Let Men Critique Feminism Says University Lecturer

Feminist CritiqueWe need to make it okay for men to critique feminism without feeling scared of the reaction they might get, according to Dr Phil Goss, a Senior lecturer in counselling & psychotherapy at the University of Central Lancashire.

Writing in a letter in the Guardian in response to Jack O Sullivan’s article on misandry and matriarchy, Goss says that feminism has “opened up new ways of being a man”, but it has also left men facing a “psychological quandary”.

Many men in relationships with women are “still caught by the tensions inherent in mother-son relationships” he says, with “part of them yearning for relationship” while another part strives to define a male identity that is separate from her.

While there are similarities in the way that boys and girls develop, Goss says “male development, and attachment patterns, from infancy onwards is not the same as that of females” and that we need to face the reality of how this impacts our adult lives, particularly in the home.

According to Goss: “we need a narrative about male development that helps us to make sense of the problems boys and men face in the same way as feminism provided a narrative for women.”

“This also needs to be a narrative that makes it OK for men to critique feminism without feeling scared of the reaction they might get,” he concludes.

For more perspectives on how to address the problems that men and boys face buy your ticket today for the Third National Conference for Men and Boys.

—Photo Credit: geishaboy500/Flickr


6 thoughts on “Let Men Critique Feminism Says University Lecturer

  1. Judging from my workplace colleagues, the men there are either openly hostile to feminism or express over-the-top chivalry towards female colleagues. The latter is quite nauseating to witness.

  2. To begin with, I will destroy the most common feminist academic fraud myths:

    — Intelligence —
    To begin with, men and women are not “equally intelligent”. Rather, they have a combination of different specialized intelligences. All biological sciences would fall flat if the genders were intellectually and physically equal.

    The male advantage in spatial ability is very well established: Visuospatial Ability [1][2][3][4], Spatial Perception [1][2][5], Spatial Reasoning and Sensitivity to Detail [1][2][6][7][8] and Dynamic spatial ability [1][2][9]. This also contributes to greater mathematical and reasoning ability in men as well. In the Scholastic Aptitude Math Test (SAT-M), men score on average 50 points higher than women [10]. At scores above 700, the sex ratio is 13:1 (men to women) [11].

    IQ and SAT tests have been dumbed down since the late 1990s in order to minimize gender differences. The test constructors and the Educational Testing Services (which developed the SAT) often eliminate items showing a male advantage in order to reduce the perception of bias [12].

    This was a political change that fooled scientifically illiterate idiots into thinking that there are no intelligence differences between men and women. When adjusted for proper methodology with the highest ‘g’ loaded tests, men have a significant IQ advantage [13]. At the near-genius level, IQ=145, there are 9 men for every 1 woman [14]. In one of the largest IQ tests ever done, the male advantage was seen across all socioeconomic levels and all ethnic groups [15]. From this data, we can calculate that at the genius level, 99% will be men; this complies with history as 99% of all scientific inventions, discoveries and innovations have come from men.

    — Brain Size —
    Men’s brains are significantly bigger than women’s even when controlled for variables of size (like height). Brain weight analyses show that males averaged a larger brain size than females even after adjusting for body size (140 g before adjustments; 100 g after adjustments) [16][17][18], from birth [19]. It is also well-documented that men have 15% more neurons than women, approximately 23 billion vs 19 billion [20]. Brain size has a moderate correlation with IQ.

    — Education —
    In school, girls get graded higher for behavior, not for ability. There is also some evidence that feminist teachers score boys lower deliberately [21][22]. Standardized tests measure ability, school grades don’t. This is why boys and young men still perform better in standardized tests. As for college, affirmative action is being used to choose women and not men. This is why there are more women than men. This is unconstitutional but the practice is carried on due to feminists in the administration systems. There are two other parallel effects. 1) the Title X law which was meant to promote equality has been by feminists to cut down men’s sports teams for nearly a decade now. This makes sure that a lot of men go elsewhere to further their interests. 2) Speech codes and censorship guidelines in colleges have greatly diminished the value of college. If it isn’t mentally stimulating, men don’t find it very interesting.

    — Health —
    Most men don’t die because they are reckless. This is a lie. The U.N spends 4-8 times more on women’s health than on men’s. There isn’t even a Men’s wing in the U.N and there are no ministries for men’s health in any country. Breast cancer research is assigned 5 times more funding than testicular cancer or bowel cancer. In other words, most men die sooner because they are not offered much aid. I find it very disturbing that feminists like you gloat about it. Evil, grotesque and pathetic.

    P.S – A lot of the studies that show male superiority mentioned here have been conducted by women and not sexist nutjobs.
    1. Voyer, D., Voyer, S., & Bryden, M. P. (1995). Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: A meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 250-270.
    2. Kimura, D. (1999). Sex and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    3. Collins, D.W. and Kimura, D. (1997) A large sex difference on a two-dimensional mental rotation task. Behav. Neurosci. 111, 845–849.
    4. Galea, L.A.M. and Kimura, D. (1993) Sex differences in route learning. Pers. Indiv. Diff. 14, 53–65.
    5. Witkin, H.A. et al. (1962) Personality through Perception, Harper & Row.
    6. Wittig, M.A. and Allen, M.J. (1984) Measurement of adult performance on Piaget’s water horizontality task. Intelligence 8, 305–313.
    7. Elliot, R. (1961) Interrelationship among measures of field dependence, ability, and personality traits. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 63, 27–36.
    8. Atran, S. (1994) Core domains versus scientific theories: evidence from systematics and Itza-Maya folkbiology. In Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture (Hirschfeld, L.A. and Gelman, S.A., eds), Cambridge University Press.
    9. Schiff, W. and Oldak, R. (1990) Accuracy of judging time to arrival: effects of modality, trajectory and gender. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 16, 303–316.
    10. Benbow, C.P. (1988) Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability in intellectually talented preadolescents: Their nature, effects, and possible causes. Behav. Brain Sci. 11, 169–232.
    11. Geary, D. (1996) Sexual selection and sex differences in mathematical abilities. Behav. Brain Sci. 19, 229–284.
    12. Jackson, D. N. (2002, December 5–7). Evaluating g in the SAT: Implications for the sex differences and interpretations of verbal and quantitative aptitude. Paper presented at the International Society for Intelligence Research, Nashville, TN.
    13. Lynn, R. & Irwing, P. (2004). Sex differences on the progressive matrices: A meta-analysis.
    14. Nyborg, H. (2005). Sex-related differences in general intelligence g, brain size, and social status. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 497–509.
    15. Jackson D. N. & Rushton, J.P. (2006). Sex differences in general mental ability from 100,000 17- to 18-year-olds on the Scholastic Assessment Test. Intelligence, 34, 479–486.
    16. Ankney, C. D. (1992). Sex differences in relative brain size: The mismeasure of woman, too? Intelligence, 16, 329-336.
    17. Rushton, J. P. (1992). Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6325 U. S. military personnel. Intelligence, 16, 401-413.
    18. Rushton, J. P., & Ankney, C. D. (1996). Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 3, 21-36.
    19. Rushton, J. P. (1997). Cranial size and IQ in Asian Americans from birth to age seven. Intelligence, 25, 7-20.
    20. Pakkenberg, B., & Gundersen, H. J. G. (1997). Neocortical neuron number in humans: Effects of sex and age. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 384, 312-320.
    21. Cornwell, C. M., Mustard, D. B. & Van Parys, J. (2011). Non-cognitive Skills and the Gender Disparities in Test Scores and Teacher Assessments: Evidence from Primary School. Institute for the Study of Labor. DP No. 5973.
    22. Cornwell, C. M., Mustard, D. B. & Van Parys, J. (2012). Non-cognitive Skills and the Gender Disparities in Test Scores and Teacher Assessments: Evidence from Primary School. Institute for the Study of Labor.

    • Very well put. If you don’t mind, I’d like to use this material in one of my Mens Matters radio shows?
      I was watching a brief clip by Dr. Richard Dawkins where he highlighted some of the crazy things that feminists claim. One of them referred to Isaac Newton’s Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica as a rape manual.

      • I asked Glen before the weekend for a little more detail as to the agenda.
        The items listed seem a bit woolly. Also is it £40 per day or for the whole

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s