Paul Lanning talks his realization that he is a feminist, and tries to understand what that means in today’s world.
This article originally ran at Above The Field.
I never realized, until recently, that a man could be a feminist. It still sounds odd to me. When I hear the term I think of Gloria Steinem, or even of the mythical Rosie the Riveter from World War II. I never think of guys who believe in equality as ‘feminists.’ And maybe that’s part of the problem.
Feminism shouldn’t just be about strong women asserting themselves and vocally fighting for their place. It really should be about anyone and everyone who believes in equality standing up for those who traditionally have been and continue to be oppressed. This is true of gender as much as it’s true of races or religions (or the right not to practice a religion at all).
I grew up relatively oblivious. As a young white male in a relatively diverse California suburb attending public schools, I really never noticed overt signs of racism. And while I’m sure I was exposed to sexism, I didn’t recognize it. After all, I was a white male. What would I know?
In recent months I feel like I’ve had an awakening of some kind. Thanks to the rhetoric of the GOP primary season, I was spurred to start exploring what exactly was going on around me. I had trouble believing what I was hearing and seeing during the debates, and some of the restrictive legislation that was being proposed (and passed!) in states around the country. This surely wasn’t the Republican Party I was a part of decades ago, when I was a member of the College Republicans chapter on my college campus. The more I listened, the more I read, the less I could comprehend.
I recall flashing back at one point to a time in college when I stood listening to two Chinese students who had escaped their homeland after the Tiananmen Square massacre. It was one of the most moving experiences of my life, realizing both what these students and their peers had been through simply for espousing freedom, and how lucky (and sheltered) I was as a white male American. I got that same feeling recently, as I heard about women being censured for speaking out in the Michigan legislature, and Arizona passing a law allowing doctors to lie to women patients in the interest of putting the fetus ahead of the mother.
I began following the discourse more closely, and interacting with some fascinating writers who weren’t afraid to have their voices heard. I listened, and discovered that indeed I have been sheltered, and oblivious.
When conservative white males (and the lemmings among the female species who follow them) put their own religion ahead of basic human rights, I am appalled. When sexual misconduct is laughed at or downplayed, my stomach turns. When doctors are able to keep potentially life-threatening news from a pregnant woman in the name of religion, I am in disbelief.
I don’t think I’m in the minority. I don’t believe that the majority of white males in America believe women are second-class citizens, playthings kept around to keep men happy but not to have minds or wills of their own. I can’t imagine that’s the state of our society in the 21st Century, despite what I continue to read and hear.
Yesterday I read of a sexual assault in Washington DC that occurred not long ago. A bicyclist cruised up to a woman and stuck his hand up her skirt, violating her very being before riding away laughing. It would be easy to pass this off as an isolated incident of some pervert getting his kicks, except that this particular woman victim (Liz Gorman) wrote a blog about it, and hundreds responded with their own stories of similar experiences and worse.
Thank goodness this woman and others like her are speaking out instead of staying silent. Thank goodness they’re upsetting the status quo. Thank goodness they’re waking people like me up to what is going on around us every day.
It’s always been hard for me to fathom that just months after I was born, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated, or that not long before that, not every citizen in this country could vote. It’s hard for me to believe that when both of my grandmothers were children, their own mothers weren’t legally able to vote. And I wonder what is becoming of our hard-fought freedoms today when our society seems deeply divided like no time I can remember, and a powerful segment seeks to limit or deny basic rights of others.
I fear for our future when I see adolescent and college-age guys being spoon-fed rapacious porn and jocular yet overtly sexist advertising that just feed into their levels of testosterone at that age. Couple this with how we continue to muffle women’s voices about sexual needs and desires, and we are raising another generation of coarse, close-minded men who rally around Daniel Tosh and don’t think twice about their sense of privilege or entitlement. Basically: bad lovers, bad fathers, absentee husbands. I grew up knowing the experience of having an adulterous, alcoholic father, and far too often I was an absentee husband in my own failed marriage, far more focused on career than relationship. That cycle needs to stop.
The stereotypical male is a sexist pig. He sees women as merchandise to be gazed at, and groped at. He sees himself as the master of his domain, and sex as HIS enjoyment, or even as his conquest. He may know of boundaries, but often feels they don’t apply to him. He laughs at sexist jokes, he gawks at pretty ladies like a slobbering schoolboy, and he is enabled and empowered by an advertising industry that gears its print and television ads at him – because, after all, the stereotypical male is the head of household, the breadwinner, and the decision maker.
I know this firsthand. I ran numerous websites and published a sexy cheerleaders calendar years ago that pandered to this demographic, and did it well. I gave no consideration to the fact that I was feeding the sexism machine, subjugating and objectifying women in the interest of making a buck. After all, the models I worked with were professionals who were thrilled to be on the sites or in the calendars, and my target demographic was those stereotypical white males who buy the merchandise.
It’s time for feminism to be mainstream. It’s time for open-minded, forward-thinking men to realize that equality means embracing feminism. Feminism isn’t a bad word. It’s simply a cry for fairness in an unfair world dominated for far too long by a small segment of white males who have convinced too many of us that speaking out is wrong, that having a voice is a privilege rather than a right, and that somehow they know what’s best for all of us.
I shouldn’t be ashamed to be a white male. I shouldn’t feel like I need to explain myself and my views to women who automatically see me as a threat, or even as the enemy, simply because I am a white male. But I am, and I often do.
It’s far past time that men start listening, instead of always expecting to dominate the conversation. Only then will we be able to start ridding ourselves of the shameful stereotypes that we’ve been saddled with thanks to the brutish ways of many of our species.
I’m a white male, and now I know I’m also feminist. And thank goodness for that. THAT I don’t need to apologize for.
Photo— psd/Flickr
“The stereotypical male is a sexist pig” Certainly I don´t follow the GMP to read this classic view on men, that by the way it´s not true. It´s this kind of labeling that feminist promotes that makes me unlike them. Believe me Feminist have made themselves heard. So loud, that any politician must make an statement about protecting women to be in the right track. But let me tell you something. There are a lot of situations where men have been discriminated. And there are a lot of laws that are against men. The world doesn´t need more feminist. Women know how to speak their mind.. and do it loud. But do we men know?
Thanks for reading, and for your comment…I did say in the same piece that “I don’t think I’m in the minority. I don’t believe that the majority of white males in America believe women are second-class citizens, playthings kept around to keep men happy but not to have minds or wills of their own.” I was simply making a point that that stereotype is out there, not that I agree with it.
Very interesting…Do you realize that as a white male in the US, you have ZERO right to control your own reproduction. If your sperm is taken (by force, by coercion, by trickery etc), you have zero right to control what is done with it. This so called war on women is in alot of cases simply saying “if you want the right to control your body, then YOU pay for it, not the rest of us”. For men like yourself, you have no rights, none whatsoever. Have you ever heard of a woman who was forced by a man to pay for a child that wasn’t hers because he tricked her into it. I doubt. It amazes me the amount of male guilt that society has shoved onto the males of today. You quote history about your grandmothers mother when in reality you are living in an age where males such as yourself have no rights whatsoever unless you sign up for selective service. BTW, have a look at your grandmothers father, depending on how rich he was, he may not have had voting rights much before his wife.
Feminism as you describe it is about taking the tolls and trials of their ancestors and attempting to conflate that with modern society. Feminism isn’t about equality, if it were large feminists orgs would not be against shared parenting, against equal access and rights for controlling your reproductive destiny, about equal access to DV shelters etc. Modern feminism is about special privs and access to all the money that entails.
Thank you for reading, and sharing your thoughts…
First and foremost, I have complete control over my sperm. Any responsible man does. It goes nowhere that I don’t take it.
Second, I think there are many different definitions of feminism, including the more radical view you point out. I’m not sure that’s the ‘modern. definition so much as it’s one extreme. I believe gender equality is another definition, and much more palatable (and necessary) than the one you describe.
Actually Paul, if you are raped, you have zero control over your sperm. And sadly female perpetrated rape of men is actually extremely common.
Hmm…ok…thank you for pointing that out. I had not considered (in my own naivete) that as a common occurrence, or one which I would experience, but you are absolutely right in bringing it up as an example of lack of control.
That said, barring rape or other such anomalies I do believe generally speaking that we men are in control of where we put our sperm.
We have some control of course, an ability to reduce the chance of impregnating or spreading STI’s but it isn’t perfect sadly. I do hope in the future for much better contraceptive methods which would help negate most of the problems regarding unwanted pregnancy. I think the worst lack of control is when male minors have been made to pay child support to adults as the adult got pregnant during statutory rape of that male.
I think Janet’s point was that A) many men are lied to in “oops I forgot to take my pill” ploys, and there have been cases in which women have actually retrieved sperm from used condoms to impregnate themselves (or even sperm from oral sex used to impregnate) and the courts still ruled the men must pay for the resultant child.
Men have zero ability post-conception (or even post-ejaculation in instances where the man would have no real expectation of a birth ensuing, because the woman acted in a fraudulent fashion) ability to control whether or not he will become a parent.
If you think that’s okay, let me turn it around.
Women have a 0% chance of being forcibly turned into a parent by a man. Don’t you think that is a privilege? If you think it’s just biology then you’re not thinking very deep.
There is a growing movement to allow men to create a “legal financial abortion” and surrender all rights and responsibilities to the child. The overwhelming majority of feminists I have talked to on the internet are against this, even though women have many post conception options up to and including legal abandonment.
Something seems wrong when we can’t acknowledge that women have a very great control over men’s reproduction. Additionally, it’s not about biology it’s about the laws and they are terribly anti-male.
On the flip side, when a man does want to take part in raising a child and the mother does not, the powers-that-be routinely interfere with a fathers right to parent his own children.
Mothers win primary custody 80% in divorce to fathers 6%. It’s time to start advocating for men when and where it is necessary and where they suffer a disproportionate amount of a societal ill.
I don’t see (on balance most) feminists do this, and that is why feminism does not = equality.
Typo: The 3rd paragraph from end should have said:
On the flip side, when a man does want to take part in raising a child and the mother does not (want him to be a part of the children’s lives), the powers-that-be routinely interfere with a fathers right to parent his own children.
“And sadly female perpetrated rape of men is actually extremely common.”
You’re speaking of physical assault? Stats to back this claim up?
Look at the new CDC report on interpersonal violence.
For male respondents reporting in the last 12 months, very nearly as many men reported being “forced to penetrate” as women reported completed rapes.
The upshot is that men make up 46% of rapes when we expand the definition of rape to include “forced to penetrate” (or what others on this board have called forced envelopment).
Thanks.
I’m confused. PHYSICALLY forced to penetrate? Overpowered physically by a woman?
I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but extremely common how?
46% of rapes are by women — are you saying this right now? In the U.S.?
Or are you speaking of abuse by an adult woman to a boy or emotional or verbal abuse by an adult female to an adult male?
Please be more explicit. I didn’t realize men were being forced to have sex with women so much.
Adult women and adult men.
From the CDC NISVS 2010 -
“Being made to penetrate someone else includes times when the victim was made to,
or there was an attempt to make them, sexually penetrate someone without the victim’s consent because the victim was physically forced (such as being pinned or held down, or by the use of violence) or threatened with physical harm, or when the victim was drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent.”
Gotcha. And, you’re saying that almost half of the rapes that occur in the U.S. (assuming that’s what you meant by “the upshot is that men make up 46% of rapes” — not that there is an upshot to rape, but OK) have female perpetrators against male victims? Are you serious?
From what I remember it worked out to be about 40% female rapist/perpetrator, 60% male rapist/perp for a one year period. But the tricky part is many stats don’t include “forced to penetrate” under their definition for rape so often you can say nearly all rapists are men as the most common form of female perpetrated rape is forcing a man to penetrate her. It’s annoying that they don’t just make rape defined as forcibly penetrated or forcing someone to penetrate, which is the definition I use.
Basically a lot of male sexual abuse isn’t in the spotlight because of the lack of FTP covered by the rape definition and often the big news stories talk about rape and not other forms of sexual abuse. This means you can create a bias in media and reporting where a lot of male sexual abuse victimization perpetrated by women goes unheard of, which is why I am guessing you are shocked to hear it.
For a long time I heard the old “99% of rapists were men” line but new stats are proving otherwise if you use the expanded definition. A lot of women are forcing men to penetrate them, and whilst it’s not as high as men forcing women to have sex it’s still very high at approximately 60%male 40% female perpetrators from what I’ve seen in the stats.
Forced to penetrate is also called Envelopment just for future reference, but yes in a 1 year period the number of men and women who were forcibly penetrated or forced to penetrate were an equal 1.1%, with 79.2% of the males reporting a female perpetrator. The stat didn’t include men being forcibly penetrated and I believe prison stats were left out as well so the number is most likely different but there would have been a 40% female 60% male (+-1% or so) distribution in those rapists/perpetrators.
I think it’ll be impossible to get a very accurate picture of how many people get raped, statistics give a good guide but either way female perpetration is not as low as many think. It may not overtake male perpetration, but it’s a HUGE problem with very little attention currently, even if there are only 1/4 the amount of male victims compared to female victims (I made this part up for the argument’s sake) that is still a huge amount of people getting abused with nearly all anti-rape material being targetted to the typical Female victim, Male perpetrator setup. Most male victim material I see only talks about male victim, male perpetrator. I have rarely seen any material on male victim, female perp (which I think outnumbers male victim, male perp) or female victim, female perp setups.
Regardless of the stats, I hope it has made you aware of the huge amount of abuse that is going on largely in silence, spread the word so we can combat all combinations of victim n perpetrator so no one suffers in silence. If you know any organization that has material/posters etc showing male victims, female perpetrators, or non-gendered material I’d love to see it as I am trying to find some to help make others aware of the problem.
If you exclude the qualifier about the assailant being female when men are “forced to penetrate” then male victims do account for 46% of the victim total in this anonymous survey.
Curious writes:
“Thanks.
I’m confused. PHYSICALLY forced to penetrate? Overpowered physically by a woman?”
Curious: think of it this way. Do you really think only men let lust overpower their brain?
Not that you necessarily said this, but many feminists fight tooth and nail against the idea of innate gender differences (i.e. men make better cops/soldiers/engineers). But in order to believe that women don’t rape too, one would have to internalize *intense* perceptions of gender differences.
Additionally, you (and most) people think this doesn’t pass the sniff test, because a lot of people believe that women are not sexual beings. Imagine the *much greater shame* of a man reporting having been raped by a woman over woman reporting having been raped by a man.
If many people internalize the message that men are sexual animals and women are asexual saints, then many confirm their bias when they hear of a woman having been raped. But, when a man reports rape by a woman he faces even more intense stigmatization and people wonder: all men are supposed to want sex, why would this man turn down sex? What’s wrong with him?
This even goes to authorities and media.
Look to this story about a man forcibly imprisoned by a woman. Instead of rape and rapist the terms used are “sex ordeal” and “nymphomaniac”
ht tp://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/man-found-sobbing-in-street-after-813563
And here:
http://www.genderratic.com/p/1448/if-it-happened-to-men-2/
Is a very good take-down of the misandry of this article on the blog genderratic.
If we want to fight sexism, then we need to fight preconceived notions of the bestiality of men, and the saintliness of women.
Another thing to remember: men’s genitals are on the outside of his body, and very vulnerable to attack when nude. I remember reading a story in which a drunk woman who had a man’s pants down who became enraged when he turned her down, physically ripped his testicles off with her bare hands. It wouldn’t take nearly this amount of force for a man to relent I believe.
Additionally, the man (like you) would internalize the message that it wasn’t really rape because he is a man and he must after all want sex.
Odd that people are referring to statistics without links to their sources. Oh well.
Here’s the report that seems to be the source of much of what is being put forth on this thread. It’s the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey from the CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/). Here’s the 124-page summary report (.pdf link): http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf. It doesn’t seem to say what others on this thread seem to think it says.
Essentially, to summarize 124 pages into a couple of sentences:
1. Men and women are both at risk for sexual violence.
2. Most female victims experience sexual violence from male perpetrators.
3. Most male victims of rape and unwanted sexual experience come from male perpetrators.
I don’t know where folks are getting their statistical information, but it doesn’t appear to be from that survey, or at least it’s a very different reading of the material that I know of. Is there a section of that report that I’m misreading?
Hey Tyler. I gave the citation of what study it was. If somebody wants a link in addition all they have to do is ask.
From that study and per Archy quoting the study when men are “forced to penetrate” 79.2% of the time their assialants are women.
So, your bullet point #3 is wrong. And it should read:
#3 rape of men (when expanded to include “forced to penetrate”) is nearly equal to that of women, and 80% of the time their assailant is a woman.
Hi, John — I would like a link to that study. The only study I see referenced in that CDC study that I used as a link. Is there a different study?
From the executive summary within their report — specifically referencing the perpetrators on page 3 of the .pdf file, which references the “Number and Sex of Perpetrators” — I’m afraid that I would have to stand by my third bullet point as an accurate — if incomplete — summary of their finding with regard to perpetrators of sexual violence.
But, when digging deeper, I see where you’re coming from. On page 24, where the report goes into more detail of their findings regarding the sex of the perpetrators, there is some reference to your figure, which is about a specific breakdown of a specific “unwanted sexual experience” involving penetration. That section of the document is specifically about male victims of sexual violence, and the indication is that in about 80% of the cases of “forced penetration”, the perpetrator was female. So essentially it’s saying that 20% of the time the perpetrator of a male victim of penetration was also male, and that 80% of the time the perpetrator was female. So I think I understand your reading of the data now.
That’s not to say that I agree with your analysis of the data, but I’m willing to read the fuller report and take some time to digest it. Unfortunately you’re running into some of my own preconceived biases when it comes to male victimization of sexually-based crimes and it may take me some time to resolve my biases with the data presented. Clearly the writers of the report’s executive summary did not read that data in the same manner that you did, so I’m reluctant to fully agree with your analysis per se. However, you do make a good point, and I’ll need to think about the material you’ve presented.
hey Tyler,
Thanks for not getting combative and looking into the numbers with an open mind. I haven’t looked at the report in a while, but based on 1.1% of men responding about being forced to penetrate (in the last 12 months) and 1.3% of women responding a completed rape the sidenotes in the report give estimated # of victims for America.
Based on those estimated # of victims I arrived at men being the victim of rape in 46% of all cases (although only 80% of those victims reported their victimization at the hands of women).
“. Most male victims of rape and unwanted sexual experience come from male perpetrators.”
Read forced to penetrate, because this statement is extremely inaccurate.
Like saying most deaths happen by being struck by lightning or spontaneous combustion.
Most male DV victims and most male rape victims, are victims of female perpetrators (just as the reverse is true for female victims). It’s easier to approach victims and/or to be in a domestic situation (for DV) if you’re heterosexual,…because, numbers. They matter.
That’s an interesting statement. Where do you get your data that supports that statement?
I’m honestly curious as to where you’re getting your information. Perhaps I can learn something.
Table 2.1/2.2, read down from there to page 24 or so in the FULL report. The summary report is biased and hides a lot of male victimization.
The report also does not count men being forced to penetrate as rape so that’s the big bias, most of us however are counting it as so because quite frankly I have no time for anyone that wouldn’t call forcing a man to penetrate someone, rape.
I haven’t seen this discussed by any of the anti-rape campaigns yet which leads me to believe that they either don’t read statistics properly, or they are biased in wanting to show women as suffering far far more than men. These stats prove however men face similar levels (not exact of course) of sexual violence as women ranging from 1/3 to 1:1 (for rape/forced to penetrate in a 1 year period) of the level women face.
I replied above to John’s point before reading your reply to my request. It looks like I may have found the section that you’re refering to on my own, and it’s worth looking at and thinking about further.
For now, as a person who’s been in a long-term relationship for over 20 year, I’m certainly willing to acknowledge that relationship strains go both ways, and that in-relationship violence can cut against both men and women within that relationship.
And it’s a fairly recent societal change that even acknowledges that rape can occur within an established relationship, so it’s not surprising that we as a society are only now grappling with the possibilities that unwanted sexual contact — including rape — can cut both ways.
I’m still not willing to buy that men face similar levels of sexual violence as women (for that I’ll really need to see some data), but I’m willing to acknowledge that the amount of sexual violence that men face is a fairly significant percentage (well over 1/4) of the total amount of sexual violence that all people face, and that a high percentage of the perpetrators of such violence are women. I’ll also agree that the issue of male sexual victimization is not nearly as widely discussed as it should be.
For what it’s worth though, I do teach sex education to middle school students (http://www.uua.org/re/owl/), and we make it quite clear that the victims of sexual violence are not only women, and that the perpetrators of such violence are not only men.
I’m glad you teach that both are harmed and also both can be perpetrators.
Some possible reasons a woman can overpower a man:
There is a commenter on the GMP who said he was told she would say he raped her if he didn’t have sex with her, so that would be coersion which probably isn’t listed under forced to penetrate.
Being threatened with violence can overpower a man, even by a woman.
As we can see with domestic abuse women are no strangers to committing violence and with social expectations such as telling men to never hit women this can go far enough that men do not even defend themselves from women. Even large n strong men can be scared of women who are physically weaker, since strength alone doesn’t dictate the outcome but you need the mental ability to fight back. Men can be pinned down by women especially if they are afraid that if they harm them they will get into trouble, a popular thought is that the police will side with the woman in ANY physical altercation, hell even I am scared that if a woman were to call the police that her word alone could land me into a shitload of trouble. I’d probably go along with her demands just to avoid the legal trouble because defending myself could get ME into a lot of strife. I am 6’6, large body but even a small woman could pin me down if she can grapple properly or if I was too afraid to fight back (which is very common). Also a lot of women can be larger than their partners so they have the physical advantage.
Another common method is when alcohol is added to the mix, I have a friend who woke up to a woman raping him by using his penis with intercourse without his consent, being drunk he was unable to fight back anyway.
The threat of violence itself can be scary enough to get someone to do whatever you want. Women can also successfully threaten to take the kids, divorce the male, etc which can play into a very real fear many men have and thus many will do whatever she wants so they don’t lose the kids.
We like to think that women are so weak and men are so strong that men are the big bad guys n women are the innocent lil angels that can do no harm but the truth is A HUGE amount of violence goes on that isn’t talked about much, isn’t known about and it hides behind those stereotypes of male = aggressor, female = victim. Who would believe a man who was raped by a woman? As someone posted earlier about the man who was raped by a “nymphomanic”, so many people think it’s funny, that he is lucky, that he must have wanted it, and I’m sure many think that he had complete control to leave when he wanted to.
New statistics are proving that men are far more vulnerable, and women perpetrate violence far more than we currently believe as a people. It’s time people let go of old gendered beliefs of violence n realize that violence can affect anyone, that anyone can commit violence whether they are 100lbs or 400lbs, that a 100lb woman can inflict just as much serious trauma as a 250lb man especially given that weapons can be used, that women can kill, women can rape, women can torture, women can emotionally, physically, n sexually abuse men at significantly high rates, sometimes up to 50:50 alongside the male perpetrators.
Women are not weak, men are not invincible. I’ve seen strong men absolutely gutted by women half their size, hell with just myself some of the worst pain n bullying I’ve felt was from women. Some of the most damaging bullying n abuse I’ve had were by spoken word n actions, not physical touching, hitting, etc. This is the number 1 failure of many people in that they don’t understand that physical abuse isn’t the only SEVERELY harmful type of abuse and too much importance is placed on physical, which in turn focuses on who is the bigger, the stronger, which is usually the man. So a lot of people see the worst type of abuse as physical and that men can easily defend themselves from women, which just isn’t true because our world, our bodies, our minds, our self-defense mechanisms are far more complex than that.
Well, Archy — I didn’t think we’d come to agreement so easily on the Internet! I can’t say that there’s anything in your post that I disagree with whatsoever.
When nonphysical methods of coercion (alcohol, threats, deception) are introduced, women and men are equals in their ability to act in a sexually abusive manner. Of that I have no doubt. I suspect that abuse of a sexual nature is probably perpetrated against women more than against men (I think the stats may back me up on this — check me if I’m wrong), but the ability to physically and emotionally abuse is close to equal, and that abuse of an emotional/nonsexual nature is is perpetrated pretty equally against both genders by both genders.
Yeah that sounds about right. Both are most likely equal in ability to perpetrate sexual violence but it affects women more (but it may not be much higher which is a key part to remember). More study needs to be done and hopefully the bias in rape definition removed, the lack of inclusion of “forced to penetrate” really fucks up the statistics that are reported in the newspapers and it’s the number 1 problem I find when people hear about the stats, they rarely if ever hear about the “forced to penetrate” stats.
“First and foremost, I have complete control over my sperm. Any responsible man does. It goes nowhere that I don’t take it.”
Ok, but even ignoring rape, men only have complete control over their reproduction if you advocate abstainance only. If you have sex with someone you take the risk of becoming a parent with no say in the matter, that’s not quite right.
Actually, there’s vasectomy too. And while condoms are not 100% effective, neither is any other birth control method, and when used properly, they’re pretty close. So the lesson would be to choose your sexual partners carefully, and weigh risks and rewards of any chosen behavior. We are responsible for the actions of our sperm so we should treat their distribution with appropriate caution.
Oh, and there’s also this option too: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/03/male-birth-control-reversible_n_1400708.html
And of course financial abortion as a last resort…..oh wait:P Would be good to have that though, it’d definitely make me feel calmer in having sex being a person who couldn’t afford kids and I already use protection and don’t think I can actually get a vasectomy at this stage of life from doctors. We have a responsibility of course but women also have a responsibility to respect our wishes of becoming fathers, but since we cannot and should not ever be able to force them to abort, I fully support financial abortion options for those who don’t wish to become a father. No one, male or female, should be forced into parenthood even after conception.
Archy,
Having the option to “abort” becoming a father is something men sorely need, particularly young men in poorer communities. Birth control is frequently not taught and so not used correctly. Rates of unplanned and teen pregnancy are high in such instances; it’d be a life-saver for many men to know they have AT LEAST as many option as women do with regards to whether or not they want to become a father. Sadly (and I said this on a different thread re: Shawn Taylor’s piece) too many people would prefer to attack men for their mistakes and choices rather than address the larger issue.
However the point needs to be reiterated: “No one, male or female, should be forced into parenthood even after conception.”
Period.
Thank you so much for writing this. 1100+ pieces of anti-woman legislation since the 2010 influx of the Tea Party into the GOP, with all kinds of bills wanting to let women die, face the death penalty for having an abortion, be needlessly internally probed, lied to about their health and their fetus’s, etc. etc. and escalating mind-boggling insanity…and yet not many men step forward and speak out, clearly, loudly, proudly against these politicians who would seriously let their wives, sisters, or daughters die, here in 2012 America. And the rest of what you lay out, so painfully true. And here’s where I reach that point of considering whether to delete this whole comment because there is so much more to say, that it just feels like why say anything at all, especially knowing the backlash about to rain down on a post in support of feminism. But I’ll leave it here…1000′s of words short of what is really inside me…and just say THANK YOU.
Thanks for reading Lori, and for speaking out…much appreciated.
Funnily enough it’s many feminists themselves who are directly causing much of the backlash. You see, if feminism was universally seen in the way Paul sees it I highly doubt there’d be much backlash at all but fact of the matter is, there are 2 main types of feminism and one of them attracts a lot of backlash.
Understanding why that backlash exists is absolutely necessary and I think it’d benefit most feminists to try. You’ll find there are actually a lot of people, even anti-feminists who totally support women but it’s the feminist label itself and the gyno-centric feminism that turns them off. I don’t think I’ve ever seen an anti-feminist ever speak out against egalitarian actions by feminists, the vast majority of backlash is when it goes too far and ends up harming men (Eg, when VAWA is implimented badly to the point it actually harms people tends to be a common complaint).
And the more that some feminists bury their head in the sand to the bad behaviour some of the other feminists do simply loses the movement more supporters. The crux of the issue is when I hear of older women rejecting feminism outright n suggesting it has lost it’s way, women who were feminists before and grew up in the 50′s/60′s.
In fact I’ll guarantee you will get more support by leaving the word feminist out of an article because the word itself is loaded, you can write a completely female-only support article against the abortion laws etc and I’d guess it’s be taken much better by people if there is no mention of feminism. It’s sad but that’s what happens when you have multiple groups using the same name but having very different goals, it’s credibility drops especially when you consider how many men go in hearing egalitarianism to a feminist space n get pushed out by gynocentrics.
Yet sadly when I discuss this with some feminists they tune out and act like there are no problems or act like this problem isn’t worth discussing. It really does feel like not many want to fix feminism’s name. But which group gets to claim feminism outright? the egalitarians who want it to advocate for men’s issues too, or the gynocentrics that want it to be for women’s issues only? Who owns “feminism”?
Backlash exists for a reason and it’s a very legitimate n valid reason. Feminism is not the utopia of egalitarianism that many are claiming it to be, you don’t get backlash like it gets now when the movement is mostly egalitarian in nature.
“I never think of guys who believe in equality as ‘feminists.’ And maybe that’s part of the problem.”
That doesn’t make you a feminist. In order to be a feminist, you need to believe that women are uniquely oppressed, and that the only problems in this world that matter are problems that affect women.
As for that specific instance of assault, I have a hard time believing it happened the way she said it did. Additionally, you don’t seem to care about men who are sexually assaulted. Feminists certainly don’t. After all, they wouldn’t continually put the entire weight of their movement behind BANNING funds from going to groups that support male victims of sexual assault.
Yes, yes of course. Because we enjoy humor we’re bad humans. Another piece of how men are the reason for every ill in this world, and women are nothing but our victims. Feminism IS mainstream. Feminism is too mainstream. Feminists and reactionary republicans are essentially the same thing. They’re both groups who are fueled by hate and bigotry that seek to create a special, privileged class of people at the expense of everyone else. On the right, it is white men, and on the feminist side it is cis women.
Feminists and right wing republicans are two sides of the same coin of hate. And the “silent majority” of each cannot claim the high road because their chosen representatives do not get ANY pushback when they vocally espouse hate-filled views. Michelle Bachmann and Amanda Marcotte are the one and the same.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts…
Were you expecting bowing and scraping? Should I get on my knees and beg women for forgiveness for the thousands of years of oppression that I had absolutely nothing to do with? Apologize for the benefits that they got for being men that I do not get? Do you support groups like NOW that fought to deny coverage for male health issues in the ACA and who continually and unequivocally fight against government funding going toward shelters and support networks for male victims of domestic violence and sexual assault?
Don’t get me wrong, feminism has done many great things; however, feminists don’t get to walk around talking about all the good that they’ve done while they simultaneously try to plunge a dagger into men.
But what do I know. I’m just someone who was abused by women for a great deal of my life with the psychological and physical scars to prove it. According to most feminists, I either deserved it, or it wasn’t the fault of the women who abused it, they did it because of some oppression they suffered at the hands of men.
Men aren’t allowed to be victims, and we’re doubly not allowed to be victims of female perpetrators. Feminists want to keep it that way.
I wasn’t expecting anything, actually. I was simply thanking you for sharing your opinions. I hope your scars heal.
I’d like to say I believe you, but you are a feminist, and you’re as guilty as the leaders of your movement who say people like my deserve what we get.
My wishes for your well-being were genuine, but it’s certainly your choice to believe otherwise. However, your comment is rather striking given your earlier comment about not bearing responsibility for others’ actions. Perhaps with time and healing you’ll stop labeling people and blaming others for your misfortune and/or the actions of those close to you. Best of luck to you in your journey.
You labeled yourself.
“In order to be a feminist, you need to believe that women are uniquely oppressed, and that the only problems in this world that matter are problems that affect women.”
That is YOUR definition of feminism, not everybody’s. There is no one way to be a feminist. Just like there is not one way to be a man, or woman or person of color. To dictate otherwise is ignorant and erroneous.
“Feminists and right wing republicans are two sides of the same coin of hate.”
I think you’re confusing individuals with political affiliations.
I’m sorry for your pain. Now, it’s time to take responsibility for your participation in your own life experience, and choose whether or not you will continue to blame women, feminism, feminists and the world around you, or make the changes you need to, to not have it happen again.
As a man, you do not have to live in fear of being sexually or physically assaulted by women, in the same way that women do – daily. However, it sounds like you are emotionally scarred and fear the same experience may occur again. Perhaps a 12-step program or counseling might help you.
Good luck!
“As a man, you do not have to live in fear of being sexually or physically assaulted by women, in the same way that women do – daily. ”
Physical assaults happen 3 times more to men than to women.
Sexual assault surveys often do not ask male victims (they outright presume it is not useful to do so). So we have little stats on this.
There are some good statistics on this. The CDC released a report (with a 124 page summary) on this: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/
“In order to be a feminist, you need to believe that women are uniquely oppressed, and that the only problems in this world that matter are problems that affect women.”
That is YOUR definition of feminism, not everybody’s. There is no one way to be a feminist. Just like there is not one way to be a man, or woman or person of color. To dictate otherwise is ignorant and erroneous.
You may not be responsible for oppression that went on a thousand years ago, but by the way you speak, it sounds like you are oppressing yourself and everybody around you!
It’s time to take responsibility for your participation in your own life experience, and choose whether or not you will continue to blame women, feminism, feminists and the world around you, or make the changes you need to, to not have it happen again. Obviously, not everything is within our control, but we can choose to dwell in the past, or dwell in possibility.
“Feminists and right wing republicans are two sides of the same coin of hate… Michelle Bachmann and Amanda Marcotte are the one and the same.”
Sounds like you’re confusing individuals with political affiliations and blanket statements.
Good luck to you in your healing.
I can respect and appreciate your efforts but this is where you lost me:
“It’s time for feminism to be mainstream. It’s time for open-minded, forward-thinking men to realize that equality means embracing feminism. Feminism isn’t a bad word. ”
Why does feminism so constantly get held up as some requirement for people to embrace? Not just “it would be great if…”, “If you’re for equality you might want to….”, or “forward thinking men may want to check out….”. No what we get are attempts at making feminism synonymous with equality as if not embracing feminism inherently means you are against equality. No you aren’t saying that directly but that is where that line of thought often goes and even if it doesn’t I think trying to make a movement synonymous with equality is just going too far.
It’s far past time that men start listening, instead of always expecting to dominate the conversation. Only then will we be able to start ridding ourselves of the shameful stereotypes that we’ve been saddled with thanks to the brutish ways of many of our species.
So men should listen and not expect to dominate the conversation is the only way to combat the stereotypes that harm us, stereotypes that are upheld by other men? It seems to me that in order to shatter those stereotypes we need to be speaking up more (because apparently not speaking up is how we’ve been letting these stereotypes go unchallenged for so long) and having our own dominant conversations (as in holding them ourselves, not barging into the conversations of others).
(As a side note question I have to ask. I often see that when groups are harmed by stereotypes it seems that men are the one group that is treated as the exception to the way to break stereotypes. With other groups the burden of changing is on society but with men the burden of changing is on men. Why is that?)
Thanks for the article, Paul. It’s a bit frustrating to see the progress that still needs to occur, and the continuing battles that I once thought would be resolved over a few years, now last into decades.
I am a (mostly) hetersexual middle aged male of anglo-saxon ethnicity. I am upper middle class. I am a feminist today, and I was a feminist in college some 35 years ago. I defined feminism simply then, and I define it simply now. Calling oneself a feminist simply means that one agrees with these three statements:
I believe that every person should receive equal treatment by figures of authority.
I believe that every person should have equal opportunity in economic areas.
I believe that every person should have control over his/her body and being able to take rewards and responsibilities for the choices s/he makes.
If, in my opinion, you agree with those statements, then — congratulations! You’re a feminist too. If not, then you aren’t. Other than those items, it doesn’t really matter what else you believe regarding you’re “feminist card”. Feminists are humans first, and are quite capable of all the assholery of nonfeministists.
Sometimes the simplest statements are the best. There’s so much noise and argument about what feminists look like and what they do, that we forget the essential and revolutionary meaning of the term “equaliity”, whether that term applies to race, class, religion, gender, or orientation.
Bravo, Tyler…and thank you.
So why is it in some feminist spaces men will get kicked out, abused, etc for speaking about male issues of inequality?
Agreeing with your big 3 doesn’t make a person a feminist, only the person in question can identify as feminist. It’s actually insulting to label them as such without their consent, I myself never ever want to be called a feminist because I reject the label itself. The label has 2 major meanings which conflict when it’s actually used in the context’s I see it used by different people. Too often I’ve seen some feminists run men out of their space whilst claiming to be egalitarian in nature yet act like children insulting and dismissing male issues of inequality as nothing.
—”So why is it in some feminist spaces men will get kicked out, abused, etc for speaking about male issues of inequality?”
I’ll assume that the kicked out men were behaving respectfully and adhering to the posted and implied rules of the space in question. If that is so, then the simple answer is that the people in charge are assoles. Being a feminist simply means that you agree with the principles above, which center around gender equality. They don’t mean that you are also kind, tolerant, educated or enlightened.
—”Agreeing with your big 3 doesn’t make a person a feminist.”
It does in my book. I’ll say it again. If you agree with those principles, then — from my perspective — you’re a feminist. If someone claims to believe in something but behaves otherwise, then that person’s a hypocrite, not a feminist. Feminism and hypocrisy are not mutually exclusive. They are unrelated terms of description.
—“The label has 2 major meanings which conflict when it’s actually used in the context’s I see it used by different people.”
I only know of 1 meaning, and it’s pretty much summed up in the first paragraph here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism. I might further simplify that paragraph into a single sentence from the OED: A feminist is “an advocate or supporter of the rights and equality of women”. If you have a different definition of feminism that is widely accepted, I’m all ears.
I’ve given my necessary and sufficient conditions for calling someone a feminist. What are your necessary and sufficient conditions to do the same?
“Feminism is a collection of movements aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women.” – From the wiki.
“I believe that every person should receive equal treatment by figures of authority.
I believe that every person should have equal opportunity in economic areas.
I believe that every person should have control over his/her body and being able to take rewards and responsibilities for the choices s/he makes.”
“Being a feminist simply means that you agree with the principles above, which center around gender equality.”
Ok, so where exactly are males represented? The wiki’s first line says nothing about defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for men yet you to believe EVERY person should have equality is to be feminist. So are men supported? From what I see most of feminist is purely from the female perspective, with sweet F A done for defining, estab, etc for male rights n issues. Seems kinda strange for people to flip-flop between being for women’s rights, and equality. It’s confusing, it’s as if feminism is just a loose term thrown around willy nilly….
“It does in my book.”
“I’m an anti-feminist and I agree with those 3 statements.” – from black yoda in the reply below. How is an anti-feminist….a feminist?
—”So are men supported?”
Absolutely. EVERYONE is supported! I’m a feminist because I believe in the equality of women. I’m a masculist because I believe in the equality of men. The terms are not mutually exclusive.
—”How is an anti-feminist….a feminist?”
I like that line. It is a quandry, and I leave that for you to resolve. Resolving those kinds of inconsistencies is what building a coherent life-philosophy is all about.
But is feminism the place for male issues? Because I often hear it is and then get yelled at or see others get yelled at for bringing up male issues. It’s hypocritical at best and very confusing, I searched for a while to find feminists who will help men as they say they would but the only ones I really found were here + nswatm, many of the others seemed focused on the women only and really didn’t like men being mentioned. Feminism is confusing as to what the true meaning really is, for all the talk of “equality for everyone” I’m sure there are other feminists who will say it’s equality for women only.
Why the fuck would I join a group that doesn’t even have a clear goal, has a huge amount of bigotry amongst many of it’s members that is rarely/if ever called out, invites men in to talk about their issues whilst letting other members attack those men n treat them like shit? It’s a joke really, but it isn’t a funny joke, all it does is breed contempt n hatred for feminism because 1 label can mean egalitarianism, gynocentrism, or even dismissing male issues n being bigoted. This 1 label has very legitimate hatred against it due to some of it’s members behaviours, that other members are either blind to or are ignorant and just allow it to happen without batting n eyelid.
I see articles asking “Why are there not more men in feminism?” and I sit there truly flabbergasted as to how a feminist could be so ignorant to the reason why, it’s absolutely obvious to anyone who’s ever seen the treatment of men in many of the popular feminist websites. And before people say feminism is more than the online presence, well…the online presence is the advertising, it’s the way feminism gets known for millions of people and if it isn’t kept in line then it’s just going to help breed more anti-feminists (and rightly so).
— “But is feminism the place for male issues?”
No, I don’t believe that it is. If there are male issues to discuss, a feminist talkspace is exactly NOT where I would want to discuss them. My sense is that a feminist talkspace is a place for people to come together and kvetch about issues and events that relate specifically to the condition of being female in our society. As a male, my role in such a talkspace would be to listen, to answer questions, and to generally be a good spokesman for my gender. To me, bringing up “male issues” on a feminist talkspace seems provocative and divisive. I prefer to find the common ground with people unlike me, and to try to see points of view that don’t match my own.
— “Why the fuck would I join a group…”
I have no idea why you would join such a group. I proudly call myself a feminist and I would never want to join such a group. To me, the “true meaning of feminism” is pretty simple: a promotion of gender equality of opportunity and treatment, and a respect for the rights of a person to control the functioning of their own body. To paraphrase Hillel, anything else is commentary.
And yes, the commentary can be frustrating, flabbergasting, exhausting, and irritating. But that’s only when you interact with feminists who, in addition to being feminists, are also ignorant and intolerant jackasses. After all, being a feminist doesn’t mean that you are enlightened. It also doesn’t mean that you aren’t.
Judging feminism by the words and actions of its most ardent and intolerant Internet website contributors is like judging Christianity by the followers of Pat Robertson. I’ve always admired Gandhi’s words, and feel that they apply to much more than Christianity: “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”
The difference I find though is there is far far more willingness by christians to denounce the bad christians which is what helps restore my belief in them as working to try make their group better. It’s something I’m not seeing in feminists much and it’s one of the reasons I believe feminists are failing to keep their name in a positive light, they just aren’t separating themselves enough from the bad ones and thus they can be often treated with suspicion as it really can look like they accept the bad feminist’s behaviour via lack of caring about it. (same goes for the MRA n masculists).
“To me, the “true meaning of feminism” is pretty simple: a promotion of gender equality of opportunity and treatment, and a respect for the rights of a person to control the functioning of their own body. To paraphrase Hillel, anything else is commentary.”
So how does that fit with your comment of
“— “But is feminism the place for male issues?”
No, I don’t believe that it is. If there are male issues to discuss, a feminist talkspace is exactly NOT where I would want to discuss them. My sense is that a feminist talkspace is a place for people to come together and kvetch about issues and events that relate specifically to the condition of being female in our society.
First you’re saying feminism is promoting equal opportunity and treatment, etc but then say feminism isn’t for men to discuss their issues? Shouldn’t you really be saying something like…
“To me, the “true meaning of feminism” is pretty simple: a promotion of gender equality of opportunity and treatment FOR WOMEN, and a respect for the rights of a WOMAN to control the functioning of their own body. To paraphrase Hillel, anything else is commentary.”
Because you don’t get equality of opportunity and treatment without addressing both issues. See this is the problem, it’s contradictory! If men aren’t able to talk about their issues in feminism, and men need to listen to women then that’s not equality or egalitarianism, that’s only 1 half of the issue being addressed. It’s dishonest in my books to say feminists are for equality when in your version they’re really only working to bring equality to women. They may want equality for all people but how exactly are they helping men reach equality? Feminists can have egalitarian views but their actions are largely gynocentric. By your definition, feminism is gynocentric, NOT egalitarian. Egalitarians would be able to address n advocate for both men and women, not just women. Do you see why I think it’s contradicting itself?
I think I see why you feel unable to resolve the contradiction. It’s the difference between philosophy and advocacy.
To me, the primary definition of feminism centers around philosophy, and it seems to be the the generally accepted definition. I choose to reject a definition of feminism that promotes anything other than equality and respect. I also choose to reject a definition of masculism that promotes anything other than equality and respect, for I consider myself to be a masculist as well as a feminist.
I think that most feminists would agree with this statement: “Equality for women is equality for everyone”. But feminist groups are (and should be) about highlighting issues and inequalities that affect women specifically. Highlighting inequalities that affect men and advocating for their legal and societal correction should be the province of masculist groups. The conflict between feminists and masculists arises when the groups’ members believe that the issues that inequality issues that other than those that affect their gender’s interests are either insignificant or irrelevant, or when people believe that one group’s social gain comes at the expense of the other’s.
So I make a distinction between philosophy and advocacy. Feminist (and masculist) philosophy is – for all intensive purposes – identical: a promotion of equality and respect that centers around gender-specific issues.
However, feminist and masculist advocacy are different. Feminists advocate for equality from the perspective of eliminating female disadvantage and inequity, and masculists advocate for equality from the perspective of eliminating male disadvantage and inequity. Because I believe in eliminating both female and male disadvantage and inequity in our society, I consider myself to be a feminist and a masculist advocate. You may be a feminist but not a feminist advocate, especially if you believe that the primary area of gender inequality is male disadvantage in society.
So I consider a feminist talkspace to be a place where we talk about inequalities that adversely affect women and come up with strategies to effect change, and a masculist talkspace to be a place where we kvetch about inequalities that adversely affect men and come up with corresponding strategies. To me, bringing up feminist issues in a masculist talkspace (or vice versa) seems disrespectful to the participants and counterproductive to the goals of that talkspace. You may prefer terms like gynocentrism for feminist advocacy and androcentrism for masculist advocacy, but that seems like hair splitting to me. To my mind, the two forms of advocacy are only in conflict when their adherents distrust each other’s motivations.
It seems that you have issues with feminist advocacy, because you see it as in conflict with feminist philosophy. Do you have similar issues with masculist advocacy and/or masculist philosophy?
Now I’d better turn off this infernal machine before I lose all coherence!
I don’t mind when a group only focuses on one gender, but it’s when some of it’s members say the group focuses on BOTH genders whilst others hate that, so it just clashes.
I haven’t seen masculists claim to be the egalitarian movement, but I have seen them say they are egalitarian in nature, but focused to male issues. So no I haven’t seen a comparable issue amongst the masculists.
My big issue is being told over n over by many feminists that feminism is where male issues are to be dealt with, that it’s the egalitarian movement, then having the support revoked whenever men are mentioned because only some feminists wanted feminism = egalitarianism and others wanted feminism = gynocentric pursuit of equality. The big problem is some feminists are telling men that feminism IS basically the feminist + masculist movement combined and then men go in expecting that to then be cast out n face the harsh reality that it’s largely the gynocentric feminist movement only for women and men are meant to shutup and listen mostly.
I’m an anti-feminist and I agree with those 3 statements.
Sorry — I replied to Archy above before reading your line. I like that line.
How do you define being an “anti-feminist”, and still agree with those 3 statements?
If you agree with those 3 statements, then I consider you to be a feminist, regardless of what you consider yourself to be. The same could be said of many culturally loaded words.
You’re free to define feminism any way you like. I choose the definition as put forth in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia entry on feminism, and reflected by those three statements.
By many peoples definition though it isn’t “Everyone” but “women”. It’s advocating that issues where women are lagging behind get fixed without anything done for when men are lagging behind. So in those cases, it’s wrong to call it equality for all since it’s just equality for women. To truly be equality for all they would have to either help fix mens issues or make women’s life worse on that particular issue to match the men. (eg selective service to be removed, or add women to it).
With that kind of definition, one could be anti-feminist but still believe in your big 3 list.
“published a sexy cheerleaders calendar years ago that pandered to this demographic, and did it well. I gave no consideration to the fact that I was feeding the sexism machine, subjugating and objectifying women in the interest of making a buck. After all, the models I worked with were professionals who were thrilled to be on the sites or in the calendars, and my target demographic was those stereotypical white males who buy the merchandise.”
- Does a sexy cheerleader calendar subjugate and objectify women? Gay men are also likely to have sexualized images of other gay men (and straight men).
” jocular yet overtly sexist advertising that just feed into their levels of testosterone at that age.”- Testosterone has nothing to do with sexism.
It is time we realized that embracing feminism does not equal promoting prejudices against men or human sexuality.
“‘jocular yet overtly sexist advertising that just feed into their levels of testosterone at that age.”- Testosterone has nothing to do with sexism.’”
Really? As a woman, I can’t tell you how many times it has been used as an excuse. The saying “boys will be boys” has been used, in variations, to excuse rape, physical assaults, bullying, aggression, harassment, etc., over time. Not to mention philandering and straight up bad f-ing behavior. Responsibility and accountability has oft been thrown under the bus in defense of men because of testosterone.
I’m not saying – by any means – that women are perfect, but your above statement belies a woman’s lived experience in this society amid male apologists, including ones on this site.
“It is time we realized that embracing feminism does not equal promoting prejudices against men or human sexuality.”
AGREED.
Really? As a woman, I can’t tell you how many times it has been used as an excuse. The saying “boys will be boys” has been used, in variations, to excuse rape, physical assaults, bullying, aggression, harassment, etc., over time. Not to mention philandering and straight up bad f-ing behavior. Responsibility and accountability has oft been thrown under the bus in defense of men because of testosterone.
Exactly it’s been used as an excuse. Or does this mean that a guy that does something bad can’t use testosterone as an excuse but someone can turn around and blame that guy’s testosterone for his bad behavior?
I don’t think AAAA is trying to belie the experiences of women but trying to cut the bull out of the way of why that stuff happens.
Nearly all men have high levels of testosterone but no where near nearly all men engage in that behavior.
It is time we realized that embracing feminism does not equal promoting prejudices against men or human sexuality.
Then the people that promote prejudices against men and human sexuality under the umbrella of feminism need to be dealt with.
“The saying “boys will be boys” has been used, in variations, to excuse rape, physical assaults, bullying, aggression, harassment, etc., over time.”
I’ve never seen this. It may be done in private, but I have never seen it done in the very public way from pundits/entertainers the way I see violence against men being the butt of jokes. Look at Sharon Osbourne on The Talk calling it delightful at the news a wife sexually mutilated her husband and threw his member in the garbage disposal to a nearly all female audience laughing their head off.
Rape is considered a heinous crime, and rabidly prosecuted (duke 3). You would never see the mocking/marginalization/dismissal of an *actual* rape victim the way Katherine Becker’s husband was mocked (and suffering zero repercussions way Osbourne did).
I see far more very visible hatred of men and male victims then I do female victims in society.
Just read some of the putrid and disgusting blogs and comments in response to Daniel Tosh’s recent night club offense, suggesting how funny rape is, and you will see the flip side. Women were called “cunts” and “pigs” on Twitter — a public social network used by millions — for speaking out against making light of the demoralization of sexual assault. Tosh’s continuing themes around sexual assault and how hilarious the topic is became sanctimonious amongst thousands of Internet fans bullying women into silence (they weren’t successful luckily, and many women – and some men – spoke out against it/him). But, many came to his defense.
I agree. It’s not at all OK to make light of what happens to a victim of a sex crime — male or female. Many of my guy friends, and relatives, were highly offended by the jokes around that wife’s crime. Honestly? I think anything involving sex in the U.S. is dealt with like a 14-year old school boy. It’s a peep show, Puritan mentality and add to that a penis and how many penis jokes there are. People can’t handle sex in a mature way and they can’t handle dealing with violence around sex, because they can’t understand that it has little to do with sex and everything to do with power, deviancy and criminality.
While men and boys are more invisible in regard to sex crimes in our society, women are more often the victims. It doesn’t make it right to ignore male victims, but you can’t deny the majority of sexual assault is not against men – it’s against women. Men can stop violence against women, men and kids, and a conversation around male victims needs to happen to reduce the stigma and encourage reporting of the crimes. Maybe with the Sandusky conviction this will be encouraged to happen. Anything good coming out of that mess would be amazing.
“Men can stop violence against women, men and kids, and a conversation around male victims needs to happen to reduce the stigma and encourage reporting of the crimes.”
I hope you’re also advocating that women can stop violence too? Too often I see calls for men to stop violence yet none for women, it leaves me confused as to why women aren’t included in stopping the violence since they commit quite a lot of it. The majority of sexual assault may be against women, but realize that the sexual assault of men isn’t very far behind women. Everyone suffers violence and I’d say both genders suffer it at a high rate. I have no problem telling other people to stop their violence (and also mine) but I do want to see people asking women as well to stop violence as well against all people. Quite a few men start to resent the call for men to be responsible in stopping ALL violence when quite a lot of it is perpetrated by women.
Curious writes:
“Just read some of the putrid and disgusting blogs and comments in response to Daniel Tosh’s recent night club offense, suggesting how funny rape is, and you will see the flip side.”
I reiterate my challenge:
“It may be done in private, but I have never seen it done in the very public way from pundits/entertainers the way I see violence against men being the butt of jokes.”
Can you point to a public entertainer/pundit who made fun of a *live* rape victim (rather than just making rape jokes in general) who got away with it scott free as Sharon Osbourne did?
People in private or anonymously on the internet will always make fun of just about anything (look at how many people made fun of Nancy Kerrigan shouting “Why??!!” after being attacked).
Entertainers are heavily moderated by public scorn. Look at what happened to Don Imus, or Rush Limbaugh when they made slight mocking about women’s sexuality and looks.
You can point to the dregs of humanity all you want (and they exist on the other side to, like rabid women (and men) on radfem hub stating that men need to be reduced to 10% of the population), but when it comes to public pundits/entertainers they rarely pay a price for mocking the pain of *actual* male victims (even of the most heinous sexual mutilation), but dare to suggest that a woman has a lot of sex (Rush) or their hair is kinky (Imus) and you will have hell to pay. It’s not the anonymous dregs on internet forums that tells us who the approved targets of pain and humiliation is, it’s the pundits at the top in entertainment.
If you have any evidence to the contrary, I’d love to see it.
“. Men can stop violence against women, men and kids, and a conversation around male victims needs to happen to reduce the stigma and encourage reporting of the crimes. Maybe with the Sandusky conviction this will be encouraged to happen. Anything good coming out of that mess would be amazing.”
No, men cannot stop anything, society can, that means men and WOMEN together can stop violence. Lets not fall for stupid stereotypes. Violence can only be dealt together as society, not splitting things up.
And please, stop making such statement, they are false and offensive. Im pretty sure you have the intentions, thats why I correct you (well I and others)
peace.
“women are more often the victims”
Citation needed. Statements like “men can stop violence” implies that female perpetrators don’t exist.
“Rape is considered a heinous crime, and rabidly prosecuted (duke 3). You would never see the mocking/marginalization/dismissal of an *actual* rape victim…”
Also, you should be more specific when you generalize about sexual assault — you’re speaking about views in the U.S., right?
I’m not really sure what you’re asking. All I get is a question being dressed in clothing that I failed to address something.
What are you trying to get at?
The stereotypical woman is one who laughs at misandry (sexism against males for those who don’t know).
“It’s time for feminism to be mainstream. It’s time for open-minded, forward-thinking men to realize that equality means embracing feminism. Feminism isn’t a bad word. It’s simply a cry for fairness in an unfair world dominated for far too long by a small segment of white males who have convinced too many of us that speaking out is wrong, that having a voice is a privilege rather than a right, and that somehow they know what’s best for all of us.”
Your version of feminism may be equality for all, but for many it means equality from the women’s perspective alone. It’s not a universal word for egalitarianism as proven countless times by countless women who get angry that men are in “their space”.
“It’s far past time that men start listening, instead of always expecting to dominate the conversation. Only then will we be able to start ridding ourselves of the shameful stereotypes that we’ve been saddled with thanks to the brutish ways of many of our species.”
So you want men to embrace a label that is highly volatile and carries quite a bit of shame? Do feminists on the whole realize there are very valid n legitimate reasons that many people reject feminism? Many people who believe in equality for all even reject it, that says a lot doesn’t it? Maybe it’s time to stop dismissing the “anti-feminist” statements and start listening to why people are rejecting it whilst claiming to be the very thing many feminists say feminism is (egalitarian).
Without major reflection on the part of feminists, feminism itself will continue to be rejected quite a lot. There is simply too much double-speak going on…some claim it’s egalitarian, some claim it’s for women’s issues only without a separate identifier. Too many people go in thinking it’s A, when that space is really B, they get blasted out of there and it creates confusion n resentment.
Hell there is so much feminist material in regards to female abortion, very little in regards to male abortion (financial abortion) which to be doesn’t appear to be egalitarian at all. I see a huge amount of gynocentric material n actions but not so much egalitarian material n action going on, the closest is looking at gender roles. You’d think feminism would have lobbied against selective service bigtime n got it removed for the men in the U.S.A judging by what many feminists define their movement as.
Nowhere in my post do I define feminism apart from equality. I understand you see other definitions and attach them to the term ‘feminism’, but my definition for the purposes of this post was – as a middle-aged white male – gender equality.
Sorry if it sounded combative, just trying to point out that the label itself is quite diverse in meaning, hence my problem with “feminism”. It’s the root cause for so many arguments about feminism, I’ve identified 2 major movements using the same name so it becomes quite confusing as to which one people are talking about. I’d say you’re talking about the egalitarian-feminist movement, which I am guessing advocates for both female and male rights/social issues awareness?
Yes…precisely…and I hesitate to comment further because I simply don’t care for labels – they tend (in my view) to lead to the very reactions that this post has generated. But you’re absolutely right – I’m talking about equality, which to me by definition includes both genders, not one vs. the other.
” I understand you see other definitions and attach them to the term ‘feminism’”
It’s more that feminists attach those labels.
It is really a surprise for me that somebody like the author who shows concern about equality for all is taking the controversial label of “feminism” instead of simply calling himself egalitarian which would be technically correct.
Well, once again into the breach dear friends! As much as I want to congratulate and support Paul’s own growth as a person… I can’t. Not like this. Not when fundamentalism is pedestalized as Ultimate Truth.
“Feminism … really should be about anyone and everyone who believes in equality standing up for those who traditionally have been and continue to be oppressed.”
There is more than one path to gender equality than Feminism, and indeed other paths have been just as successful — if not more so. I too have the same reactions as Paul does to stories of oppression, prejudice, discrimination, and outright sexism. But I differ strongly in the application of those feelings. It is NOT okay to condemn or dismiss others for finding other equally valid answers to questions of gender outside of a strictly zero-sum game such as mainstream Feminism. (By the way, saying that Feminism isn’t mainstream is a lie. I wish I could put it nicely, but Feminism has been mainstream since Second Wave.) Paul noted in his comments that he believes that men have, for the most part, reproductive rights. Yet when confronted with the lived experience and realities of other men who assert that this isn’t true, he downplays the importance. Sadly, men DON’T have very many reproductive rights, whether in cases of rape or consensual sex. But that’s hardly the point. The point is that Paul doesn’t know these things, leaving us to educate him. The point is that when we tell him these things, he still doesn’t get it or even seem to really care all that much. He doesn’t see these things as issue.
That’s the problem.
For me, the problem is seeing half a dozen Well-Intentioned people strolling in here on a weekly basis with massive privilege and no knowledge of men’s issues. The problem is having to devote comment after comment from legions of us in order to point out that the solutions so simply put in this article are not feasible for a vast population of people — men, people of color, religious minorities, ethnic groups, LGBTQ communities, the poor, the disabled, basically people who aren’t from the White heteronormative upper-class.
It’s frustrating to have to constantly teach these new people about an entire discourse, about communities as far flung as Oakland, CA and Auroura, CO, and about issues as diverse as father’s right, male victims, and the education gap. How many times will we have to educate people like Paul? How many times will we have to restart men’s issues 101 before we get to have people contributing, en masse, who actually know something?
Paul says, “It’s far past time that men start listening, instead of always expecting to dominate the conversation. Only then will we be able to start ridding ourselves of the shameful stereotypes that we’ve been saddled with thanks to the brutish ways of many of our species.”
The irony is only too bittersweet. These stereotypes are just that: stereotypes. But Paul gives them power by setting them up as boogeymen to scare us into his definition of “good behavior”. (Which is funny since he says he doesn’t agree with them.) Such conversations about gender to men always seem to consist of either the stick or the carrot. Even other men, albeit usually only male Feminists, seem to easily get sucked into belittling us or insulting us. You can tell by the language, brutish. Always men are compared to animals, beasts, brutes, as if our differences must be so bad that we’re dehumanized. It’s almost comparable to hearing a racist speak about Black people, almost.
Instead, my advice would be to ask Paul to take his own advice. Listen to us. Believe us. We’re not doing this for kicks or playing make believe. Our issues are serious and deserve far better treatment than being told it’s your way or the highway. But I doubt any save the choir will listen.
Ah but therein lies the problem with stereotypes. When have a large numbers of individuals who are pron to seek false validation through the promotion of a stereotypical identity, why should we remain silent? Why not vocally challenge those who assume that chauvinism, masochism, and hedonism are the birthrights of the male sex?
Surly there are ample opportunities to grow from within as there will be opportunities to protect masculinity as a treasured culture.
Can we not state that feminism’s push for equality is inherently flawed when it fails to also recognize the plight and problems of men. Many feminists only recognize only women’s problems believing that men have it easier or do not have the same/similar problems. They will then push for protections only for women leaving those men behind, thus making it unequal.