Men also receive harsher punishment for the same crime in the criminal justice system. They are more likely to receive custodial sentences and the sentences are longer.
This is an important and worthwhile effort. I applaud everyone who has been involved with this committee.
Beware. Any time an initiative like this arises to help men and boys, man-hating bigots and corrupt interest groups come out of the woodwork to try to shut it down. They’ve contributed to many of the problems listed above, but victim-blame innocent men instead of taking any responsibility for what they’ve done. Be ready to push back against them.
Many U.S. assistance programs remain heavily and unfairly biased in favor of women, even in areas where women are doing much better than men. For example, women have been receiving 55-60% of college degrees for decades, but almost all gender-specific scholarships are still reserved for women. Women on average outlive men; however, there are lots of federal offices dedicated to women’s health, and not even one federal office dedicated to men’s health.
It is less likely that the anti-male interests will try to shut it down than that they will infiltrate it and steer it in a feminist direction. In fact, because it is driven by liberal Democrats, it may start out that way. See my comment below.
Stephen, I appreciate you weighing in with your insights. What you have described and what I have described have both happened. This British graphic sums up what happens too often to initiatives aimed at helping men, unfortunately.
However, I’m willing to give this proposal the benefit of the doubt for now. It looks good and well-intentioned so far. I hope that those connected to this committee will resist the pressure from anti-male groups to undermine it that you and I have warned about.
Like him or dislike him, Richard Reeves has probably helped to tone down some of the anti-male sentiment in the Democratic Party (along with major election losses that Reeves repeatedly warned would happen, and did, because of Dems' misandry and refusal to address men's issues):
I hold out very little hope for this. It is reminiscent of the Clinton Administration's program for "Responsible Fatherhood" (https://www.independent.org/tir/2004-spring/is-there-really-a-fatherhood-crisis/). It turned out to consist of two things: 1) psychotherapy with a feminist tinge, "encouraging" fathers to be more like mothers, and 2) collecting more child support. The same program was then repackaged by the Bush Administration under the title, "Healthy Marriages" and consisted of the same two elements. (DeSantis recently tried the same sleight-of-hand in Florida.) The liberal-Democratic influence of Reeves confirms my suspicion. In fact, liberal Democrats (and quasi-Marxists) have been involved from the start in efforts to "raise awareness" of the importance of men/fathers, while simultaneously demonizing actual men/fathers. (Foremost David Blankenhorn and his book, "Fatherless America": https://www.lewrockwell.com/2004/09/stephen-baskerville/the-failure-of-fatherhood-policy/.) Do not be fooled.
Another topic: Men are marginalized as parents; particularly when they are divorced.
Men also receive harsher punishment for the same crime in the criminal justice system. They are more likely to receive custodial sentences and the sentences are longer.
Don't hold your breath waiting for the Democrats (or Republicans) to address this. It will never happen.
I discuss this extensively in my Newsletter and books: www.StephenBaskerville.com
It's 2025 and a new day! Join us!
My oh my, y'all are doing it! Tremendous! Congratulations! This will help a whole lot of people.
Thanks for all your work, Blair
This is an important and worthwhile effort. I applaud everyone who has been involved with this committee.
Beware. Any time an initiative like this arises to help men and boys, man-hating bigots and corrupt interest groups come out of the woodwork to try to shut it down. They’ve contributed to many of the problems listed above, but victim-blame innocent men instead of taking any responsibility for what they’ve done. Be ready to push back against them.
Many U.S. assistance programs remain heavily and unfairly biased in favor of women, even in areas where women are doing much better than men. For example, women have been receiving 55-60% of college degrees for decades, but almost all gender-specific scholarships are still reserved for women. Women on average outlive men; however, there are lots of federal offices dedicated to women’s health, and not even one federal office dedicated to men’s health.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/92-percent-of-sex-specific-scholarships-are-reserved-for-women-study-finds/
https://jameslnuzzo.substack.com/p/us-mens-and-womens-health-offices
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13685538.2019.1645109#abstract
Systemic misandry is a big problem, and it’s critical to address the anti-male biases baked into too many of our policies and laws.
It is less likely that the anti-male interests will try to shut it down than that they will infiltrate it and steer it in a feminist direction. In fact, because it is driven by liberal Democrats, it may start out that way. See my comment below.
Stephen, I appreciate you weighing in with your insights. What you have described and what I have described have both happened. This British graphic sums up what happens too often to initiatives aimed at helping men, unfortunately.
https://x.com/dadmatters_uk/status/1841787685842677801/photo/1
However, I’m willing to give this proposal the benefit of the doubt for now. It looks good and well-intentioned so far. I hope that those connected to this committee will resist the pressure from anti-male groups to undermine it that you and I have warned about.
Like him or dislike him, Richard Reeves has probably helped to tone down some of the anti-male sentiment in the Democratic Party (along with major election losses that Reeves repeatedly warned would happen, and did, because of Dems' misandry and refusal to address men's issues):
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/08/young-men-donald-trump-kamala-harris
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/10/17/harris-campaign-strategy-men-00184062
How would an initiative aimed at helping men and boys earn your trust and confidence?
What would it look like?
I hold out very little hope for this. It is reminiscent of the Clinton Administration's program for "Responsible Fatherhood" (https://www.independent.org/tir/2004-spring/is-there-really-a-fatherhood-crisis/). It turned out to consist of two things: 1) psychotherapy with a feminist tinge, "encouraging" fathers to be more like mothers, and 2) collecting more child support. The same program was then repackaged by the Bush Administration under the title, "Healthy Marriages" and consisted of the same two elements. (DeSantis recently tried the same sleight-of-hand in Florida.) The liberal-Democratic influence of Reeves confirms my suspicion. In fact, liberal Democrats (and quasi-Marxists) have been involved from the start in efforts to "raise awareness" of the importance of men/fathers, while simultaneously demonizing actual men/fathers. (Foremost David Blankenhorn and his book, "Fatherless America": https://www.lewrockwell.com/2004/09/stephen-baskerville/the-failure-of-fatherhood-policy/.) Do not be fooled.