Katz holds a classic both-sides view of men and women. In other words, yes, men have been bad to women, but women are just as bad to men.
This is easily debunked if you do nothing more than look at which gender is more likely to kill members of the other gender. As The Atlantic reported in July:
The CDC analyzed the murders of women in 18 states from 2003 to 2014, finding a total of 10,018 deaths. Of those, 55 percent were intimate partner violence-related, meaning they occurred at the hands of a former or current partner or the partner’s family or friends. In 93 percent of those cases, the culprit was a current or former romantic partner. The report also bucks the strangers-in-dark-alleys narrative common to televised crime dramas: Strangers perpetrated just 16 percent of all female homicides, fewer than acquaintances and just slightly more than parents.
Obviously men are not killed 55% of the time by their former or current partners, partner's family or friends. Men are killed by male strangers far more often.
Now I didn't have to look this up to have a rough idea it was true. I pay attention to the news, read magazine articles, etc. But if need be, it's easy enough to confirm via a Google search for online data. But I suspect that the kind of woman who looks to Katz as an authority on anything isn't well-informed and is unlikely to look things up for herself.
Meanwhile Katz promotes traditional gender-role men as mates to his audience - the kind of men who are more likely to commit violence against women.
Now he occasionally nods towards the problems of men being horrible to women - he mentions the MeToo movement. It looks good to the suckers.
Then he follows it up by citing Camille Paglia, the world's most famous lesbian misogynist, saying nice things about Hugh Hefner.
Misogynists like to reinforce each other so here's Katz approving of Paglia's idiocy:
- Men and women are more the same than ever before and it’s hurt the dating dynamic.
- Men should be more courtly and chivalrous to women.
- There is no male defense of sexual assault or harrassment.
- Women could benefit by embracing the feminine, eschewing victimhood, and not lumping all men in with the worst of men.
This demonstrates just exactly how full of piping hot shit Evan Marc Katz is when it comes to "believing women" which he claims for himself in the blog post about MeToo.
In the view of Katz and Paglia, women are not justified in feeling like actual victims in a world of frequent sexual assault in the workplace and frequent violent assault in the home. Acknowledging the horrors of living in such a world is considered "victimhood" by professional misogynists Katz and Paglia.
One of Katz's sad followers quotes Paglia approvingly in the comments below his post:
“I was horrified, horrified by the pink pussy hats,” she said; the pink pussy hats were “a major embarrassment to contemporary feminism.”
Of course Paglia would say that. She hates women and she loves Donald Trump.
And that is the essence of what Evan Marc Katz does to his audience - citing misogynists with approval to make them feel like worthless losers so they'll agree to relationships with awful men. Because the important thing is Evan Marc Katz's track record and there are far more single assholes than single good guys in the world. Pushing women to go for creeps helps Evan Marc Katz's business and that's what any snake-oil salesman cares about.
And when these horrible men treat those women like inferiors the women will accept it for the cause of "vive la difference" and they will not ask for help because they've been advised by Evan Marc Katz and Camille Paglia to "eschew victimhood."
And when these horrible men treat those women like inferiors the women will accept it for the cause of "vive la difference" and they will not ask for help because they've been advised by Evan Marc Katz and Camille Paglia to "eschew victimhood."
I really hope one of the victims of Katz's horrific advice sues that little weasel some day.