CDC Spends $1 Million on “Manhood 2.0” To Bring “Healthy Masculinities” To Young Black Men

CDC Spends $1 Million on “Manhood 2.0” To Bring “Healthy Masculinities” To Young Black Men

Who spends almost a $1 million dollar chunk of change on a program to change gender norms? The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, of course!

The project, entitled “Manhood 2.0” seeks to produce “healthy masculinities” in young black males in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania using a curriculum which involves “identifying examples of policing gender and sexuality” and teaches young men that masculinity is not about physical strength.

So now, gender is a “disease”. Especially if you’re a young, black male. HOW, pray tell, is this not offensive to the black community?

According to The Washington Free Beacon, The study is enrolling 900 teenagers in 14 community centers in Pittsburgh into its “Manhood 2.0 curriculum” or a job skills program, to see which program is better at changing attitudes about sexual assault.

The “Manhood 2.0” curriculum or a job skills program. Sadly, this should not be an either or proposition. Why not give them both? Elizabeth Miller, professor of pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh who is leading the study, provides more details on what exactly is “gender transformative programming”:

“‘Gender transformative programming’ involves identifying and challenging rigid masculinity norms about what it means to be a man, identifying examples of policing gender and sexuality (through media messages), and envisioning different ways of expressing one’s masculinity (that does not involve physical strength, use of violence, sexual conquest).”

The CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control first awarded a grant for the project to the University of Pittsburgh last year. The study has cost $899,364 thus far, and its budget will not expire until September 2016.

Challenging rigid masculinity norms. Policing gender and sexuality through the media (good luck with that one) and envisioning different ways of expressing masculinity. Hmmm. I can get behind encouraging young men to not use violence and treat women as sexual conquests. On this level, I commend the University of Pittsburgh attempting to reach out to young black males. However, I don’t think emasculating young men of any socioeconomic background turns them into real men, either. To contrast a curriculum such as “Manhood 2.0” with a job skills program to see which program is better at changing attitudes about sexual assault is preposterous.

These young men don’t need a $1 million dollar curriculum to turn them into “deep thinkers”. If the CDC wants to target young men in the inner cities, they are not going to to it with philosophical academia. These young men need life skills and a sense of accomplishment. They need to learn to be independent and not dependent on the government. They need a purpose. They need the truth about sexuality and to be taught how to have healthy relationships with young women. They need a positive male role model in their lives. The rest will fall in line.

We live in a world where we don’t want to be “policed” but we need to “police” gender and sexuality. We live in a world where some want to blur the lines of gender definitions and do away with the distinction of “boy” or “girl”, “man” or “woman”. We have men unhappy with the fact that they are anatomically male and women unhappy about the fact that they are anatomically female. We live in a world that is inundated with body shaming (Photoshop is everywhere) and sexual images of women yet our young men are told they need they need to keep themselves in check. Good luck with that! We have heterosexual “feminists” who go off and shame men who open doors for them but are totally cool with their boyfriends giving them the “thumbs up” on an abortion. The sad irony is that our government is flicking Benjamins off the balcony to take care of this confusion they’ve in part created with regard to “rigid masculinity norms”.

Written by

  • Appalled By The World says:

    I see this as just more worship of Jug Ears in the White House. THAT is now the ideal “man” as he is the GLOAM (Genius Leader Of All Mankind). The media constantly tells us of the GLOAM’s triumphs in all he does-politics, diplomacy, race relations, golf, transforming the nation, etc. What boy in their right mind wouldn’t want to emulate such a perfect “man”? I know I feel so inadequate when compared to such perfection. Now it’s the right time to create a whole line of Obomobots- genetic engineering will probably head in that direction as well in the future. It sure is nice to see tax money so well spent!

  • Lisa Carr says:

    I think it all comes from within and no government program can teach “values” based on academic theory. We all know that’s where POTUS got his (values) from (in addition to liberal, anti-American family members and role models.) These kids cannot depend on society to tell them what is right and what is wrong or to re-invent manhood or “gender roles”. It has nothing to do with “rigid masculinity” and everything to do with how our jacked-up society paints masculine strength. Masculine strength is not always overpowering women with sexist remarks, innuendo and bravado. Masculine power and strength isn’t always equated with sexual assault! In fact, I would see that as a sign of masculine weakness! Sometimes, masculine strength is as simple as a man having an ounce of responsibility for himself and his actions and his family (if he has one.) I don’t think it take a $1 million dollar study to figure that out but that’s just me…

  • I agree; if not overtly racist, it is overtly demeaning. It is progressive in the usual sense, where empty souls use government to tell the lesser people how they should be.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner