MEN ARE GOOD, FATHERS ARE GREAT

                                         MEN ARE GREAT, FATHERS ARE GOOD


MEN ARE GOOD! How often do you hear that these days? How about FATHERS ARE GOOD. How often do you hear that these days? Probably not a lot, if we're honest. And when we do hear it, its usually spoken in an unconvincing patronizing manner and often in a tone suggesting "yeah, right."

In today's society women as a gender are repeatedly told over and over and over and over again that they're great, strong, brave, powerful, beautiful and indispensable. The media push to empower women isn't a recent thing. it's the continuation of a thing that has many decades behind it. Female self esteem must, in terms of contemporary thought, be constantly bolstered, apparently from birth to death. In feminist terms, absolutely no criticism of women is tolerated. Any criticism is strictly and immediately viewed as misogyny and sexism. The feelings and emotions of western women is considered sacrosanct, so much so that in all expression, western women can only feel empowered if they are firmly perched on that metaphorical pedestal. The gynocentric role of men, as feminist would have it, is that he must exist in exclusive deference to women by becoming and maintaining a metaphorical foundation, base and pillar of the metaphorical pedestal I've mentioned. His existence, as many of us have experienced, is not as an autonomous individual living for his own sake and benefit, but instead as a resource to be exploited by western women (and other elements of contemporary society.)  Practically from birth, a man is socialized to accept a type of psychological obligation towards women in which what defines his virtue is his collective participation as a support system for the pedestal on which western women are perched.

This dynamic extends to mothers, daughters, and any woman in general. And not only are men socialized to provide the living material for the multitude of pedestals on which entitled western women reside, in feminist terms, men must LIKE our role as support material. Any deviation from these obligations is thus described by feminists as the source of all societal problems. And they describe these societal problems with a selection of terminology that invariably genders problematic social issues wholly as that which is the fault of men. All solutions advocated by feminist, literally advocated, involves only men who have to change. But the change is always in one direction --- and the direction is always in the form of, yes, you guessed it, accepting deference to women  through further acceptance of a psychological obligation to become the material, which shapes the pedestal supporting western women.


The compulsory, "LIKING " part is essentially to keep western women's self esteem afloat. They must be constantly complimented, rewarded, and their vanity satisfied no matter what she does or doesn't do. If she's a mother, it must be assumed she's a great mother, and if she uncharacteristically feels one day that she may not be, it is the responsibility of men to furnish her with assurances that she's not only a GOOD mother but the BEST mother, even if clearly she's not. Whatever obvious faults and flaws western woman has, is to be downplayed, or rationalized completely out of existence. Any deviation suggests too much diminshment reducing the pedestal on which entitled western women demand they remain permanently perched.

Yet can contemporary western  man expect equal repricosity?

Any honest observation reveals the answer is no For decades western man has been fed a steady feminist diet of himself as the sum total of all that is wrong, evil, bad and unnecessary in the world. In fact we're so used to hearing  about how we're bad fathers, and evil men many men truly believe it and live in a cocoon of self loathing. When western contemporary man sees images of fathers on TV and in movies, any example of a GOOD father or GOOD husband or GOOD man is mostly the exception rather than the rule. How do we kn ow this, because when a positive image of a father is exhibited in media, most of us are genuinely surprised to see it. And you can only be surprised by something if you're not used to experiencing/seeing a particular thing that consistently exhibited in one format that appears predictably normal.

Take for instance several decades in which TV sitcoms featured almost without variation, the dumb, incompetent bumbling dad. It's bad enough that sitcoms are filled with immature, brain-dead manchildren, who are supposedly reflections of men and fathers in real life. but to compound matters, we now have many men who truly believe the worse about themselves and sometimes will  regurgitate to the mainstream media these aspects of male identity as though no other positive aspect is manifest. One incarnation of self-loathing men is in the form of male sitcom writers. Over and over again they fuel the feminist predisposition that men are innately childish, sexually confused, intellectually void, emotionally stunted and barely cognitive enough to figure out how to cross a street intersection without the saving grace of brilliant flawless, intellectually superior women whose saving grace is how much they tolerate our infantile nature.

Some feminist will say, they are opposed to the bumbling man  incompetent father trope that is frequently a feature of male gender in TV and movies. Yet I find it difficult to believe them. They externalize the negative portrayals to "patriarchy." (Another way of blaming men as a collective.) Despite the fact that it was feminists in academia and society that pushed the bad man, bad father paradigm into modern social consciousness. Well, it's not as if you see groups of mainstream feminists openly protesting against TV shows and movies on behalf of men with the same passion as they exhibit when seeking to destroy the careers and livelihoods of men who depict women as less than appealing in anything including motherhood. Want to test it? Give it some thought. How many feminist openly protested  the daytime talk show called "The Talk" which had a five minute segment praising Catherine Kieu and mocking the man whose penis she destroyed the same way they protested Don Imus for making an insensitive comment about an all female basketball team. Did the feminist openly call for the hosts to lose their jobs? Did the feminist take to mainstream media to spotlight the intolerable sexism practiced by the "feminist" hosts of "The Talk" Did they wage a sustained campaign to destroy the reputation and define the hosts, and its creators as misandrists for life?

No.

In fact, when it comes to sexism against men that hurts men, feminist default into the "Sexism doesn't harm men because the oppressor (men) cannot suffer the same as the oppressed (women).

So when you hear  or read about feminist who claim to disparage negative images of father in mainstream media, consider how they never seem to want the creators of those negative images to
suffer sustained public censure.

There should not be a sense that good fathers are the surprising exception to the rule when the inverse is true. Men and fathers should take the lead and declare over and over and over again our virtues as a gender. We should not be afraid of openly claiming our accomplishments and achievements in terms of what exemplifies the qualities of masculinity and male identity. We need to tell out boys they are special and as boys part of something unique and magnificent. Fathers need to be consistently praised, respected and vigorously defended. At every opportunity modern man need to say MEN ARE GOOD, FATHERS ARE GREAT! Especially to feminists. We should shout it defiantly and mean it with a level of sincerity that tolerates none of the feminist narratives expressing otherwise.