The Language of Misandry in Academia: a Collection of Quotes by Faculty Members, Students, and Administrators

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

Here you will find a warehouse of quotations by faculty, administrators, and students who display moderate to extreme forms of misandry – contempt or hatred toward men and boys. It will be continuously updated, with new quotes added over time.

This collection should be a useful resource for those new to men’s issues in academia. It should also be useful to advocates as a “go-to” resource for identifying and referring others to the kind of hostile learning environment that has become pervasive in certain academic circles.

To clarify, this post is focused on misandry as it occurs in the spoken or written word only, but stops short of where misandry is presented visually on banners, posters, and so forth. If you would like examples of that, see the post “The face of misandry in academia: a collection of banners, posters, and other visual aids.”

The list is meant to be extensive, but not exhaustive. There is no feasible way to contain all the examples of misandric language in academia in this post. That being said, if you would like to add any that are not included on the list, feel free to do so – with citations that can be independently verified – in the comments section.

As we go through the quotes, there are some things I would like you to bear in mind. As I said inthe post introducing the basics of institutional bias in academia, misandry in academia is not merely a collection of infrequent and disassociated anomalies arising from individuals uninfluenced by supportive or acquiescent peer groups. On the contrary, it is culturally pervasive in academia in a way that cannot be reasonably characterized as incidental or coincidental.

In addition, while misandry may most often be identified by examining others’ statements, it is important to remember that the deeper problem with misandry is not the singular or occasional statements by faculty members, administrators, or students, but rather the attitude and the worldview behind them. For that reason I advocate looking at this collection of quotes holistically where each quote is a part of a larger tapestry, rather than getting hung up on one or two statements.

For the detractors

Not only is misandry pervasive in academia, the denial of it is as well. Some may dismiss these quotes out of hand by presuming that they are taken out of context. Never fear; I have provided the sources for every single one of these quotes so that they can be independently verified.

While most of these quotes are recent, some are older. Some may be tempted to dismiss them out of hand for that reason as well. What they may not consider is that many of these older hateful quotes have been reprinted in more recent humanities textbooks and presented as though they are gems of virtue. I have provided some of those newer sources as well, where appropriate.

Lastly, it bears mention that virtually nothing has been done prior to the publication of this post to take a substantial stand against misandry in academia by the academic community itself. The attitudes and worldviews expressed in more recent quotes bear continuity with those expressed in older ones, demonstrating that misandry in academia has not diminished over time, but rather has become the moral bedrock of an entrenched academic subculture.

Update 11/4/2013 – David Futrelle and his readers at the blog “Manboobz” have posted a critique of this list. View my dissection of their counterarguments here.

Let us begin.

Misandry via rape hysteria

Rape hysteria – one of the most common manifestations of misandry in academia – takes a variety of forms. It is primarily seen in the practice of seeing rape everywhere (including and especially where it does not exist), advocating an extreme reduction or elimination in due process for accusations of sexual misconduct, always taking the side of the woman regardless of the evidence, and suggesting that false rape accusations are acceptable – if not a social good. Some people in academia even believe that since we live in a society where “men rule” that it is not possible for women to consent to sex, making all heterosexual sex rape by default. Here are some of the quotes I have compiled:

“They [victims of false rape accusations] 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.”

– Dr. Catherine Comins, assistant dean of students at Vassar College. Source: TIME magazine.

“I’m really tired of people suggesting that you’re somehow un-American if you don’t respect the presumption of innocence, because you know what that sounds like to a victim? Presumption you’re a liar.”

– Wendy Murphy, adjunct professor of law and sex-assault victim advocate, commenting on the Duke lacrosse false rape case. Source: National Public Radio.

“Stop with the presumption of innocence. It doesn’t apply to Duke. When they make administrative decisions about student behavior they don’t owe them any due process.”

– Wendy Murphy, adjunct professor of law and sex-assault victim advocate, commenting on the Duke lacrosse false rape case. Source: NBC news.

“If a woman did falsely accuse a man of rape, she may have had reasons to. Maybe she wasn’t raped, but he clearly violated her in some way.”

– Ginny, college senior interviewed by TIME magazine (source here).

“Although consideration of male victims is within the scope of the legal statutes, it is important to restrict the term rape to instances where male victims were penetrated by offenders. It is inappropriate to consider as a rape victim a man who engages in unwanted sexual intercourse with a woman.”

– Dr. Mary Koss, a widely cited and prominent Feminist “rape researcher,” in “Detecting the Scope of Rape,” p. 206 (last paragraph).

“It’s obviously one of the big side effects, if it could result in an innocent person being found guilty. But I think sexual assault is such a big issue that it’s worth the risk.”

– First-year student Steph Winters at the University of Maryland on the school lowering its standard of evidence to “convict” male students of sexual assault. Source: The Diamondback (school newspaper).

“So many women get their lives totally ruined by being assaulted and not saying anything. So if one guy gets his life ruined, maybe it balances out.”

– Oberlin sophomore Emily Lloyd, after Feminist students were criticized for placing posters around campus that bore the title “Rapist of the Month,” and below that heading a name of a freshman male drawn randomly from the campus registry. Source: the Toledo Blade.

“A lot of people are very upset by it, but I think if a man was secure he wasn’t a rapist, he wouldn’t be threatened by this list.”

– University of Maryland senior Erin Lane, after Feminist students were criticized for placing posters around campus that bore the title “NOTICE: THESE MEN ARE POTENTIAL RAPISTS,” and below that heading the names of hundreds of male freshmen drawn randomly from the campus registry. Source: the Baltimore Sun.

“There is no clear distinction between consensual sex and rape, but a continuum of pressure, threat, coercion and force. The concept of a continuum validates the sense of abuse women feel when they do not freely consent to sex.”

– Dr. Liz Kelly, The Hidden Gender of Law, p. 350.

“Rape is perhaps the foremost male fantasy in our society.”

– Dr. Andra Medea and Kathleen Thompson, Against Rape, p. 14

“And if the professional rapist is to be separated from the average dominant heterosexual male, it may be mainly a quantitative difference.”

– Dr. Susan Griffin, Rape: The All-American Crime; Ramparts Magazine, p. 30, 1971Quoted thirty years later in Making Sense of Women’s Lives: an Introduction to Women’s Studies, published in 2000, p. 451-452, among others.

“Rape is indeed an extreme form of behavior, but one that exists on a continuum with normal male behavior within the culture.”

– Dr. Mary Koss, ”Football’s Day of Dread,” Wall Street Journal, Feb. 5, 1993. Cited in Who Stole Feminism, p. 210.

“Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex and feels violated.”

– Dr. Catharine MacKinnon, Feminism Unmodified, p. 82.

“The American dating system, which constitutes a primary source of heterosexual contacts, legitimizes the consensual purchase of women as sexual objects and obliterates the crucial distinction between consent and nonconsent.”

– Drs. Margaret Gordon & Stephanie Reiger, The Female Fear, p. 60.

“Then there are the wolf-whistles, unwanted hugs and pinches – what the authors of one book call “mini-rapes” – which continually remind women they are vulnerable, sexual victims.”

– Professors Margaret Gordon & Stephanie Reiger, The Female Fear, p. 6.

Notes to the above quote: while it is clear by reading their book that Drs. Gordon and Reiger support this view, it is also clear that they are referencing a chapter called “Little Rapes” (see here) on page 49 of Dr. Andra Medea’s book Against Rape. In addition, in an interview among Dr. Christina Hoff-Sommers, Camille Paglia, and Ben Wattenberg on the PBS show “Think Tank” (source here), Dr. Hoff-Sommers says,

“I interviewed a young women at the University of Pennsylvania who came in in a short skirt and she was in the Women’s Center, and I think she thought I was one of the sisterhood. And she said, ‘Oh, I just suffered a mini-rape.’ “And I said, ‘What happened?’ And she said, ‘A boy walked by me and said, `Nice legs’. ‘You know? And that — and this young woman considers this a form of rape!”

“Don’t allow psychological rape or commit it yourself. Psychological rape consists of verbal harassment, whistles, kissing noises, heavy breathing, sly comments or stares. These are all assaults on any woman’s sense of well-being.”

– Goshen College website (link here, screenshot here, AVFMS article here).

“Sexual violence includes any physical, visual, verbal or sexual act that is experienced by the woman or girl, at the time or later, as a threat, invasion or assault that has the effect of hurting her or degrading her and/or taken away her ability to control intimate contact.’”

– Dr. Liz Kelly, Surviving Sexual Violence, p. 41.

“Can we not, therefore, conclude that general consent sometimes equals rape because of the harms that it brings to the consenting woman? These harms include the loss of the sense of selfhood, for by consenting to sex which is not pleasurable; the woman is using her body to further the interests of her man, thereby treating herself as a means to that men’s ends.”

– Dr. Mangena, Fort Hare Papers, vol. 16, 2010, p. 52.

“Under conditions of male dominance, if sex is normally something men do to women, the issue is less whether there was force than whether consent is a meaningful concept.”

– Dr. Catharine MacKinnon, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State, p. 178.

“Many feminists would argue that so long as women are powerless relative to menviewing ‘yes’ as a sign of true consent is misguided.”

– Dr. Susan Estrich, Real Rape, p. 318.

“Consent as ideology cannot be distinguished from habitual acquiescence, assent, silent dissent, submission, or even enforced submission. Unless refusal or consent or withdrawal of consent are real possibilities, we can no longer speak of ‘consent’ in any genuine sense.’”

– Dr. Carol Pateman, “Women and Consent,” Political Theory, vol. 8, p. 149.

Notes to this quote: Dr. Pateman isn’t talking about consent in a situational interpersonal context, but the very concept of consent itself and women as a political class. That’s why she does not refer to “consent’” in unqualified terms – like normal people do – but instead as “consent as ideology.”

In other words, to Dr. Pateman consent is a concept that only exists in the minds of ideologues. By referring to consent as “an ideology” and placing herself in opposition to it, she is disagreeing with the concept of consent itself. Only “ideologues” believe consent is possible in a patriarchy, and she’s not one of them.

“Consent–agreeing to something–is usually not a hard concept to understand. It may at first appear more complex in the context of rape. One reason is simply its unexpected presence. There is no other crime defined in terms of consent. Only in rape is the victim asked, ‘Did you agree to it?’ Compare: “Did you agree to be punched in the face?” “Did you agree to be mugged?”

– Professor Carol Sanger, “New Perspectives on Rape,” Los Angeles Times, April 25, 1991, p. B7.

“Why could we not expel a student based on an allegation [of sexual assault]? It seems to me that we value fair and equitable processes more than we value the safety of our students.”

– Amanda Childress, Sexual Assault Awareness Program coordinator at Dartmouth College,quoted in Inside Higher Ed. AVFMS article here.

“Ask the [7th grade] students to close their eyes. Once they’ve closed their eyes, say ‘Imagine that the woman you care about the most (your mother, sister, daughter, girlfriend) is being raped, battered, or sexually abused. Give them at least thirty seconds to think about the scenario before asking them to open their eyes.”

– Classroom anti-violence program for 7th graders, who are then asked to write about their feelings. The program is titled Gender Violence/Gender Justice and is referenced in The War Against Boys, first edition, p. 57.

“Men are a good deal more likely to rape than to be raped. This forms their experience…almost half of all women, by contrast, are raped or victims of attempted rape at least once in their lives.”

– Dr. Catharine MacKinnon in Toward a Feminist Theory of the State, p. 176. Also quoted in Applications of Feminist Legal Theory to Women’s Lives, p. 475.

“The point of recapitulation in the first movement of the Ninth [Symphony of Beethoven] is one of the most horrifying moments in music, as the carefully prepared cadence is frustrated, damming up energy which finally explodes in the throttling, murderous rage of a rapist incapable of attaining release.”

– Dr. Susan McClary, Minnesota Composers Forum Newsletter, 1987.

“Traditional historians and philosophers have said that these [rape and tor­ture] metaphors are irrelevant to the real meanings and referents of scientific concepts. But when it comes to regarding nature as a machine, they have a quite different analysis: here, we are told, the metaphor pro­vides the interpretations of Newton’s mathematical laws: it directs inquir­ers to fruitful ways to apply his theory. But if we are to believe that mechanistic metaphors were a fundamental component of the explana­tions the new science provided, why should we believe that the gender metaphors were not?

“A consistent analysis would lead to the conclusion that understanding nature as a woman indifferent to or even welcom­ing rape was equally fundamental to the interpretations of these new conceptions of nature and inquiry. Presumably these metaphors, too, had fruitful pragmatic, methodological, and metaphysical consequences for science. In that case, why is it not as illuminating and honest to refer to Newton’s laws as ‘Newton’s rape manual’ as it is to call them ‘Newton’s mechanics’?”

– Dr. Sandra Harding, The Science Question in Feminism, p. 113.

“When someone says ‘I was raped,’ BELIEVE THEM! It is not your role to question whether a false accusation occurred.”

– The website for The Clothesline Project, an event in support of sex-assault victims on many campuses.

“In this book we will be using the term victim to refer to people who claim to have been sexually assaulted.”

– Drs. Carol Bohmer and Andrea Parrot, Sexual Assault on Campus, p. 5. Throughout the book the authors never consider the idea that any man accused by a woman might be innocent, and take the accuser’s side every single time. This leads to statements with contradictory and convoluted logic later on in the book. For example, in describing a trial court acquittal they say on page 29, “The victim said she did not consent; the jury did not believe her.” How do we know she’s a victim if the jury acquitted?

“Feminism is built on believing women’s accounts of sexual use and abuse by men.”

– Feminist Professor Catharine MacKinnon, Feminism Unmodified, p. 5.

“Little girls learn to flirt with their fathers. You know, ‘Kiss daddy goodnight’ – and all this sort of business.”

– Dr. Germaine Greer, when asked how little girls become sexualized. Source: British Broadcasting Company.

Misandry: men are bad, useless, or disposable

“In politics, if you want anything said, ask a man…if you want anything done, ask a woman.”

– Margaret Thatcher. Not an academic, but quoted by The Network of Enlightened Women (NeW), a traditionalist women’s college group, in their group’s introductory video (source here). This video was also featured on their website.

“Good Guys” in the patriarchy are harder to find than the Loch Ness monster in a desert. But according to many people I hear and talk to, “good guys” are everywhere. The propensity to acknowledge the shortcomings of men, overlook them even in obvious examples (such as gang-rape) and excuse their moral responsibility with the magic words, “But he is a good guy,” is an epidemic phenomena at the very least.

“I am amazed continuously with the amount of forgiveness people are willing to grant men, as if the majority of rapes aren’t committed by them, as if the majority of businesses aren’t owned by them, as if they majority of pornography isn’t consumed, produced, and profitable to them, and, as if they aren’t somehow affected by the extreme privilege granted to their gender class.

“By existing as men, men directly aid in the oppression of women.

“Every time a man uses pornography, beats his wife or coerces a woman or dismisses or laughs at her, he is simultaneously denouncing her humanity and reaffirming his own. He does not just do this to amuse himself; her subjugation is a vehicle necessary for his continued existence. That is why men accepting responsibility and acknowledging their complicity in women’s oppression is so extremely uncommon. It is also why there is no such thing as a ‘good guy’ in the patriarchy.”

– University of New Hampshire student Whitney Williams, in her article for the campus newspaper titled “The Universal Myth of the ‘Good Guy.’” See the AVFMS post on it here.

“Most people know the tragic tale of the Titanic, and one part in the movie and true story always struck me as a NeW lady: “Women and children first.” Chivalry is not about superiority or inferiority, and it does not trample equality. Chivalry is on a completely different level – acting out of concern and respect for those who you believe should be respected.

“Even biologically and anthropologically, the male traditionally acts on behalf of the female because she is important – perhaps more important than himself.  Being a gentleman is a selfless and natural way of life, not one that diminishes women or elevates men.”

– The Network of Enlightened Women (NeW), a traditionalist women’s college group, on their website.

“Though still in its conceptual form, the male allies project is the brainchild of the women’s centre designed to bring self-identified men together to talk about masculinity and its harmful effects on both men and women. We know that many men are concerned with the way masculinity denigrates women by making them into sexual objects, is homophobic, encourages violence, and discourages emotional expression.

“It is the hope of the women’s centre that the male allies project will help men address these concerns in conjunction with other men and allow them an opportunity to reimagine what masculinity could be.”

 – Website of Simon Fraser University Women’s Centre, on its page “Male Allies.” This page has been removed by the Women’s Center, but was screenshotted and uploaded to AVFMS.

“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.”

– Sandra J. Anderson, former professor of law at Ohio State University, Board of Trustees member at OSU from 2013-2016. Comment on the online version of Peg Tyre’s 2006 Newsweek article “The Boy Crisis” (now removed). This quote is referenced on page 11 of Peg Tyre’s book The Trouble with Boys and is reproduced on the iFeminists website.

“I have a great deal of difficulty with the idea of the ideal man. As far as I’m concerned, men are the product of a damaged gene. They pretend to be normal but what they’re doing sitting there with benign smiles on their faces is they’re manufacturing sperm. They do it all the time. They never stop. I mean, we women are more reasonable.

We pop one follicle every 28 days, whereas they are producing 400 million sperm for each ejaculation, most of which don’t take place anywhere near an ovum. I don’t know that the ecosphere can tolerate it.”

– Dr. Germaine Greer, at a Hilton Hotel literary lunch, promoting her book The Change – Women, Aging and the Menopause. Reported in “Greer Mocks Men’s Misses” in theSydney Morning Herald, 11/14/91.

“The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.”

– Dr. Sally Miller Gearhart, in her article “The Future – If There Is One – Is Female,” ironically featured in a later book promoting nonviolence: Reweaving the Web of Life: Feminism and Nonviolence, p. 266

“I think it’s not a bad idea at all. If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males.”

– Dr. Mary Daly’s response when asked what she thought of the above quote by Dr. Gearhart, in an interview called “No Man’s Land” conducted by EnlightenNext Magazine, 2001.

“As long as some men use physical force to subjugate females, all men need not. The knowledge that some men do suffices to threaten all women. Beyond that, it is not necessary to beat up a woman to beat her down. A man can simply refuse to hire women in well-paid jobs, extract as much or more work from women than men but pay them less, or treat women disrespectfully at work or home.

“He can fail to support a child he has engendered, demand the woman he lives with wait on him like a servant. He can beat or kill the woman he calims to love; he can rape women, whether mate, acquaintance, or stranger; he can rape or sexually molest his daughters, nieces, stepchildren, or the children of a woman he claims to love. THE VAST MAJORITY OF MEN IN THE WORLD DO ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE.”

– Dr. Marilyn French, The War Against Women, p. 182, her emphasis.

“Everybody wants to tax somebody else: Tax the rich, tax the fat, tax the bald, tax pet owners, gum chewers and those who like manicures. I would like to offer a different solution: Let’s tax men. In fact, let’s tax men a lot, more than they’re already being taxed, and let’s not tax women at all.

“Sound fair to you? Good. Me too.

“After all, women are not the ones wrecking the nation’s infrastructure. We’re not the ones shooting at the “No U-turn” signs on rural highways. It’s not women who are trying to make our names as graffiti artists. You’ll rarely find a bunch of broads gathered together attempting to create weapons of mass destruction or figuring out how to really get ahead in next year’s arms race.

“We’re not the ones running Fortune 500 companies into the ground or manipulating the stock market. As many people have noted, had the firm been called Lehman’s Sisters it might not have gone down the fiscal toilet, taking Wall Street’s profits with it.”

– Dr. Gina Barreca, in her article “Send Men the Bill – They Made the Mess” in The Courant, 10/6/11.

“I find myself increasingly shocked at the unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed. Great things have been achieved through feminism. We now have pretty much equality at least on the pay and opportunities front, though almost nothing has been done on child care, the real liberation.

“We have many wonderful, clever, powerful women everywhere, but what is happening to men? Why did this have to be at the cost of men?

“I was in a class of nine- and 10-year-olds, girls and boys, and this young woman was telling these kids that the reason for wars was the innately violent nature of men. You could see the little girls, fat with complacency and conceit while the little boys sat there crumpled, apologising for their existence, thinking this was going to be the pattern of their lives.

“The teacher tried to catch my eye, thinking I would approve of this rubbish. This kind of thing is happening in schools all over the place and no one says a thing.

– Doris Lessing, an old-school Feminist, in an article at The Guardian

“To be a feminist, I believe, requires another ingredient: the felt experience of oppression. And this men cannot feel because men are not oppressed but privileged by sexism. To be sure, men do feel oppression, but are not oppressed as men.”

– Dr. Michael Kimmel and Thomas E. Mosmiller, Against the Tide, p. 2-3. Quoted in Dr. Amanda Goldrick-Jones’s book Men Who Believe in Feminism, p. 80.

“There’s no such thing as reverse racism or reverse sexism (or the reverse of any form of oppression). While women can be just as prejudiced as men, women cannot be “just as sexist as men” because they do not hold political, economic, and institutional power.”

– Drs. Ozlem Sensoy and Robin DiAngelo in ”Is Everyone Really Equal? An Introduction to Key Concepts in Social Justice Education,” page 46 (bottom). PDF here, pic of quoted section here, Reddit thread about it here.


Some Pictures of Women Against Feminism

There exist strong, independent women who oppose feminism. Their reasoning is that they don’t need an ideology centered around them to be independent and able to strive for their own well-being. I could speak more towards why they are the way they are, but I won’t, because these women can speak for themselves just fine.

Many of these pictures are from

7 3 15 4 13 114 142 62 5 113 8 2 9

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.

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: