MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Failings of Feminism

Filed under: General — Downunder @ 9:51 am Thu 19th May 2005

It has often been said to me, “Men will not save themselves from feminism -they will need to be rescued by women.”

It has taken too long to appreciate that while the face of feminism was equality its true ambition has always been superiority. The truth may be a shock to the delicate ears of the conservative politically apathetic kiwi male, along with the realization that men have slipped below the line of equality and our sons are now an optional extra in a women’s world.

In a society that professes gender neutral policy, but practices gender biased implementation, it is not hard to find marginalized men who often reach one of two diametrically opposed extremes – a state of suicidal tendency, or righteous indignation. That is simply not an attractive destination for the same young men.

Every successful society has prospered on the basis of the expendable male, and while that may at times be a risky vocation or just plain hard work, it has in the past been balanced with a secure position that encouraged pride and commanded respect.

The rapidly changing roles of men and women in New Zealand Society have cast our social structure into disarray. The determined push forward by feminists and a hesitant step backwards by men have an accompanying belief that the pendulum might eventually be brought to rest by some form of social gravity. Equality doesn’t come that easy, it isn’t free. It is not only a position that one must fight to secure, but also a position that one must defend. The difficulty for a society attempting to achieve gender equality is that it requires the participation and co operation of both Men and Women, either in rigorous defense of each position or through mutual respect for each others position. We only fool ourselves if we pretend that the current “perceived equality” is working well for us at this point in time.

Men and in particular fathers do not represent themselves well, and are often portrayed for the consequence of their absence, rather than by themselves for the significance of their presence. Even those that dare to try receive scant endorsement from society. The male role is often undescriptive and undervalued and in our ignorance while we allow immediate damage to the family unit, a stage is set for much greater intergenerational consequences.

Take for example the relationship between a father and a daughter as she grows from childhood through teenage years. This is the primary relationship that will establish a code of behavior for a yet unknown partner whose relationship with his mother for the same reason is equally important. Balance this against the extreme views of feminists that occupy senior roles in our administration.

The position that men occupy in the feminist agenda is something in the nature of a slave. Being shackled in chains and made to work for the state for part of the day, is no different to being assessed for your earning capacity so a proportion of your income can be deducted from your earnings over and above taxes.

The position of women in the feminist agenda is little better than that of a battery hen, in a state funded breeding program, the consequences of which do not even allow us to reproduce our own population. The only winners here are the feminist elite and the emasculated males who traded their testicles to fulfill their selfish ambitions.

There is a harsh reality for us to encounter – to come to terms with the nature of the experiment that has been foisted upon us.

History will condemn its proponents, and stigmatize its willing followers as is the case with any regime, however if we take too long to appreciate the longitudinal effect and social consequences we will not only fail our children and our grandchildren, but we will fail ourselves.

As our election approaches we should remind ourselves that the cost of democracy is nothing less than participation if not political involvement. More fool those who trade their vote for cash, rather than cast it with careful consideration.

Bevan Berg.


  1. Beautifully cogently put Bevan.

    Comment by Stephen — Thu 19th May 2005 @ 1:37 pm

  2. I second that – dad4justice

    Comment by Peter Burns — Thu 19th May 2005 @ 3:15 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar