archive.today webpage capture | Saved from | ||
| All snapshots | from host thevarsity.ca | ||
| Linked from | wikimannia.org » Frauengewalt de.wikimannia.org » Frauengewalt en.wikipedia.org » Canadian Association for Equality en.wikipedia.org » International Socialists (Canada) en.wikipedia.org » University of Toronto Students' Union | ||
| WebpageScreenshot | |||
 share download .zip report bug or abuse Buy me a coffee | |||
SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center
for more information.
SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center
for more information.
The University of Toronto's
Student Newspaper Since 1880
Student Newspaper Since 1880
Arrest, assaults overshadow “men’s issues” lecture
Protestors organized through Facebook greet controversial speaker Warren Farrell
By Dan Smeenk
Published: 3:24 am, 17 November 2012
Modified: 11 pm, 20 November 2012
Vol CXXXIII, No. 09 under News
Published: 3:24 am, 17 November 2012
Modified: 11 pm, 20 November 2012
Vol CXXXIII, No. 09 under News
Around 100 protestors disrupted a lecture given by controversial author and activist Warren Farrell at the MacLeod auditorium at U of T on Friday night.
Farrell, whose works include
The Liberated Man, Why Men Are the Way They Are, and
The Myth of Male Power, was on campus to give a speech outlining his theory about how males are disadvantaged in Western society. He was hosted by the Canadian Association for Equality (CAFE).
Police formed a cordon in front of MacLeod auditorium. Q_E_D/TWITTER
Farrell, who describes himself as a former feminist, and the only male ever to have been elected to the Board of the National Organization for Women three times, started to include men’s issues in his work about gender in the mid-1980s.
About fifteen protestors stood in front of the doors before the event, forming a barricade and blocking attendees from entering through the main doors of the auditorium. About two dozen Toronto Police Service officers were present to provide security for the event, including officers on bicycles and on horseback. U of T Campus Police were also present.
One protestor was arrested after a scuffle broke out in front of the auditorium’s doors. He was later released with no charges. Another protestor was cautioned for assault of a police officer at the back entrance. A video posted on YouTube shows event attendees entering the building, and people identified by the videographer as organizers physically assaulting protestors.
There was also significant controversy over the move by protesters to barricade the doors. Many patrons argued that the methods used by the protestors suppressed free speech and stifled debate. The protestors argued that Farrell’s talk was hate speech, and did real damage to women. Demonstrators shouted the slogan “No Hate Speech on Campus” on a number of occasions throughout the night.
Farrell’s lecture centred around ten major themes, including discussion of “men’s issues” such as video game or porn addiction, which disproportionately affects men, and boys’ relative disadvantages in education.
Other topics included the devaluing of male sexuality and life. Farrell argued that increasing rates of male impotence, increased suicide rates, and instances of men seen as heroes for taking risks with their bodies and lives, were all evidence of the disposability of men. Farrell also argued that it should be more socially acceptable for men to contribute to their families apart from working full-time.
The lecture was delayed by the crowd of protestors, who had organized on Facebook through a coalition group calling themselves “U of T Students United Against Sexism.” Protestors accused Farrell and the men’s issues awareness movement of misogyny, and of protecting and denying male privilege.
“We recognize that they [the men’s issues awareness movement] are really messed up … men are at a point of privilege, so we need to recognize privilege and become an ally [of women’s rights],” said Guled Arale, Scarborough Campus Students’ Union vice-president, external during a speech about 20 minutes before the event was scheduled to start.
Other protestors were more measured in their criticism.
Peter Hogarth, who created the Facebook page, accused the men’s issues awareness movement of splitting problems strictly along gender lines. “We [protestors] don’t want to say the gains of women have come at the expense of men, but rather the issues that men’s groups talk about are real; we’re interested [in] general equality,” he said.
Zack Morgenstern, a second-year U of T student present at the protest, said that his issue was not so much with Farrell himself, but instead promotes feminism as a more relevant issue than men’s rights.
Brad, a recently-graduated U of T graduate student, paid for his ticket to see Farrell speak. He said that gender issues were “symmetric … while women have suffered in many ways, men have as well.”
A section of Farrell’s book
The Myth of Male Power
that deals with date rape drew particularly vehement condemnation from the protestors. The part in question is drawn from the first words of a subsection of the book called “Date Fraud and Date Lying.”
“If a man ignoring a woman’s verbal ‘no’ is committing date rape, then a woman who says ‘no’ with her verbal language but ‘yes’ with her body language is committing date fraud. And a woman who continues to be sexual even after she says ‘no’ is committing date lying,” wrote Farrell in the 1993 book.
Farrell follows this section in his book with his own personal experience, and a set of survey statistics to illustrate this point. In an interview with
The Varsity, Farrell said that he does not blame date rape on its victims, and that he only made the point that there was an “evolution of misunderstandings between communication and litigation.” He also added an example that a verbal “yes” said in the tone of “no” also means no.
“I didn’t know what they were talking about in regards to promoting rape culture,” said Iain Dwyer, a member of the CAFE board of directors, in response to claims from U of T Students Against Sexism. CAFE, he said, does not “disregard misogyny … we want to address gender issues.”
A protestor, who identified themselves as a member of ‘U of T Students Against Sexism’ submitted the following video, allegedly taken at Friday’s event:
Contributor
×
Comments for this thread are now closed.
Around The Web
Also on The Varsity
-
Malthus • 2 years ago Feminism has devolved from the healthy, humanist request it used to be to a form of mass mental illness whose symptoms are: hysteria, persecution complex, paranoia, cult-like adherence to conspiracy theories (the world-wide patriarchy); psychopathic lack of empathy for anyone but themselves, delusions and schizophrenia.
What happened at UoT is neither surprising nor shocking- it is feminist norm, These people shouldn't be blamed or condemned- they should be pitied and treated, just like any other mental patient.-
Guest > Malthus • 2 years ago Malthus is right, but I have no sympathy for the feminazis. They're vicious beasts who've ruined millions of lives. The sooner all feminazis are rounded up and hanged by the government for their crimes against humanity, the better.
-
-
Guest • 2 years ago If the young twits who are against the men's movement are the future, then the world is
fucked. All they do is trot out the same old catchphrases that were
blurted out by their moronic "leader", without knowing what they mean or
why they're repeating them.It's obvious that the moronic
"leaders" of these idiots have seen women ruin men's lives by falsely
accusing them of rape and violence. Seeing it occur over and over again,
and hearing feminists make a living out of saying all men are bad, has
convinced these idiots that hurling false accusations against men is a
foolproof way of silencing anyone who confronts the flaws in feminist
ideology. People might fall for a ploy when it's used sparingly and
convincingly, but when it's pulled out by idiots who can't get their
story straight then it's easy to see through it. Aileen Wournos found
this out the hardy way. Going to the well too often just leads to the
water drying up.I think it's fair to say that the manginas and
and young feminazis who are against the men's movement are a danger to society. They
might be pathetic, stupid and pitiful, but they have strength in numbers
and friends in high places. No man is safe from these string bean
bullies. Avoid universities at all costs. If an area of your town is
frequented by these freaks, avoid it like the plague whenever they're
around.It won't be long until the feminazis, manginas and militant fags who run this evil website take this comment down. They can't handle real men standing up and speaking the truth about their evil regime. -
Guest • 2 years ago My sympathies go to all the sane Canadians who have to deal with these nutbag feminazis.Don't the violent, power hungry feminazis and sex starved marginas realise that their evil regime has the potential to create another Marc Lepine? -
Guest • 2 years ago If the young twits who are against the men's movement are the future leaders of the world, then the world is fucked. All they do is trot out the same old catchphrases that were blurted out by their moronic "leaders", without knowing what they mean or why they're repeating them.It's obvious that the retards' moronic "leaders" have seen women ruin men's lives by falsely accusing them of rape and violence. Seeing it occur over and over again, and hearing feminists make a living out of saying all men are bad, has
convinced the idiots that hurling false accusations against men is a foolproof way of silencing anyone who confronts the flaws in feminist ideology. People might fall for a ploy when it's used sparingly and convincingly, but when it's pulled out by idiots who can't get their story straight then it's easy to see through it. Aileen Wournos found this out the hard way. Going to the well too often just leads to the
water drying up.I think it's fair to say that the young manginas and and young feminazis who are against the men's movement are a danger to society. They [manginas/feminazis]
might be pathetic, stupid and pitiful, but they have strength in numbers and friends in high places. No man is safe from these string bean bullies. Avoid universities at all costs. If an area of your town is frequented by these freaks, avoid it like the plague. -
Tristan • 2 years ago can't they listen to what the man has to say first then make an argument? people react to quickly to a premonition without taking into account what he has wrote or said. -
wbp • 2 years ago I arrived a bit early for Warren Farrell's lecture. I was astonished to see such a hostile and large group of protestors blocking the doors. The vile things they were saying -- calling me a pervert, and WR supports incest. Then the women screaming at the top of their lungs. Both entrances were blocked -- and if police were not their, attendees would very likely have been harmed -- the hysteria was just unbeleivable. UFT Against Sexism group was acting more sexist than I have ever seen. They need to re evaluate themselves. -
YesIAmDude • 2 years ago Good too see some people won't accept Farrell's misogynistic ramblings. -
Bora D. Explora • 2 years ago Funny how those trying to deny others free speech and assembly are the first to talk about how we live in a "police state"... -
BjamminD • 2 years ago As a man, who at least in his own opinion, has always believed and supported complete equality for all genders, races, creeds, cultures, sexual orientation or the like; I can't begin to tell you how much this type of behaviour (exhibited by the protesters) disturbs and disgusts me.
Freedom of speech is one of the values I hold most dear, for it to be trampled in such a disgusting fashion is so disheartening to me in such a strong regard that I can't even put it into words. The people involved in this protest should be ashamed, I don't know what else to say.-
Hanna > BjamminD • 2 years ago As a woman who supports the same, I understand your disgust. However some of the comments made by Warren Farrell are pretty horrific: date fraud? He doesn't seem to have his head screwed on. Definitely not a great protest, but I can also understand the level of outrage that lead to the protester's reactionary behaviour. Reading some of the misanformed and anti-women comments on this site is pretty upsetting too. However it is a relief to hear you speak respectfully and coherently on the subject.-
BjamminD > Hanna • 2 years ago Thank you, I think the type of discourse you and I are having is a far more likely to lead to some sort of amicable resolution than the sort of protest we saw. I also agree some of his points are made in a way that is either deliberately offensive or insufficiently senstive but I point the the purpose of free speech in the first place; "Free Speech is not intended to protect popular speech, its intended to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech by definition requires no protection."To take it one step further, I would love to hear you or anyone else posting the freverent comments seen on this board address his points rather than point out the somewhat offensive terms he uses to express them. I'm not saying I agree, just that discourse is more effective than calling people lunatics, mysogynists, or feminazis.-
Guest > BjamminD • 2 years ago no*
-
-
-
-
Sandro Pehar • 2 years ago Ideology is the enemy, Knowledge is Power.Here's a link to Warren Farrell's Wikipedia Page.
Take special note in the 'critical reception' area. -
Mrs T • 2 years ago "We [protestors] don’t want to say the gains of women have come at the
expense of men" Women have more rights in family law than men so yes, those rights have come to women at the expense of men. Parents should be granted equal rights that are not based on their gender because that is sexism masquerading as feminism.I'm not against feminism, just the fact that certain people who have labeled themselves feminist don't think they need to look at their own actions or beliefs. -
fuck censorship/sexism • 2 years ago It's sad that the few protesters who participated in the barricades make the issue no longer just about sexism, which is what should be focused on and what people should be discussing. Censorship would not be part of the debate if 15 protestors could learn how to protest in a responsible manner that was more about educating people than just chanting. I do not support the polices' actions either. -
Tim Goldich • 2 years ago In the realm of gender politics, there is feminism on the one hand and on the other hand there is nothing. If he could, Warren Farrell would get male perspectives entered into the gender-political equation.
While acknowledging that men are overrepresented at the top, he would also have us spare a thought for the much larger numbers of men overrepresented within the true bottom rungs of society. Apparently, however, our universities are not open-minded enough to hear it. To me it is sad and scary that our universities are so in thrall to the feminist ideological dictatorship that alternate views will not be tolerated let alone embraced. For every one CEO there have been many POWs. If one can tear one’s eyes from the tip of the success pyramid, even for a moment, and look anywhere else, one finds that men suffer comparison with women in virtually every measure of wellbeing (health, longevity, homelessness, imprisonment, sentencing, suicide, substance abuse, work-related fatalities, battlefields, education, child custody, reproductive and parenting rights—the list is endless). I hope that someday it will not be considered “misogynistic” to explore such truths in open forum. -
ray24 • 2 years ago Feminism has a long history of misandry as shown in the video, "Los Misandry" at Youtube. The result of decades of feminist lies and propaganda has been an institutionalization of misandry, leading to a witch-hunting of males as shown in the video "Witch-Hunting Males" at Youtube. :-/ -
PlainOldTruth • 2 years ago Marxist privilege is revealed. Misandry is central to the authoritarian eugenics vision of all the social engineers and community organizers (of both the socialist and neo-con varieties, both globalist). Freedom is despised by politically correct psychopaths who want to control others. -
Harry • 2 years ago This just goes to show that ignorance and ideology are not distant cousins, but married at the hip. It's clear that none of the protestors has ever read anything Mr. Farrell had written. Had they even read the inside leaf of one of his book covers they would have refused to participate in such an asinine demonstration. These idiots can be nothing more than a bunch of followers of one or two other idiots who know absolutely nothing legitimate about anything having to do with gender and the differences thereof and for. My guess is the parents of these brain dead morons should stop financing their way through college and help them find work on a coal barge before they graduate from college with a license to hurt others with stupidity. -
Tony • 2 years ago Although this "men's rights" issue is complete BS and a total joke, who the hell are these protestors? You don't make a point through actions such as those. -
Ashamed to be a U of T student • 2 years ago This is ridiculous. A group that calls themselves "U of T Students United Against Sexism" goes to great lengths to support sexism. It is not wrong to recognize that sexism affects everybody, and that males also experience and suffer from sexism, that they are disadvantaged in many, many ways. When people try to talk about this, though, all they get are unfounded accusations of misogyny and other evils, as if trying to talk about the problems of a group that is usually ignored in these matters somehow means that you hate all the other groups. No, what their actions really show us is that the people who did this "protesting" (which turned into outright assaulting) are themselves just incredibly sexist, and if they only had the thought to think about their own actions and not treat people of different genders differently, they would realize how sexist they are and hopefully be very ashamed of themselves.-
KratchMRA > Ashamed to be a U of T student • 2 years ago "as if trying to talk about the problems of a group that is usually ignored in these matters somehow means that you hate all the other groups."Acknowledging men have issues too, and that women don't have a monopoly on gendered problems (or that problems labeled as gendered aren't actually gendered), you remove their power base. Male guilt can no longer be used as effectively to acquire power, privilege and money. This is unacceptable to some.
-
-
dielon • 2 years ago All due respect to the protesters point of view, they don't have the right to physically stop someone from expressing their opinion or other people to listen to them because that is fascism. You have the right to criticize him for his opinion but to prevent people from listening to him is awful and does more to harm your cause then help. How would like it if a bunch of men prevented a woman's rights rally from happening? That would not be tolerated and shouldn't be tolerated. He has the right to peacefully express his opinions on the matter, and you have the right to disagree. Perhaps people were going to see him so that they could be sure that they don't support him. Reading "Mein Kampf" does not automatically make you a nazi.These protesters clearly support censorship and so i cannot in any way shape or form support these protesters. I love how people who label themselves politically correct think they can act as ridiculous as possible without taking any responsibility for their own actions.-
Concerned Student > dielon • 2 years ago So do you value Dr. Farrel and the MRA Group's right to expression over that of the protesters? In the end, no protester harmed Dr. Farrel or any of the folks attending nor did they physically attempt to stop Farrel from speaking. They stood, peacefully, in the entrance to a building to express their dissent towards what those folks intended and the ideas they stand for.If you respect the freedom of expression of Farrel and his supports, do you not also support that of the protesting students and community members who speak against them? Or, is it rather that you are fine with seeing these protesters attacked by police and supporters. Or is it that you are perfectly ok with censoring their protest? Freedom of expression is a two-way street. No protester among that group attempted any grand act to silence Farrel, they wanted their dissent noted and did so peacefully. If only they could have received the same respect.-
Guest > Concerned Student • 2 years ago Concerned Student,You are an attention-seeking idiot. -
KratchMRA > Concerned Student • 2 years ago "So do you value Dr. Farrel and the MRA Group's right to expression over that of the protesters? "Last I checked, Dr Farrell, nor any of his supporters, denied the protesters the right to hold their protest. The reverse is not true. You are correlating unequal outcomes as the same."In the end, no protester harmed Dr. Farrel or any of the folks attending nor did they physically attempt to stop Farrel from speaking. "The presentation was delayed for over an hour due to the blockades by the protesters so your assertion nobody was harmed and Farrell was not stopped from speaking are in fact lies."They stood, peacefully, in the entrance to a building to express their dissent towards what those folks intended and the ideas they stand for."They blocked the doors and denied people access. Don't pretend that is the benevolent actions you described. Your dishonesty about the situation is rather telling. The same arguments are used against MRA's. Saying the protesters are wrong for blocking the doors and denying others their own freedom of assembly is equated to saying the protesters aren't allowed to protest... Just like saying men have issues that need to be acknowledged is equated to saying women have no issues. -
Milton > Concerned Student • 2 years ago I was there. They were not peaceful. They physically blocked us, called us "rape apologists" and generally tried to intimidate everyone with aggressive behavior and a numbers advantage.I was there with a colleague of mine - a woman who works with me helping disadvantaged youth in the community - and she was accused of selling out her own gender for my pleasure. "My" pleasure? She's a coworker. We went because we have an interest in learning more about the challenges facing men today.These people were anything but civil or informed. None of them could actually articulate why they were opposed to this talk and all would only repeat the same catchphrases over and over when asked what their problem was.This was shameful and I am embarrassed that, as an activist and a community worker, these people claim to be associated with causes I support.There was nothing but hate, anger and violence in that crowd. -
Bethany Baby > Concerned Student • 2 years ago Peacefully protesting the event is a completely legitimate exercise of one's right to freedom of expression.Physically barricading the doors to prevent others from exercising their right to freedom of expression is not.It's not that complicated. Of course they try and justify their hypocrisy by labeling it "hate speech." Which, of course, is defined as anything these people disagree with. -
dielon > Concerned Student • 2 years ago Exactly freedom of expression is a two way street; that's what i was saying and no i don't value any person opinion over the others but these protesters seemed to.I was not at the event and did not hear about it until reading this article, which says "About fifteen protestors stood in front of the doors before the event, forming a barricade and blocking event attendees from entering through the main doors of the auditorium...Several patrons were able to get in through the back entrance before protestors blocked those doors as well. " that seems to me to be preventing people from trying to hear what he had to say.Perhaps instead of protesting his lecture, it would be more productive for the protesters to a organize their own lecture about their views and probably would have more attends then his lecture. I am now going to read his books to see if i actually disagree with his point of view instead of automatically taking the word of people who have declared him evil. Also, I in no way support police preventing any type of peaceful protest i think we can all agree that that is disguising.-
Concerned Student > dielon • 2 years ago But is not forming a barricade or standing in a particular place an expression of sorts? While you might not agree or condone their means, perhaps their dissent was just as valid an act as the event itself. Besides, many more protesters seem to have not formed the barricade and did not engage in that fashion - still, all forms of dissent might well be considered valid.I too have been and shall be reading Dr. Farrell, but a wrote dismissal of the other side of this discussion on the grounds of their manner of expression is just as problematic, which is what I fear many shall do in this situation.-
Anon > Concerned Student • 2 years ago No, that is not "an expression of sorts." It's just being a baby. -
dielon > Concerned Student • 2 years ago No i do not think their dissent is just as valid. They're preventing peaceful discourse and just because they didn't cause physical harm to anyone does not mean their behavior is acceptable or i have to agree/support their actions.I'm not against all protesters involved, just anyone involved in the barricades, because they clearly see their point of view as more valid then Warren Farrell.-
fuck patriarchy > dielon • 2 years ago "No i do not think their dissent is just as valid. They're preventing
peaceful discourse and just because they didn't cause physical harm to
anyone does not mean their behavior is acceptable or i have to
agree/support their actions."Just because you aren't aware of the violence Farrell and the Mens Rights Movement perpetrates doesn't mean they are engaging in "peaceful discourse". I'm sure many who attended the rally including myself looked into Farrells work and the ideology of MRA's and then in recognizing the violence these spaces are perpetuating, the violence that is informing events like Fridays and developed their tactic/response based on that. Barricading the door is a survivor-centric response that potentially seek to stop talks like Farrells for what it is, violent and oppressive. Theres no reasoning with the perpetuation of systemic violence (this point is made even more visible through the actions of the police),-
Anon > fuck patriarchy • 2 years ago How is a talk violent/oppressive? -
dielon > fuck patriarchy • 2 years ago There is no reason to prevent people from hearing what he has to say. You view his opinions as perpetuating violence and you are telling me i have to as well. Don't tell me what to think. By blocking access to hear his lecture, those particular protesters are telling me what to think as well that is wrong. Freedom of expression does not mean you have the right to prevent another person's freedom of expression and people's right to hear it if they wish. After reading many things Warren Farrel has written, i do not agree with most if not all that he has written (as i have not read everything he has written and would like to read more before forming an opinion) he has the right to say whatever he wants to say no matter how hurtful and you have the right to say he is wrong and criticizes his views and protest them. That does not mean every form of protesting is valid even if it is noneviolent.
"Theres no reasoning with the perpetuation of systemic violence" fair enough.But there doesn't seem to be any reasoning with people who think they are morally superior in the situation and who tell people what they can and cannot think because that is oppressive.
-
-
Concerned Student > dielon • 2 years ago Well, who claims one has to support either side in this matter? However, it rather seems that your willing to give way to 'peaceful discourse' - of which some of Farrell's suggestions, such as the notion that women cannot be trusted to be truthful with issue of consent (see some lower comments on that) which belie that point - but that peaceful assembly and expression take a slightly backseat.But, if you would allow a group to speak freely, then so too should one allow one to express freely (as we have freedom of expression, not speech alone in this nation). The protesters did not cause physical harm, nor did they stop Farrell and others from assembling - they could easily have went elsewhere within campus or outside of it to avoid direct confrontation just as much as the protesters could have done so - but they expect it and (to a degree) desire it as these standoffs create space to make discussions of 'censorship' (though, as state, I think both sides can claim that fairly of the other equally) rather than of the actual issues at hand.Thus, the protests themselves - as you state - are somewhat counterproductive, but even so that doesn't de-legitimize that form of expression inherently. Moreover, Warren Farrell likely sees his own view as superior to those against him, as they do to him - this is a realm of ideology, that is to be expected. Some of those who came to see Farrell acted violently as did the police and some of the protesters built an inconvenient barricade. It seems as though still you would put greater concern on the latter than the former.-
Anon > Concerned Student • 2 years ago Your idea of 'freedom of expression' is ridiculous. "hey could easily have went elsewhere within campus or outside of it to avoid direct confrontation." That's not something someone who believes in the Charter would say. -
dielon > Concerned Student • 2 years ago I never said i agreed with any of Warren Farrell's positions, just that he has the right to express them and people have the right to listen to them. I agree with the position of the protesters, all i said was that certain people's actions in the protest were not acceptable. Preventing people from attending the lecture is not acceptable which certain protesters seemed to have done.
To quote you "dismissal of the other side of this discussion on the grounds of their
manner of expression is just as problematic, which is what I fear many
shall do in this situation." I completely agree with you. I never dismissed their position, just their actions. If these protesters are going to get the freedom to assemble which of course they should, then they should give the same right to Warren Farrell and the people who wished to hear him speak. By acting inappropriately they have created more people talking about his ideas which seems ironic because that what they were trying to prevent. You seem more concerned about the rights of the protestors then freedom of expression/speech, which do apply to everyone including Warren Farrell.-
Concerned Student > dielon • 2 years ago Again, I'm not attacking or devaluing the rights of Warren Farrell or any of his supporters, but I am indeed concerned that many in this conversation have been (though, clearly as in these responses not yourself) dismissing the protesters whole positions on the basis of the actions of some. Moreover, I've questioned whether there is some manner of equivalency between the actions against Farrell and the manner in which protesters (all of them, not just those barricading) have been treated by supporters and police.Obviously, no matter if one condones the actions of the barricading parties or not, their actions have not led to success - as you note.-
Factory > Concerned Student • 2 years ago On the contrary....these protestors did the Mens Movement a great service, for which I would like to thank them. This suppression of dissenting views is ENDEMIC to feminist ideologues. They are quite afraid what will happen if too many people hear a viewpoint counter to RadFem propaganda. But, as we are seeing, this xenophobic view is not shared by society in general.The simple fact is, Feminism cannot withstand scrutiny. There is not one single facet of Feminist ideology that is not built on lies, misinformation, or distortion of truth. Because of this, Feminists will not (cannot?) engage in any kind of discoure. Instead, they take the approach used by Totalitarians throughout History...they suppress and attack their detractors.Here's something to think about though...If they are so correct about everything, why are they so afraid people might listen to other viewpoints? After all, if the Feminist take is the logical/correct one....wouldn't inviting dissent actually STRENGTHEN their views? And what does it say when they are so afraid of examination, these people who bully politicians into compliance?The Mens Rights Movement isn't going anywhere though, so they might as well get used to it. -
Michael > Concerned Student • 2 years ago Fundamental rights are subject to reasonable limitations. The freedom of expression and peaceful assembly have limitations. One of those limitations is where the exercise unreasonably infringes on the rights of others. In forming a barricade, those protesters were physically attempting to prevent the exercise of the rights of the attendees. This is problematic.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hardy Weinberg • 2 years ago I couldn’t believe I paid 10 bucks for this, I thought it was a Boyz II Men concert, but ended up being a crazy misogynistic speech by Kenny Rogers. I think Kenny Rogers should stick to his music and delicious rotisserie chicken. And I was really pissed off that I was lied to about Boyz II Men!Also, I felt this article is a bit sensational and bias as it focused on the one post by q_e_d and not on a broader discussion.1) This was NOT a UTSU event, please don’t bring partisan student politics where it doesn’t belong. The UTSU event Friday night was the Diwali celebration at New College. This event was primarily organized by Womens’ rights groups on and off campus. And just because Danielle Sandhu was there does not make it automatically a UTSU event. Sandhu is no longer a member of UTSU and acts as her own independent agent. Like when I see Sandhu on the street, my first thought is not “OMG is there a UTSU event going on at the
cross-walk?”2) A lot of the people inside and outside the event
were non-UofT community members, although I would hazard a guess the protestersoutside had way more UofT affiliated people than inside. The head of the UofT branch of CAFÉ is Justin Trottier, who is a former uoft student and is widely
known in the city for his outrageous antics/events intended to instigate
various groups.3) I absolutely condemn blocking doors and the scuffle with the police (be it the
instigated by the police or by the activists). However I do not condemn the
right to peacefully protest. There were 100-300 people protesting, of which a
small minority, mostly people outside UofT, were involved with any assaults and
arrests. The majority of people at the protest and those who were leaders and representatives
of various communities and groups were on their best behavior.4) The tone of the event did represent a misogynistic/sexist view,
something that I abhor and I feel should be combated against. As a man, I was
offended by the stereotype that men sit around and watch porn and play video
games. I was also offended by his view that men and women fit into little boxes
in our societies, thus advocating for the creation of glass ceilings and glass
walls for both genders. His tone and rhetoric was often misogynistic and in
some cases homophobic or racist (Chinese companies sell Bras to Japanese men).For a more indepth analysis of the event, the Ryerson campus
paper has a better overview than The Varsity. http://www.ryersonian.ca/artic...And this event was completely antithetical to the message of Boyz II Men, which is to love and respect women.-
KratchMRA > Hardy Weinberg • 2 years ago "And this event was completely antithetical to the message of Boyz II Men, which is to love and respect women."Rather telling that you think the purpose of a boy becoming a man is to cater to women (see, I can misrepresent statements to sound sexist too). Just for clarification, a failure to abide by the feminist rhetoric and to advocate for men, without the ultimate goal of that advocacy being beneficial (or in any way relevant) to women is not misogyny. Women do not need to be the focus of every discussion in order to not be seen as hating them.
-
-
Name • 2 years ago Who gives a fuck? Attendance was voluntary. If you don't like his point of view, don't go his lecture. Just more idiocy from the UTSU lifetime protestors. -
Rishi Maharaj • 2 years ago Well the way to respond to a point of view you find objectionable is definitely organized thuggery. Can anyone imagine would that this institution would be like if anyone who could put together a mob was allowed to dictate what could or couldn't be discussed here?I'm unsurprised to find Danielle Sandhu, who has never been legitimately elected to represent any one for any reason shouting and yelling that she represents the students of U of T. Maybe one day she will find the courage to replicate the assault and destruction of property that she advocated as UTSU president and finally be removed from this campus.-
Sue > Rishi Maharaj • 2 years ago Funny how feminists never point to all the bigoted speech that comes from their leaders or members. They're too busy playing the blame-game to look in a mirror and realize the truth.
"Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience." Catherine Comins, Vassar College Assistant Dean of Student Life in Time, June 3, 1991, p. 52.
"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig." -- Andrea Dworkin
"All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman." -- Catherine MacKinnon
"The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race." -- Sally Miller Gearhart, in, The Future - If There Is One - Is Female.
= they support/promote false allegations, physical violence against males, and eugenic fantasies of sex-based population reduction. Half a sentence from Dr. Farrell taken out of context is hardly 'hate speech' in comparison.
PS: MRAs are completely against violence against children, in part because women are 2x as likely to commit it but feminism hides this. Feminism lies about the MRM and the world is catching on to feminist tactics and hypocrisy. -
KratchMRA > Rishi Maharaj • 2 years ago Is she one of the two that denigrated and disrespected the rememberence day ceremony? -
wbp > Rishi Maharaj • 2 years ago Danielle Sandhu did not even know that the speaker was Warren Farrell. She is a joke.
-
-
Anonymous • 2 years ago I had the chance to take to two female-identified students that came to the event. They told me that they had gone to the event thinking that Farrell was speaking at the protest. After arriving the organizers videographer decided to cover the entrance fees for these two students. When they went inside they realized that it was because there were very few students present (or at least straight from high-school students). These two students left the discussion early but told me that they found the discussion very heavily focused on the binary - as if there was just boys and just girls. They also reported some racist interpretations made from Farrell regarding Asian men. They also reported some tokenistic comments around homophobia ("my brother was bullied because he was gay, that's why I'm fighting sexism against men" - ummmm). The students I talked to seemed very eager to listen to the speaker and hear his interpretations, but after the event they seemed really concerned that he said the things he said without providing actual evidence or sources to back up claims. They referenced dramatized videos that were obviously scripted and acted out that had no actual substance (see quotation above).I write this because some people feel like the men's awareness group is one that needs to exist. I recognize that the issues they present in promotional material are sometimes very relevant - suicide, depression, mental health, etc. However, there are plenty of groups and campus resources that target these issues within a anti-oppressive framework. And while work can always be improved and expanded, the framework the Men's Awareness Group uses is not to address the issues above, but to express frustration and hatred towards women, feminists and anti-oppression work. They do this through victim blaming, the building of rape culture and the reenforcement of an increasingly irrelevant binary system.What's most troubling is the University's inaction to address the concerns that the protesters have made. First, this event was presented as a campus group event despite all of the organizers being non-students. I'm not saying that the wider community shouldn't have access to the campus, but that they should not have campus group booking fees when less than 10% of the attendance are students, staff or faculty (campus police excluded). The University's inaction to address the lack of definition and purpose of the group in it's constitution is also troubling. And most importantly, when provided evidence of various statements made by Farrell that put the blame of women being raped on women the University's response is "did he specifically endorse rape?""If a man ignoring a woman's verbal 'no' is committing date rape, then a woman who says `no' with her verbal language but 'yes' with her body language is committing date fraud. And a woman who continues to be sexual even after she says 'no' is committing date lying..."Now I know that this post is going to be trolled. I recognize that just like Toronto Star, National Post, Globe and Mail and anything google searchable there is going to be a bunch of people (or one person with multiple accounts) who are not affiliated with UofT commenting on this. Let the trolling begin and let's not given in to the propaganda and hate this "group" is bringing to our campus.(See this post and the amount of comments it has received compared to other posts. Trolling does exist: http://socialistworkercanada.c...
0 Comments
