Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/American Union of Men

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tally: I count 13 delete votes and 4 keep votes. I ignored troll/sockpuppet votes from User:Crevaner, User:Old Right, and User:Bigbadsteve. I did count User:QIM as a keep vote. I'll delete American Union of Men now. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:00, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] American Union of Men

See Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion#Masculist_Trinity. -- Solitude 07:06, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Delete: Very odd political argument, non-significant. Geogre 11:47, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Keep; article may need extensive work, but this is not a reason to delete. --Daniel C. Boyer 15:05, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete - this is more Tom Smith vanity nonsense - Tεxτurε 19:32, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Keep - Seems significant to me. -- Crevaner 23:25, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Vanity. RickK 00:08, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)
• KEEP, I don't think its vanity at all, just info. -- Old Right 15:57, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Even if the organization in question were notable, a reader of that article still comes out with no idea what it is that the organization does, if anything. Livajo 16:11, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • As a side note, it also seems that an article with this name has been deleted in the past. See here. Livajo 16:15, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• KEEP, I put the article up a few years ago as "info" and a few of us did some work on it then. I've been busy and didn't get back to it until a few days ago to do some more work on it. The organization was copyrighted in 1986 and has been in the Encyclopedia of Associations since 1991. It now hosts one of the largest discussion groups of men's issues on the net and has a respected international reputation for developing strategies, agendas and coalitions in the men's movement. The respected and newly successsful international movement "Father's 4 Justice" have utilized some of the products of our brain storming and we are associated with them. User:QIM
• KEEP - I am a masculist rights activist and writer from Melbourne, Australia. I have used Tom Smith's AUM as an important source of gender rights information and debate for some years. The attempt to delete information about it is probably the work of radical feminists and their fellow travelers, many of whom will use any means possible no matter how immoral and totalitarian to try and stifle debate about their outmoded beliefs which lamentably are practiced by many Western governments partly via sexist Womens' Departments funded to the tune of millions of dollars a year. In Canada, for instance, there is a govt-funded Women's department campaign for feminists to 'take control' of the internet. Recently the department was named in the Canadian Parliament for trying to make male-positive reporting illegal, monitor pro-male journalists and activists, and jail them. This is typical of tactics used worldwide, since logic and fact alone are not enough to allow the outdated and exaggerated lies of radical feminism to prosper. To give in to their demands by pulling Tom Smith's article would be the digital equivalent of book burning on the grounds of 'political incorrectness.' The fact that AUM expresses what are often presently minority points of view no more justifies censorship than would an article by an author expressing opinions common amongst his or her minority race or minority sexual preference. To do so would be discrimination, pure and simple.- Steven Stevenson Bigbadsteve
  • You're calling me a feminist? Please excuse me while I go provide some colleagues with their daily entertainment, haha. -- Solitude 12:03, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: User:Bigbadsteve has only recorded 2 edits so far, both to this discussion. See contribs. Rossami 03:47, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Google knows about Mr. Smith's organization, but offers no hint of him or it having any particular notability beyond aggressive self-promotion on the internet. According to the above, however, I am probably a tool of a vast international radical feminist conspiracy, so my vote should probably be ignored. RadicalSubversiv E 07:22, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Nonnotable vanity. ElBenevolente 09:13, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete in the interest of National Security(tm)--MaxMad 12:00, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable. Jallan 19:36, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Vanity, non-notable, pseudo-personal attack on women and feminism under the guise of empty, politically-motivated "criticism", aka propaganda. --Viriditas 02:14, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, Delete, Delete, Delete... sorry, but the feminists who control me have made it quite clear how I am to vote. func(talk) 01:26, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: agenda promo, personal promo. Wile E. Heresiarch 13:33, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• KEEP This article is currently thin but gives insights into an aspect of the debate on the role of men and women in society. If this is deleted where do you draw the line on other pressure and advocacy groups? JPF 10:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, this seems a sufficiently noteworthy topic and I don't believe that Wikipedia should succumb to such censorship. StuartH 12:47, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment. The line is drawn on notability. Positions put forward by advocacy groups should be given in articles about that position, where people would expect to find them, probably listing the more prominent groups supporting that position. A prominent advocacy group is likely to get its own article. Small advocacy groups themselves are not especially notable. Ideas are not being censored. But non-encyclopedic articles are dropped according to policy. Edge cases are mostly argued here on this forum. Generally articles that appear from their manner of presentation to be progaganda are dropped, whether feminist, masculinist, pro-Christian, anti-Christian, pro-Bush, anti-Bush and so forth. In theory, articles on minor organizations are dropped, no matter what their purpose. If you want to call it censorship, then Wikipedia does attempt to censor obviously POV articles and non-notable information. I presume American Union of Men also "censors" on its website, including only material that is generally relevant to its purposes. Most people voting here so far do not feel this article fits Wikipedia's purposes. Jallan 15:32, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. I note that during the voting period, none of the "keep" voters have improved the article. If the subject is encyclopedic and notable, surely there are some newspaper articles that would provide the basis for an acceptable article. The page seems to be no more than a self-promotion, poorly conceived, non-encyclopedic, non-salvageable. ---Rednblu 17:32, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm sorry that the vote has gone this way, but considering the group think of the times and the enormous power of feminism, it's a hopeful sign of Wikipedia's NPOV that my page got the "Keep" votes it did. Many thanks to those who voted to "Keep". User:QIM

Men's rights

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (November 2008)

This article or section has multiple issues. Please help improve the article or discuss these issues on the talk page. It needs additional references or sources for verification. Tagged since May 2007. It may contain original research or unverifiable claims. Tagged since August 2007.

The term men's rights refers to freedoms and entitlements of men and boys of all ages. These rights may or may not be institutionalized, ignored or suppressed by law, local custom, and behavior in a particular society. The term may also refer to an activist movement advancing these rights. Supporters of men's rights aim to promote the physical, economic and emotional well-being of all men and boys, viewing this as part of human rights, civil rights, or equal rights. They are particularly concerned with issues involving family life such as family law, child custody, paternity fraud, and domestic violence. There is no single unifying manifesto or organization which can claim to speak for the entire movement and the term is used in various ways.

Related areas of the men's movement include:

• Fathers' rights focus on the relationship between fathers and their children and in particular family law.
• Masculism provides a counterpart to feminism and argues against legal constructs, reforms, or entitlements which deny men equal rights under the law on the basis of gender; there are conservative "traditionalist", "liberal", and libertarian strands.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Men's rights movement

In the 2000s men and concerned women began to share their concerns on the Internet, often bringing forward unheard statistics or viewpoints. Its supporters are considered part of the Men's Movement, and often call themselves Men's Rights Activists, or MRAs. Father's rights and misuse of Domestic violence laws are areas central to the men's rights movement. Its concerns include health, education, employment, civil rights, legal equality and representation, and Constitutional rights.^[1][2] Many supporters are particularly concerned with the effect of Sexual Harassment^[3], Divorce^[4], Custody, Rape^[5] and Violence Against Women Act-type laws^[6], on men's rights and freedoms. It is argued that these laws cause violation of Constitutional rights such as the right to a fair trial and the right to due process.^[7]

Affirmative Action programmes, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 are also areas of prime concern. One group, S.P.A.R.C., argues that these policies have a far more discriminatory effect than is widely reported or acknowledged. ^[8]

Men's Rights Advocacy and Masculism also promote the concept of "defending male identity". Typically MRAs would subscribe to masculinity as strength, honor and honesty.^[9]

[edit] History

Prior to 1995 the men's movement was predominantly a disorganized movement that received little attention or recognition^{[citation needed]}. The American Coalition for Fathers and Children was founded in 1995 by activists such as Stuart A. Miller, and Dianna Thompson. ACFC founded the shared parenting movement and organized the largest protests in the history of the men's movement, the largest held in over 225 cities around the world on father's day, 2001 in the "Bridges for Children" campaign.^{[citation needed]}The Coalition of Free Men, commonly known as the National Coalition of Free Men (NCFM), was founded in 1977 and is the oldest active men's rights organization in existence. NCFM has chapters and members throughout the United States and in several countries. In 2008 the NCFM started doing business as the National Coalition for Men since people often struggled understanding the significance of the word "Free".^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Structure

Like most social movements, those concerned with men's rights comprise a wide variety of individuals and organizations, both united and divided in various ways on specific issues including the mistreatment of men in the media, the abortion debate, family law and false rape allegations^[10]. Some groups are formally organized or incorporated, while others are casual alliances or the work of a few individuals.^[7]

Although the vast majority of men's rights leaders and activists are men, there are many women, including those in significant positions within the movement. For example, Sue Price in the Australian Men's Rights Agency has been at the forefront of activism there. Naomi Penner was a women's rights activist in the 1960s who later helped to create the National Coalition of Free Men in America in 1981. B.N. Saraswati founded one of the earliest Men's right group in India. Significant books have highlighted a disparity in the feminist movement's active support for equality when seeking redress for women, but their lack of support for equality when men are disadvantaged.^[11][12]

Although most men's rights advocates live in western countries, from 2003 onwards men's rights groups began to emerge in countries such as Japan and India. It includes a heterogenous mix of atheistic to highly religious individuals as well as individuals from across the left, right, and center of the political spectrum.

[edit] Issues

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2007)

Within the larger context of human rights, men's rights advocates are concerned with many of the same general issues as proponents of women's rights, only with special attention and consideration to the less recognised role of men and boys.^[1][2] There are however radical Men's rights proponents who see Women's rights as the 'enemy' (and vice versa), rather than as allies in a fight against gender based discrimination of various kinds.^[13]

[edit] Conscription

Male-only military conscription : The risks to life and limb in male-only military conscription is not compensated and hence is alleged to be gender biased against males.^[14]

As Betty Friedan has argued, there have been attempts to put the draft on equal footing with regard to requiring the registration of both men and women^[15]. The Equal Right Amendment in the USA was not universally supported by either men or women, and was eventually defeated after Phyllis Schafly secured bi-partisan support for a campaign against the change on the basis that women would not be drafted into the army.^[16]

In 1981 in the United States, the case Rostker v. Goldberg alleged that the Military Selective Service Act violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment by requiring that men only and not also women register with the SSS. The Supreme Court eventually upheld the Act, stating that "the argument for registering women was based on considerations of equity, but Congress was entitled, in the exercise of its constitutional powers, to focus on the question of military need, rather than 'equity.'[1]"

A male only draft is considered by many to be unequal. In much feminist dialogue, a draft that requires only male registrants is considered to be rooted in benevolent or ambivalent sexism[2].

Current attitudes toward a draft show a change in women's ability to participate in the military. The most recent attempt to have the draft reinstated inside the United States, the Universal National Service Act, states that “young men and women ages 18-26 could be called to service."

While it might be considered by some a positive that women are kept from the front lines by not being required to register for the draft nor being allowed in front line combat, it can be argued as to whether or not that is a privilege.

[edit] Divorce

Members of the fathers' rights movement state that the outcome of divorce is overly one-sided, divorce is initiated by mothers in more than two-thirds of cases - especially when children are involved, and that divorce provides advantages for women, such as automatic custody of the children and financial benefits in the form of child support payments.^[17]

[edit] Alimony

The origins of alimony (a legal term that dates to the mid-17th century^[18]) can be traced back to the ecclesiastical courts in England^[19] Alimony laws vary by country and may not be applied in every divorce case. In some countries alimony is also available to men.

One legal precedent for male alimony in the United States was made in Orr v Orr,^[20] where the Supreme Court invalidated Alabama's statutes by which husbands, but not wives, were required to pay alimony upon divorce. This statute was considered a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

In the United States, the percentage of alimony recipients who were male rose from 2.4% in (1996-2001) to 3.6% in (2002-2006) and is expected to increase as more marriages feature a female primary earner.^[21] In 2005, wives earned more than their husbands in 25.5% of dual-income families, and 33% of all families where the woman worked.^[21]

[edit] Marriage strike

Marriage strike is the name given to the phenomenon of males refusing to marry for fear of unfair legislations [www.nomarriage.com] [3]^{[citation needed]} and financial ramifications of divorce for the male. Divorce has been described as 'slavery for men'.[4] The Rutgers report — though based on a small sample — found ten prevalent reasons for declining preference for marriage among males. The first three : They can get sex without marriage; they can enjoy "a wife" through cohabitation; and, they want to avoid divorce and its financial risks.

[edit] Education

In recent years, girls in the United States are performing much better than boys in the same age group, in most schools and colleges.^[22] In the United States, 57% of college students are women, and the number is growing.^[23] Also, a significant majority of primary school teachers in the United Kingdom are female. [5] Medical schools in the UK currently admit 2 females for each male. The trend is similar in other industrialized countries. Male rights authors argue that there is no meaningful action to address this in the USA, despite recognition and action to address issues in the UK since the early 1990s.^[24]

[edit] Employment

Employment law is another area of concern, with such problems as unequal treatment around parental leave, retirement age, and pension entitlements. They also assert sexual harassment policies are de facto directed against the male style of inappropriate sexual behavior in the workplace, while ignoring the female style of inappropriate behavior in the workplace.^[25] They express anguish towards the fact that a man telling a joke or simply referring to a co-worker by a nickname is grounds for dismissal or lawsuits.^[26] Spain's recent 40% requirement on boardroom members has come under harsh criticism from the movement, while a company with 100% female board members would be acceptable under Zapatero's new law.^{[citation needed][who?]}

[edit] False Rape Accusations

"According to much-cited feminist statistics, two percent of all reports are false.... According to a study conducted by Eugene Kanin of Purdue University, the correct figure may rise to the 40 percent range. Kanin examined 109 rape complaints registered in a Midwestern city from 1978 to 1987. Of these, 45 were ultimately classified by the police as 'false.' Also based on police records, Kanin determined that 50 percent of the rapes reported at two major universities were 'false.'" ^[27]

Several examples of both confirmed and possible false rape accusations exist in the media. See 2006 Duke University lacrosse case and Kobe Bryant sexual assault case. It is important to note that neither of the accuser's in these cases faced consequences for their accusations after the cases were dropped. In fact, one accuser plans to write a book and the other settled the case for an undisclosed amount of money after changing her story numerous times. In stark contrast lasting damage, including emotional hardship and the stigma of being accused of rape, was done to the accused. The media did not focus significant attention on this disparity in consequences for the false accuser and the accused.

In the South Australian Parliament, one MP stated "tongue-in-cheek" that men would need signed consent from women to protect themselves from false rape allegations, should a proposed law come into effect. She described the proposed law as making men who are accused of rape guilty until proven innocent, and stated, "Having to have a consensual sex contract is ridiculous but having these laws that don't protect men's rights are also ridiculous."^[28]

[edit] Family

Family law is an area of deep concern among men's rights groups. Members of the fathers' rights movement state that the legal system discriminates against fathers regarding issues related to child custody.^[29] These issues vary from state to state and country to country.

[edit] Health

Health disparity concerns of men's rights movements include:

• The disparity in the spending on men and women in the healthcare system. As another example, in the United Kingdom significantly more money is spent on breast cancer research than prostate cancer research.^[30] 40,000 cases of breast cancer were detected in the UK in 2000 and claimed the lives of 13,000 women in 2002. In 2000, about 27,200 cases of prostate cancer were detected and claimed nearly 10,000 lives in 2002 in the UK. Funding for prostate cancer, however, is only about a fourth of breast cancer. Awareness for breast cancer is very prevalent in society today, with October being Breast Cancer Awareness Month in the United States. There is no proportionate funding for male cancer awareness or treatment.

• Increasing suicide rate amongst young men, four times higher than amongst young women in the United Kingdom[6]; (73% of all suicide deaths in the United States are white males.^[31])

• Workplace deaths and injuries occurs at a higher rate for men in the United Kingdom^[32][33]

• Male circumcision is the removal of the foreskin of the penis. In the United States and Israel, circumcision has been traditionally performed at birth. Some men's rights advocates believe that men have a right to make their own decisions regarding such procedures. Some also believe that circumcision, like conscription, is an example of the way in which many cultures accept violence against males. [7]

[edit] Media portrayal

Another issue of concern is the anti-male bias in the media. Men's rights activists argue that men are portrayed unfairly on television, radio and in newspapers and magazines. They argue that not only does the media not pay serious attention to men's rights issues but that men are portrayed in a negative light, particularly in advertising.^[34] The lack of concern over men's issues^[35] such as higher rates of suicide by men, decline in academic achievement among boys, and a willingness of the press to print feminist statistics distorting the size of the "wage gap"^[36][37] has led to the term "Lace Curtain" to describe feminist control over publishing and media representation of gender issues.^[38]

[edit] Refugees

In Australian immigration policy a distinction is regularly made between women and children (often treated erroneously as equivalent to "family groups") and single men. The details are subject to current debate and recently failed legislation (August 2006) in the Australian Parliament. But for example in one recent case, the Minister for Immigration, Senator Amanda Vanstone, determined as follows concerning Papuan asylum seekers: "The single men on the boat would be sent to an immigration detention centre, but families would not be split up and would be housed in facilities in the community".^[39] The discriminatory treatment of single women (routinely assumed to be members of some family) and single men evident in such a practice is rarely examined in the Australian media.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Reproductive rights

The term Male abortion was coined by Melanie McCulley, a South Carolina attorney, in her 1998 article, "The Male Abortion: The Putative Father's Right to Terminate His Interests in and Obligations to the Unborn Child," which was published in The Journal of Law and Policy.^[40] The theory is that when an unwed female becomes pregnant she has the option of abortion, adoption, or parenthood; and argues, in the context of legally recognized gender equality, that in the earliest stages of pregnancy the father should have the right to relinquish all future parental rights and financial responsibility – leaving the informed mother with the same three options.

In 2006, the National Center for Men brought a case in the US, Dubay v. Wells (dubbed by some Roe v. Wade for men), that argued that in the event of an unplanned pregnancy, when an unmarried woman informs a man that she is pregnant by him, he should have an opportunity to give up all paternity rights and responsibilities. Supporters argue that this would allow the woman time to make an informed decision and give men the same reproductive rights as women.^[41][42] In its dismissal of the case, the U.S. Court of Appeals (Sixth Circuit) stated that "the Fourteenth Amendment does not deny to [the] State the power to treat different classes of persons in different ways."^[43]

There are also those that include the father's reproductive right to protect a pregnancy from abortion. They argue that father's should be given equal power over an abortion decision to protect their offspring.^[44]

Critics argue that the concept of a "financial abortion" presents a problem in and of itself. Some men and women argue the availability of abortion should not relieve men of equal financial responsibility to a child they helped conceive. Additionally, opponents say, in a country such as the U.S. where government assistance is often railed against--see welfare state--the question remains: how does a society take care to ensure children do not descend into poverty? And who should be on the line for the financial support of these children?[8]

However, "after a woman has a baby, in Michigan and elsewhere, she has the right to give up that baby for adoption. If she exercises that right, she cuts off her own financial responsibility to the child, along with other parental rights and responsibilities. A man, by contrast, may not relinquish his financial responsibility for an unwanted child unless the biological mother shares his wish to give up the child for adoption."[9]

[edit] Sentencing

A University of Georgia study found substantial disparity in criminal sentencing men and women received "after controlling for extensive criminological, demographic, and socioeconomic variables". The study found that "blacks and males are ... less likely to get no prison term when that option is available; less likely to receive downward departures [from the guidelines]; and more likely to receive upward adjustments and, conditioned on having a downward departure, receive smaller reductions than whites and females." ^[45]

[edit] Social security and retirement

In some societies there is legislated discrimination against males in provision of social security. In Australia, for example, a woman over 50 years of age may obtain a Widow Allowance^[46] approximately equal to a pension if, after turning 40, she becomes widowed, divorced, or merely separated from a spouse (who may be a de facto spouse). She must have "no recent workforce experience", but she can easily qualify for this well after the loss of her partner by going through a period of underemployment. There is no similar allowance for men. In Australia and the UK^[47], some of these discriminatory arrangements (including also women's earlier qualification for Age Pension, etc.) are being legally phased out. The policy of "age 65 for men, age 60 for women" remains in place in most Western countries, however.

[edit] Violence Laws

Members of the fathers' rights movement state that feminist organizations invoke the specter of domestic violence as propaganda directed against fathers and fathers' rights groups.^[48]

Male Rights protagonists point to domestic violence studies based on the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS), which suggest that men and women act violently toward their partners in about equal percentages.^[49][50] They argue that men comprise a "significant portion" of the victims of domestic violence,^[51] and they call for more services to be provided for male victims of domestic violence.^[50]

Advocates cite government statistics that show that in 15% to 38% of the cases of intimate partner violence the victim is male.^{[citation needed]} Furthermore, according to a 2000 CDC/Justice study, "Approximately 23% of the men who had lived with a man as a couple reported being raped, physically assaulted, and/or stalked by a male cohabitant, while 7.4% of the men who had married or lived with a woman as a couple reported such violence by a wife or female cohabitant." [10] Researchers argue that the real numbers for violence against men are likely to be higher, since male victims may be less likely to report abuse than female victims due to social stigmatization ^[52]. They also assert that the percentage of shelters for battered men should make up a respective percentage of all shelters. The National Coalition of Free Men has sued several women's shelters with the goal of allowing battered men and their children to be admitted and to receive assistance from shelters (see Violence against men). Many women's shelters will assist male victims of domestic abuse but do not house men, instead offering hotel vouchers, counseling, case management, legal services and other support services.

Opponents accuse men's right enthusiasts of ignoring and/or 'defending' male violence. Michael Flood and Michael Kimmel argue that studies based on the Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS) are unreliable and that men's rights advocates ignore this when they cite statistics based on CTS studies.^[53]. In response to this, it has been pointed out that the CTS is the most widely agreed and reliable method of investigating domestic violence because it asks both men and women the same questions, and asks them to scale responses in an equitable way. Following revision of the CTS scale - in response to criticism about ignoring the influence of former (rather than current) partners - further studies based on the CTS 2 scale continue to show that women initiate violence at least as often as men, and perpetrate serious violence as often as men.^[54][55]. In a study specifically examining the behaviour of former partners, Dutton & Winstead (2006) found that women initiate revenge behaviours more frequently than men.^[56]. Dr Ridley-Duff's review of Kimmel's and Fiebert's work triggered the advancement of an alternative theory of male violence rooted in socialisation of men to accept responsibility for high risk situations.^[57]

While the media awareness group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting acknowledges that violence against men by women takes place, it also suggests that a misreading of the Straus/Gelles studies accounts for the difference in numbers observed by some men's rights advocates and those from the United States Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics.^[58]

The Violence Against Women Act in America is being vehemently opposed by rights groups for discriminating against men. Similarly, laws such as 498a in India, outlawing cruelty to women by their husband or his relatives, are being fought by groups such as Save Indian Family Foundation.

[edit] Wages

Women and men often make different choices: in college major, in hours and years worked, and in what jobs to take.

Critics of the discrimination theory, including men's rights activists, argue that these "free choice" elements are the source of virtually all of the gender earnings gap. According to these critics, women often choose to prioritize social and family life before their careers, and will therefore avoid jobs that require long or inflexible hours.

U.S. Census data from 2001 reveals childless women who have never married earn 117 percent of their childless male counterparts, when the comparison controls for education, hours worked and age. Furthermore, 2004 Census Bureau data shows that "a part-time working woman makes $1.10 for every dollar made by her male counterpart."^[59] In contrast, economists' research conducted in the 1990s found that, even after accounting for parenthood status, education, job title, and other factors, there was still a significant income disparity in men's favor (Blau and Kahn 1997, Wood et al 1993).

Wages are not the only factor in determining spending power. 1984 U.S. Census Bureau data indicates "women who are heads of households have a net worth that is 141 percent of the net worth of men who are heads of households."^[60]

[edit] See also

• Antifeminism
• Fathers 4 Justice
• Fathers' rights movement
• Human rights
• International Men's Day (19 November: Trinidad & Tobago, Jamaica, India, Australia)
• Male abortion
• Masculinity
• Masculism
• Misandry
• Paternal rights and abortion
• Parental leave
• Paternity fraud
• Pro-feminism
• Feminism
• Radical Feminism
• Save Indian Family
• Shared parenting

[edit] Significant writers

• Michael Green
• Warren Farrell
• Christina Hoff Sommers
• Glenn Sacks
• Herb Goldberg

[edit] References

[edit] Bibliography

• Save the Males by Richard Doyle, 2006, ISBN 978-1411696334
• The Myth of Male Power by Warren Farrell, 1993.
• Women Can’t Hear what Men Don’t Say: The myths that divide couples and poison love by Warren Farrell, 1999.
• The War against Boys: How misguided feminism is harming our young men by Christina Hoff-Sommers, 2000.
• Who Stole Feminism: How women have betrayed women by Christina Hoff-Sommers, 1994.
• Spreading Misandry: The teaching of contempt for men in popular culture by Paul Nathanson and Katherine K. Young, 2001.
• The Hazards of Being Male: Surviving the Myth of Masculine Privilege by Herb Goldberg, 1987.
• Refusing to be a Man: Essays on Sex and Justice by John Stoltenberg, 1989.
• Iron John: A Book About Men by Robert Bly, 1990.
• Stiffed: The Betrayal of the American Man by Susan Faludi, 1999.
• Men Freeing Men: Exploding the myth of the traditional male by Francis Baumli, 1985.
• Flood, Michael: Backlash: Angry men's movements in: Rossi, Staceay E.: The Battle and Backlash rage on. 2004, XLibris Corp., ISBN 1-4134-5934-X, S. 261-287 [11]
• Flood, Michael: Men's movements in: XY magazine, vol. 6. 1996 [12]

[edit] External links

Bibliographic

• The Men's Bibliography, a comprehensive bibliography of writing on men, masculinities, gender and sexualities, listing over 16,700 works. (mainly from a constructionist perspective)
• Boyhood Studies, features a 2200+ bibliography of young masculinities.

Other

• The ManKind Project of Chicago, supporting men in leading meaningful lives of integrity, accountability, responsibility, and emotional intelligence
• XYonline, on men and gender issues. Includes over 180 articles on men, gender, masculinity and sexuality, and categorised links to 560 websites.
• NIMH Web Pages on Men and Depression, talks about men and their depression and how to get help.
• Article entitled "Wounded Masculinity: Parsifal and The Fisher King Wound" The symbolism of the story as it relates to the Wounded Masculinity of Men by Richard Sanderson M.Ed., B.A.
• A unique stance on men's rights, talks about a perspective men can take which will foster acceptance, rather than retaliation.