As we've previously discussed, false charges are a major problem in divorce and custody cases. Men and Women Against Discrimination, the West Virginia affiliate of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, has been making progress on the issue. Both houses of the WV legislature just passed a bill that "slaps criminal charges on those who falsely report child abuse or neglect in order to influence a custody case."

The article is excerpted below.

Bill would criminalize false abuse charges
By Michael C. Lewis
The Journal, 3/10/08

MARTINSBURG—Nine times, one aggrieved father says he fought to protect his name and his relationship with his daughters after he was accused of child abuse in a custody dispute.

The man, whose name we will not use to protect the identity of his daughters, said he is pleased that West Virginia legislators last week passed a bill that slaps criminal charges on those who falsely report child abuse or neglect in order to influence a custody case.

On Thursday, state senators passed House Bill 3065, after the measure met overwhelming approval in the House of Delegates last week. The bill charges those who makes a false abuse report with a $1,000 fine, or forces the plaintiff to pay for the defendant’s legal fees. The misdemeanor crime would also carry a punishment of up to 60 hours of community service.

The man, previously a resident of Huntington who now lives in Burlington, Ohio, said in 2003 and 2004, he was accused of breaking and entering, assault and sexual and physical abuse against his two daughters. Faced with serving at least one year in jail and losing custody of his daughters, the man fought the charges.

“They were never proven to be false. They were said to be ‘unsubstantiated.’ They found me not guilty. But I know I’m innocent. I want the satisfaction of knowing that on my record it was a lie, but I’ll never get that,” said the man, who said he spent thousands of dollars in legal fees to prove his innocence. “People have no idea how much time and money this wastes in the system.”

In West Virginia, from March 2007 to March 2008, West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources Child Protective Services received and did paperwork on 37,165 incidents of child abuse. From those, 26,904 cases were further investigated, said John Law, spokesperson for WVDHHR. Only 3,998 cases were found to be substantiated, or less than 20 percent of all investigated incidents.

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

False Rape Charge: 'Police usually do not lay charges in such cases and do not identify the women who make up the stories'

Another false rape claim, another admission that police rarely file charges over such claims. Perhaps the best part is this--most of the story is dedicated not to the men who could have been targeted, or the men who have been the victims of false rape claims, or even to the waste of police time, money and resources. Nope. Most of the story is dedicated to how difficult it is for rape victims to come forward--as if we were discussing a real rape.

Also, nice quotes from a feminist professor:

"Cheryl Regehr, a professor of social work at the University of Toronto, said that only makes sense, because such fabrications are almost always 'a call for help in many cases.'

"While she said false rape charges are 'exceedingly rare,' they usually draw a disproportionate amount of publicity.

"'They become highly sensationalized and highly publicized, because they're so rare,' said Prof. Regehr. 'And usually they're pretty lurid stories.'

"But the effect they can have on real victims of sexual assault can be chilling, she said. 'Since the dawn of time there's been this urban myth about how women make up rapes,' she said.

"'Every time a case like this comes out, it feeds that … and it really dissuades the real victims from disclosing.'"

As for false rape charges being "exceedingly rare," that is not the case, as I explained in my column U. of Maryland right to deny protesters a forum to publicly name alleged rapists (Baltimore Sun, 10/15/07). And if they are rare, we certainly seem to get a lot of them--I've posted God knows how many on this blog.

The story is below--thanks to Jeremy Swanson.

Etobicoke Rape A Lie, Police Say Chill Effect; Woman claimed she was abducted at gunpoint
Chris Wattie, National Post
Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Police spent hours this weekend searching for two men who hijacked a woman's car in her Etobicoke neighbourhood, sexually assaulted her and drove away, dumping her in front of her home.

The woman told police she was abducted at gunpoint, forced into a dark green van, driven to an unknown location and sexually assaulted.

Her car was found abandoned at Woodbine Raceway, but officers were unable to find any sign of the two suspects.

They soon concluded the unidentified woman made up the whole story.

Read the full article here.

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

More Lazy Husbands/Complaining Wives

We're accustomed to listening to wives complain about their husbands who golf. Apparently this lazy, good-for-nothing hubby can't even muster the energy to go to the golf course so his wife can be mad at him about it.

From Dana Summers' comic Bound and Gagged.

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

John Travolta Has Some Good Advice on Women & Sex

In radio there's a saying about questionable content--"When in doubt, leave it out." I advise my 15-year-old son the same thing about questionable sexual situations with girls. (Actually, I tell him that I don't want him to have sex at all, but I acknowledge that nothing I say there is going to stop him on that.)

Anyway, a "questionable situation" includes:

1) You don't have a condom (danger: pregnancy, disease)

2) She's been drinking (you don't want her to regret it in the morning and then be accused of a phony "date rape")

3) She's emotionally unstable (same dangers as 1 and 2 combined)

4) Gang bang (disease, and the good chance that you'll be accused of rape. It's also rather disgusting.)

In every case, my advice is "leave it out." John Travolta, in the movie Pulp Fiction, puts this more eloquently than I ever could.

The situation is this: Travolta (playing Vincent Vega) is the bodyguard/henchman for Marsellus Wallace, a minor league crime boss. Wallace's wife/girlfriend is Uma Thurman ("Mia," pictured above).

Wallace leaves town on business and orders Travolta to watch over Thurman. Travolta takes Thurman out for the evening and they end up dancing and having a great time. Travolta and Thurman come home and begin dancing again (pictured to the side).

Travolta goes to the restroom while Thurman turns on some music and dances alone. Travolta stares into the mirror telling himself he'd better leave Mia alone and not cross his boss. He gives himself some advice at 2:30 in this video clip that every single guy needs to heed sometimes. I played it for my son the other day, and hopefully he understood its wisdom.

To watch the video clip, click here.

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

'The lonely, divorced carpenter thought he was going to Brazil to make wedding plans'

"[Parts of the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005 (IMBRA)] sound draconian. For example, the IMBRA requires American men who wish to correspond with foreign women through private for-profit matchmaking agencies to first provide those businesses with their police records and other personal information to be turned over to the women.

"Corresponding with a foreigner is legal. Marrying a foreigner is legal. Immigrating spouses and their husbands go through rigorous and lengthy screening before visas are issued. Mail-order brides in the U.S. are protected by laws against violence.

"Now American men who wish to pursue a legal activity must release their government files to a foreign business and foreign individuals...Contacting a woman for romantic purposes -- internationally or domestically -- is not a crime. Those who do so are not a priori criminals who must prove themselves innocent before being allowed an email exchange."--Fox News columnist Wendy McElroy, founder of www.iFeminists.com  

As usual, if some men like it or it suits men, it must be wrong. Such is the case with brokered international dating. As Wendy McElroy notes, one can debate the desirability of international brokered marriages, but it's these men's personal prerogative to pursue international relationships if they wish. The same goes, of course, for American women interested in international relationships. It's wrong for the government to violate these men's civil rights simply because they're an easy group to target for negative stereotypes and scare tactics.

IMBRA was allegedly passed to prevent foreign women from coming to the US and being abused by their American husbands. That was greatly overblown, but in that vein, the 2006 article about Raymond Merrill below is interesting. To the extent that violence in international dating relationships exists, it probably exists to some degree on either end. But somehow I don't think IMBRA's opponents will be citing Merrill's story...

Dating Scam Ends in Murder
Brazilian Fiancée Charged in Robbery, Slaying of California Man
By KIM CURTIS and STAN LEHMAN, AP
10/31/06

SAN BRUNO, Calif. (Oct. 31) - The lonely, divorced carpenter thought he was going to Brazil to make wedding plans.

Instead, he was drugged and held captive for six days at his fiancée's home while she and another man emptied his bank accounts, according to Brazilian authorities. Then they drove the 56-year-old victim to a vacant lot, where they strangled him with copper wire, doused his body with fuel, and set it on fire, investigators say.

Authorities found Raymond Merrill's charred body in April.

Now, the woman he believed was his betrothed is under arrest, along with a man suspected of helping to kill him.

"He would talk to me about ideal relationships and pure love," said Merrill's best friend, Bill Rauch. "With age doesn't necessarily come wisdom. He was used to doing things his way and, in the end, it did him in."

For months, his family knew nothing of his horrifying end. It was only after a bungled robbery in Brazil that investigators even learned of Merrill's fate.

Merrill met Regina Filomena Rachid (pictured together above) last year through an online dating service. At the time, he was lonely and depressed, having been dumped by a Las Vegas woman for whom he had bought expensive gifts, according to Merrill's best friend.

Merrill and Rachid exchanged dozens of calls, e-mails and photographs, often enlisting Rachid's 18-year-old daughter as a translator. Rachid was 41, from an upper-middle-class family that was in the real estate business.

"I thought, `This is going a little fast,' but I didn't want to sound critical," said Merrill's sister, Marcia Sanchez Loebick.

The warning signs were obvious to Merrill's friend of nearly 30 years. Merrill gave Rachid $10,000 to start a skin care clinic and bought her a $20,000 sport utility vehicle. She complained it wasn't a fancier, more expensive model, Rauch said.

"This from a man who was tightfisted," Rauch said. "Ray and I would go out and I'd have to buy all the beers. All of a sudden, he's lavishing all these gifts and money on a relationship he's not even close to consummating.

"I said, `Ray, these are so many red flags. I can't believe you're pursuing this,"' Rauch said. "He would just slough it off. He'd say, `She's just a passionate and emotional Latina.' What do you say to a guy like that?"

Merrill visited Rachid twice in Sao Jose dos Campos, an industrial city about 60 miles from Sao Paulo. Both times he stayed a week longer than planned. Both times he notified Rauch, who then drove to Merrill's home in San Bruno to water the plants and collect the mail. On the third trip, Merrill again overstayed his return, but this time he didn't call Rauch to let him know.

Loebick, who lives in Cleveland, said she sent her brother repeated e-mails warning him that their 86-year-old father was dying, but got no response. She and Rauch's best friend called police in California to report him missing.

What happened to Merrill was more awful than either could have imagined...

To read more and to discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

Parental Alienation Story, Bill

Background: In April, I called your attention to a new, damaging Parental Alienation bill in the California legislature in my co-authored column AB 612 Will Make It Harder to Protect Children from Parental Alienation (Riverside Press-Enterprise, 4/2/07).

Policy consultant Michael Robinson of the California Alliance for Families and Children helped lead successful opposition to AB 612, and the bill died last summer.

In January, I was contacted by Dan Abendschein of the San Gabriel Valley Newspaper Group here in Los Angeles regarding parents who have been alienated from their children after a divorce or separation. In this blog post I asked readers who fit the description to email me so I could pass it on to Dan, and many of you responded with stories of your experiences.

Dan's article on Parental Alienation came out a few days ago, and is linked and excerpted below.

To write a Letter to the Editor regarding the story, click here.

SGVN owns several papers in the greater Los Angeles area.

Bill addresses theory used in custody cases
By Dan Abendschein, Staff Writer
SGVN, 03/09/2008

A state bill that would set guidelines for child custody cases has highlighted a nearly 20-year-old dispute over a theory used by psychological evaluators.

The bill, AB 612, which failed to pass into law in 2007, targeted the controversial theory, called Parental Alienation Syndrome. The syndrome describes behavior where one parent turns a child against the other, convincing the child the parent has treated him or her badly, even when they have not.

Dr. Philip Stahl, a California evaluator and member of the state's Association of Family & Conciliation Courts, says evaluators are split in their beliefs about whether children can be alienated.

"You have evaluators who really don't understand alienation, and people who want to apply it in every case," said Stahl.

Evaluators are not the only ones with differing views on the issue: there are stalwart advocates who believe that hundreds of people have suffered because of parental alienation, and those who believe just as many have suffered from false charges of the syndrome.

Women's group advocates say the theory has been used by courts to place children with abusive fathers, and strip mothers of their custodial rights.

"It's junk science used to target women and take their custody rights away," said Karen Anderson, a spokesperson for the California Protective Parent's Association. "It's a problem in courts all over the country."

Julia Cotton, a mother from Los Angeles County, said that a custody evaluation in her divorce case accused her of alienation and led to her young daughter being placed with her husband full time.

"Her recommendation led to me only getting my daughter for supervised visits," said Cotton. "When I saw her she acted traumatized and seemed totally out of it."
Cotton said she suspected that her ex-husband was abusing her daughter in some way, but didn't know what to do about it.

"I knew that the more I tried to do something about it, the more I would be accused of alienation," she said.

While woman's groups tout Cotton's story as a typical one throughout California, father's rights groups have a polar-opposite view of custody courts and alienation.

"Ninety-eight percent of the time that you see abuse charges that have not been verified by police, those allegations are coached," said J. Michael Kelly, a Los Angeles County lawyer, and member of the United Fathers of California law group.

One father from the San Gabriel Valley in the middle of a custody battle who asked to be called Norm said his two teenage daughters say they don't want to have anything to do with him, and he can't figure out why.

"They call me a violent man, they say I am aggravating," said Norm. "I had a bad custody evaluator and now I barely see them."

Norm said he believes his wife is genuinely convinced that he does not treat their kids well.

"I don't think she is trying to be vindictive," he said. "I just think in her mind, there is some deeper mental problem that is convincing her I'd be bad for the kids."

The text of the 2007 version of AB 612 was drafted by the CPPA and explicitly banned the use of Parental Alienation Syndrome, or just the term alienation from use in evaluations. It also aimed to minimize the use of custody evaluations.

The family law section of the state bar and several psychologists groups banded together to oppose the bill.

The 2008 version of the bill is much vaguer than its predecessor, stating evaluators will be forced to conform to "standards generally accepted by the medical, psychiatric, legal, and psychological communities." The bill does not specifically mention Parental Alienation Syndrome.

"The thinking was that if you mentioned specific syndromes or disorders, people who would use them in evaluations would just start calling them by a different name," said Ira Ruskin, D-Redwood City, who introduced the bill.

But, Karen Anderson, who helped draft the original bill, said the new version, labeled AB 2587, is not strong enough.

Read the full article here.

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

A Telling Comic from Roy Schneider

A telling comic from Roy Schneider's “The Humble Stumble” series. The comic is about a single dad raising his daughter.

Thanks to Michael, a reader, for sending it

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

Hugo Schwyzer: Erectile Dysfunction Makes Men Less 'Insufferable'

"Men would be far more insufferable than they otherwise are trained to be if the penis was, in fact, a muscle entirely under their control."

I guess if it's humiliating to men, it must be good. Feminist professor/blogger Hugo Schwyzer recently wrote a blog post "in praise of ED." Schwyzer writes:

"In my Humanities class on the 'body' yesterday, I noted in passing that there was much to be said for erectile dysfunction. I have always maintained that men would be far more insufferable than they otherwise are trained to be if the penis was, in fact, a muscle entirely under their control....ED literally softens the penis; it can also figuratively soften a man by forcing him to rethink his allegiance to a cruel and unattainable standard."

In light of this, it kind of reminds me of an odd interaction I had with Hugo when he was on my radio show a couple years ago. We were discussing something related to sex--I can't remember what--and I said something like "Of course, Hugo, men's perspectives change as they get older. Like me, I'm sure you're not quite the stallion you used to be."

Hugo is a very nice guy, and it's hard to get him angry over anything, but he was not happy over this remark. I was surprised, and didn't quite know what to make of it. Any amateur psychologists out there have any ideas?

The Schwyzer post is here.

[Late note: Hugo has written a response to this on his blog—to read it, see Humiliation and becoming human: how erectile dysfunction made me a better man, husband, and person

He makes some valid points and, as is typical for him, goes on and on and on about them. Hugo is a thoughtful guy, and in many ways the world would be a better place if every man were like him. We’d probably all be better in touch with our emotions, and things would be more peaceful.

On the other hand, we’d probably still be living in caves and mud huts…]

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

Woman Who Flung Her Boys off Overpass Got Custody of Her Kids Despite Conviction for Attacking Rival Woman with a Knife

"In 2004, CPS investigators found that the boys were unkempt and wore dirty clothes. Officials provided Ms. Busby with services including day care, food, clothing, help with utilities, and parenting skills training.

"The following year, investigators received a report of a domestic violence incident between Ms. Busby and her then-boyfriend. She was arrested, and the two boys were placed in foster care.

"They remained there for several months until a judge returned them to Ms. Busby...

"Her criminal history includes charges of assault, trespassing and burglary.

"In 2002, Ms. Busby was sentenced to a year in the county jail after finding another woman in her boyfriend's home, attacking her with a knife, and stealing her purse.

"In 2005, she was accused of scratching a Dallas County detention officer. That case is pending."

A knife attack, arrests for domestic violence, assault and burglary--nice lady. One can see why CPS would give her her kids.

I wonder where the kids' dad(s) are? Did they abandon their kids? Or were they driven away by this violent, dangerous, vicious lunatic? If anybody hears anything, please let me know.

The article quoted above is the Dallas Morning News' Family was on a rocky road before mother flung boys, self from I-30 overpass (3/13/08). Note the way the reporter describes the would-be murderer as "troubled"--a word generally not applied to men who murder children.

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

And of Course, Now Ashley Dupre, Spitzer's High-End Hooker, Is a Victim

"She left a broken home on the Jersey Shore at 17 and came to New York City to work the nightclubs as a rhythm and blues singer. Now, at 22, she is the unwitting, and as yet unseen, star of the seamy drama that is the downfall of Gov. Eliot Spitzer of New York...

"'I just don’t want to be thought of as a monster,' the woman said as she told the tiniest tidbits of her story. Born Ashley Youmans but now known as Ashley Alexandra Dupre, she spoke softly and with good humor as she added with significant understatement:

 “'This has been a very difficult time. It is complicated.'

"Reached Thursday morning by telephone, Kyle Youmans, Ms. Dupre’s brother, said she is holding up fine, but is stunned by all the media attention.

"'She’s a strong girl,' he said. 'She’ll make it through fine'... "Ms. Dupre said on by telephone Tuesday night that she was worried about how she would pay her rent since the man she was living with 'walked out on me' after she discovered he had fathered two children...She owns a company, created in 2005, called Pasche New York, which her lawyer said was an entertainment business designed to further her singing career...

"She left 'a broken family' at age 17, having been abused, according to the MySpace page, and has used drugs, 'been broke and homeless.'

"In the affidavit, the woman known by the Emperors Club as Kristen is described as 'an American, petite, very pretty brunette, 5 feet 5 inches, and 105 pounds.' She apparently was booked at about $1,000-an-hour, placing her in the middle of the seven-diamond scale by which Emperors prostitutes commanded up to $4,300 an hour.

"[Her mother] Ms. Capalbo said that she was 'shell-shocked' when her daughter called mid-last week and told her she had been working as an escort and was now in trouble with the law. She said she was not sure Ms. Dupre realized who Mr. Spitzer was when he was her client.  

"'She is a very bright girl who can handle someone like the governor,' Ms. Capalbo said in a telephone interview Wednesday. 'But she also is a 22-year-old not a 32-year-old or a 42-year-old and she obviously got involved in something much larger than her.'

"In the New York Times' For an Aspiring Singer, a Harsher Spotlight (3/13/08), Ashley Dupre (pictured), Spitzer's high-end hooker is, of course, a victim. How someone who gets paid $1,000 an hour at their job is a "victim" in that job is unclear to me.

I think laws against prostitution are counterproductive because they often place low-end/street hookers in the position to be exploited by pimps, madams, johns, and police. But that isn't Dupre.

Dupre makes various vague claims to victimhood because of her family situation. I'm sure as we learn more it will all turn out to be dad's fault, and who knows, maybe it is.

She also claims she has no money, which seems odd for such a high-earner.

Poor thing. If she needs money, perhaps she can sell that giant rock on her finger...

To discuss this issue on my blog, click here.

A New Feature on My Blog--'The Dissident Feminist'

"I don’t quite get why so many men (the men who comment on this blog, for instance) get so angry at, and feel so oppressed by, feminism. I grew up around feminists, I’m married to a feminist. I live in one of America’s epicenters of feminism, and it never seems to me as though feminists, as a group, exert much power in our society...

"Where are these awful encounters with feminists, or feminism, happening?"--Dan Oppenheimer  

As many of you know, I would very much like to see more direct interaction between women's advocates and men's advocates. There seems to be little civil debate between the two, particularly on the Internet.

When His Side with Glenn Sacks ran in a syndicated format, I often had feminist guests on the show in an effort to promote civil debate. Some of those guests included: Martha Burk, Helen Grieco [head of California NOW], Gloria Allred, Lynn Gold-Bikin [feminist family law attorney], Michael Kimmel, child support advocate Debbie Kline, Amanda Marcotte, and Donnalee Sarda of the anti-father advocacy group Justice for Children.

Someday men and women are going to have to come together on gender issues. With this in mind, I've decided to launch "The Dissident Feminist" on my blog.

The purpose of "The Dissident Feminist" is to give feminists a chance to speak directly to my audience, and my audience to debate the issues with them in a civil manner. The first two contributors to this are male feminist bloggers Dan Oppenheimer and Jamie Berger of the blog Masculinity and its Discontents.

I am also open to other feminists--female or male--to provide or participate in "The Dissident Feminist" postings. If you are interested in submitting something for this purpose, please email me at glenn@glennsacks.com.

Why did I choose Dan and Jamie? Dan wrote a blog post several months ago in which he labeled me a "misogynist." As I've done with many feminist critics, I asked for evidence of this. The surprise? In all my years of doing this, Dan was the only one who ever gave me a substantive answer. He was wrong, but he made an honest, credible effort at it, something no other feminist who I've challenged on this has ever done. As such, he earned my respect. I met Jamie because he is Dan's blog partner

I know that many of you will have opinions on whether I should have agreed to publish "The Dissident Feminist" here. This is a fair question, but I will ask that you wait on it. After a few postings, I will have a thread which allows readers to express their views on whether they like this idea. It makes little sense to discuss that question now, since "The Dissident Feminist" has not had a chance to post. For now, please make sure to keep your comments confined to the content of "The Dissident Feminist."

Below is Dan and Jamie's introduction.

The Feminist Dissident: An Introduction

When Jamie and I started our blog, “Masculinity and it's Discontents,” about a year ago, there were two kinds of arguments that I hoped to have. One was with men (and women, but mostly men) who were against feminism.  The other was with other feminists. I wanted to offer a feminist perspective on masculinity that wasn’t driven, as I believe a lot of such views are driven, by the perceived demands of feminist ideology or movement-building. I wanted to err on the side of sympathy for how hard it can be, for a man, to live up to all the demands that his spouse, his kids, his friends, his politics, and his culture place on him. Marriage, parenthood, friendship, romance, career—these are hard things. Getting by is hard. And when you throw in a barrage of ideas about being a man, and about relating to women, coming at you at high velocity from feminists, anti-feminists, MRAs, conservatives, radicals, etc., it gets harder.  

Then there’s pop culture, which sometimes tells us to be all McDreamy—sensitive and ready for commitment and emotionally vulnerable—and at other times to be all Russell Crowe, Gladiator-ish and stoic and emotionally inaccessible (not to mention when it’s telling us to be a pimp-playa hybrid of James Bond and Jay-Z).  So my reaction to the general tone and content of a lot of feminist writing, which focuses a lot of attention on the wrongs done to women by men and by the patriarchy, isn’t that it’s wrong, but that it’s not intended to speak sympathetically to men. It tends to be oppositional, for the reasons that all movement-based activity tends that way. I think that this orientation makes sense (for the most part) from the perspective of building and sustaining a movement. But there are consequences to an oppositional perspective, one of which is that the people you’re opposing, as well as the people who fear that you’re opposing them, tend to feel attacked and maligned. And reading feminist bloggers can sometimes leave me with the sense that feminists think that all of women’s complaints against men are justified and that all of men’s complaints against women are expressions of sexism.

As one of the commenters on this blog wrote to me, recently, "it is unfortunate IMO that you still associate with the term “feminist.” … If you are someone who advocates equal rights and responsibilities for women, then, by today's standards, you are no feminist. By today's standards, any male 'feminist' is required, in my opinion, to hate themselves for being a guilty part of the oppressive “patriarchy” (the bedrock concept of feminism of any stripe). You seem like a reasonable, thoughtful person, and I hope you will not take offense at my comment. I am truly interested in why you see value in continuing to identify with the “feminist” label, when it is now so laden with negativity. Wouldn't you be better off, and perhaps be more accurate, if you simply described yourself as 'non-misogynist'?" 

I get this (I don’t agree, but I understand). I understand how one could, from reading feminist blogs or ‘zines or magazines or books, arrive at these conclusions, even though it’s not my experience of feminism. I rarely come away from reading feminists feeling like they want me to hate myself, or anything like that. Then again, I come from the same world that they do. I went to the same kinds of fancy schools, and have lived in the same kinds of liberal communities, that produce the most visible feminists. We speak the same language, and there are all sorts of things I can take for granted about feminists—the biggest being that they’re just regular folks—that maybe isn’t so obvious to people who come from different backgrounds.

I don’t feel attacked by feminism, but I have a sense of how, for men who don’t speak the language in the way I do, feminist rhetoric might seem vindictive and man-hating.

At the same time, though, I don’t quite get why so many men (the men who comment on this blog, for instance) get so angry at and feel so oppressed by feminism. I grew up around feminists, I’m married to a feminist. I live in one of America’s epicenters of feminism, and it never seems to me as though feminists, as a group, exert much power in our society. It seems even less like the hardcore feminists I know are walking around trying to use feminist rhetoric to exert power