting to serve in combat. I don’t think they should. But that is just me.

    But what I really wanted to comment on is about one of the comments to the effect that:

    “A bunch of guys you’ve never met can make a decision to go to war somewhere, and they can compel you to serve and if necessary die in that war, and you will have no say in the matter.”

    I just would like to say that we are pretty much beyond this. As we get more and more women in positions of authority to do exactly that — send men and women to war, the good-old-guys-sending-men-to-die syndrome may be a thing of the past. We have a female Secretary of State, we had a female National Security Adviser, we may one day have a female SecDef, even President.

    Just imagine neocon, hawk, warmonger Palin as vice-Presdient with neocon, hawk, warmonger President McCain… (Or, perhaps better, don’t even think about it)

    Finally, I believe that I do know what “f***ing oppression,” ” a sh** deal. So sh** a deal,” “bull***t,” “a load of s**t, “f***ing oppression,”,”the f***ing draft,. “kick the s**t out of,” etc. mean, but to me these f***ing words just detract from whatever message an author is trying to convey. But, that’s just me — again.

  • SteveK

    First, I have to say that I don’t have a very good idea what all this is about…

    Thank you Dorian, I believe you speak for many.

    I’m sorry that Mr. Esmay has been abused by women, almost as sorry as I am that he feels the need to keep going on… and on… and on about it on a heretofore political blog.

    Most of us, both male and female (I think), have pleasant, positive feelings toward and good relationships with one other. It’s not always perfect but what the ‘heck’ is? (thought I was going to say f**k didn’t you?)

    Most adults realize that there are a few… a very few… men, and women, that abuse or are abused by members of the opposite sex.

    This is wrong and a real shame but it seems that a court of law or professional therapy would provide a better chance of resolution than bi-weekly anti-female rants on political websites… But what do I know.

  • LOL at Dorain’s comment. Not in a disrespectful way. Dorain’s last paragraph just sounds exactly like what my grandfather says since he’s been on the ‘Net. Just classic. 🙂

    @SteveK: I’ve been following Dean for a long time regarding this issue. He’s very passionate about this topic just as some are about politics. And I think TMV is better for it to have this type of variety on the site. And there’s nothing anti-female in what he is saying. I grew up around some strong women. The type of women that you want to have your back in a life or death situation. I love those women deeply. But my earlier comment really shined the light on some issues that exist regarding male-female interactions that slant towards women and leave men standing high, dry, and vulnerable. These are real issues that are out there. I experienced them twice in my life (another was on the job with a female IT manager that kept making inappropriate sexual comments about me). She flew under the radar for awhile (no matter how many times I told her to stop, no matter how many times I went to HR, and I did get the whole “Dude, she’s hot. You should be loving it.” from male co-workers). Finally another female manager heard her comments and handled the situation so fast it made my head swim (a great manager and friend now).

    I take great pride handling things and getting to a solution. But when I’m hamstrung because I’m supposed “handle it” when the situation doesn’t warrant me “handling it” (since the outcome would be bad for me and the other), it really shines the light on a situation.

    Labeling his words as anti-woman isn’t fair and isn’t accurate. In all due respect.

  • DR. CLARISSA PINKOLA ESTÉS, Managing Editor of TMV, and Columnist

    Agreed with most here. I have to say, and I know I’m another generation [meaning I’ve witnessed the absolute wreckage of human life on both sides of the oceans via my family and peers of FAR TOO MANY WARS: WWI, WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, Gulf War, Iraq, Afghanistan, and all the ‘undeclared’ firestorms that kith and kin have been sent into. War has not been a once in a lifetime event. In my generation, war has been CONSTANT, if not just about to be, then just done, or else in the midst of.]

    I feel strongly and stand on the absolute that women have, since forever, done the war efforts in the saddest ways possible, and over and over again, until many can hardly stand the torment. They have given birth to the men led to slaughter, often conscripted against their wills.

    Where I grew up there were gold star mothers galore, and if you dont know that that is, it is a woman who lost a son in battle. Many windows had more than one star in them. Dont be telling me women have not contributed to war in ways that have damaged all of us> We carried, gave birth to, nourished and nurtured, pulled back our children from the brink of death and disease many times… and then were pressed to give our sons, our brothers, our fathers, our uncles our cousins, our husbands and our neighbors WHOM WE LOVED with everything in us, to a government that said they would MAKE men of them.

    Excuse me, they were already MEN, and we are the ones who helped them to be so. We were and they were pressed, OFTEN AGAINST our wills and theirs to go die from some old men who cannot get along with one another and who mount armies.

    Do NOT try to tell me otherwise. DO NOT. When a soldier is killed in battle, everyone who loved that soul dies in many ways and for the rest of their lives. FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES. It doesnt matter whether the dead are male or female. It doesnt matter. NOT ONE child of any mother and father should EVER be sacrificed in trumped-up wars, the latter being a subject all of its own. DONT get me started.

  • ordinarysparrow

    Thanks Dorian and Steve K….There have been lots of positive changes…Just last week a woman give birth at a battle field in Afghanistan…She was doing some heavy duty soldiering too….That was sobering…

    Dean it is shrill… the post loses impact due to tone …it appears there may be in a cycle of recreating the original trauma…baiting angry and wounded women with your own anger and woundedness…getting the same results as the original trauma…I do not see how this advocate style helps you, the men you advocate for, or the women the many women the rants gets directed towards who have also gone through similar traumas …..

    Advocacy is best when one can speak clearly from the heart as to what one is for…rather than what one is against…. It does not have to be us against them…


    Who are the perpetrators of fatal child abuse: Men are more prone to use violence, women are more prone to use neglect…

    Fact Sheet
    Fatal child abuse or neglect is the fatal physical injury or negligent treatment of a child by a person who is responsible for the child’s welfare. It is reported that more than 2,000 children in the U.S. die of child abuse and neglect each year, and the actual number of abuse and neglect deaths is estimated to be much higher than that reported by vital statistics data.

    No matter how the fatal abuse occurs, one fact of great concern is that the perpetrators are, by definition, individuals responsible for the care and supervision of their victims. In 2010, parents, acting alone or with another person, were responsible for 79.2 percent of child abuse or neglect fatalities. Almost 30 percent (29.2 percent) were perpetrated by the mother acting alone.
    Child fatalities with unknown perpetrator relationship data accounted for 8.3 percent of the total.

    There is no single profile of a perpetrator of fatal child abuse, although certain characteristics reappear in many studies. Frequently, the perpetrator is a young adult in his or her mid- 20s, without a high school diploma, living at or below the poverty level, depressed, and who may have difficulty coping with stressful situations. Fathers and mothers’ boyfriends are most often the perpetrators in abuse deaths; mothers are more often at fault in neglect fatalities.

    ‘Young children are the most vulnerable victims. National statistics show that children under six years of age account for 86% of all maltreatment deaths and infants account for 43% of these deaths. Fathers and mothers’ boyfriends are most often the perpetrators in the abuse deaths; mothers are more often at fault in the neglect fatalities. Fatal abuse is interrelated with poverty, domestic violence and substance abuse.’

    This is also a good link FBI 2010 Crime stats based on Gender

  • ordinarysparrow

    T-Steel sheesh… that is a hard one… i also went through a stalking situation for about 6 months … Initially reported it to male cops only to have it discounted and walked away feeling blamed…since i knew the man had been convicted for sexual molestation i went to the County Court and pulled the records, then went to see the prosecuting attorney who was great and instantly helped in navigating through it until the guy was picked up for violating his probation… the whole experience was a mind screw…nobody should have to go through that kind of invasion, we need strict legislation against stalkers..

    Stalking in America:

    Thanks Dr. E…. your voice is powerful…

    Dorian we need more like you in this world… not old fashion, but a man beyond your time…

  • SteveK

    I’ll leave this thread with the start of a poem by one of my guides in life… I’m concluding that our guides are as important a factor, if not more so, in our lives then we ourselves are:

    anyone lived in a pretty how town
    (with up so floating many bells down)
    spring summer autumn winter
    he sang his didn’t he danced his did.
    Women and men (both little and small)
    cared for anyone not at all
    they sowed their isn’t they reaped their same
    sun moon stars rain
    children guessed (but only a few
    and down they forgot as up they grew
    autumn winter spring summer)
    that noone loved him more by more


    No credits or links on this one… If you’re interested in the rest you’ve clues enough to find it, if not I’ve said too much already.

  • DR. CLARISSA PINKOLA ESTÉS, Managing Editor of TMV, and Columnist

    @Steve: I know it well Steve, and thank you. I wont give away the author in case others would like to follow the breadcrumbs trail.

    @Dorian, agelessness is the goal, you’re way more than halfway there

    @mi sparrowcita
    I join you in so so MANY incidents of literal sexual harrassment, racial exclusion, sexist impeding of promotions. I literally could write a 5000+ page book about it. Men snickered and discounted, women shared much of the same. These were far from the finest moments of our culture of men and women. Even when it bordered on criminal, even when it was felonious assault, even when it was menacing and harrassment, help was so slow to come, if ever it did. This slowness to react in inquiry and decency for protection of ALL the public, I think, may have caused some of the loud retort by many women once they had their own press, for instance. I’m not educated in feminism [as I’ve mentioned many times, feminism did not reach down to the miserable layer of culture we lived in, and never consulted us as to what our concerns, and moreso, NEEDS, were), but if being harrassed and assaulted with unwanted and unprovoked intrusions is the bar, I have an unwanted ph.d. in knowing more about it first hand than I ever wanted to know. I understand Sparrow. I understand.

  • DR. CLARISSA PINKOLA ESTÉS, Managing Editor of TMV, and Columnist

    Also, isnt that something that some of us have lived to span six generations, in LIVING memory. And, have heard so many ideas from each generation? I knew my of my great-grandgather through MANY stories about his likes and passions and dislikes. I knew my grandfathers, my fathers, myself, my children, my childrens’ children. SIX generations of thought and experiences… and most of all love.

    Tonight as I was writing my first comment including Gold Star Mothers on this post, I was between remembering the gold star mothers, and teaching a grandson how to dj the breaks in a hiphop record he loves (yes, having a turntable is the privledge of the very young and those young at heart, aint that something? lol)

    I was reflecting about what my brother Tyrone said above re how he sees a couple specifics. I have children older than Tyrone and younger than T. And they are visiting tonight. We looked at what everyone here wrote. All their opinions are different, but everyone was intently trying to understand points of view other than their own. But, most of all, here, our young men in the family were looking overall for male leadership into what my youngest grandson calls “peace and problemsolving both.”

    Those to my spirit too, are called leadership in going forward with our small contributions to a better world. My adult kids and mid and late teen family members, tonight, didnt quite get the referring back to ‘getting the vote’ or what some people said long ago or did long ago. They dug that many were trying to solve the present to make it better.

    But they thought the article must have been written by ‘a really old person’ and they wanted to hear from people their age, 15+15 who are ‘well adjusted.’ Three things crack me up… ‘well -adjusted’? we might have to search a lonnnngggg time. lol. And secondly, the younger generation blows off alot of what no one can do anything about in the past. They are not pounding the sand about it near as much as those over 30, I think. They know history, at least those in my family do, because they love stories, and history is tragic, comic, saga on end. They are likely to be called ‘the now generation’ in certain ways tho because of their ‘being here now.’

    And lastly, I have to talk to the kids about ageism. I get PLENTY of agist remarks toward myself, nearly daily, not from family, but usually from strangers. It is really quite something what men and women think to do and say just because one is older than they. But Dean is not an old guy. But, he is a guy. That part is true. lol

  • time is a tree (this life one leaf)

    That’s for Steve. Same author, and one of my favorites. Thanks for reminding me of a poem, “anyone lives…”, that I had not read or thought about in years.

  • roro80

    The draft was instituted by FDR to deal with the overwhelming number of young men signing up for WWII. As has been noted, it ended here in 1973. I think it would be tough to find a feminist who thinks it should have been used as it was during Vietnam, and tougher o find one who thinks it should be used as such now. Women are, in fact, in the military now, and you know who is fighting to allow them to occupy the same roles as men? Feminists. Talking about the suffragettes in connection with today’s feminist movement seems so out of place. the world was such a different place -most women weren’t even allowed to work outside the home. Their primary job was to care for children, and we’re considered just plain inferior at most jobs. Again, you know who fought to change that? Feminists.

    Yet again, I am concerned with this author’s misunderstanding or purposeful misrepresentation of facts in support of his thesis that men are oppressed by women and feminists. Despite the author’s consistent idea that women want all the advantages of citizenship with none of the responsibility – the autonomy of an adult with the protection given to a child – he remains deeply mistaken.

  • roro80

    Also extraordinarily hackish is the mention of Sandra Fluke, and the offensive claims about women wanting their sex lives subsidized. Thanks, Rush, I’m sure we all missed the dirty slut argument the first time around. Super classy. Good work.

  • roro80

    Good god I wish I hadn’t read the last few paragraphs of this crap article.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :