How much should be expected from “masculinism”? The term appears to be mostly window dressing for the fathers’ rights movement, initiated by men who have been abused by a divorce and child support system that often gives women the power at will to kick husbands out of the house and their children’s lives while forcing them, under Draconian penalties, to keep supporting the (now fatherless) household.
The “fathers’ rights” movement makes sense, and attempts by the feminist establishment to tar it as extremist, invoke “hate crime” legislation against it and what not are characteristically disgraceful. In fact, the movement fully accepts the feminist premise that radical equality is the appropriate standard for relations between the sexes, and so in theoretical terms is objectionable chiefly on grounds of excessive compliance with the views that now count as “mainstream.” Still, the feminists are right that it poses a fundamental threat. Radical equality is necessarily a fraud. Opening up discussion on “women’s issues,” as the “masculinist” movement does, is likely to dramatize the fraudulence and open up the possibility of some resolution that comes closer to accepting human beings as they are. And that would mean the end of all familiar forms of feminism.