This is the article that goes into more detail about the CMNI Inventory from a previous post “The Everyday Hatred of Men Part 3.“ This post goes into a great deal more detail about my interactions with the researcher and the misandry of his inventory.
Thanks for the post, Tom. Misandry is rampant in the mental health profession. Thanks for confronting the resesrcher on his misandry. I like to tell manginas that, if they get prostate cancer, they will learn that their feminist sisters made sure that breast cancer gets many times more taxpayer funds than prostate cancer.
More than 10 years down the road from the original publication date of Tom's splendid analysis (2012), we can see that little has changed. Connell's 1995 discussion of "hegemonic masculinity" took hold and finds favorable reception in books on masculinity and sports--e.g., Eric Anderson's 2005 "In the Game" and Andrew Billings' & Leigh Moscowitz's "Media and the Coming out of Gay Male Athletes" (2018). Many researchers do what Tom traces here, look for evidence to confirm what they believe to be true. The people vetting this research follow the methods and share the assumptions of the authors whose work they assess. It's a closed kind of inquiry; the true believers talk to each other. They nod their heads and then tell the rest of us what is what. The aim is not to learn about men. The aim is to lecture men on their faults and tell them (as Anderson does) to be like women.
I did a Google search on this misguided and misandrist fool. I get a full page of hits. I know nothing of academia as I've worked in corporations, but should I assume that once something is considered precedent it's very difficult to root out.
We owe you a debt of gratitude Tom for the time & effort you give to making mens lives better. It requires courage, conviction and tenacity. We really need more people to speak out as you have.
I'm baffled that a male author would promote such a negative stereotype of a group of which he is a member. I can understand greed or self-promotion. Even the effects of societal coercion. However, he is denigrating an essential aspect of who he is as a person.
Thank you Half Newfie. I am baffled too. Having interacted with Mahalik and with the Div 51 types it seems to me that they are decent human beings who have well above average intelligence. It just doesn't make any sense that they would be so anti male. They have obviously bought into the Connell nonsense and can't seem to back out.
There is an excellent article about complex systems. It is representative of how misndry has taken root in our society today. Small changes like ideology based research can have a profound downstream effect.
Thanks for the post, Tom. Misandry is rampant in the mental health profession. Thanks for confronting the resesrcher on his misandry. I like to tell manginas that, if they get prostate cancer, they will learn that their feminist sisters made sure that breast cancer gets many times more taxpayer funds than prostate cancer.
Agree Frank. Each one of us needs to speak out. So true on the prostate/breast funding issue. Misandry/Gynocentrism is everywhere you look....,ugh
More than 10 years down the road from the original publication date of Tom's splendid analysis (2012), we can see that little has changed. Connell's 1995 discussion of "hegemonic masculinity" took hold and finds favorable reception in books on masculinity and sports--e.g., Eric Anderson's 2005 "In the Game" and Andrew Billings' & Leigh Moscowitz's "Media and the Coming out of Gay Male Athletes" (2018). Many researchers do what Tom traces here, look for evidence to confirm what they believe to be true. The people vetting this research follow the methods and share the assumptions of the authors whose work they assess. It's a closed kind of inquiry; the true believers talk to each other. They nod their heads and then tell the rest of us what is what. The aim is not to learn about men. The aim is to lecture men on their faults and tell them (as Anderson does) to be like women.
I did a Google search on this misguided and misandrist fool. I get a full page of hits. I know nothing of academia as I've worked in corporations, but should I assume that once something is considered precedent it's very difficult to root out.
Indeed, sadly, momentum is stronger than truth.
Exactly Allen. So true and well said. Thank you.
We owe you a debt of gratitude Tom for the time & effort you give to making mens lives better. It requires courage, conviction and tenacity. We really need more people to speak out as you have.
I'm baffled that a male author would promote such a negative stereotype of a group of which he is a member. I can understand greed or self-promotion. Even the effects of societal coercion. However, he is denigrating an essential aspect of who he is as a person.
Thank you Half Newfie. I am baffled too. Having interacted with Mahalik and with the Div 51 types it seems to me that they are decent human beings who have well above average intelligence. It just doesn't make any sense that they would be so anti male. They have obviously bought into the Connell nonsense and can't seem to back out.
There is an excellent article about complex systems. It is representative of how misndry has taken root in our society today. Small changes like ideology based research can have a profound downstream effect.
https://www.palladiummag.com/2023/06/01/complex-systems-wont-survive-the-competence-crisis/
Very interesting article. Thanks.