Fathers Battling Injustice

Ottawa Citizen - How the matriarchy oppresses men

Posted By: r-man
Date: Friday, 31 March 2000, at 10:10 a.m.

This made page A14 of the March 31, 2000 print version, but is absent from the online version(?). There's a feedback form available at http://www.ottawacitizen.com/frontpage.html. Neil Reynolds is the Citizen's editor (nreynolds@thecitizen.southam.ca). It's important that we show support for this kind of journalism.

Enjoy.

r.

How the matriarchy oppresses men

by John Robson, Senior Writer and Deputy Editiorial Pages Editor, Ottawa Citizen

Monday's Citizen noted chirpily that "According to Health Canada statistics, suicide in younger men has risen dramatically over the past 40 years, but there has been little if any research to find out why." There's a big surprise. The story went on to note that "About 80 percent of suicides in Canada each year are male." Yawn.

If women were killing themselves in huge and growing numbers, there'd be an outcry. The Minister responsible for the Status of Women would vow an action plan. So where's the Minister responsible for the Status of Men? Oh, that's right. There isn't one. The matriarchy doesn't care about men.

You doubt me? Well, what do you suppose would happen if men were living five-and-a-half years longer than women and accounting for two-thirds of all hospital stays and visits to doctors? There'd be a clamour for more spending on women's health, led by the National Action Committee on the Status of Women. But since women live five-and-a-half years longer than men and account for two-thirds of those medical services ... [sic] there's a clamour for more spending on women's health. And the National Action Committee on the Status of Men? Oh, that's right. There isn't one.

It's not just the welfare state (although women get on average $2.56 out of the CPP for every dollar they put in, men only $1.36). It's systemic. Men are twice as likely as women to be victims of violent crime, and make up about 97 percent of federal prison inmates.

The real problem, as any gender analyst can tell you, is a hegemonic discourse that privileges certain points of view. Report that women are beaten and abused and the newspapers will run banner headlines no matter how absurd your numbers are. (Or invent a statistic about Super Bowl Sunday.)

Never mind the August 1993 Canadian Panel on Violence Against Women report that 98 percent of women have experienced sexual violence. Just look at StatsCan's claim three months later that it was 51 percent. Macleans sneered that "Predictably, some critics were quick to quibble with the numbers." Yes, Ian Hunter quibbled last year in the National Post that it counted not only an unsolicited goodnight kiss, but also disappointment at not getting one. As to female violence, "At the time it was decided that since violence against women was more prevalent, we would only keep track of that," said a StatsCan spokeswoman. How do you know it's more prevalent? Well, we did this survey ... [sic]

B.C. Minister of Women's Equality Sue Hammell wrote openly to the Post that "to say that women and men are equally violent with each other ignores the reality of power imbalances and gender inequality." It's hard to keep that in mind when you've just had your skull cracked by a frying pan, but do try to pay attention. And the hegemonic discourse rolls on. Jean Chretien can say "women work harder and talk less" than men and everyone chuckles. If he'd said men work harder and women gabble too much, all he'd be saying in public now is "Fore".

And the organizer of a women-only cancer fundraiser in Nanaimo cancelled a band found to harbour men, saying "What is the problem? Men have their functions - why can't we?" And what would those be? The Boy Socuts? No, it went co-ed. Unlike the Girl Scouts. Big Brothers? No, it went co-ed. Unlike Big Sisters. Sports? No. Girls can play on boys' teams, but not the reverse. Female reporters can walk in on naked male athletes, but not the reverse. (Oh, and in 1993 our Supreme Court ruled 7-0 that female prison guards can frisk male inmates and see them naked, but not the reverse.)

Change is unlikely, since education is so sytsemically biased. By now 21 percent of Canadian women age 20 to 29 have university degrees but only 16 percent of men. Women are now 55 percent of undergraduates, and at least half of masters', law and medical students. Boys, meanwhile, are a disease: 10 percent of boys in Alberta are on Ritalin, and about 80 per cent of those on such drugs in B.C. are male. By a remarkable coincidence, at SFU 79 percent of education students are women, as at UBC. (So are 80 per cent of Ontario's social workers.)

Since virtually all those school shooters were on such drugs, the government should forget gun manufacturers and sue educators. Instead, it's seeking women professors as role models, though in 1997, 99,616 women got university degrees and only 72,120 men, and nearly 40 per cent of new faculty in the 1990s were women. But hey, if men want role models, they can just look at the end of a rope. Suicide is now the leading cause of death among men aged 10 to 49.

True, women attempt suicide three times as often as men, but use less lethal methods and have one-ninth the success rate. They're trying to get noticed. As for men, they hardly get noticed even when they succeed.