The War on Male Students

Editor’s NoteThis article has been reprinted here with permission from Johnathan Taylor, founder of A Voice For Male Students (AVFMS). AVFMS is an excellent resource for concerned parents and college students that are (un)aware of the persecution facing young men and boys in a Western educational system. This excellent article covers the high points of the crises men face in education, and there are references available for anyone willing to dig. -VZ


America’s colleges and universities are, in theory, indispensable institutions in the development of critical minds and the furthering of individual rights, honest inquiry, and the core values of liberty, legal equality, and dignity. Instead, they often are the enemies of those qualities and pursuits, denying students and faculty their voices, their fundamental rights, and even their individual humanity.

– Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, Mission & Background statement

First, a brief note about war

I would like to preface this page with the disclaimer that I do not think the rhetoric of war is appropriate in all situations concerning men’s issues. “War” is a strong term, and while I do believe it should be used boldly and unrepentantly (where warranted), I also believe it should be used with discretion.

It also bears mention that what society normally and narrowly conceptualizes as “war” might discourage people from properly classifying such phenomena when such a term is appropriate. Wars are fought in a variety of ways. Sometimes they are fought by overt aggression and characterized by grand displays of power. At other times they are fought by subtle policies of attrition, invented and enforced behind closed doors.

Phrases like “The Cold War” were created for this purpose: to shore up our limited definitions of broad-scale conflict, and to help the public come to terms with a war that was indisputably present, nontraditional though its methods were.

There are a great many inequities men and boys face in academia that have become deeply entrenched in the last few decades. I divide them into three main areas: educational attainmentinstitutional bias, and rights and protections. While this site sometimes deals with each issue in isolation, it would be dishonest for me to pretend as though these problems were created in a vacuum or randomly fell out of the sky.

And while I do place great value upon educating society out of maladaptive policies and attitudes (which we must always continue to do), it would also be dishonest for me to pretend as though everyone – including those who stand to lose from the institutionalization of more equitable practices – are amenable to reason. This especially includes those who have sold themselves to money, established ideology, and politics.

That is why, among other functions, part of this site’s mission is to promote the equal human rights of men and boys in education by “thoughtfully, tactically, and aggressively foster a culture of accountability toward those who display and promote institutional bias against men and boys.” It is also why this site recommends and supports, when appropriate, provocative tactics and direct action (source: AVFMS Mission and Values).

I will now illustrate some of the dynamics of the present conflict as they relate to each of the three main areas of educational equity described earlier. These illustrations are not intended to be holistically representative of the problem, but should serve as a modest introduction.

Educational Attainment & Well-Being

Also: see main page regarding this topic.

Consider these data on college graduation rates:

Four Graduation Rates, Degrees, Associates, Bachelors, Masters, Doctorate, by Sex and Percentage, United States (new version)

Notice in the graphs above that these disparities in educational attainment are not new at all; on the contrary, they have existed for decades and grown to chasmic proportions. The only thing that is new is the willingness of a principled few to create a conversation about them.

Thomas Newkirk, author of the book Why Boys Fail, also authored the article “Stop avoiding the issue of failing boys.” In this article he reminds us that students in the United States “rank at the bottom of the developed world” in terms of college graduation rates, and that “Hardly a month goes by without another major foundation or education advocacy group reminding us of the peril our country faces if we don’t send more students to college.” He then says:

Interestingly, however, there’s something all these groups studiously avoid talking about. These U.S. education numbers look bad primarily because the schools are failing boys…the gender angle never gets mentioned.Popular, well-thought-out solutions, which include strengthening the high school curriculum, building better after-school programs and making college more affordable, skirt the obvious solution of reaching out to failing boys specifically…those omissions are striking, given that boosting the number of men earning college degrees should be the low-hanging-fruit remedy. Why the silence?

– Thomas Newkirk

Indeed, why the silence.

Whether through tuition or taxes, we pay rather comfortable salaries to administrators with such titles as “President of Diversity,” “President of Student Success,” “President of Student Engagement,” “Diversity Coordinator,” and so forth, along with all their attendant vice-presidents, co-presidents, Title IX Coordinators, etc. – not to mention the Department of Education – to be the watchdogs for broadening trends of inequity. In essence, it is their job to know, and we pay them well with the expectation that they should.

During the three decades following 1978, when women began graduating college at greater rates than men, when faculty and administrators have sponsored programs, practices, studies, and reforms on gender equity, it has virtually always been for the benefit of women and girls. This has been the case even when female students were flourishing (1990s onward) while the problems distinctively afflicting male students – underperformance, suicide, emotional disturbances, boy-averse curricula and educational environments, lack of positive male role-models, learning and behavioral disorders, misdiagnosis and overmedication, and so forth – were becoming deeply entrenched.

Even today, this late into the game, if you visit the Department of Education’s page on grants and programs for gender equity, it will list only programs, grants, and initiatives for women and girls (see more here and here and here). Absolutely none are listed for men and boys.

If the disparities in educational attainment were new, if they were small, if they were not attended by a wide array of afflictions distinctive to male students, and if there was no evidence of institutional bias against men and boys in education, we might reasonably conclude that some leeway in academia failing to address these problems is understandable.

But when the problem of educational underattainment is attended by a wide variety of other problems distinctively affecting boys, when these problems persist not just for years but decades, when the inequities deepen from a trench to a chasm, and when they have been coupled by over thirty years of radio silence from our educational institutions, there comes a time when it is no longer reasonable to conclude that well-intentioned people are making honest mistakes.

As stated earlier, we pay people to know these things and work toward creating a conversation about institutional inequity. And they have done so, for everyone except men and boys. If this is the first time you have seen this data, consider asking why you are hearing it first from me. Why aren’t our topmost educational institutions sounding the alarm? Why aren’t you hearing it from them?

Which brings us to the next section.

Institutional Bias

Also: see main page regarding this topic.

Our educational institutions are quick to embrace new ideas and worldviews that become socially or politically fashionable. Unfortunately, one of the worldviews the academic community began to widely adopt in the late 20th century was misandry – prejudice and hatred against men and boys – although they did not recognize it as such at the time, let alone call it that.

In the 1970s and 1980s, a new culture emerged in our educational institutions. This culture divided men and women into separate and antagonistic political classes, and perverted the movement for gender equity into a zero-sum game in which acceptable faculty, administrators, and some students must only advocate for one “side” – that side being women and girls. Equality no longer meant creating a balance, and no longer would it be permissible to say that both sexes have issues; according to fashionable politics, women alone had collective needs, and men and boys only “needed” to be taken down a peg.

In 2006, the front page of Newsweek magazine read “The Boy Crisis: at Every Level of Education they are Falling Behind. What to do?” In response, Dr. Sandra J. Anderson of Ohio State University, had this to say:

Boys in a ‘crisis’? in my grandmother’s day, only men could vote. When I was a girl, only boys could play sports. In the Roman Catholic Church, only men can be priests. In certain societies today and throughout history, girls can’t attend school, and women can’t work or show their faces in public. In China, girl babies are discarded because boys are favored.

In America, glass ceilings block females from access to power, money and leadership. On playgrounds, a common taunt among boys falls along these lines: ‘You cry/act/talk/throw like a girl.’ So for the fraction of a nanosecond in human history that boys are perceived to be on the short end of the stick compared with girls, you call this a ‘crisis’? C’mon, guys. You take a turn at second-class status for once.

– Professor Sandra J. Anderson, Ohio State University

Consider what would happen if the situation were reversed and girls were falling rapidly behind, and a professor in higher education had said this:

Girls in a ‘crisis’? In my grandfather’s day (and still today), only men were drafted into war. In his day, when the Titanic went down, the crew called for “women and children first” to be saved while men were left to die. Before child labor laws were passed, countless boys were subject to heavy manual labor that often resulted in their injury and death. Prior to the 1900s, husbands were often punished for the crimes wives committed. Newborn boys all around the world are genitally mutilated as part of a religious “right.”In certain societies, men cannot be stay-at-home fathers. In America, men are and have always been overrepresented at the bottom of society, and are the majority sex among the homeless (85%), prison inmates (93%), workforce injuries and deaths (93%), suicides (80%), and die 5-10 years earlier depending on their race and more often from every major disease. So for the fraction of a nanosecond in human history that girls are perceived to be on the short end of the stick compared with boys, you call this a ‘crisis’? C’mon girls, you take a turn at second-class status for once.

Men at bottom

What you have just witnessed is one of the many denials, rationalizations, deflections, self-serving reinterpretations, and blatantly misandric statements that many in the academic community employ to dehumanize men and boys – and by extension male students as a group. As I have demonstratedelsewhere, and as is alluded to in the picture above, men and boys have always been overrepresented at both the top and the bottom of society (whereas women are more clustered in the middle), and both sexes have been historically limited and empowered, and privileged and disadvantaged – each in different ways.

We should not use men’s overrepresentation at the top of society as a means to dismiss the educational needs of men and boys any more than we should use men’s overrepresentation at the bottom of society to reflexively dismiss the educational needs of women and girls. In other words, as is said in this site’s mission and values statement, “gender equality is not a zero-sum game; the mere existence of issues or needs for one sex does not automatically invalidate the existence of issues and needs of the other.” But unfortunately, this is not what many in academia believe.

It has never been a one-sided state of affairs, and men and boys – and male students by extension – are hardly deserving of the “payback” that seems to be so widely accepted in society, but perhaps most distinctively in the culture of our educational institutions. There is no reason to suspect that Dr. Anderson has never heard of the male-only military draft, the circumstances surrounding why child labor laws were drafted, or what happened when the Titanic went down. There is no reason to suspect Dr. Anderson thinks the carpeted, air-conditioned offices where she works in comfort every day magically fell out of the sky, or were built by anyone other than lower-class men expending the sweat and blood that Dr. Anderson takes for granted.

But even if it were the case that most men historically lived lives of genuine ease while women fought in their wars, worked and died in coalmines, went down with the ship, paid all of men’s expenses, and were punished for all the crimes men committed, wouldn’t it be better for both sexes in the long run for those concerned with women’s issues to rise above the cycle of hatred rather than perpetuate it? Wouldn’t it be better than waiting until a problem builds up to disastrous proportions?

Dr. Anderson’s apathy toward men and boys – indeed, her denial of their humanity – is not a result of her ignorance of the widespread suffering and sacrifices of men and boys. No, it is not because she does not know; it is because she does not care. Educating her will do nothing to help her adopt a more egalitarian position or develop empathy toward men and boys; she has already made up her mind, and is set in her ways.

And since she holds a very powerful position, she is effectively standing in the way of progress.

Here is a statement by Catherine Comins, Assistant Dean of Students at Vassar College, regarding two young men who were falsely accused of rape on campus:

They have a lot of pain, but it is not a pain that I would necessarily have spared them. I think it ideally initiates a process of self-exploration. ‘How do I see women?’ ‘If I didn’t violate her, could I have?’ ‘Do I have the potential to do to her what they say I did?’ Those are good questions.

– Catherine Comins, former assistant dean of students, Vassar College

Imagine if a man – especially a male assistant dean of students who oversees student affairs – had acknowledged that female students who were raped experienced a great deal of pain, but declared that it is not a pain that he would necessarily have spared them. How much longer would he have been employed in his position? Male professors and administrators have incited outrage and firestorms of protestors, and have been forced to apologize, or have been fired, for saying much less.

But when Catherine Comins made her statement, there was no outrage. There was no apology. There was nothing. It was one of the many anti-male statements that the culture of academia just passed over, as if nothing unexpected had happened. And again, it is not as though Ms. Comins does not see that her male students are experiencing a great deal of pain. It is not because she does not know. It is because she does not care. No amount of education, no amount of facts, and no degree of asking nicely will change her mind; she is a bigot, and bigots – being “true believers” – are not amenable to facts or the humanity of others.

Although Dr. Anderson and Catherine Comins are addressing two different issues – educational attainment on the one hand, and rights and protections involving false accusations of sexual misconduct on the other – what is consistent between the two is a zero-sum approach to gender issues that denies the humanity of men and boys as a group. In Men’s Movement circles, we call this misandry: prejudice against men and boys.

Unfortunately, Dr. Anderson and Catherine Comins are not alone in their beliefs. Academia is simply filled with people just like them.

Rights and Protections

Also: see main page regarding this topic.

Hand-in-hand with the deepening culture of misandry has come the erosion of the rights and protections of male students, especially freedom of expression and due process for those who are charged with sexual misconduct. This is especially true concerning sexual assault, which all public colleges and universities are now required to adjudicate.

Many people question whether academic institutions should be in the business of adjudicating felony offenses when they clearly lack the investigative power to do so effectively. But more disturbing than the prospect of incompetent bureaucrats adjudicating serious crimes is the systemic lack of substantial due process and procedural protections that are now afforded those wrongly accused, as well as the vague, broad, and sometimes discriminatory definitions of sexual assault that many institutions adopt, which go far beyond the legal definitions of sexual assault. A brief list of them is provided in the Summary of Issues page.

As prejudiced worldviews are premised upon ignorance and lies, suppression of dissent is necessary to maintain the establishment of such a worldview. Thus along with a deepening academic culture of misandry has emerged an atmosphere of censorship and intolerance. When students put up posters at Arizona State University to form a men’s issues student group, their posters were ripped down.

At a Canadian university, when student Sarah Santhosh attempted to create a men’s issues group on campus, the Ryerson Student Union quickly rewrote the rules on student organizations to prohibit the formation of any men’s issues student groups that did not make women’s issues central to their activities or that acknowledge the concept of misandry, effectively shutting down her ability to form a men’s issues group.

At the University of Toronto, protesters pulled fire alarms, barricaded doors, screamed, stomped, shouted, used noise-enhancing devices, and banged on walls right outside the lecture hall in order to prevent Drs. Paul Nathanson and Kathryn Young from speaking on men’s issues. Campus administrators and campus police, when they are not themselves actively taking part in violating the free speech rights of their students (see “The Penis Monologues”), often transform into spineless invertebrates and look the other way when students and faculty violate their rights to expression. See the truth for yourself:


Our academic institutions have in many areas become bastions of deliberate inequity, willful prejudice, and self-righteous intolerance. Ideas like equality and tolerance of diversity are now just words many say, rather than values they actually believe in.

As I have said elsewhere, the cause of educational equity for men and boys cannot be just an academic movement because the barriers to widespread institutional change are not primarily academic, but cultural and political. Solving boys’ academic problems requires far more than just a change in education policy. It also requires a simultaneous transformation of the moral fabric of the academic culture.

And the reality is that many people do not want that kind of change. Many careers are dependent upon the status quo. Many people are simply too far gone to change. They will not, as poet Dylan Thomas would say, “go gently into that good night.” They will put it off, ignore it, set up stumbling blocks in front of it, lie about it, attempt to defund it, physically assault it, and so forth.

As with all wars, there will be risks and sacrifices. That is the unfortunate yet inescapable nature of war itself. Websites like this one, among others, exist to mitigate these risks by providing important news, commentary, resources, and advice based upon experience and long observation. There once was a time when men and boys in academia were truly alone.

But thankfully, that is no longer the case.


SGA Spring Block Party

KSUM will be at the SGA Spring Block Party on the Campus Green this Thursday, March 27th, starting at 10 AM, with a camcorder at the ready. The timing is wonderful because the next meeting is on March 28th.

We will educate passerby on the lies and hatred spread by gynocentrism and misandry, and crowbar open unexplored avenues for discussions and local activism. We will also be discussing the ideas behind the emerging anti-feminist movement, so ruffled feathers are to be expected considering that KSU is at least 60% female. If you are interested in the complete story on gender issues and about issues on your campus, stop by our table and chat with us. We will happily show you the problems faced by men and boys, complete with numbers. We will also spell out specific steps towards practical, reasonable solutions that are respectful to the rights of everyone.

If you like what you hear and want to help out in our quest to put an end to misandry, we are seeking additional officers. Officers get a vote in meetings for KSUM administration and access to funding for small-scale men’s rights activism projects.

News Roundup – March 23rd

Editor’s note: Please welcome new contributor IndependentShock, who will be reporting on local events and sharing relevant men’s rights content.

Renaming the Women’s Resource Center

KSU Men has opened correspondence with Shameka Wilson, the Director of Women’s Resource & Interpersonal Violence Prevention Center. KSUM founder Sage Gerard met Wilson at Southern Smash, a KSU Love Your Body event themed around smashing scales with sledgehammers. According to Wilson, the center serves both men and women. So why does the center not have a gender neutral name?  Wilson’s response was that a name change was “one of her battles,” although she has not said with whom she is fighting the battle.

Additional emails have been sent to Wilson, but we have yet to hear a response.

RAD Copyright Legalities

For those of you who are not aware, KSUM has been putting pressure on the KSU RAD program due to RAD for Men’s (RFM) questionable marketing and course curriculum. RAD staff are unable to distribute the private copyrighted course materials, but they were also inappropriately unresponsive to simple questions about the course for several months. Our questions were regarding what specifically RAD for Men (RFM) teaches men.

KSUM can get access to RAD materials if and only if a student attends a RFM course. But no RFM course was scheduled during the Spring semester due to a lack of space, according to RAD Director Trudi Vaughan.  Sage managed to take some pictures of some pages from the RAD manuals before his phone battery died, but the images collected so far are not fully representative of the course material.

KSUM will circumvent the copyright issues by enrolling one or more members in RFM for this Summer. This means that we will get access to materials and quote excerpts for informative purposes. Since KSU Public Safety has been under pressure by KSUM for some time, it is possible that the instructors might tailor the delivery of the material once Sage or another KSUM member attends a class. However, it is doubtful that RAD will make any significant changes in response to pressures from so few students.

Adviser Rotation

Sadly, KSUM recently lost a faculty endorsement due to a misunderstanding.

KSUM’s promotional events were funded by the readers of A Voice For Men (AVFM), a flagship organization for men’s rights activists (MRAs). The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) alleged that AVFM was misogynistic in Issue 145 of the SPLC Intelligence Report, but never actually formally declared AVFM as such. The adviser sponsoring KSUM assumed that the allegation made against AVFM was indicative of KSUM being associated with a hate group, even though KSUM is not formally a subsidiary of AVFM.

Quote Arthur Goldwag of the SPLC:

“It should be mentioned that the SPLC did not label MRAs as members of a hate movement; nor did our article claim that the grievances they air on their websites – false rape accusations, ruinous divorce settlements and the like – are all without merit. But we did call out specific examples of misogyny and the threat, overt or implicit, of violence. […] The SPLC, as a matter of fact, did not formally add any of the groups profiled in the article to the list of 1018 hate groups that it counts as of 2011. Nor did it deny that many of the issues that the Mens (sic) Movement cares about–criticism of the family court system, false rape accusations and the like–have legitimacy.”

Thankfully, KSUM has found a new adviser. A proposal to amend the KSUM constitution has been filed in an attempt to allow for more than one adviser. This way, KSUM will not have a single point of failure through a dependence on faculty endorsements.

Summary of Educational Equity Issues for Men and Boys

Editor’s Note: This article has been reprinted here with permission from Johnathan Taylor, founder of A Voice For Male Students (AVFMS). AVFMS is an excellent resource for concerned parents and college students that are (un)aware of the persecution facing young men and boys in a Western educational system. This excellent article covers the high points of the crises men face in education, and there are references available for anyone willing to dig. -VZ

Summary of Educational Equity Issues for Men and Boys

The issue of educational equity for male students is divided into three main areas which are briefly summarized here. Click on a link to see a list of raw data, education policies, key blog posts, videos, infographics, and more that is relevant to the selected topic.

Section One: Educational Attainment & Well-Being


This area addresses gaps in degrees conferred (among other educational metrics) between male and female students, the lack of educational outreach for men and boys, the lack of male role models for lifelong learning for boys (especially in lower education), the unique literacy problems for boys, and whether or not to grant male teachers and students affirmative action.

This section also concerns itself with what learning styles and environments boys respond best to, the systemic elimination of male sports, the widespread use of Ritalin as a bandaid and in lieu of making positive structural change in boys’ learning environment, the epidemic of male suicide, learning and behavioral disorders, and so forth.

Section Two: Institutional Bias (Sexism, Misandry, Gynocentrism, & Conformism)


This area inquires into the general culture of academia. Is there a subculture creating a hostile learning environment for male students and teachers? This section documents the pervasive and permissive subculture of misandry (prejudice against and hatred of men and boys) in academia, and the phenomenon of gynocentrism (woman-centeredness) in education policy, discourse, and practice.

In addition, this section asks the question: are male students being taught outdated notions of gender that may limit their intellectual and psychological well-being? This area also focuses on the academic culture’s general tendency to prize conformity over principled dissent and its adherence to a rigid status quo.

Section Three: Rights & Protections


This area addresses the lack of rights and protections concerning issues that disproportionately or uniquely affect men and boys in education. Special attention is given to the lack of due process protections for wrongly accused men and boys against charges of sexual harassment and sexual assault, and the systemic failure of educational institutions to discipline false accusers.

This section also concerns itself with the “school to prison pipeline”: the tendency of educational institutions to rely too much on suspensions, expulsions, and law enforcement in place of counseling and intervention. It also deals with the lack of checks and balances that encourages abuses against special needs students, who are overwhelmingly male.

Introduction Video

Here is a video introducing the three areas:

Men’s Human Rights on Kennesaw State University

Editor’s Note: This article, dated September 13, 2013, has been reposted from A Voice For Men. This article covers preliminary observations made by KSUM’s founder, Sage Gerard, regarding the environment men and women live in on KSU.

Kennesaw State University (KSU) is a relatively small university in Northwest Georgia, U.S.A., roughly thirty miles north of downtown Atlanta. KSU has been over capacity for the better part of the seventeen short years it held university status. The bustling student population supports at least 226 formal organizations representing a wide range of different interests, and many more organizations not listed in the previous link. Despite KSU’s diversity, they consistently neglect the needs of men.

Let me show you how KSU treats its men and women.


About 60% of KSU’s students are female, and a number of opportunities offered by campus and state organizations are given exclusively to these young women. For example, the Georgia Executive Women’s Network offers a scholarship to women age 24 and up, and Women In Electronics offers supplementary funds that stack on existing financial aid to female students [1][2].

Campus organizations like Kennesaw Women in Mathematics (KWIM), promote the participation of women in mathematics. KSU and its student organizations have never hesitated in connecting women to opportunities from a plethora of programs. There is nothing wrong with offering opportunities to female students, but they are harder to justify when you compare the status of the KSU woman to the status of the KSU man.

There are scholarships, programs and courses available to all students, but women are the focus in promoting each. The most disturbing example is KSU Security’s Rape Aggression Defense (R.A.D.) course. The KSU security department’s page for R.A.D. mentions that men are allowed to attend a men’s only R.A.D. course near the bottom.

Resisting Aggression with Defense for Men is a new program being offered this year, to address the many requests from our male population for basic self-defense options. RAD For Men (RFM’s) goal is to provide responsible information and tactical options of self-defense for men who find themselves in confrontational situations. For a male self-defense program to be an empowering experience it must contain a few key elements. These are: to educate men about their roles and responsibilities in reducing violence, to instill an understanding of reliance on others, to understand the responsibility and importance of making different decisions, and to obtain self-realization of the power of controlling one’s emotions.

Scroll back up to the first paragraph of the same page and you will see this.

Rape Aggression Defense (R.A.D.) is a simple yet affective [sic] self-defense class for women only.

In addition, the periodic email blast for R.A.D. not only leaves out all mention of R.A.D. for Men, it also explicitly tells you only women may attend. The email shown below was sent to me on September 4th, 10:44 AM. broadcasts a message to all students, assuming you are sending the message from an authorized address (If you try to send something there, it won’t work since you are not authorized to broadcast anything). This alias makes it easy to promote events.

10:44 AM is an odd time for automated system to send emails, so I suspect a human being typed this email. This means (s)he had a chance to see the hypocrisy of offering a unisex course while claiming that it is exclusively available to women.

Email showing only women get rape prevention training

Download the email source to see the original message for yourself. I removed my student email address from the source to preserve my dying anonymity for now.

AVFM member Eriu pointed out that an FBI Uniform Crime Report (UCR) for KSU shows that only twelve rapes were reported on KSU from 1995 to 2010. From 1995-1999, not a single rape was reported [1][2][3][4][5]. One rape was reported in 2000, and then we drop again to no rapes for 2001 and 2002.

The R.A.D. course was founded in 2002.

At time of founding, one rape report was all they had to demonstrate need. The highest number of rape reports totaled a whopping 4 in 2009 [1][2]. R.A.D. cannot feasibly take credit for the low numbers, since even prevented rapes would be reported by frightened, would-be victims.

When R.A.D. for Men was introduced, KSU Security Officer Trudi Vaughan had this to say about what the course offers in the Sentinel (the campus paper):

“It doesn’t insult or diminish your ability to be a man if you walk away,” Vaughan said.

RAD for men was developed from the Rape Aggression Defense for women, a course offered by KSU PD since 2002.

“It focuses a lot on what your responsibilities are as a man,” Vaughan said. “When women say ‘no,’ it doesn’t mean ‘no until you talk me into it’; it means no.”

The RAD for men mission statement is “To provide responsible information and tactical options of self-defense for men who find themselves in confrontational situations.”

Men are offered “tactical options for self-defense” such as walking away from violent confrontation after being reminded that “no means no.”

R.A.D. simulates a live attack on students executed by the “R.A.D. Man.” The R.A.D. Man can be played byeither a man or a woman (where the woman is still informally called the R.A.D. Man in promos). If you look at the email, you will see that women are expected to inflict injury and pain. In the Sentinel, men are encouraged to not fight back, and are given a reminder to not rape.

Outside of security, the KSU Gender and Women’s Studies department offers a masculinity course (see GWST 3080) with required readings including Michael Kimmel’s Guyland. The original course proposal has a red flag on page 3:

The course will be regularly evaluated through the ongoing assessment of the gender and women’s studies program faculty according to university guidelines.

Students are regularly evaluated by the people who endorse Kimmel and the kind of environment KSU provides. Women are the focus for numerous campus benefits, and even a unisex service for preventing a traumatic event is marketed to women alone. Men are not considered important enough to communicate with, even though some programs have become unisex in response to male demand.

Men have silently fought for representation, only to have it reluctantly granted with a gynocentric twist.

Facts are facts. KSU plays favorites.

Haphazard Support for Men

On February 20th this year, I attended the first meeting of The Gentlemen’s Club (TGC), a self-described “safe haven” for men founded by two KSU counselors. I was impressed and excited about the group after hearing about the philosophy of its founders, but started to back away when I learned of its policies.

The founders, Dr. Faust and Dr. Griggs, claim to follow the methods of Dr. Miles Groth. After the first meeting, the group sounded too good to be true. Quote Dr. Faust at 1:02:15 of the first meeting:

[We will be] a group of guys who will get together and talk about real issues that we face everyday. We can’t do it out there. There’s people out there who don’t understand. They humiliate us. They talk about us. They embarrass us. That will never happen in this particular safe environment. [I want to] create an environment where people can be themselves. That’s all we’re asking for. It’s not complicated!

I reacted positively, and the doctors asked me to help recruit new members. I offered the doctors a chance to talk to the staff at A Voice For Men (AVFM) for exposure. The doctors declared AVFM “militant” and backed away from it. They declined me the opportunity to record our second meeting, so I cannot prove what they told me next. I must therefore simply ask you to take my word for what I learned. All members had to sign a contract giving the doctors consent to monitor intermember communication.

When I questioned TGC’s founders about their invasive policies, they responded with a bitter psychoanalysis of my outlook on society and how men fit in the grand scheme of things. Dr. Faust said that there are broken men that needed to be ”fixed,” and he never clarified what that meant. My take is that many men are just fine the way they are, but need a place to be themselves without carrying the burden of unwarranted guilt and bottled up emotions.

I thought that TGC was the sanctuary men deserved, but I was wrong. TGC was meant to be a group therapy session where the members were not allowed to socialize with one another outside of the group. Unsurprisingly, Dr. Groth was confused by this approach when I emailed him to ask about it. It is safe to say that TGC does not follow Groth’s methods as closely as it first claimed.

My suspicions were correct: TGC was too good to be true. But I must say through gritted teeth that TGC was the best thing for men I could find on campus. A full log of my relationship with TGC can be found on MarZ.

Kennesaw State University is a school where men are struggling for relevance. KSU enforces anti-discrimination policies just enough for men to get representation, so long as it’s all for the grace of women.

KSU does not respond to men’s issues with violence or resentment. Instead, KSU greets men with tense silence followed by reluctance, a small cookie reward and some PR hand-waving, in that order. Once KSU feels like men are satisfied enough to shut up, the benefits KSU and its student-run subsidiaries just that second gave to men are reoriented to focus on women.

It would be wrong to say that no one on KSU cares about men. There are signs of life in the student body showing interest in men’s issues, but these people always come second to gynocentrism. R.A.D. as it exists today demonstrates exactly what KSU is willing to let their own police department get away with.

Would you attend Kennesaw State University?

March 14 KSUM Meeting

During the next KSUM meeting, we will discuss the following topics:

  • The conduct of KSU Security around their Rape Aggression Defense program.
  • Shameka Wilson and renaming the Women’s Resource Center
  • Laurie Davis and contributing men’s rights materials to gender studies
  • Men’s Rights presentations in the Social Sciences
  • The upcoming November 1st conference
  • Additional officer positions
    • Secretary
    • Digital Media director
    • Social media ambassadors
    • Administrators
  • Upcoming KSUM radio show on Live365

See Upcoming Meetings for directions to the meeting space.

Feminism in a Nutshell v2.0

Feminism has grown to deny men and boys their basic humanity. This excellent rap by Jared White spells it out.


Trigger warning

Trigger warning

Trigger warning

He’s back

Greetings class. It is my great pleasure today to re-introduce to you a prominent
member in our cause to educate students about the fight against misogyny.

As always, we urge you to please brace yourselves with whatever self-esteem
sustaining rituals you use to keep the truth at bay and the ideology of feminism
safe and sound behind your barriers of denial.

And now, our Speaker.

For those who hadn’t heard, feminism is about equality.

Anyone who denies this is just a raging misogynist.

To prove this, here’s a brief rundown of what the movement has given us so far.


An idea someone thought you should know about men

Took it to the extreme now masculinity’s a sin

With views sproutin’ nationwide levels of politicism

All about women guess that’s why they call it feminism

Step up cause the men were runnin’ wild and on the loose

Rapin’ and abusin’ women no one who knew just what to do

Until the feminists came along with the ultimate solution

Break the male sex with fifty years of persecution

Don’t worry bout the menz

Cause the patriarchy’s got their back

The biggest challenge now

Teach these brutes the proper way to act

Feminist guidance keeps the boys from turnin’ into rapist men

And lets em’ know they gotta sacrifice for all the lives of women

Females rapin’ men is way too miniscule

Too fuckin’ rare

False allegations

When it comes too suffering they don’t compare

Men hold all advantage over women don’t you even dare

Try and add male suffering to the issues we don’t want it here

Instead go find some caution tape

Grab a penis

Wrap it up

We’ll have these weapons off the streets before they get a chance to fuck

The dignity and peace of mind straight out of women’s bodies

And We’ll train these men to know their place so they won’t hurt nobody

It’s a simple process

All you gotta do is just ignore the past

All the men who died ain’t important you can let it pass

Women were the unconditional slaves of their husbands

So to care about the men who lost their lives

Nothin’ but redundance

Lynch mobs formed on the basis of a woman’s word

Swords run through a man’s face cause of what was heard

Bullets ricocheting back and forth inside a man’s skull

All because a woman cried rape

That’s irrational

Women never lie

It’s a truth you need to understand

There’s never been a woman who would rape or beat up on a man

All the rapists and abusers hold the male chromosome

That’s why we made these classes set up under every college dome

Just brush off those who don’t agree as mongorers of hate

When a woman fucks a man against his will that’s just a date

Penetration is the only form the definition states

Cause the CDC has spoken only men can stop rape

Keep the female bigots out ya mind only men discriminate

That thing they call misandry isn’t it’s all fake

Misogyny is all that fuckin matters in this world

That’s why the only real victims are women and girls

Men and boys can fall behind in school jobs and life

The only ones they got to blame are in the mirror am I right

But if a woman struggles anywhere feminism’s on the case

Blamin’ men and gettin’ money for some female only space

And tearin’ down the spirits of the men who group together

To discuss the issues plaguin’ males maybe try and make em’ better

But as a feminist let em’ know male spaces are forbidden

The only thing a group of men should do is protect women

Rest assured feminism’s all you’re ever gonna need

For tools to handle every implication of equality

We took a hammer to the rigid gender roles enforced

Women got set free and kept their male workhorse

Now the choices all belong to women you can count em’ off

Stay at home

Go to work

Be a parent

Pass it off

Equality is only for the women to enjoy

That’s why feminism is a fuckin’ patriarchal steroid