Last week, while you were distractedly waiting for one of the presidential candidates to just go ahead and choose Michael Phelps as his running mate, a Manhattan lawyer sued Columbia University for discriminating against men.
In a news release, Roy Den Hollander, who's best known for suing Manhattan nightclubs because they offered free or discounted Ladies Night drinks to women, claimed the university could not use government money, such as federal financial aid, to fund its Institute for Research on Women and Gender. Women's studies courses, he maintained, discriminate against men and are therefore in violation of the Fifth and 14th amendments. He also called Columbia a "bastion of bigotry against men ... (that has) thrown its influence and prestige into violating the rights of men by offering a women's studies program but no men's studies program."
Two questions come to mind (and, for the record, I have a degree from Columbia). First, how did an institution that kept its undergraduate women in a separate college across the street (Barnard) until 1983 manage to become a "bastion of bigotry against men" in such a short time? Second, when did women's studies gather enough steam to pose a legitimate threat to men?
I'm not suggesting there aren't certain strains of feminism that unfairly dismiss the male perspective. But come on, how much damage can be done by term papers with names like "Reappropriations of Patriarchal Narratives: A Gaia-Centric Interrogation"?
Quite a lot, apparently. When I called Den Hollander, he explained that women's studies departments offer networking opportunities from which females benefit more than males, even though men are allowed to take the courses.
quot;The courses pretty much treat guys as if they're sources of evil in the world and the women are victims," Den Hollander said. "I'm using the same argument here as we have with Title IX. When a university receives government funding, they have to provide equal opportunities for men and women. If there's no men's studies, women's studies is unconstitutional."
I know what you're wondering, and the answer is yes. Men's studies exists in the broader academic world, although Columbia doesn't have a men's studies department. It explores such subjects as "paradigms of fatherhood" and "gendered violence." And according to Harry Brod, editor of the scholarly book "The Making of Masculinities: The New Men's Studies," it's an outgrowth of the feminist movement. "If Roy Den Hollander really understood what men's studies was," Brod told me, "he wouldn't be in favor of it."
Den Hollander, for his part, hasn't gotten that far. "I don't know if men's studies even exists," he said. "But whenever you make a charge that you're favoring one group over the other, they either have to make it equal or eliminate the first one. I'd like to see every women's studies program throughout the country eliminated."