“Just as there are no female Jack the Rippers, there are no female Mozarts,'' feminist professor and cultural critic Camille Paglia points out, showing her understanding of gender differences. Men also get a lot of “credit” from Jack the Ripper. And their Mozart (and hero)? There aren't that many.
A prime example of this was revealed in a recent article titled “Toxic Masculinity Saves Women's Lives.” It begins with this quote from columnist Mark Stein:
December 6th marks the 35th anniversary of the Montreal Massacre. That tragic day in 1989, when 14 female students at the École Polytechnique were murdered by a man known to posterity as Marc Lépine.
Currently, Canada lowers its flag on December 6th every year to commemorate this occasion. About what happened on that fateful day, Eric Atter, author of the aforementioned article, writes:
The most relevant and tragic aspect of this tragedy is that all the men in the classroom where the massacre occurred, professors and students alike, obeyed orders and left the room. They did not raise any objections or pushbacks, but simply resigned their female classmates and fellow humans to their fate.
Steyn elaborates on the above in his December 6 article, writing:
These “men” were standing in the hallway outside and did nothing when they heard the first gunshots. And when it was over and[Lepine]… walked out of the room and walked past them, they still didn't do anything. Whatever their other drawbacks, Canadian men don't suffer from too much testosterone.
Considering Canada's current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, many people would have no objection. (Prime Minister Trudeau has vowed to continue the pattern of low stance by raising a “feminist son.”) But there's more to the story.
No facts, wrong lessons
Stein reminded us that a generation ago he wrote, “I hate the annual commemoration of the Montreal Massacre.” What is his reason? First, “Marc Lépine” sounds like a pretty violent French-Canadian. That's also half true.
Stein notes that Lépine was born “Gamil Gharbi, the son of an Algerian Muslim who beat his wife, whose battered spouse told the court at a divorce hearing that her husband “completely despised women. “He testified,” he said.
However, this information is not remembered by the Canadian media. In fact, if you highlight it and dare to express double-plus unpleasant feelings towards Algerian or Muslim men, charges of hate speech may be imminent. However, the trend of demonizing men in general has not stopped. Stein also writes:
For women's groups, the Montreal Massacre is an atrocity that stains all men, and all men must admit their guilt. Marc Lépine represents the murderous misogyny that lurks within us all.
Of course, Stein and Utter argue that this is the wrong lesson. Never mind that men's intellectual efforts in science, medicine, etc. have saved the lives of billions of women (and men). Utter also points out:
Real men, steeped in their own “toxic masculinity”, will stand up for women and say “enough is enough!” About “trans women” in women's restrooms and locker rooms. And no real toxically masculine man would ignore the gang rape of innocent young girls being committed by “immigrants”.
There are still men with “heroic masculinity.” One example is the brave Daniel Penny, who helped subdue an unstable man who was threatening people on a New York City subway car. So, interestingly, testosterone levels in men have dropped by 30 percent over the past 30 years, but they still continue to be secreted.
broken contract
Now, it's understandable why Stein essentially indicted the men present at the Montreal Massacre for cowardice. I'm sure most, if not all, of those guys, now in their 50s and 60s, don't want that to be their best time yet. They may not even like to tell people they were there. But there's another side to this as well.
Garbi had a gun ready for use. This means today's critics say those schoolboys should have risked their lives for women. Maybe he should have taken the bullet for the woman.
Even though women/feminists have been ostensibly demanding equality in all aspects for 60 years.
Ah, the demand that men be chivalrous protectors has been made to Western men for generations. And yes, they generally endured it. The difference was that the code of chivalry was prevalent across the board. The message was:
“Yes, gentlemen, I as a man put you on a pedestal. I will protect you, and I will die for you if necessary.” Then there was balance.
“In return, I will gain more authority in society, because with greater responsibility comes more authority. (After all, we have families to feed.)
Of course, all of this is bye-bye. In fact, a few years ago, Canada even removed the words, “Love for true patriots, obey the orders of your sons” from the national anthem. Prime Minister Trudeau called it “another positive step towards gender equality” at the time. (Is it another thing to take bullets equally?)
yo-yo men
About 25 years ago, when I was working with children, I casually spoke to a 13-year-old boy about the duties of chivalry. Without missing a beat, he replied, referring to the girls: “They don't want that anymore.”
For decades, young people have grown up hearing, “Women can do anything a man can do, and maybe even more!”
“Anything that benefits boys and men is patriarchal tyranny.”
“Women must be allowed into your educational institutions (for example, military academies) and even on men's wrestling teams.”
“If you dare complain, you are a sexist, a misogynist, and an obstacle to a more equal world.”
Younger generations also now consider equality to be the most important value. Is it any wonder, then, that half of the code of chivalry has been poisonously dismissed, and the other half is falling by the wayside?
But again, under certain circumstances, many people still claim half responsibility for that code. This reality is comically depicted in the following meme.
The same goes for the video below.
So should men stand up and be men? It depends on who (and when) you ask. More than a generation ago, feminists in Sweden, Germany and Australia took up the cause of forcing men and boys to sit while urinating. Seriously. They argued that the typical way men tend to follow the call of nature symbolizes their “triumph of masculinity.”
Of course, efforts to tackle suppression will be more difficult than controlling how people use the bathroom. (Only for infants who need potty training)
But men should stand up for women. Men should sit in place of women. It's all a bit contradictory and confusing. Perhaps that's also why feminists at the Ecole Polytechnique in 1989 didn't have to worry about men “triumphing with masculinity.”
