Stop the alpha/beta, strong/weak man no*sense. This prevents assessing people on equally sound values based on good character and personality that unilaterally apply to both men and women. The so-called ‘high value’ assessment (10% of men) that certain men apply to themselves and to establish some sort of male hierarchy is an example of not only very poor values but prejudice amongst men who apply the alpha/beta, superior/inferior assessment. A general assessment of men’s equality to women, no exceptions, is a must, otherwise men will never have an equal value to women or be defined in their own right compared to women. It’s self-evident that many men h*te men as do women who only seek men to e*ploit them at ‘the finish line’. Otherwise, this 10% condition wouldn’t exist.
Assessing men in any way as to be worthy of women is a blatant form of m*sandry expressed by women and accommodated by many men. To cater to this mindset is to further promote m*sandry in our society. The materialistic (slave owner) assessment placed on human life (men) didn’t exist in the past except amongst a very small minority of women who were highly disrespected by the majority. This societal condition only reflects the poor values and characterizations of the present.
Men and women in the past, as a common standard, got married just out of high school when neither “had a pot to p** in”–a popular expression commonly used to describe the effect. To discount human lives in such a manner is an expression of s*x bigotry and discrimination against half the human population. It’s little different from racial d*scrimination that in the past plagued our society, except this is against a larger segment of the population. It’s ironic to hear men, especially bl*ck men, using the same terms applied to men that were used in the past to des*gnate bla*ks i*ferior to w*ites.
Indeed, men need to be considered equal to each other before they can be considered equal to women. Why is this ethical statement somehow disputable by some? Who, other than those with ulterior motives, would have a problem with this ethical standard? Let’s make it happen without thinking up more ways (excuses) to avoid the equal regard for men or worse, trying to ‘justify’ preventing it.
Alan Millard continues to be a prominent men’s equality advocate since the early ’80s. He began writing his first book, Equality: A Man’s Claim, in the Spring of 1983. He has been thereafter continually affiliated with the major men’s rights organizations and has contributed many articles, radio, and some television broadcasts. His work includes research conducted through his graduate and doctoral coursework and knowledge acquired through his independent studies and colleague associations as a university professor. He heads the group Men’s Equality on Facebook. He is the author of three books addressing men’s equality concerns. His most recent book, A Flaw From Within: How Women’s Higher Status Defies Equal Justice, Violates Men, and Destroys Society, is available through Amazon.
Discover more from NEWSOFX
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
