World's first males studies course.

I'm a woman and consider myself a feminist and I can understand that Male Studies are taught at university. I think males also face many challenges too in today's world. The world seems to the oyster of the "alpha" male but there are lot of men out there too who don't meet that criteria and are also having a lot of difficulties to fulfil what's expected of them (both emotionally and financially).

Gender divisions and societal expectations are tough on both men and women. The fact that women's place in the world needs to be analysed and studies doesn't rule out that men's place also deserves respectful attention.

I should add that the university has possibly approved the course in good faith, realising (as most people do) that the physical and psychological health issues particular to men do require serious academic attention.

And it is very crafty of the MRAs to use men's health as an angle into academia, as it is a legitimate topic. But I'm sure they won't stop there. Their real agenda is anti-feminism, and we should not be surprised to see the usual MRA obsessions (all of which revolve in some way around regaining men's control over women and children, which the feminist movement has eroded) popping up in new male studies courses soon.

Don't fall for UniSA's spin. The fact remains that two of the lecturers for this course have been published on the viciously misogynist hate site A Voice for Men.

Here's one of them in his own words, from the OP's link:

Male Studies lecturer Greg Andresen is also the Australian correspondent for US-based site National Coalition For Men, which declares false rape accusations to be "psychological rape", argues that talking about violence against women makes men invisible.

Asked about his connection to NCFM, he said they were the longest-running organisation in the world to look at discrimination against men and boys.

"Certainly they don't shy away from touching issues like false rape allegations, domestic violence, some of those hot topics," he said.

"We have had 20 if not 30 or 40 years where the only study on gender has been from a feminist perspective … that's why I think this course is so long overdue."

So he is explicitly characterising the course as something that is needed in order to counter feminism. Andresen is also the founder of the One in Three campaign, which aims to convince people that women commit domestic violence at close to the same rates as men.

The men's health stuff is just a cover. The salient point here, and one which should be very worrying to feminists, is that MRAs have gotten a foot in academia. As they are highly organised and determined, I'm sure they'll proceed to leverage their new position to the fullest extent, utilising the language of 'equality'.

The MRA movement is making advances every day - in the courts, and now in the universities.

Hazchem, slightly off-topic, but given you are a fellow Aussie and seem a bit more clued up on this stuff that I am atm, what do you think about the Mens Shed movement? I've just come across it and am having a bit of a wtf? moment. I mean, what it is supposed to be combating is serious - male depression, suicide, esp the situation in rural Australia- and something needs to be done, but it also seems, from another perspective like a whole group of mens' clubs, funded by all levels of Australian government. I may also be slightly biased in that I am a keen woodworker who would love to be able to go along to a local council funded place which has tools, courses and so on.

it just seems a bit of a weird way to address the issue.

It's not you, haz, it's how the link puts it.

Personally, I think it's disappointing we've got to a point where gender studies centres (which used to be women's studies) might now need feminists to split off and teach feminist theory elsewhere.

I would like just to see 'women's studies' back.

I think it is possible to 'switch off' and study without bringing in explicit feminist theory, but not possible to stop noticing feministy stuff. But what's wrong with that?

Oh and not sure if this should be another thread but... If you start looking at things through a feminist lens is it ever possible to stop? I'm studying sociology at the moment and I keep asking myself but "what about women?" when I look at the other theories.

No, I don't think it is possible. Ever since I had my 'scales falling from eyes' moment, I can't look at anything without analysing it through a feminist lens. I seem to spend a lot of my life now in a state of mild fury at the world, so I sincerely wish I could stop occasionally!

The actual content of the course will be extremely useful, especially the health promotion aspects of it. Traditionally single men aren't too good at taking themselves off to the GP if they display worrying symptoms, and it can never be a bad thing that they understand that x is not good, and to speak to a HCP.

The way the first article described it was that it was MRA 101, and who in their right minds wants anyone taught anything so hateful?

Although it does piss me off that women's studies tends to become gender studies...because studying 'gender' as a real phenomenon isn't compatible with quite a bit of feminism, and from what little I've seen, it is often 'gender as a reality' rather than 'gender as a construct'.

Agree wholeheartedly with this.

Looking at the university's statement it seems as though the course is just in male health issues, not MRA 101 at all. Personally I'm meh about this. There's solid statistical evidence that men - particularly young, poor men - have pretty bad health outcomes on a number of fronts and given that it's not massively unreasonable for a healthcare education provider to run a course in those specific issues.

Yes, I get that - I was more commenting out of confusion about terminology on this thread, because like jac, my first thought was 'uh ... but it isn't, why would they pretend it was'.

Yes but it was presented in the Australian media as a men's rights are like women's rights type OMG course.

Nobody has an issue now that the uni has said, errrrrrrr, it is so not that at all. Except for the issue of why this was presented in the way it was.

We're quietly confused as to what Rupert wanted as well ;)

Although it does piss me off that women's studies tends to become gender studies - not in terms of 'how dare you include menz in my academia', but because studying 'gender' as a real phenomenon isn't compatible with quite a bit of feminism, and from what little I've seen, it is often 'gender as a reality' rather than 'gender as a construct'.

Bit confused.

I know shitloads of people who study what I suppose could be called 'male studies' (they usually call it 'masculinities'). I know someone who's just brought a book out on fatherhood as a cultural phenomenon and I've just been looking at it, and it's fascinating.

This should be completely separate from twits trying to pull of the whole 'men's rights are like women's rights' thing. But it is a perfectly valid thing to study.

(Guess I'm saying similar to jac).

Never mind, now they can all assume we hate the menz.

Is that not what some in radical feminism would want? What is the background of the author of the piece the OP quoted, Tory Shepherd?

I can't see the problem if there was a course that explored all aspects of being a man. Discussions on male suicide rates, homelessness and man on man violence seem sensible and exploring what are the keystones behind them. Surely within gender studies there are two genders and both deserve to be understood, otherwise I am sending a message to my boys whatever you face in life has no value because others think only women's studies within the bounds of gender studies are worth while. Sorry but if we want equality surely both sides need to be understood and valued.

It's worrying isn't hazchem? Never mind, now they can all assume we hate the menz.

Seriously though how this course was represented in the Australian media was bizarre compared to what it actually appears to be. Excuse some of us for going WTF? It did not appear to be a simple course on men's health, it appeared to be MRA 101 in reaction to feminism.

I don't understand all the press this simple course on men's health is getting.

A) it seems to bear no relation to the anti-feminist stuff that is being reported in the media

and

B) men's studies courses and modules already exist at several places (eg here or here or here)

Actually, if you are Australian, the anger is understandable. I assume your universities are subsidised to some extent by the tax payer. What a load of pseudo-scientific bollocks.