In one of today's posts by Price, The V-Day Project: Meet the Vagina Men, he engages in one of the semi-regular attacks on male feminists - they typically use the term "mangina," because, you know, they're witty. This post goes after a group of men - The V-Men - who oppose violence against women.
Here is a little of Price's editorial brilliance:
If anything, the V-men provide us with a portrait of a male feminist: a deeply wounded, self-destructive, dysfunctional and sometimes dangerous man. It is almost as though Michael Kimmel is deliberately surrounding himself with these types, and hard at work creating more by working to destroy families through support of exactly the kind of legal tools that enabled Mr. Matousek’s mother to remove his father’s protective influence from his and his sisters’ lives.I'm all for fathers being a part - a central part - of their children's lives (which is where Price goes in his next paragraph), having grown up without one for many years, I know the damage it does. Fathers should have the same rights as mothers as far as I am concerned.
We have to keep in mind that male feminists are often severely disturbed individuals who have a burning hatred for masculinity, and therefore a deep sense of shame and self-hatred for their own natures. It is no wonder that some of the followers of the men’s studies discipline have made the choice to utterly abnegate their masculinity through self-castration.
But to say that all men who support women having equal rights are severely disturbed is simply insane in my opinion. There are areas where men are at a disadvantage under the law and in the cultural code, but that does not necessitate hating on women's rights. We both need to be on equal footing before the law - and in our gender roles.
So what do you think?
Can men be feminists and not hate men, not be filled with shame for being men, and not be deeply disturbed?