10/16/2014 Jonathan Taylor

Bigoted board members at Sydney University block formation of men’s health group

Surprised? I’m not. Here’s the news (my comments are interspersed):

For the first time in over a decade, the Board of the University of Sydney Union (USU) has rejected an application for a new student society.

Good heavens, has it really been over ten years? What extreme actions was this group engaging in? What incorrigible views were they supporting? Were they advocating genocide, perhaps? Perhaps the mutilation of infants? Perhaps the mass clubbing of baby seals?

The Brotherhood, Recreation and Outreach Society (BROSoc), held its Inaugural General Meeting in early September. During the meeting, BROSoc elected an executive and developed a constitution as part of its attempt to join the USU’s Clubs and Societies (C&S) program.

BROSoc’s constitution states that the society’s main aim is to provide a safe space for men on campus and address mental health issues specific to men, through the establishment of a Men’s Shed.

So…what’s the problem? Men are 80% of suicides and are often victims of intimate partner violence. And that deserves to be shut down?

Kate Bullen, Women’s Portfolio holder and Board Director, took a similar line, stating that BROSoc was ‘clearly not about breaking down gender roles’, and would be potentially exclusionary towards women.

Unfortunately for Kate Bullen’s position, this “clear evidence” regarding it being “not about breaking down gender roles” is not presented to the public. Perhaps it’s the kind of evidence that we just need to try really hard to see. You know, like when we look up at the stars and see figures from Greek mythology.

Also, the board’s argument that it is “exclusionary toward women” is a farce, and unlike Kate Bullen I actually do have clear evidence for my claims. Sydney University has several “women’s spaces.” One of them is quite literally called Women’s Space. Another is a women’s research group, and another is a women’s college.

But that’s not all: when a women’s domestic violence and a women’s homeless aid service (which, among other services, were unrelated to the university) closed in the city, the board decided that they needed to somehow help these women-only services stay afloat. From their website:

In recent weeks, the Board has been contemplating the values we will hold throughout our 2014-2015 term. Given the constitutional commitment of the USU to welfare, particular attention was paid to valuing justice, safety and inclusivity.

In March, tender packages for homelessness services were released for inner Sydney, with only $1.1 million specified for wom*n experiencing domestic and family violence. The overall reduction of $6 million for Sydney, with the view to redistributing it across the State, leaves no specific funding for services catering to wom*n who are ‘homeless or at risk of homelessness, who have experienced childhood sexual assault, abuse or neglect, mental health and/or drug and alcohol issues, or for women leaving custody’, SOS Women’s Services reports. For wom*n fleeing domestic violence, discrimination or hardship, these services are of vital assistance.

And fuck men who commit suicide, right?

So let me get this straight: these “values of inclusivity” are what, in the minds of these board members, compel them to support women-only services that aren’t even related to the university, and to close down services for men that actually are.

Right.

Let’s be real here: these people have no values when it comes to equality or inclusivity. Values are only values when we apply them to everyone consistently. When we do not, they are not values but prejudices. And that is an accurate reflection of the character of these administrators.

Sydney University rallying to support women-only services that aren't even related to the university, while closing down men's services that are. All in the name of "inclusivity."

Sydney University rallying to support women-only services that aren’t even related to the university, while closing down men’s services that are. All in the name of “inclusivity.”

These administrators were spouting feminist rhetoric and ideals the entire time too. Could this be further evidence of, as we are so often told, how “Feminism is working on men’s issues”?

I’m reminded of people who complain that men’s advocates never do anything. Actually, we do quite a bit. Unfortunately, a lot of us get kicked in the teeth when we make good-faith efforts to actually help people who are, quite literally, dying.

“Coincidentally,” it is often the very same gang of ideologues who stop us from doing anything helpful who then turn around and complain that we aren’t doing anything. It’s like breaking someone’s legs and then blaming them because they can’t walk.

So let this be Exhibit A as to why we feminism has to be scrapped and thrown into the dustbin of history for any meaningful change for men and boys to be made. It’s a supremacist movement, pure and simple. Men’s advocates can actually say that both men and women have issues of importance, but these people can’t.

Also, at the risk of belaboring the completely obvious, let’s remember that these anti-male bigots aren’t on the margins of society. On the contrary, they are a strong institutional presence. In other words, this is Exhibit #19768B as to why, whenever a feminist tells you that the bad feminists are on the margins of the movement and society in general, that nothing could be further from the truth.

Jonathan Taylor
Follow me

Jonathan Taylor

Jonathan is Title IX For All's founder, editor, web designer, and database developer. Hailing from Texas, he makes a mean red beans n' rice and is always interested to learn new things.
Jonathan Taylor
Follow me
 
Tagged: , ,

About the Author

Jonathan Taylor Jonathan is Title IX For All's founder, editor, web designer, and database developer. Hailing from Texas, he makes a mean red beans n' rice and is always interested to learn new things.

Comments (9)

  1. One thing that is universal and that is the bigoted and misandric attitudes of these self righteous hypocrites. Is there any way that such a men’s group can operate outside or as a ‘covert’ fringe group? Such a rebel status could attract a fair bit of support both in and out of the university.

     
  2. Miles

    [This post is one of several by this user which contained nothing but a link. It was removed by this website’s administrator]

     
    • Yeah, that link doesn’t have anything to do with this topic. Or anything to do with educational equity for men and boys, or men’s human rights. And neither do your other posts, which are nothing but a link to RoK.

      This site is not a link farm to non-MHRA websites. Your future comments will be premoderated.

       
  3. Emelio Lizardo

    “Values are only values when we apply them to everyone consistently. When we do not, they are not values but prejudices.”

    I describe this aspect of Feminism as “Asymmetric Sexism”.

     
  4. Emelio Lizardo

    “In other words, this is Exhibit #19768B as to why, whenever a feminist tells you that the bad feminists are on the margins of the movement and society in general, that nothing could be further from the truth.”

    Similar to ‘good’ Nazis or ‘good’ Stalinists,

     
  5. This is so ridiculous! And hypocritical. Either you have no gender-specifics groups, or you have groups representing both genders. This woman is clearly not logical. Or compassionate. Who wouldn’t want a group to help anyone with mental health issues???? And, like women who prefer talking to women, I imagine men would prefer to share with only other men.

     
    • I think there should be women and men like you on these boards i.e. people who have real compassion for others and who are not morally compromised by bigotry and hypocracy.

       
  6. I run a men’s mental health support group in the UK called MEN HEAL (@menhealuk / http://menheal.org.uk) I find this news article shocking.

    Let me know if I can help in any way. I’d be willing to sign something on behalf of this other men’s group, signed by the founder of MEN HEAL (me), if it helped at all.

    Just let me know.

    Thanks
    Mike

     
  7. Joe Joe

    “Queer Portfolio holder and USU Board Director Liam Carrigan argued that
    allowing the formation of BROSoc could cause “significant damage” to the
    queer community, especially amongst trans and genderqueer members.”

    http://www.altmedia.net.au/sydney-university-board-blocks-mens-society/98435

    I’ll bet this held more weight than anything else in the deliberations. Gay men and transgenders are extremely threatened by traditional masculinity and they have a huge voice right now. Even Obama is pushing the GLBT agenda and withholding funding from 3rd world countries that don’t play rainbow ball.

    The odd thing is that nothing in BROSoc’s application or stated mission implied anything about traditional masculinity. Sounds like GLBT got their collective panties in a bunch and pushed their agenda.

     

Comments are closed.