Lisa Hickey thinks we need more stories like Hugo Schwyzer’s, not fewer.
TRIGGER WARNING: this post may be triggering to those in recovery or victims of violence.
♦◊♦
A thought experiment:
Scenario One: You are driving down a road approaching an intersection. You get distracted for a moment, run the stop sign. A policeman pulls you over, gives you a ticket.
Scenario Two: You are driving down a road approaching an intersection. You get distracted for a moment, run the stop sign. You strike and hit another car, killing a passenger. You are immediately arrested and jailed.
In both cases, your actions leading up to the event were the same. You were driving. You were distracted. You ran a stop sign. But what happens next, changes everything.
There is no miracle of science that allows us to undo past events. No matter how they happened. No matter what led up to them. No matter how good our intentions.
♦◊♦
Hugo Schwyzer has written almost 100 posts for The Good Men Project over this past year. He knows how to tell a story. He’s written about his lesbian ex-wife, about rape and sexual violence, about conscious celibacy. He’s been attacked for his stories – everything from “too hard on men,” “too feminist,” to being called the dreaded “mangina”.
But no attack has been as vicious as the uproar and ostracization Hugo has received over a story on his own blog, a story about an event that happened in 1998. Back when he was binge drinking and drugging, Hugo tried to take his own life along with that of his girlfriend. If you read his post about the issue, be sure to read his response of today as well.
♦◊♦
If there’s one thing I’ve learned through the almost 5,000 stories I’ve read and discussed since launching The Good Men Project 18 months ago — goodness is not an inherent quality. It is not something you “have.” It is not immutable – like love, it can change and grow. I see goodness as a moment-by-moment series of decisions and actions. Goodness is something you define for yourself every day.
Sometimes you get distracted by driving and run the stop sign. Sometimes you make what seems like an endless series of bad choices. Sometimes you make a horrible, horrific decision and need to repair the damage in whatever ways you can. But the thing you can do best, today, at this moment in time, is to re-visit your intention to be good.
♦◊♦
I’ve heard it said that depression is worrying about the past, and anxiety is worrying about the future.
Peace of mind is when the voices inside your head stop squabbling. When the voices of guilt and shame reliving the past over and over for you, and the voices filling you with fear and anxiety about the future finally stop, there is a lovely silence that lets you live in the present.
The people who try to shame us are trying to rob us of peace of mind. They tell us we should worry about a past we cannot change and then continue to worry about the future because there is never hope of redemption.
The shamers apparently prefer to live in a world filled with more depressed and anxiety-ridden people.
But I would prefer to live in a world with more Hugos.
♦◊♦
When I read Hugo’s story months ago, it didn’t change the person I had talked to the day before. It didn’t change Hugo-in-the-present the day after. The only thing it did was open my mind to what Hugo had been through in the past and gave me another point of empathy. He had done something horribly wrong. He admitted it. He had done what he could from that moment on to make things right.
We need more stories like Hugo’s so we can get more people to understand that addiction breaks people. A truism is that if you stay addicted long enough, it is inevitable you will end up in a mental hospital, jail, or dead. In Hugo’s case, he came perilously close to all three in a twenty-four hour stretch.
The problem with addiction is, you can’t admit it when you’re in it, and those around you often can’t imagine that their loved ones will end up behind bars or in a psychiatric ward or in a coffin. It would be great if more people like Hugo could step up and say, this is what could happen. This is what bottom looks like. Hugo, who is alive and well and outspoken and articulate. He’s not homeless and sleeping on a park bench, he’s someone who could be my younger brother. Shaming people like Hugo and others from telling those stories doesn’t do much to solve a single problem.
Shame is what keeps addicts from getting help. Shame is what keeps our mind from being able to move forward in a way that would be most helpful. Shame is what keeps survivors of sexual abuse from coming forward. Abuse plus silence paves a path for more abuse. If we’re ever going to put a stop to abuse of all kinds we have to let people talk about it. We have to let people tell their stories.
Hugo and I have had our differences, but I respect Hugo and all he has done on his path to restorative justice. I hope that others will let him continue that path – openly, honestly, with the grace and compassion he deserves.
♦◊♦
NOTE: After this story was posted, it was pointed out to me that one of the unintended consequences of storytelling is harm you might cause others and who were involved in the same story. This I believe, and I would actually like to point out that fact very strongly. FIRST DO NO HARM TO OTHERS. I will be writing more on that, but if anyone would like to right about that part of it, or any other concerns this post brings up, please email me at lisa at goodmenproject dot com.
–
photo: jason_burmeister / flickr
About Lisa Hickey
A lot of the talk that is defensive or forgiving of Hugo is somewhat dependent on a good faith assumption that Hugo is just trying to do good. Honestly I don’t think he deserves that. Its one thing to differ in opinion but he ignores facts that go against his beliefs. Its the crime of omission that removes any assumption of good faith i could have for him. Until he deals with the arguments that are well made well reasoned and backed up with evidence his status as some kind of authority or an intellectual with high academic standards isn’t justifiable.
“Until he deals with the arguments that are well made well reasoned and backed up with evidence his status as some kind of authority or an intellectual with high academic standards isn’t justifiable.”
Leta you have committed the ultimate blasphemy.
1) Asking a feminist to deal with reasonable arguments backed with evidence.
2) Demanding a high academic standard from gender studies instructor. If gender study qualifies as an academic discipline, then alchemy, astrology and witchcraft should also qualify as disciplines of science.
Rapses,
I understand very profoundly how much you dislike feminists. I really do. And I have been reading your comments and comments of others who feel the same way as you do and I’m trying very hard to understand. I think both David Bryson and Archy (among others) can attest to the fact that I am trying my best and that I want to hear you.
But I have a really big problem with the way you spread your hatred of feminists to all feminists. I’ve tried to sit back and watch and wait and see if maybe someone like myself could wiggle my way into your heart or your subconscious and make you question whether or not there are legitimately good, well-intended feminists.
I’m not asking you to agree with me, not even on a *single* thing. You can disagree with every word I say. If I say “the sky is blue”, please feel free to say, “Sorry, it’s grey.”
What I hope is that you start to see the heart and the human behind me, and behind some of the feminists who are here on this site like Erin or Nikki B or me. I’m not asking you to send a FB friend request to Amanda Marcotte, I’m just asking you to soften just a little bit. Just enough to let me be an individual, unique human being to you.
I know your points are strong, and they are valid. Because of that, letting yourself soften to *some* feminists shouldn’t hurt you. You clearly feel you’re standing on solid rock with your position, so why not let me on it too? It won’t crumble.
I know it would be easier for me to denounce myself as a feminist, to say, “No, I’m not a feminist, I’m an equalist” — well, I am an equalist, and equality is the foundation of MY feminism. I don’t want to step on you, I don’t want to remove rights from you, I don’t want to diminish the abuse of boys or men. I don’t want women to go around feeling fine about saying all men are dicks or that they don’t trust men.
That’s not MY feminism.
I could denounce my alliances with Hugo Schwyzer, but that wouldn’t be true to who I am and what I believe. I’ve been very honest about the aspects of Hugo’s career and writings that I disagree with, I’ve been honest with him about it and with all of you. I’m not a zealot or a fanatic for Hugo (or anyone or anything), I am merely a friend and a supporter.
To be frank, not only does what you wrote above actually hurt my feelings a little bit, it makes me disregard the important things you may have to say. Because it’s actually really mean. And it’s snarky and feels very dirty.
I could very easily argue against point #2 but I’m sure I couldn’t convince you. You have every right to feel that way, and given how you feel you’ve seen Feminism sweep abuse of males under the rug, I can understand your frustration. But point #1 is simply just s***-talk.
I will hear your side. I will see your evidence. I will listen. But be kind.
Will you take a moment and hear me, Rapses?
I agree with Joanna, we can’t judge an entire group based on the actions of a few. I agree there are some black clouds over the usage of statistics but I don’t think it’s ALWAYS purposely done, but more a result of stereotypes biasing views before the stats were done which do come out during the report. What the CDC did still had bias but it’s a massive step towards the future, they actually addressed a wide variety of sexual abuse and domestic abuse towards men, by women even! It’s a recent stat so it’ll take time to trickle through the various organizations but I’ll be surprised if we don’t see more people taking male abuse seriously from it, I’ve already seen Joanna take notice and a few other feminists.
Just to be clear I don’t hate anyone really atm (except abusers with no remorse, who don’t try to change, and certain people in power that mess up other countries:P), I dislike anyone who funnybuggers the stats for political points, or tries to push the womengetitworse or mengetitworse without accepting the other side EVER. Feminism has great parts to it, that needs to be praised and built upon, even borrow that goodness to masculism and both work together. I would absolutely love to see both sides join together to make an abuse and rape support network, taking care of EVERYONE, if they actually worked together, helped people together they’d all find they’re far more similar than people realize.
Joanna, what I notice is many seem to be quite hurt by some feminists and they lose hope for the rest. If you’ve ever heard of the “Agent Orange Files”, radfemhub, and the SCUM manifesto it’ll be obvious why some men take great offense but they need to realize this is a small group of very outthere people who spread such hate. It’s hypocritical to spread outright hate if you’re against it, call out the bad they do but remember to not judge the whole by the few. Hating a group that has caused many good outcomes for women will NOT get you support, if you want to point out certain groups that misuse feminism then go ahead but do so intelligently or you will cause Joanna, and other feminists, hell even equalists like me to disregard what you say.
I’ve already called out some feminists I knew on bigotry towards the MRA’s and disregarded what they say because they think MRA’s are misogynists and only see the trolls, I’m calling you out to drop the bigotry of the entire group. Feminism is a idea, anyone can self-identify as a feminist, it can be hijacked by others just like many other groups. So unless you can prove the outright majority are bad, learn to focus your criticisms properly.
And drop the snarkyness, sarcasm, it doesn’t help and it’s just as bad as the “whataboutthemenz” insults I heard from bigoted radfems.
Archy – I assume you’ve heard this, but LIsa just told us about this:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/06/justice/rape-definition-revised/?hpt=ju_c2
A little progress!
A VERY little progress. A woman forcing a man to have sex doesn’t count as being raped here. It’s similar to the NVAWS definition.
However this is just the UCR definition they are talking about. It’s not a legal definition. It is just for collecting statistics. Makes it easier for feminists to pretend men never get raped with this sort of definition but the law itself is clear that women forcing men to have sex are committing a crime often called first degree sexual assault or rape.
The new definition means that a woman forcing oral or anal penetration on the man is rape yes? I don’t understand why the envelopment aspect is being left off. Is it because of difficulty in proof or because of stereotypes about erection, male arousal and more. And I am also thinking hard about the political aspect David ie feminists.
Clarifying question if you don’t mind answering; Is this new UCR definition part of current law or not? If a woman can be proven to have raped a man by envelopment is that current american law (=rape)? I wasn’t sure exactly what the last part of your paragraph meant.
It is not a federal crime to commit rape, so this government declaration does NOT affect law. But it will influence how things are prosecuted, though there are no guarantees of that.
You have to remember what are federal crimes, they aren’t usually person-on-person crimes, so it’s not shocking that this isn’t a law.
But, David, it IS progress and all these steps forward get the issues of men’s rights moved into the limelight. This is something to grateful for, and I’m not sure why it has to turn into something that makes it “easeir for feminists to pretend men never get raped”…
Yes, it should do more, I agree, but it is forward progress.
WIll you clarify for me, based upon this wording, why a female forcing penetration (even if she’s being penetrated) isn’t included in this definition? I’ve heard it both ways.
And, with all the respect I have for you my friend, please stop saying feminists are doing these things!!! Geeze!! Do I need to start calling all misogynists MRAs? I wouldn’t, I can make the distinction that the men oppressing women who are MRAs are not representing all MRAs. Do the same for me, too, please?
I think politically (depending on the leverage used to get the stats changed) it is a chink in an armor that will see more progress. Much like civil unions were a step in the inevitable progress towards legalizing gay marriage.
That’s my feeling and I was happy to see the report today, for men and women both.
Definitely good to see progress, envelopment is what I would also add of course. I think a lot of people can’t get their head around the fact a person can be forced to penetrate someone else, penetration is usually seen as a willing act. It can be done under coersion, threat of force, I believe someone on here was told that SHE would claim rape if he didn’t go along with it, some might use the threat of crying rape or claiming they will take the kids (things men commonly feel they have no defense against).
Humans are interesting creatures, we might assume a rape victim would fight them off but the fight or flight responses and other survival mechanisms can work in different ways, 1 way is to fight, another is to flee but there’s also the play-dead or go along with it aspect. People might lie there, take it in the hopes the attacker won’t hurt them even more.
Regardless of what people think, erections do not indicate arousal 100% and the body can be aroused whilst the mind hates every second of it and doesn’t want to do anything. A bladder being full can cause an erection, dreams during sleep, I believe even the higher testosterone levels in the morning play a role so a man can be enveloped during sleep or after he’s just woken up, can be manually stimulated into an erection and so on (getting wood in front of the doctor for instance is one of those random erections).
Education, lots and lots of it is needed to combat rape and abuse, female abuse of males has only recently been acknowledge I believe and we still have a long way to go in educating people that even men can say no.
Rape Victims Get Erections, Too
http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/yes-rape-victims-get-erections-too/
Under the federal definition just quoted if someone threatens to take the kids or hurt them to get you to have sex that is rape (or whatever the law was actually called “aggravated sexual abuse” I think) however merely threatening to bring a rape accusation would not be sufficient.
Oh hell yes it’s illegal under federal law.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/109A/2241
18 U.S.C. § 2241 : US Code – Section 2241: Aggravated sexual abuse
Whoever… knowingly causes another person to engage in a sexual act -
(1) by using force against that other person; or
(2) by threatening or placing that other person in fear that
any person will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or
kidnapping;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned
for any term of years or life, or both.
And then it has a section covering drugging people and sex with minors similarly worded. So the feds can write gender neutral rape laws just fine when they want to. I don’t know how old that text is but I’d guess something like 50 years because a bunch of the old rape definitions got updated to use sexual assault language way back then.
One thing I am really bad at is law — I should’ve given that caveat.
But see, here’s where I’m confused. Isn’t the issue that this is called aggravated sexual abuse, and not rape? I mean, that definition seems gender-neutral to me. What am I missing here?
Why are we saying that “rape” doesn’t include rape against men, then? Just for research purposes? Sorry if I seem dense, I’ve had a long day.
“they need to realize this is a small group of very outthere people who spread such hate”
Unless of course you’re wrong about that.
@Joanna
I have been reading articles on GMP sites for about 2 months, but I have started commenting only about 3 weeks ago. I am really surprised that I have caught attention of feminist editors though I never used f-, p- or b- words. I am really glad that you have not called me sexist or misogynist as some other feminists do when men disagree with them. Yes I totally dislike feminism because it is completely based on the idea that men as a group are oppressing women, which is completely lie. I have questioned many feminists as to what is this feminism? I also ask you this question. One definition I read somewhere was “feminism is the radical belief that women are people too.” To know that I don’t need any prophet, messiah or thousand-page research report. I know instinctively that women are people. It includes my mother, cousins, grandmother and aunts. I like to put my honest opinions without trying to please or offend anybody. May be sometimes I use too much sarcasm. Following are two points among many that appear regularly in articles and comments which I trigger my anger.
1) Patriarchy is an evil thing which oppresses women and it oppresses men too.
I have several times pointed the commenters to define patriarchy and explain how it leads to oppression of women and men too. Till date nobody has been able to establish any connection between patriarchy and any kind of oppression. I have discussed it with Julie Gillis as well. Still this meme continues to be repeated again and again. Patriarchy literally means rule of father.
Suppose, I say that
Group A do some bad things X. Everybody would start accusing me of being sexist, racist, xenophobic, or homophobic, according to the context.
Now a certain meme goes like that
Patriarchy (fathers) is oppressing women (wives, daughters)
It is challenged by anybody.
Do you think rich, influential man would oppress his daughter to favour unrelated male. That is absurd.
2) White male has several privileges.
I wish to state that I am not American citizen or white, though I have lived in the U.S. and studied for M.S. and PhD, and worked there for some time. I have never seen any White feudal lords with lot of privileges in the U.S. As far as I have seen White American men are really hard working with few exceptions. By saying that they are privileged you are demeaning their efforts and poking fun at White working class.
There are several other issues as well which I would like to discuss later. You can be friends with Hugo Schwyzer or anybody you like that is none of my business.
I am really sorry to have your feelings and advice you that feelings have no place in heated discussion. The only thing that matters is reason, argument and evidence. Since you have gone through all my comments, you must have also seen that I am not a troll who hits and runs. I have presented reason, arguments and have never left any questions directed at me unanswered. I like to be brutally honest, it is my default state and if you want me to become goodie-goodie boy, then you would be seriously disappointed. BTW whether you can sky “blue” or “grey”, it does not matter sky is what it is. If you wear the uniform of feminism, you would be fired at by its opponents, you cannot complain that they should not fire because you are in logistics and not infantry, they are firing at their enemy unit not at any individual. In certain conditions, individuals don’t matter, group do.
Best regards.
I realize this post is to Joanna, but I wanted to say how much I enjoyed reading it.
I’ll let her respond and then I might also add my view back in if you’d have it, Rapses.
@Julie
I would be glad to have your views and please bring as many feminists as you can for the conversation.
Rapses- my comments (in italics) will be in the body of this post responding to you.
1) Patriarchy is an evil thing which oppresses women and it oppresses men too.
I have several times pointed the commenters to define patriarchy and explain how it leads to oppression of women and men too. Till date nobody has been able to establish any connection between patriarchy and any kind of oppression. I have discussed it with Julie Gillis as well. Still this meme continues to be repeated again and again. Patriarchy literally means rule of father.
Yes, and many of us do not feel that there should be a ruler in a family period. Male or female, but should work towards a more collaborative structure.
You cite one definition-but there are two at dictionary.com
1)A system of society or government in which the father or eldest male is head of the family and descent is traced through the male line.
2) A system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it.
There are also more “little p” patriarchy definitions where in terms of how life runs, the default is male. Mankind instead of womankind etc. Man was created and Eve from his rib etc. Woman as afterthought, helpmate, a little less than. Not sayng you believe that, but those are frames within which I’ve heard of patriarchy.
Suppose, I say that
Group A do some bad things X. Everybody would start accusing me of being sexist, racist, xenophobic, or homophobic, according to the context.
Now a certain meme goes like that
Patriarchy (fathers) is oppressing women (wives, daughters)
It is challenged by anybody.
Do you think rich, influential man would oppress his daughter to favour unrelated male. That is absurd.
Have men not married off daughters to the suitors the fathers felt were most suitable for money, land and etc? Daughters were not favored by kings in European cultures, as the next in line should be male. Daughters were utilized for political currency. That seems oppressive to me currently. Don’t know if the women felt so at the time. Also, if the father is the ruler of the house, and say a daughter wanted a lifestyle the father disagreed with, does she get a vote? Does she do what she wants or should she defer to his ruling? If she should defer, against her own life’s path, I’d say that was a bit oppressive. No good example from me there, just asking.
2) White male has several privileges.
I wish to state that I am not American citizen or white, though I have lived in the U.S. and studied for M.S. and PhD, and worked there for some time. I have never seen any White feudal lords with lot of privileges in the U.S. As far as I have seen White American men are really hard working with few exceptions. By saying that they are privileged you are demeaning their efforts and poking fun at White working class.
The white feudal lords you speak of are part of Fortune 500. It’s not a feudal system, but a corporatocracy. There are very very wealthy men in power in America. Not all of them are white, but many of them are. Surely you’ve been reading about Occupy? I’d say they have privileges we can only dream of. I don’t poke fun at the white working class. I do think many of the white working class have been sold a bill of goods though that says if it weren’t for the “gays, women and people of color” their lives would be better. That “things were better in the 1950′s when women stayed at home and men were men.” When in actuality, a lot of women worked in the 50′s. It was a time, in America at least, of great social upheaval though.
I’ll leave you with that for now.
YES, Julie. But this is a tar baby. Good for you for trying, though.
I don’t think this is a tar baby.
I think Rapses is coming to us saying, “Please address this! No one is talking to me openly.” I am grateful Julie is doing it. I just typed a whole response that got eaten by refresh (luckily I know now to copy my text every few minutes if I’m going long!) but I don’t even need to post most of it because in that time, Julie covered my points! Phew!
I want to make something very clear, here. Men are NOT the Patriarchy. There are men IN the Patriarchy, and both men and women benefit differently from Patriarchy.
White Knighting is one example of this. I was out to lunch with my best girlfriend and her male roommate yesterday. We were standing there and a guy was acting odd. I used this as an example of how White Knighting could be damaging. I said, “I can see that Neil is instinctively becoming protective of Angela and me, which is honorable and good. But the fact is, Neil shouldn’t HAVE TO protect us any more than we should protect him, except in a situation in which his physical strength is needed (Ang and I are both very small, thin women and he is a muscular man over six feet tall). In fact, I have a particular history and skill at talking to unstable people and helping to comfort them and disarm their anger. So in that way, I’m most fit for addressing the issue of this particular man.
When I said this, a certain smile came across Neil’s face. Sweetly, he said, “I don’t mind being you ladies’ protector, but I am sort of relieved to know that there are women who see the burden in that.”
Also, that White Knight thing is bad for us females, because we become weaker when we believe we cannot handle a situation. If I’d instantly assumed the crazy guy was Neil’s responsibility and not mine, I wouldn’t be able to rely upon my own intelligence and skills. I become stronger when I am supported by Neil (and Angela) but not “protected”.
As far as defining Feminism… You can Google that.
But for my definition, it is the quest to equalize the imbalance of power between the sexes, particularly for women. Now, my feminism doesn’t want any of the power that I gain authentically to REMOVE power from you men. A mother having a voice in the family doesn’t detract from the voice of the father. They join together, they become a unit, they become stronger together.
My feminism worked to make laws against beating your wife. My feminism made birth control legal. My feminism allowed young women to play sports in high schools. My feminism protects me from being sexually harassed at work.
My feminism, however, doesn’t want men to NOT be protected from these things. My feminism wants us to be protected equally.
I hope that allows you some insight into what we’re saying and I hope that you’ve finally gotten some answers from some feminists, straight-up and respectful answers.
Thanks for your thoughtful response, by the way.
Oh, and by the way, just because we “should” be able to leave our feelings outside in heated debates, we are humans. We all deserve respect, and the snarky sarcasm isn’t respectful. I want to use it ALL the time, I start writing sarcastic things to people I disagree with, but I try to remember that all of us are humans with hearts. We can’t just leave those hearts behind. We can’t deny them, in fact we should utilize them.
Archy appeals to my heart all the time with his stats on female on male rape. That’s how I learned about it. Through his open heart to mine.
Sounds very touchy-feely, but we’re making progress. Please join us.
“I just typed a whole response that got eaten by refresh”
Look this is important because this is a VERY serious bug. At the same time when it happens to me I’ve ever lost any text. What browser are you using? Are you sure the text didn’t just move to the bottom of the page? There was one odd time when I thought I’d lost text but weirdly the refresh thing seem to have had the effect of just making me go “back” a page, so I just hit “forward” and got it back again.
I don’t lose text when it happens to me either. Usually. But I’m more used to typing in replies in wordpress while I’m modding. It is a huge annoyance.
I scrolled to the bottom and the reply window was empty… Was I doing something wrong?
I’m using Safari.
Also, DB, know that when I said “will you please…” up above, I’m not trying to be inflammatory. If we were in the same room I would say that, laughing. But I do mean it. I wish you’d stop lumping me in.
We are working on it. Our tech folks got behind over the holidays, but we are looking to make sure the text stays in place everytime. Sorry for the hiccups.
The biggest thing I want to know on patriarchy is…Does it take male responsibility into account? There are hugeee burdens based out of patriarchy, as far as I know (and I may be wrong) the privileges came with the burden of war, a man had to step up and fight to the death which to me makes me wonder if it really is a privilege at all.
I totally understand genderroles are harmful, I just hope people realize that whilst men had the privilege of working they also had the expectation of working, if the funds became tight they usually copped the flack and had to work themselves to death to feed the family, often in highly unsafe jobs at times. Not only that but they were first to die, sacrifice your life for your family, a massive burden as you say on having to protect women and children and whilst this treats women in a sexist manner, it also treats the men in a sexist manner as it says their life is worth less than that of a woman.
So these privileges come at a terrible cost, such as male-only conscription, a macho culture that hides male pain, competition of resources and the downsides of those effects (crime, failing to succeed – eg, bankruptcy before welfare was in place). Take a look at society now, we have men in power at the top but a lot of men at the bottom, prisons are full mostly with males so it really does make me wonder about male privilege as a whole. At the moment I believe there are male privileges, but also female privileges. I don’t see life as a simple black and white, women were oppressed and still are ALWAYS, I can see areas where women get treated terribly, and others where men get treated terribly, I see how toxic our culture can be with the push and drive for greeeed and a few succeed and become mega-rich, but many fail and can’t afford to feed themselves. Don’t even get me started with pedophile paranoia, I am shit scared to be around kids when I do photography that it’s just too stressful much of the time to even bother. I feel as a male like I am automatically seen as a MONSTER for being a male and near a child, just yesterday walking in town I slowed down my walk bigtime because kids had started walking just in front of me, I felt I needed to distance myself incase someone thought I was suspicious. Females most definitely have privilege in being seen as safe near children.
It’s great that the gender roles are being broken down, I think some people might be stuck in the past a bit as I hear quite a few feminists pull out stuff that hasn’t been a big part of society in my country or other western ones for a while. I also wonder if they actually went through and analyzed the Negatives men face, even in certain countries young boys get thrown into the soldiering job, men have to live in very strict ways. I recently read that in Afghanistan, young men going to work had to grow beards and play I-hate-america type music on their phones as ringtones simply so the taliban didn’t go beat the %*$) outa them, they had to blend in going against their beliefs (they don’t hate anyone, except the taliban I’d guess). If we always look for the ways women are treated bad without also doing the same for men, we could really bias our view and think women get it far worse than men. I’m not sure if this is addressed but I hope it’s not common, to compare the genders you need to study both.
As for who gets it worse? I’m not sure, there are negatives on both sides and after being exposed to feminism, masculism, seeing all the fighting I don’t think we need to start saying who get’s it worse but instead work together to fix the issues of both at the SAME time. It appears to be the only way to get the right support and increasing overall hands to help.
Women are definitely better off in the West.
Afghanistan under the Taliban is a tough call. The feminists used to called it the worst place in the world to be a woman so I did some research (this was before 9-11) and found that – yeah what a shock – men had a very hard time under the Taliban and probably worse.
Men had to grow minimum length beards yes or they are attacked by the religious police. We all heard about how the religious police were anti-woman? In fact they arrested and beat up far more men than women. Just like every other police force on the planet. I think I saw stats saying 5:1 which is actually more equal than most. But back to the beards the thing was that while Pashtun men can grow big beards Hazara men cannot so it came down to a lot of racism targeting the men. There was a bunch of other examples. The Taliban themselves saw themselves as treating women well. They built schools for girls and some higher education women-only facilities but Western media and feminists lied about all that stuff. A lot of it was just made up entirely. Seriously I have seen photos of Taliban girl only schools. The feminists just utterly lied. Truthfully hardly anyone got to attend school in Afghanistan because of all the imperialist wars there for decades destroyed everything, but of what litle they had, they had for boys and for girls (separately of course – like radfems they love the sex segregationism).
Partly all this lying by feminists I think it was to help imperialist plans to invade Afghanistan although this was even (like a year or two) before the invasion there’s evidence it had been planned. Whatabouthtewomenz now acts as cover for all US invasions and bombing campaigns. What’s easier than to make up stuff about how evil those nasty middle eastern MEN are to their adorable angelic womenz? People lap up that stuff. Great combination of racism, sexism and nationalism.
Just read an amazing comment, apart from the generalizing at ToySoldiers site –
ht tp://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/youre-not-helping-v6/#more-6395
nikonian on January 6, 2012 at 1:58 pm said:
“You cannot have a discussion without “yes but”. Then it is not a discussion (where ideas, concerns, and issues get bounced back and forth) but merely the transfer of information as one perceives it (and often just a rant). Feminists usually describe a discussion by presenting the problem as they see it and then telling you to decide on which solution route is best. This is not a discussion.
In an argument with once…. The feminist stated that domestic violence is a crime that men do to women (gendered crime). Myself as a victim responded “but…” and was cut off by her saying that “there are no buts it is a crime against women and that’s it! I so sick of men turning a discussion into a…” etc. I wasn’t allowed to argue her statement because it was “fact” and that is that.
Hugo Schyzer anybody?
People wonder why men don’t discuss abuse…”
THIS^^
I have felt this when I tried to discuss it with SOME feminists, automatically cut off, dismissed, a male privilege grenade lobbed in for good measure, an air strike of dismissive responses. I walked away thinking, wtf, they’re bigots and don’t care about abuse, they just want to care about WOMEN only. A few experiences like this made me close to hating feminism, but I learned what I really hated was just a few bigots abusing the title. You can find quite a few in one of the facebook feminist groups actually, they’re as bad as the trolls.
They want men to discuss abuse, “men can stop rape”, but if men talk about it some of these “feminists” will quickly shut them down, accuse them of derailing, accuse them of showing privilege. They don’t want to talk about abuse, they just want to talk about women. They don’t seem to understand that you need to end abuse in every form so it doesn’t cycle on, that includes the abuse males suffer. You only have to watch a few crime channel shows on killers to understand there is a link between traumatic experience SOMETIMES, building a hatred for a gender, a people, etc, and the abuse cycle. Most misogyny I hear usually comes from a bad experience with a woman, most misandry I hear usually comes from a bad experience with a man.
If you aren’t willing to discuss the topic properly, don’t invite men to the table. I have zero interest in only discussing abuse from the women as victim mentality because it’s not helpful to ignore the male side, you don’t end violent behaviour by ignoring it. It’s as bad as setting up anti-violence campaigns for women but not men when the majority of violence in the world is male-male, you have to cover it ALL.
The “nice feminists” here don’t appreciate how utterly toxic that label is.
The nice feminists don’t know how toxic the “nice” label is? I think we do. Or is there a different label?
Is a “nice” feminist the same as a “fun” feminist?
I’m always wondering the distinction. Are the fun ones fun because you can rile them up, or am I a fun feminist because I’m also a sex writer who publishes pictures of herself on GMP.
I’m not sure if they are the same thing. I know that I am probably considered a “fun” one because I write about sex. Though I haven’t published any pictures on GMP lately. I should though. I’m cute.
I think the “nice” thing always hits me like…..pick a side and fight for it, don’t just middle ground it trying to appease people.
Is working for peace appeasement? Is there an actual call and need for a new “wave” of feminism (even though the waves are based in generations)? If (and I use the word if not to cast doubt on what the men here are saying, but only that I have not read all the links provided to me and want to be careful with language) their is a political force in place (money, lobbying, theory and discourse) focused on eliminating a segment of the population that can be raped, focusing on a binary of men must stop rape, women don’t have to do that work, then I’d say there does need to be a significant push back from feminist women who don’t buy into that kind of political powermongering.
Given that I’m not currently (yet) a major voice in the movement (any movement), I’m not sure who those new wave people are/would be.
I’m disturbed though at the thought that due to political expediency someone is getting thrown under the bus. Then again, when in the history of the world hasn’t that happened? Amirite? Shouldn’t be a surprise.
I have no idea what a fun feminist is, care to explain anyone?
I Know of gynocentric and egalitarian feminism, I prefer the latter as the former tends to annoy the hell out of me as much as phallocentric masculists.
ht tp://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-governance-feminism/australia-launches-the-plan-and-the-end-to-civil-rights/
Julie, if this link here has any truth to it then that is the kind of stuff the new wave feminists would have to advocate against, bring back gender neutrality into law except for pregnancy, prostate cancer (but not breast cancer since sadly men can get it too), and other clearcut gendered issues. This is one article I truly wish was false, burying of stats is bad, ignoring victims is bad, stereotypes of abuse is bad, and I fear that these people have the power to actually bring in laws like this.
In Australia we have violence against women, Australia says no campaigns, white ribbon day, and a bunch of other very gendered anti-violence campaigns that leave male victims and female abusers without help. We don’t need more female violence only laws or associations, they only help to cement the stereotype of the male abuser and female victim and as we all know now the stats show anyone can be a victim and anyone can be an abuser. This is why I will NEVER support these gendered campaigns whilst both genders are affected, I do support the breast cancer movements since they actually help the 1% of cases that are male but the abuse based ones clearly show both sides receive a significant amount each, depending on the stats it’s even close to parity.
And to bury statistics or ignore them, to show such outright bias and campaign in ways to further harm people via stereotypes to me is quite evil! No matter which group or gender does it, EVIL! Why can’t people just push for the truth and reality?
@ Joanna
Your touchy feely response to my comments sent me to White Knight mode. I could not think of anything to reply without wondering whether it would hurt your feelings or not. Please develop some sense of humour and don’t take any attack on feminism personally, because we humans are much more important that all –isms of this world. I am all for equality and removing all labels of prejudices and stereotypes. My motto in life is “Justice for all, Appeasement of None.” But when you wear the label of feminism, then you become part of a group. There is no professional certification for feminism till date. Anyone who claims to be feminist is considered feminist. You cannot pick and choose your feminism. You have to own everything that is been done in the name of feminism, if you consider yourself feminist. Therefore, please drop the label of feminism from your shoulder.
Best regards.
Tar baby? Really?
I realize “tar baby” can be used as a racial slur, though that’s not its original meaning. I’m sure Lori Day only meant the term as a sticky situation, not unlike a straw man, which exists to lure someone into a distracting fight.
Thanks, Justin. I’m familiar with the term and its history. I just think we can do better.
Yes, and many of us do not feel that there should be a ruler in a family period. Male or female, but should work towards a more collaborative structure.
You cite one definition-but there are two at dictionary.com
1)A system of society or government in which the father or eldest male is head of the family and descent is traced through the male line.
2) A system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it.
There are also more “little p” patriarchy definitions where in terms of how life runs, the default is male. Mankind instead of womankind etc. Man was created and Eve from his rib etc. Woman as afterthought, helpmate, a little less than. Not sayng you believe that, but those are frames within which I’ve heard of patriarchy.
Let me explain my objection to the assertion Patriarchy is an oppressive system in terms of social evolution.
Firstly, the word patriarchy is derived from two root words “pater” meaning father and “arche” meaning rule. Now imagine the primitive world where humans were living in small hunter-gatherer social groups. The environment was hostile and the average life expectancy was under 30 year. Suppose there is a couple X (female) and Y (male) living in this primitive world. Y has more physical strength than X, thus he is more suitable for undertaking physically strenuous and risky jobs for survival. The group needs more manpower for survival and to flourish. Here X has something valuable to offer which is her reproductive function, i.e. giving birth to young ones. Given the hostile environment in which they are living may be most of their children would die before attaining adulthood. So the optimal strategy for group survival would be for X to stay in safe environment and produce as many babies as she can in her life time and Y should go out and perform other necessary functions like hunting, protecting, tool making etc. Since X would remain pregnant or be taking care of the child most of her adult life, she would not know as much about outside world, giving Y the leadership in relation by default. I am using the word “leadership” and not “rulership.” This is the origin point of patriarchy. Neither X nor Y are oppressing each other. They are taking up gender roles as the survival strategy. As the human civilization progressed the gender role became bit more relaxed. You can see that upper class women were educated and participated in politics in the ancient civilization of Greece, Rome, China and India. The social imprint of thousands of years of struggle for survival had no erased. The dominance of men in government comes from the fact that in ancient and medieval age, political power was attained through wars, manipulation and taking risks, which might lead to murder. You cannot deny that aristocratic ladies lead a life of ease and luxury. There are many instances of female monarchs supported by patriarchs. With the advent of modern age, life became very easy compared to before. Women has ample time for recreational activities and decided to move out of the confined of home and work. Women’s rights movement agitated for the rights of women to vote, education and career. Several men supported it and several opposed it. Ultimately these rights were granted by the men in power to women. Feminists did not fight any civil war for it, though there was some resistance by few men, but finally it was reasonable men decided that it would be fair to give them. Now to say that patriarchy is oppressive here is being ungrateful. If the so called White patriarchy would have not decided to empower women, it would have never happened. If you don’t trust me look at Saudi papa (patriarchy) who has only recently given car keys (right to drive car) to his dear daughters (women).
As for the small “p” since men were in the public space, they were more visible to others. Thus the term “mankind” and “Eve made out of Adam’s rib” etc. came in the minds of writers. As they say out of sight, out of mind.
Have men not married off daughters to the suitors the fathers felt were most suitable for money, land and etc? Daughters were not favored by kings in European cultures, as the next in line should be male. Daughters were utilized for political currency. That seems oppressive to me currently. Don’t know if the women felt so at the time. Also, if the father is the ruler of the house, and say a daughter wanted a lifestyle the father disagreed with, does she get a vote? Does she do what she wants or should she defer to his ruling? If she should defer, against her own life’s path, I’d say that was a bit oppressive. No good example from me there, just asking.
How a father caring for the welfare of his daughters is an act of oppression? Fathers married their daughter of to the suitors who had the resources to provide a comfortable lifestyle. That does not seem pretty cruel to me. Daughters were not favoured by kings for next in line because the successor had to be strong and capable of fighting wars, but these princesses were married to kings and nobles and led luxurious life. The poor little princess could cry at her misfortune dressed in expensive clothes and jewels surrounded by servants at her disposal in a big palace. All the while his fortunate brothers would go around having fun fighting battles. Daughters as political currency worked out well for both father and daughter. Everybody has to make sacrifices in a royal family. Fathers care for the best interests of their children, so there should be no basis of hostility. Assuming that daughter is adult, she can do whatever she likes. The daughter has to make her own choice whether to go on her own or consider fathers wishes. Whatever happens as a result a good father will always be there of his daughter.
“The white feudal lords you speak of are part of Fortune 500. It’s not a feudal system, but a corporatocracy. There are very very wealthy men in power in America. Not all of them are white, but many of them are. Surely you’ve been reading about Occupy? I’d say they have privileges we can only dream of. I don’t poke fun at the white working class. I do think many of the white working class have been sold a bill of goods though that says if it weren’t for the “gays, women and people of color” their lives would be better. That “things were better in the 1950′s when women stayed at home and men were men.” When in actuality, a lot of women worked in the 50′s. It was a time, in America at least, of great social upheaval though.”
It is a bit ironical that I (person of color) am defending White men on the privilege issue from attack by White feminist. Privilege refers to the special rights and immunity granted to a person or group which others do not have. White male privilege is something that is enjoyed exclusively by White male. When I mentioned about absence of White feudal lords in the U.S., I meant that White men are not some feudal lords with non-Whites working as their serfs. U.S. is the best model democracy and has rule of law. Did you even consider what percentage of White men constitute part of Fortune 500? It is not exclusively dominated by White, there are others too on the list. Why should it be assumed that they are rich due to some privilege, maybe they worked hard, invested wisely or were simply lucky.
P:S. Julie’s comments and my response got mixed up due to some formatting on two above posts.
Well, I don’t know about feudal lords in the us with non white serfs in the us, but I do know that most factory workers in the deep south are either poor whites or blacks. And I do know that corporations outsource factory jobs in China and India (non white) and pay next to nothing and working conditions are often deplorable. We may have a democracy in the US but we also have many wealthy beyond belief US and Western corporations employing (nearly enslaving in many cases) citizens of other countries. In fact many of us in the US are highly suspicious that the role of Democracy is under severe attack and the two parties are exceptionally close together in terms of supporting the wealthiest of lobbyists and corporation.
I won’t even start on our military.
At the height of wealth we are talking about Race goes out the window I suppose, but Class is everything.
And I do think that class (mainly of men) has power we can’t even dream of.
“Most factory workers in the deep south are either poor whites or blacks. And I do know that corporations outsource factory jobs in China and India (non white) and pay next to nothing and working conditions are often deplorable.”
This statement confirms that there is no universal White male privileges because of anything like that existed, there would be no poor White factor workers. Being born White male gives you no special advantages. My country of origin is in Asia and if you would pardon me, I would like to say that I know about working conditions and pay there slightly better than you. Given a choice I would l prefer working in MNC to working in a native business establishment. Native capitalists are more exploitative than White capitalists.
Borrowing a line from James Bond movie “Licence to Kill”
“Its nothing personal. Its business.”
If there are exploitative capitalists of other other races and poor White factory workers, the how does the notion White male privilege stand. Its hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty to say it.
“Class is everything.”
If class is everything then I would like to say that class mobility in the U.S. is much better than other parts of the world.
Well, and this is a modern POV, what if the rich man the father married her to was a lout? An asshole. A rapist. A drunk? Hated her. Ignored, abused etc her. She had no choice. The father looking out for her welfare meant money, not emotional support. Which back in those days was probably not ever considered.
What if she wanted more from life than sitting in a castle. What if she had thoughts in that pretty little head that weren’t allowed? That daughter couldn’t do what she liked if she was a pawn of a royal system! Good grief. Fathers do NOT always care for the best interests of the children. If one could marry off a child to a serial killer and get a shit ton of land, they’d have done it. She’s would have been a pawn.
Anyway, I feel this argument will only go round and round and round. We have a vast difference in opinion even about words like “family” so I think it might be best to move on to other topics.
I think he’s saying that she could have not taken her marriage and left her family. But the consequences to that weren’t really possible. She could NOT have made a living on her own, and wouldn’t have been allowed to own or buy property.
So when you don’t have civil rights as an alternative, where is the “choice”?
It is a big lie the women in medieval period did not work. I can provide countless examples to prove it. Moving out of family would have been really uncomfortable for either son or daughter, but not impossible.
I do not know how much you are familiar with the system of arranged marriage. In my family all marriages were arranged which lasted. The suitors for daughters are chosen carefully and due attention is paid to all details. If the daughter has some problems as you have mentioned, she could return to her father. It would cause some serious rift between two families and require intervention by community leader. You cannot seriously mess up with the daughter of a strong father, even if she is your wife. I think same would have been the case in Europe during the medieval period. Emotional support was not much in fashion in those days. In a family men supported men and women supported women emotionally. As for the royal family, it was the game of chess in which all members of family were pawn which could be sacrificed to save the king or capture enemy king. It is the rule of game.
During the medieval period there was not much to do outside, or even inside, home for an upper class lady to do. The outside world was dangerous full of war and civil strife. The little head could only think about parties, ball dances and jewellery, and leave the rest for the man of the house. I agree that not all fathers were good fathers, but majority of them were good and moral looking for the welfare of their children. Father taking lot of land for marrying his daughter to man is myth. On the contrary, father paid dowry to marry of their daughters to good families. In those days, serial killing was a legitimate business.
Joanna, may I contribute something.
From what I’ve read in that response, it sounds like you’re a feminist who’s very understanding and reasonable. One of the rare few. So I compliment you on your position and am sympathetic to your plight.
Having said that, Joanna, I need to fill you in on my aversion to calling myself a feminist.
The reasonings behind it have nothing to do with you or your brand of feminism. So don’t take it the wrong way.
It’s not your fault that I don’t call myself a feminist even though I posess views that would label me a feminist.
I don’t call myself a feminist is because, while you’re welcoming and willing to listen to men when they express their struggles, lurking in the shadows nearby is another feminist shaking their head vehemently while muttering words of advice, being the back seat communicator. Saying “He should check his priveledge”, “He’s an MRA”, “Why is he mansplaining? Women have it worse”. This feminist is part of that vocal minority you speak of, but yet they’re standing right there or are lurking somewhere since feminism isn’t a monolith and welcomes all views. Including said views of that gynocentric, “Women have it worse” feminist I speak of.
I’ve been hurt and scarred by feminists like those in the past. To the point where I’m deftly afraid of speaking out in feminist circles. Even with feminists like you nearby, Joanna, I still have to share space with that feminist I speak of and their toxic belifes.
I was also recently hurt by another feminist. This feminist was VICIOUS and made below-the-belt remarks on my person, mocking my rections. Granted, I shouldn’t have taken the bait and I lost control. Plus, it was my fault for getting into a debate on certain points she had in the first place.
However, that was no excuse for this feminist to attack me like that. Even writing this out, I’m still scared because that feminist is very well known out there. I’m afraid also that this feminist might attack me in real life, go after me, harass me now that I’ve outed myself via the articles I wrote. Imagine having to live with this fear, Joanna, and you’ll understand why I’m having to constantly look over my shoulder when speaking out. Even to feminists I trust. Because, again, since feminism isn’t a monolith, those vicious ones share the same space.
The worst part about that incident, Joanna? None of the other feminists defended me when she made those attacks. There were some who weren’t feminists that lept to my defense, though.
The place where I was commentating, I had to leave for good because not only was I triggered, I was again having suicidal thoughts. I couldn’t concentrate on my work, my lifestyle was affected, emotional state akimbo, you name it I felt it. It didn’t last long, thankfully.
So you’ll also understand why I’m reluctant to call myself a feminist. The last thing I want is to be in the same space as feminists like those ones.
But Joanna, can I ask you one thing? If any of those feminists I speak of are in the same vicinity as you, prattling on and attacking me, would you leap to my defense and tell them to, excuse my language, “Fuck off”? Would you be willing to pick me up when I’m down because in triggered states, there’s only so much I can do before being rendered helpless?
There are some feminists who do so that I’m so thankful for. Would you be that feminist for me? Make all the monsters go away when they come when it takes more than my inner strength and courage to do it? Please?
“None of the other feminists defended me when she made those attacks.”
Yes that’s the tell.
First, Eagle, this is SUCH an important thing you’re saying. I’m so glad you’ve said it.
I would ALWAYS say what I believe, and I would ALWAYS stand up for what I believe. I can be a peacemaker, it’s my nature, but not for a milisecond would I fail to call out someone who was attacking you personally. No chance. No way. And, just FYI, if that ever happens here, please email me joanna.schroeder @ gmail.com and I will come into the convo. Write down my email and keep it for these extreme circumstances.
Second, why should I allow some rude, cruel feminists who are mean to people and who disregard the needs and feelings of men to define ME as a feminist? How about they stop calling themselves feminists and let ME step forward? Just because they’re meaner, doesn’t make them the “truest” ones. I think I am the truest, that Julie Gillis is a true feminist. If I don’t speak for MY feminism, who will?
It’s my motto, “if I don’t speak for me, someone else’s voice gets assigned to me.”
Well, I’m not gonna let feminism go down like that without a fight. There are more of feminists like me than you know, they just aren’t the ones you notice because they, too, are probably intimidated by the people of which you speak.
I’m not telling you what to do, but how about those of us who believe in equality-feminism stand up and speak? How about we reclaim this.
My other question is for the MRAs on here: You just read what Eagle wrote… Would you do the same if there were MRAs being pushy, mean, below-the-belt to a feminist? Would you step in and say, “that sh** ain’t cool, use respect please”? Even if it is toward someone you disagree with?
See, I would, even if someone were saying it to someone whose ideology I disagreed with. That’s community accountability and we should all use it to keep our community here at GMP safe and productive.
So, no, I will not stop calling myself a feminist (I know you weren’t asking me too, I’m just reaffirming it). Even if it makes someone hate me. I am what I am, those others don’t define me.
Word. Right back at you Joanna, and Eagle you can email me too @ juliegillisproductions@gmail.com.
Just to be clear, Joanna and Julie, I’m not asking any equality feminist to stop calling themselves a feminist.
I’m not someone who believes feminism is a hate movement nor do I believe it has had its day. There are still issues out there that women face on a regular basis which need correcting and addressing. I can get behind that.
But the emphasis is on Equality Feminism for me. Any Gynocentric Feminist I tend to steer clear of because some you just can’t reason with no matter how much you make it clear to them. It’s not worth it. There are even some, like the one I mentioned before, who would go to great lengths to hurt you as what happened to me.
So yes, I’m an “Equality” feminist in some sense. When men are suffering, I don’t go “Well women have it worse” or “Their priveledge negates their suffering”. I’d rather listen and support them. That’s my philosophy not just as an eglitarian but who also knows what it’s like to have been traumatized by a woman to the point of fear for speaking out.
Maybe I’ll eventually be able to feel safe in feminist circles. Someday. Just…not now.
““He should check his priveledge”, “He’s an MRA”, “Why is he mansplaining? Women have it worse”.”
Omg they’re the worst terms I hear. Feminists like that I try to listen to but usually have to give up on, I can’t stand people asking for others to listen yet silencing their voice.
“My other question is for the MRAs on here: You just read what Eagle wrote… Would you do the same if there were MRAs being pushy, mean, below-the-belt to a feminist? Would you step in and say, “that sh** ain’t cool, use respect please”? Even if it is toward someone you disagree with?”
I’m no MRA but I do this, a bit here and other places. I tried it on a facebook page but it was full of said gynocentrics, they get MRA trolls pretty bad and trying to get both to see the good in each other is like trying to sew graphene with your hands. It’s sad that they’re so polarized at times, like rare earth magnets in the wrong direction they just repel repel repel, so much that I’m surprised they don’t float!
By the way, Archy, I gotta tell you that I give up on people, too. Calling someone out and asking them to hear me is usually only done if I feel like the person shows some heart and not just hate. When I see people with hate and no back-and-forth potential, I ignore them.
That’s human, and that’s healthy (if you ask me).
Well the worst *I* have heard is,
You’re a rapist
You’re a pedophile
You love hurting women
You are raping me now (yes – I’ve often been accused of rape in an on-line chat)
You are stalking me
You are harassing me
I remember a convo with a radfem trying to say I was raping her because we had a conversation where she and I were arguing? Apparently I was meant to stop straight away and sit there taking abuse. Arguing is not rape, rape is rape. Throwing it around to mean someone not stopping talk when you want them to is just terribly wrong to do especially if you are doing the same. Gotta love the sexist insult “creep” too over the most trivial of matters. Tossing out serious accusations during an argument is very wrong in my eyes, call someone n asshole but don’t go falsely accusing them of a horrific crime because you don’t agree with them.
That is f’ing bananas.
See, that pisses me off! Who would say you’re “raping” someone because you’re arguing? You could be hurting their feelings, making them feel unsafe in a social online environment, you can harass (I’m not saying either of you DID that, I’m just saying these things are technically possible).
But I’m sorry, you’re not an “internet rapist” for disagreeing, even if you act like a jerk. What makes me mad and upset about that is that there is a REAL thing in the world called RAPE and that word is reserved for people who sexually violate a person. These women are gaslighting their own damn selves.
Ugh.
Okay, I’m calm now.
Thank-you!
It pisses me off quite a bit too, I’d much rather just be called a jerk or an asshole.
I am asking you to stop calling yourself a feminist.
Me?
Why?
If you folks don’t mind me speaking up on this to Rapses.
Unlike a lot of the people that are trying to cool down the hatred at feminism I hope you hear me out for one reason, I’m working my own way through that very same hatred right now.
First off I don’t want to try to say you’re wrong about that point you gave (“Asking a feminist to deal with reasonable arguments backed with evidence.”) because simply put there are feminists who actually do fit that bill. I only want to say that they don’t all act like that. Even though there are a lot that do (and of course a lot that will hang on to every word such feminists say) there are plenty of fair minded ones that don’t.
Next I want to point out that more than likely the basis of your frustrations with feminism probably come from a very valid and fair point. (Folks this is why you must be careful about telling a critic of feminism something to the effect of “If you would interact with real feminists instead of drawing your opinions from right wing rhetoric, media depictions, MRAs….” or accuse them of building straw feminists.) And over time as you have tried to address those valid points you probably kept getting dismissed until you reached a breaking point and at that point you decided to stop trying to be reasonable with them right? At that point the cycle of hate poisoned your mind and from there poisoned your thoughts and words I bet.
It does feel good to strike them back with the very same hatred they struck you with right doesn’t it? I know it felt good for me. But ultimately its useless. Useless for the very same reason their hatred didn’t actually get you to change your mind on issues or address your otherwise very valid criticisms (and by “address” I don’t necessarily mean “solve”, simple “acknowledgement” would do). But I’ll tell you what helped. Finding feminists that are actually capable of hearing your valid points. Now I understand that it feels like feminists like that are about as plentiful as unicorns but trust me they are out there but you may have a hard time seeing them because of hatred that has poisoned you.
Now Joanna Schroeder here seems like she may be one of those that is at least willing to hear you out. But you have to bear in mind that she is not one of feminists that is going to dismiss you because your male or one of those feminists that has a poisoned mind. She is probably alot like yourself (or myself) before the hatred took over. The trick to working with folks like her is to find a way to work your way back to your old pre-poisoned self. One thing to bear in mind is that her brand of feminism is not the same brand that sent you over the edge. In fact look at what she said here: “To be frank, not only does what you wrote above actually hurt my feelings a little bit, it makes me disregard the important things you may have to say. Because it’s actually really mean. And it’s snarky and feels very dirty.” When combined with the other things she’s saying I take this as dead solid proof that she is turned off by hatred towards feminists and (and this is important) she is turned off by hatred coming from feminists.
Even though I don’t know you Rapses I’m willing to bet that your arguments are much stronger with they are weighed down in hatred. I know mine are. It hurts to think about giving any feminist a chance after being treated harshly by some of them before. But I’ve found a few that actually are worth giving a fair chance to. If you come across any please to try to give them the fair chance that you weren’t given by other feminists or that you haven’t given to previous feminists (and I say that only on the premise that you’ve come across some good ones that you didn’t give a fair chance to).
(Here’s a good tip on finding the fair minded ones. Look for feminists that actually share your criticisms of other feminists. If they are willing to call out their own, especially along points similar to yours, then they might be worth dropping the hatred for. Just please remember to drop the hatred.)
@ Danny
I do not know why I am being treated like errant child. Personally, I have never been touched by feminism. I came from a regular family where there is no place for any kind of oppression. I am 36 year old unmarried (heterosexual) man with no bitterness towards any woman. Social science is not my academic discipline. I have deep interest in philosophy and current affairs, and am a voracious reader. My problem with feminism is at the intellectual level. The way feminism is taking over the public space with false rhetoric devoid of any reason or argument, misrepresenting and twisting facts to suit an agenda. The only option for me is to speak out or shut up. I am a seeker and not an avenger. Where did you get the idea that I hate anybody? Hate is a very expensive emotion that needs lot of energy to sustain. Joanna, took one of my sarcastic remarks too literally and feels hurt. Don’t you see how many feminists avoid any reasonable arguments and try to silence others by name calling?
I do not know why I am being treated like errant child.
My apologies for coming off that way. Please believe me when I say I’m not trying to treat you like a child.
Personally, I have never been touched by feminism.
I was however treating you like someone who has had bad experiences with feminists. Again my apologies.
Don’t you see how many feminists avoid any reasonable arguments and try to silence others by name calling?
Oh I most certainly do as I’ve been on the receiving end of it plenty of times. I was apparently reading something into your comments that wasn’t there.
Rapses, did Julie and I not give you reasonable respect and responses above, when you asked VERY genuinely for your questions to be answered by feminists.
Danny, you response above brought tears to my eyes. I am amazed by you for a few reasons:
1. Admitting that you had hatred. I know the feeling, I used to be very afraid of the oppression of men and had bad experiences that colored my perceptions of manhood in general (not all manhood, I’ve always had tons of guy friends whom Ioved like brothers).
And I had REALLY bad ideas about MRAs until just recently. Now that I’m able to hear from some whom I respect, or from neutral people who have some MRA views, I’m changing. I’m still a feminist, I still disagree sometimes, but I hear you guys now.
2. Healing from the hatred and allowing voices like mine to be heard. I’m imperfect, deeply imperfect, but the fact that you can see that in my heart I want to hear you means so much to me.
Thanks for that, my friend.
It’s amazing when the fear, anger and hatred lifts isn’t it? Our society is plagued with generalizations (I just did it
) but I do believe there is some truth to this, I am trying actively to avoid it and focus on the individual because we can’t judge everyone as the same. It’s almost like target shooting, you slowly get better at aiming criticism, fear, etc better to the point you don’t just scattershot the target but you nail the bullseye at 500yards because you practiced, learned about the topic, and can recognize what it is exactly that bothers you.
I recently got extremely annoyed by something a few feminists said, but luckily I know it’s only a few feminists and not the entire group. That’s important because I can still respect feminism, no one, two, or three persons can speak for feminism, from what I gather even in the start they had members that didn’t agree on many issues but what’s important is the issues they all agreed on got support.
1. Admitting that you had hatred. I know the feeling, I used to be very afraid of the oppression of men and had bad experiences that colored my perceptions of manhood in general (not all manhood, I’ve always had tons of guy friends whom Ioved like brothers).
Oh no the hatred is still there. Not to sound like a comic book but it will probably always be there. I just have to learn how to control it.
And I had REALLY bad ideas about MRAs until just recently. Now that I’m able to hear from some whom I respect, or from neutral people who have some MRA views, I’m changing. I’m still a feminist, I still disagree sometimes, but I hear you guys now.
And thank you for keeping an open mind about them.
2. Healing from the hatred and allowing voices like mine to be heard. I’m imperfect, deeply imperfect, but the fact that you can see that in my heart I want to hear you means so much to me.
Thanks. I take this as a sign that I’m making progress.
Thanks for that, my friend.
And thanks to you as well.
Danny – what we take issue with is the lumping in of all feminists with the ones you don’t like without any attention to the diversity of the movement. As I always say, over and over, I won’t do that to you MRAs, don’t do it to me.
Second, the sarcasm and assumption that I’m too thick-headed or stubborn to listen to facts was downright offensive and that is where people get the idea that you’re hate-filled.
You can choose to hear me on this, to believe that this is the truth as I’ve perceived it (and others) and try to find a way to communicate (as you first did in your reply), or you can continue to tell me that nothing you did was actually offensive or hurtful and dismiss what I say.
But like I said, that method won’t work to effectively deliver your information to most reasonable people.
I’m really sorry, I addressed that to Danny and I meant it toward *Rapses*. That was a pretty serious misfire.
Zorro: “No I think Hugo is too smart to think that ALL men are like him and neither would he want all men to be like him. But where the problem lies is that people, particularly men, have issue with his pieces because these often project guilt upon men – and men are too macho to be guilty for anyone else’s sins, especially gender crimes, wars, and other injustices with a male face, right? Is there a choice though when you’re covering controversial topics and the perpetrator(s) of these crimes are men? Perhaps we should rewrite history and blame women….”
No, men are not too macho to be guilty for anyone else’s sins. It’s because they are sick and tired of being made to feel guilty by others due to the select few men in power at the top because they share the same gender.
Last time I checked, Zorror, gender crimes, wars, and other injustices take more than the face of a gender to put a reasoning behind them right? More than what’s dangling between the antagonist’s legs?
“Last time I checked, Zorror, gender crimes, wars, and other injustices take more than the face of a gender to put a reasoning behind them right? More than what’s dangling between the antagonist’s legs?”
I can’t see why both sexes can’t take responsibility/guilt for all the wrongs in society. Don’t you understand that is what I’m getting at? (If we don’t ALL feel guilty/responsible at some point – nothing will get solved! Things will remain status quo because we’re too narcissistic to think about anyone else’s suffering besides our own problems), Last time I checked my reality meter, rape goes both ways, crime goes both ways, but my reality meter also tells me these events are disproportionate between the sexes (British Crime Survey: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/science-research/research-statistics/crime/crime-statistics/british-crime-survey/).
I believe the people who’ve really been burned by women whether from failed marriages, rape or sexual assault etc are too jaded to see beyond their own pain and anger. It is easy to recognize the ones on here who carry grudges and ill-will towards the opposite sex because of some horrible (likely isolated) experience they’ve had. That is tragic. This is tragic for mankind.
“It’s because they are sick and tired of being made to feel guilty by others due to the select few men in power at the top because they share the same gender.”
I feel that is an excuse to carry on hating women which keeps humanity and society from moving forward. Crime knows no bounds, rich or poor, male or female, nor race — we all bare witness to this.
It is a new year, many of us have a lot of reconciling with our pasts to do.
“I believe the people who’ve really been burned by women whether from failed marriages, rape or sexual assault etc are too jaded to see beyond their own pain and anger. It is easy to recognize the ones on here who carry grudges and ill-will towards the opposite sex because of some horrible (likely isolated) experience they’ve had. That is tragic. This is tragic for mankind. ”
I see the reverse in many women, I can sense their pain but I also feel bad for them that they are jaded. I once was jaded against women too until I met some amazing women of all ages who taught me an extremely important lesson – We are individuals and vary so much.
I’ve met good and bad men, women, jaded, bitter, you name it both have had it. I’ve known feminists who were so caught up in stats and jaded that they cried butwomengetitworse, to the point the men’s pain didn’t matter at all (and seen some mra’s do the same in reverse).
Woman hating, Man hating, all this hate. There’s no good men, no good women, all men cheat, all women cheat, men are rapists, women are rapists, these generalizations I hear so much from people really have annoyed me and I try to understand what they see that makes them believe this. I think truly that most have had a very impacting experience, a rape or being cheated on that the bad guy/girl starts to become that gender as a whole, they probably tunnel vision by a thought growing in their mind seeing a gender as bad and they will actively take notice of this and ONLY see the bad men, or the bad women.
Mediahound could probably tell me what this is in psychology, I did the same for quite a while in seeing only the negative in the world and ignoring the positive. For me it was based on age, women over 40 were always nice to me but girls my age during highschool and a while after…well many were quite evil and they stuck in my memory, it wasn’t until I met some awesome women around my age who broke 2 assumptions I had, women my age were evil, and beautiful women were bitchs (due to the popular girls in school being such). I knew some totally beautiful women who were absolutely sweet, nice, loving caring women (which made them a whole new level of beauty) that I realized it wasn’t something superficial like age or beauty that makes someone mean, it’s far more complex and it’s impossible to look at someone and judge them as good hearted, bad hearted.
These jaded people need to see the people they fear, they need to understand that the really special person in your life isn’t representative of all of their gender, race, etc, and it’s silly to assume they do. If you feel this, take the time to truly look around, ask your friends, relatives, talk to them and find out what they are like. Don’t be like me and ignore the good people, I didn’t take much notice of the not so popular girls who some were very nice, I didn’t even notice the nice girls in the popular group because I had already made up my mind based on a few experiences. Open your eyes and I guarantee you will find good in what you think is the “enemy”, I really wish feminists and mra’s would do this!
Archy – amazingness happening here.
I think it’s so true that all this hate is based upon fear. I wish we could get to the root of what we’re afraid of?
I have made a few Oprah jokes on here and in conversations lately, but seriously, Oprah’s onto something with getting to the root of all this fear business. That sort of hippie-skippy thing of saying that all behaviors are based upon only two things: either fear or love. You can buy that or not, but it’s an interesting thought experiment.
I find it’s so true in my life. I used to be afraid of some of the MRAs, afraid that they were going to hurt me. That they were going to say something that would hurt my feelings or uproot my feminism.
Now I’m not afraid of that. If my feminism gets legitimately uprooted, well then I should be. Do it. Uproot it. I’m not afraid of that anymore. And no longer am I afraid to read the comments of the extremists on either side (MRA, feminists) because even if something hurts my feelings a little bit, that’s okay, I’m not so fragile that I can’t handle it. I get over it fast.
And yes, there is good in the “enemy” — almost ALL of the time!
Amen to that Joanna, I wonder if the biggest fear is they’re more alike than they think.
I’ve read so much hurtful stuff that not much bothers me anymore, I am lucky in a sense that I was my own worst enemy and my own inner voice criticized me the most, and in combating that I am much more calm and can take criticism. I am desensitized to most of the stuff trolls say, the horrible jokes and insults bore me to death more than anything (online gaming can expose you to some real class acts…). I find it quite interesting though to read through their words and figure out why they’re so angry or bitter, I wonder what would have caused them to act like such assholes?
I realized a super duper important thing of life. Everyone has their own opinion, it doesn’t have to match mine. I’ve been called an MRA because I dare mentioned male suffering, saw the belittling whataboutthemenz insults but you know what? Those individuals showed everyone else who read their comments their bigotry and stupidity. I don’t want to take sides, if only men were given awareness on the tough issues (in general society) I’d be whataboutthewomenz so everyone has a chance. I prefer to focus on the valid criticisms, I’ve learned so much from valid criticisms of what I’ve said. I am no expert but I’m willing to listen, to learn, to change my behaviour if it’s wrong.
I believe 100% firmly in that both genders need to have safety, good role models, a fair chance, support each other for this world to be great. This is a core belief, you can’t beat this out of me I’ll take it to the damn grave and spread it amongst the plants when I fertilize them. So what if some radfem calls me a MRA as an insult, or radmra? calls me something, I’m over being in fear of what others judge me as because I know I have people that love me for who I am, I am not changing to suit some miserable people who wanna fight.
What people have to say could totally shake up my view of the world, I might read something super terrible tomorrow and it’ll call into question my actions. It’s already happened after I read about bullies, I learned how bullies are often abused in the home and the anger I felt for mine turned immediately into sadness for them. As much as I wanted to break bones, I wondered what good would that do when they’ve probably been beaten just as bad at home. It doesn’t excuse their actions but it did help make me realize how bad the cycle of abuse becomes, because I had remembered I too had bullied a bit in school and never knew why. Luckily I seemed to grow out of that quick and feel absolutely terrible for it, you reach an age of understanding your actions and feel like an asshole for what you have done but I guess that’s a part of growing up, I’m just glad I didn’t do it to the excesses others did to me.
So much of my growth comes from listening to peoples stories, I am addicted to the comment threads because they tell as much or even more than the main article does, reading others experiences makes me feel less alone.
Yes, I do believe much hate is from fear. Racism, directly fear of the unknown, I grew up seeing that and even had the bit of racism in me until I actually got to know some of those people. I had followed everyone else it seems, I live in an area racism is popular and when you’re a kid you tend to follow the lead of others without knowing WHY. I ended up being good mates with an aboriginal boy and thought to myself, wtf, he’s nothing like what people say. Goodbye racism, hello open mind. I don’t think many of those racists actually met many aboriginals, it seems like they just parrot the same hate their parents did, grandparents, and I doubt any of them have a clue as to why they hate them really. Throughout highschool I had white friends, black friends, asian friends, I remember one black friend probably made me laugh the most of anyone there, how the hell could anyone hate him simply because he is from a different ethnicity?
I guess the first time blacks and whites met, they’d both be absolutely mindboggled at the different colour skin and this probably was fear of the unknown. If we ever meet aliens, I guarantee that fear will popup bigtime. You can see it plain as day after 9/11 with the anti-muslim sentiment, people didn’t known much of islam except what they heard and what they heard was probably quite bad. If you only hear bad, and have a significant event to cement it into your mind you’ll breed hate and vengeance in that case very easy. And guess what makes the news? Sensational BAD news, good luck trying to find good news. The news has so much fear in it that I can barely stand watching it, I swear the news anchors jump at their own shadows. We live in cultures of fear when we should be living in cultures that celebrate a more positive emotion. My life was consumed by fear because of a hyperactive fight or flight response based on previous trauma, too much fear is toxic so we need to drop that fear and start listening to each other. It’s helped me tremendously, the more I listen the less I fear, I’ve realized others are just as scared as me whether they want to admit it or not.
Maybe we need a story on hate and fear? I’ll write comments for it but I don’t think I’m ready to make an article just yet. I find it quite hard to get things into a good order and have a nice flow for an article.
TALK to the people you fear and you’ll probably find that fear disappears quite a bit.
“Now I’m not afraid of that. If my feminism gets legitimately uprooted, well then I should be. Do it. Uproot it. I’m not afraid of that anymore”
Are you sure? Because I had pretty much decided to give you civilian status. And why were you afraid of changing your mind? That’s a wonderful thing to have happen.
It can be a wonderful thing to change one’s mind. Are you being coy though? I feel pretty certain you understand that changing a deep structure world view isn’t as easy as all that. It means really restructuring things, giving up “old friends” in terms of values and often it means giving up, or being left by real people. Cognitive dissonance and all that.
Still, I don’t think Joanna (or me for that matter) ever came on this board with a “my way or the highway” position. Part of why she’s here (and why I’m here) is to learn. Learning means being willing to change if you believe the change is necessary.
That’s probably true for many feminists but you guys seem to be hanging out here where frankly you are already on the fringe of the movement and I don’t think you’d suffer some sort of abandonment by your social circle which absolutely would happen if you were lets say a regular at Feministe or something. That sort of in group thinking – which I think is often even worse with women because their social ties are more important – think of feminism as like a big girls clique – really makes it hard to go against the mainstream feminist views which say that eg. people like Eagle33 have to be attacked and humiliated and NOBODY better say otherwise.
It’s always striking because — and I know you’ll believe this where Joanna perhaps might not — I really like feminist “girls” for just about everything EXCEPT their being feminists. They are usually smart and opinionated and don’t take any shit from people. Other than the feminist stuff they are often reliably left wing with apparently sincere interest in social justice issues. And beautiful of course! They are not meek little sheep. But then you get the topic on feminism and only about 10% will be willing to face down their peers on a point of principle.
One of the things I hate feminism for is what it has done to all these otherwise wonderful minds. See? Even I can’t avoid the desire to protect women!
Uh… I guess the male feminists too but they just don’t do it for me
I always think it is funny when people just assume that if you criticise feminism it must mean you hate women. Anyway….
So I don’t think you and Joanna have a social group to lose, but I also don’t see either of you as too intellectually married to the feminist ideology. I don’t think you even know what most of it is. But then I guess most of it is to do with how to relate to other feminists in a group in some sense…. I guess that ought to make you both easy pickings from a sociological point of view— like a religious person who doesn’t regularly attend a church of some sort.
Which makes the question of why hang on to the label of feminist all the more interesting maybe. Especially in Joanna’s case.
Okay first.
DavidByron, you and I would be the greatest pair to have at a party together. I swear. People would be like, “Oh my God, I love them, they’re so completely insane!” But they would see that we like each other. Or at least I like you. I’m not sure you fully like me yet. I’m not going to try to win you over, but I think you will eventually enter the darkside of being pro-me.
Aside from that. Yeah, I’m not a big label-wearer. I’m not even a liberal, I don’t think. Okay, well I am liberal, but I’m confused about a lot of issues that if I mention them here I will be eviscerated, so I’ll just shut it. I don’t like labels. I even have trouble being called a “wife”… It bugs me. I feel labels are very confining and uncomfortable.
On the other hand, I’ve been a feminist since I was 10. No one told me to be, I just was. I had this boy who was one of my BEST friends (and is still dear to me) and he would sing dirty songs and put my name in them. He wasn’t harassing me, he was being a 10 year-old. But I felt a lot of shame over this. Another boy stood up for me and said, “She doesn’t like that. Don’t do that.” (10 year old White Knight – the beginning of all my relationship problems, haha.)
I went home and told my mom the story and she said, “Wow, that nice boy just taught you about women’s-lib.” Then Cyndi Lauper had that song Girls Just Wanna Have Fun, which I know doesn’t seem like a feminist manifesto, but has this lyric, “Some boys take a beautiful girl and hide her away from the worst in the world. I wanna be the one to walk in the sun.” and I was like 12 when those words sunk in and I realized what it meant to be a feminist.
I just want to be in the sun. I want to slay my own dragons, I want to have someone think of me to do something that requires brains and finesse and skill. Beyond that, I want women to be respected academically, professionally, legally… in all ways. Alongside men.
And I want to look at the world through the lens of gender. I like reading Austen and seeing why domesticity was important to women in that time, what it meant, the social hierarchies and how Austen was staging teeny rebellions with her characters. That’s what my Women’s Studies degree was in, by the way, women and literature. I’m a writer, not a theorist, can you tell?
But I am a feminist because I want equality. That’s what women wanted in the history of this movement. I’m not going to shy away from the term because Amanda Marcotte pisses off a lot of people—Or, even worse, the emotionally-unstable commenters at Feministe (which I like but don’t read comments on) who don’t care about men at all.
PS I’ve never been so overly-involved in a message board discussion. What have you people done to me?! Geeze.
I’ve noticed a lot of feminists are also masculists, and vice versa, seeing as they are 2 halves to gender equality, the definition of equality kinda mandates feminists and masculists are actually both. I guess if you only speak of female issues you’ll be a feminist, only speak of male issues you’ll be a masculist but so many speak of issues of men, women, blacks, whites, etc so the labels are kinda wierd to be honest.
Why especially in Joanna’s case? I do, actually, have a social group to lose, though it isn’t a tight social bond and I’m liked/needed for other reasons, so losing it here in Austin would be less likely. I’m not a regular at other online mags, that’s true. I myself have had a huge issue with the pile on/shut down I see on Shakes and Pandagon. I understand the behavior though. It’s group stuff, less than feminist stuff (though I think you are right about how women deal with social bonds). Women can be exceptionally violent, though in different ways. Shunning is painful.
The deeper structure is harder to undo. If you believe for years the earth is flat, it means changing a lot of thought structure to get to “round” in all the ways you think of things. Which doesn’t mean it can’t be done.
Do we know what most of it is? If I took a Gender Studies final exam, I’d probably make a D or C grade based on not knowing theorists and historical markers. I stand by my basics of rights, but see the purpose and benefit of being “humanist”
I’m not much of an ideologue. That’s a part of my personality and education I should look to. Anyway, I”m still formulating what this next career/activist phase will be.
I”m a woman not a girl, though I get the dig, FYI
I think he’s saying that I have less to lose than you, as you’re more the obvious feminist.
So, like, if I have so little to lose why wouldn’t I shed a label that, in his mind, doesn’t really fit me and has me being viewed through a really unkind lens at times.
But I’d say the same thing about “MRA” … That label is shit in the world, people who know the term who are outside the movement roll their eyes and think of privileged white guys who are afraid of losing their scholarships. You and I know very well how wrong this assumption is, but most don’t. So why not shed that label that causes so much vitriol, if you aren’t a member of the most extreme factions of the movement?
Problem with labels and identity is that it’ll just have a new one later on and still carry that same vitriol. Feminist, grrlpowerist, you’ll still be seen as someone advocating for women’s rights. The only term that could be neutral is equalist and many of the people i’ve seen comment here are feminist or masculist + equalist anyway. The terms aren’t a lockin of what people believe….
Hmm.
I think what’s happening here (I said that? Sounds like me but I don’t remember writing it) is that I’m saying, “If you can legitimately uproot what I’m saying, if you can convince me I’m wrong, then I SHOULD convert, I SHOULD give it up.”
I say that because it would take a lot. But I’m not so attached to any label that I wouldn’t be willing to give it up if I thought it was wrong, or if I believed what I was doing was hurting rather than helping.
You can try to uproot my beliefs with respectful critique and appeals. And I will hear them and give them the respect and attention they deserve.
So in that way, DB, we agree. I’m not at all afraid of changing my mind.
PS what was I about to be promoted to “civilian” from??
combatant
Am I your combatant now?
I never felt at war with you.
Empathy would actually be preferred over guilt. But some of us lack this basic human characteristic, so perhaps working in a little guilt can accomplish the same thing or bring about some signs of empathy and behavioral changes.
If you think about it, most public service announcements/advertising and also citizen demonstrations/protests…have messages that project guilt onto you; guilt is used as a marketing tool by many to effect change (some are intended to offend). And since the beginning of time, even GOD (and most scriptures in the bible project guilt) and most religions use guilt to keep people in line and be good neighbours to each other (ie. if you’re good and believe in God, you’ll go to heaven; if you’re bad, you’ll go to hell).
**** The problem I see with male-guilt is that some on here take it FAR too personally. Like I said in my above post, nobody expects you to be PERSONALLY responsible for another’s suffering – we can all acknowledge and understand this. (We are not the direct cause for someone’s pain mentioned in an article or on the tube). But I also think, that doesn’t exempt ANYONE from behaving responsibly towards each other or when the situation calls for it – I think as the most intelligent animals on this planet, we should be able to set aside our differences and collectively work together to achieve common goals.
Below are examples of how guilt is used in ad campaigns. Now for me looking at these ads, or if one to hit me in the face, this is how i would rationalize them: I can understand they are not intended to shame me as an INDIVIDUAL, I know that I don’t suffer the sins below or guilty of them, but it is obvious that these problems do exist and I’m willing to ACKNOWLEDGE this fact. These are serious societal problems (abortion – depends on your stand) and I understand that i have a duty, as a law-abiding, morally conscious, empathetic human being – to SPEAK UP against these injustices or wrongful actions. ie. I will take away the keys of someone who’s intoxicated. I will call 911 if I know someone who abuses animals. etc.
Here are some anti-smoking ads, throwing guilt in your face:
http://pik-a-boo.blogspot.com/2008/11/creative-anti-smoking-ads.html
Here is an anti-abortion demonstration: http://classicruby.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/anti-abortion-crazy.jpg
Anti-animal cruelty ad: http://www.advertolog.com/persecution-education-trust-cc/print-outdoor/dogstar-770905/
Don’t drink and drive ads: http://www.toxel.com/inspiration/2008/09/02/dont-drink-and-drive-ads-collection/
It’s hard not to take it personally sometimes, it truly does feel like we’re pushing soo much for male guilt on these matters whilst ignoring the female guilt. It can feel like men’s suffering isn’t important, we don’t acknowledge it much and push the guilt so it’s a slap in the face for some who’ve suffered by women especially. I think it requires balance to work effectively, I don’t recall ever hearing people being bothered by human guilt but if you make it about gender, or religion, it can get people cranky. Like blaming catholics for the child abuse scandals for instance, it’ll just piss off a bunch of catholics who’ve never harmed a child.
Empathy, a recent emotion I’ve fallen in love with but as a man one that has been suppressed so badly, hell even recently I feel like there’s been a push to be selfish in life for both genders. Empathy needs to be encouraged in everyone, it’s the source of sooo much good!
I understand where you’re coming from. I can empathize the need for “balance” as the ideal ie. I wish crimes were equally balanced too between the sexes, so we equally suffer in the same numbers. But more ideally, there shouldn’t be any pain or suffering for anyone.
We are all sensitive to profiling, and yes it would be nice not to be lumped together with guilty groups – but if you ask security officials/law enforcement, some of them will tell you the fastest way to address the issue is to address the group that’s responsible. So say, if you want to address child abuse scandals within the church, you will do this at Catholic churches because this is where it’s happened – you’re not going to be effective going to Christian, Buddhist, Scientology churches – you go to the source of the problem to deal with it. There could be strategy to also speak generally against child abuses, so the general public hears the message too.
But where do you draw the line? That’s what I’m asking.
You think it’s really productive to tell a male survivor like me that he should feel guilty for the few who above who share his gender? After what he’s been through?
It’s like everytime before I open my mouth, I’m being made to raise my right hand and say “I do” to the request “Do you solemnly swear to atone for male sins, all male sins, and NOTHING BUT male sins”. Too many times I’ve felt it to the point where I’m seriously afraid to speak out every now and then. That’s even worse.
Being made to believe you are guilty until proven innocent in rape culture, that your priveledge negates any suffering you’ve been through, that you’re an anomoly as women have it worse, you really think this is going to bring out empathy from them?
Zorror: “So say, if you want to address child abuse scandals within the church, you will do this at Catholic churches because this is where it’s happened – you’re not going to be effective going to Christian, Buddhist, Scientology churches – you go to the source of the problem to deal with it.”
Yet, you believe ALL men are responsible for suffering. So you basically threw every single catholic under the bus, not the churches, the people who actually were responsible for the scandals and the people who excuse them. If you’re going to use that analogy. That’s not a way to deal with the problem.
“You think it’s really productive to tell a male survivor like me that he should feel guilty for the few who above who share his gender? After what he’s been through? ”
The problem I see here, is that you’re taking this personally and putting your defenses up because of your past experiences with women or whatnot, so truly this is not productive for you or for others!
If I were to call you or write a letter personally addressed to you and blame you for rape culture for example – yeah you would have every right to be offended and angry and feel that you’re being shamed; because you are being specifically targeted. But the reality is: ad campaigns, writers, protesters…don’t spend thousands of dollars, or hours and hours of writing/protesting to SINGLE you out. Sorry you are not that special! Neither do they do a background check on you to see if YOU qualify for their ad campaign; how would they know you’ve been burned by women or abducted by aliens?
A regular Joe would not feel indignant or shamed, because he understands that an article or advertisement is not speaking to him on a personal level. A lot of guys know how to use the TV remote control, so on-line with any article or banner ad/pop-up ad – you are in control; if you don’t like what you see – skip it! See a Viagra ad? Haha…you know that doesn’t speak to you! You have no issue in this area and are not bothered by the ad. You could look at it this way too: the product would be beneficial to other dudes and you’re glad that finally somebody’s invented something to address this issue. Or you could be completely OFFENDED by the Viagra ad, and protest that the ad is shaming men so there must be some feminist agenda behind it; well if that is the reaction, then in that case you can just mouse over to the X mark to close the pop-up ad and look at something else that interests you.
Well, some people are offended by advertising, even things like Viagra or Levis or whatever else.
Because despite it not being aimed at Eagle or whichever individual, advertising only works when it affects people on an individual basis.
What advertising does is create an “atmosphere” and a “tone”… The tone here is that men are responsible for stopping rape. Fact is, I actually even believe in rape culture, but I believe we ALL are responsible for it.
As I said, why not “YOU are responsible for rape”?
Creating an environment where men are solely responsible for something that is systemic is actually minimizing the power women have in our society. Yes, go ahead and argue that women DON’T have power in our society, but we do. We are 50% of consumers, we go to movies, we buy magazines, we view porn… What we find acceptable from others in our social circles matters, too, and while it may be hard to imagine, there are MANY women who buy into Slut Shaming.
YOU Can Stop Rape would send the same message — especially if you could target the advertising to different groups. IE groups of college students, fraternity/sorority members, a group of teens, adults in a workplace, childcare situtations, teachers in front of a classroom…
And then you aren’t creating anti-man messages, either.
Advertisements/Marketing/Protest demonstrations pretty much play on EMOTIONS for them to be effective, in that sense it can be felt on an individual level. Some people who have done wrong and are conscious of it, may feel guilt and see that the message resonates with them on a personal level, otherwise just take the message for what it is worth – glean the best from it and do your part. “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.”
“What advertising does is create an “atmosphere” and a “tone”… The tone here is that men are responsible for stopping rape. Fact is, I actually even believe in rape culture, but I believe we ALL are responsible for it. ”
I agree with the above statement. If we could all set aside our differences, then I think we would have room for responsible action and compassion for each other.
I just don’t like the attitude where someone waives off responsibility because they have been hurt; and frame every (feminist) situation as a shame tactic, therefore in their eyes this group doesn’t deserve their support. Compassion like communication needs to be two-way for it to be effective…we just can’t hold each other back because of wrongs done in our lives.
I have heard them speak…I know there are some men who are seeking validation from people on here (feminists) for their pain/anger, for what they are going through or been through. To me, this seems very personal! I really don’t think coming on here getting defensive and putting down feminism will give them the closure they desperately appear to need. I sincerely think professional counseling would help a great deal to resolve past issues and give some sense of closure.
ht tp://www.catalyst.org/publication/256/buying-power
” 75.1% of women identified themselves as the primary shoppers for their households, according to MRI’s Survey of the American Consumer in 2009, down from 85.5% in 1989.13
According to a study from the Boston Consulting Group, women “control $12 trillion of the overall $18.4 trillion in global consumer spending.”14 When probed further, the survey actually asked whether women “controlled or influenced” purchases, which is a broader distinction.15
”
Seems like women have most of the buying power these days so advertising should be pandering to them, I think women have far far far far more power than they realize. I believe in the US at least there are 8million more women who vote as well, now whilst males are the majority in the power positions, women do hold more power in ability to vote them in. That is a HELL of a lot of power quite frankly so anyone that assumes problems like rapeculture are solely on men make me question if they’ve bothered to actually look at society.
Women have quite a lot of power, men have quite a lot of power, both are responsible for the good AND bad of society. To assume only men (in western societies that equality has made large progress in) have power and are responsible for the evils of the world is quite frankly misandrist, it may have been true in earlier years or in other cultures. Rape is a human problem, not male problem.
**** The problem I see with male-guilt is that some on here take it FAR too personally. Like I said in my above post, nobody expects you to be PERSONALLY responsible for another’s suffering – we can all acknowledge and understand this. (We are not the direct cause for someone’s pain mentioned in an article or on the tube). But I also think, that doesn’t exempt ANYONE from behaving responsibly towards each other or when the situation calls for it – I think as the most intelligent animals on this planet, we should be able to set aside our differences and collectively work together to achieve common goals.
I think the reason guys take male guilt too personally is because frankly there are times when its held above our heads as the barrier of entry into the conversation. This leaves men feeling like they are being expected to do their part to do something about the suffering of women while their own suffering is simply not acknowledged (and think this happens on a count of people trying to avoid female guilt).
I agree that everyone should do their part to end suffering but how is that going to happen when you have people who deny the suffering of men while at the same time expecting men to work on the suffering of women?
Just saw the new “My Strength” campaign, “Men can stop rape”. To be honest it’s quite frustrating without a similar one for females in the light of those CDC stats, is 40% of rapists in the last 12 months not shocking enough for these campaigns to put a simple poster in for HIM saying no and for the guilt and responsibility to be put onto HER? I feel like these campaigns don’t inspire me at all, I feel like we’re addressing half of the situation. I can definitely see where the anti-feminists get their ammo from, it really does look like men are ignored.
As Danny says, “how is that going to happen when you have people who deny the suffering of men while at the same time expecting men to work on the suffering of women?”. Should men ignore their own safety whilst advocating for the safety of women? Are we simply continuing a perception that rape is caused by men, against women? I am totally at wits end to try understand why anti-rape campaigns so frequently portray it as male rapist, female victim even in the light of new stats showing female rapist, male victim is extremely common? Is it about ending rape, or ending rape FOR WOMEN ONLY?
I’m so with you. How about “YOU Can Stop Rape” and have it targeted at a range of different demographics?
Amen to that. We can’t be the only ones that notice it, I’m still in disbelief I haven’t seen any campaign like that yet. It seems…so much like common sense?
I’d jump at the chance to see campaigns like that.
James Landrith had a few words to say about that.
http://jameslandrith.com/content/view/3847/79/
It’s hard to believe that in California, in 1998, after the raised awareness of intimate partner violence following the O.J. Simpson case, that someone, privileged or not, would avoid prosecution in this scenario.
It’s hard to believe that someone who could have blown up a building was not charged with endangerment of property by the building’s owner or the mortgage holder. It also defies belief that there is no consideration or mention of other people living in the building who could have been killed from an explosion or fire.
It’s hard to believe that someone could refer to such happenings as an “anecdote,” could dash them off in 20 minutes or so, and include details that border on the sensational and hyper-erotic.
I don’t think this story is true. I think it’s a good story, but I don’t think it is factual. It sounds allegorical like a scene from GO ASK ALICE.
And about shame: I think shame gets a bad rap. I don’t think it is inappropriate for someone who has done something terrible to feel shame. I think it is fine to carry the weight of something for your entire life if you have done something to warrant it. I do. Shaming victims and disenfranchised people is wrong; shame is because of what you do, not who you are. Knowing that you’ve done something wrong and feeling ashamed is a sign of moral development, it’s also an assurance to never do that thing again.
I am not going to comment on whether the story is true or not — I don’t know, but you bring up some points that I wish Hugo would answer.
I would like, however, to address your point about shame, because I think it is not only fair and valid, but an “aha” for me.
I think when shame becomes an overarching theme of one’s life — it grows into a monster that can be both debilitating as an individual and unhelpful to others who might be helped with a shared experience. And that was what I was trying to get at. That said, if there is a way to compartmentalize the shame — feel shameful around what one did but still able to move forward as a productive member of society — YES. That actually would be the ideal. Continue to feel shame around the specific action so that you would never do that or anything like that again. And I think that is a very valid point that is coming up with in the commenters — if Hugo still feels shame, they cannot see it. While from my vantage point, it actually did appear to me that Hugo felt shame for those actions — as people talk about the way they see things — I’ll admit, I could be wrong. But to me — that’s exactly the point about what storytelling does. It lets your beliefs be challenged. And to me, that is more often a good thing than not.
From my own personal experience, this is how shame worked with me — there were events in my childhood that caused great shame for me as a person. For years I didn’t talk — not only about what happened but about anything. I was so afraid of the “wrong” words slipping out that it seemed safer to not say anything. Drinking helped me deal with the shame — I still felt it, but if I drank enough I could block it out. That sucked as a solution. I became ashamed of my addiction and ashamed of my actions while addicted. And so I talked even less. It was only when I was able to talk, it was only when I saw that the way through the shame was to deal with it, that I was able to function as a human. The only was I was able to gain self-esteem was to go out and do things that were esteemable. But you’re right — taking responsibility for my actions and continuing to feel a very specific type of shame around those actions, is part of what keeps me from going back there — part of what keeps me from going anywhere close.
In some ways with this story, I feel like Tom. What I mean by that is I think it is helpful to articulate your POV on something — and allow people to add their POV’s which may be different than your own. The ability to do that in this day and age — something I didn’t have the luxury of growing up — has been life-changing for me. It has been so amazingly life-changing for me that I want to share that experience with other people. It is very possible that there might be a better way of doing things, or better words I could use, or if I kept thinking about things all by myself, researching and studying, I could reach better, more thoughtful conclusions before I got out there and spoke. But my point is, when I tried that route, I didn’t speak. It’s hard to be a fully-functioning human if you are afraid of talking to people. So that’s where I am at this moment in time.
“Between shame and shamelessness lies the axis upon which we turn; meteorological conditions at both these poles are of the most extreme, ferocious type. Shamelessness, shame: the roots of violence.”
― Salman Rushdie, Shame
Zorro:
I just don’t like the attitude where someone waives off responsibility because they have been hurt; and frame every (feminist) situation as a shame tactic, therefore in their eyes this group doesn’t deserve their support. Compassion like communication needs to be two-way for it to be effective…we just can’t hold each other back because of wrongs done in our lives.
I can agree with this. However bear in mind that this “waiving off responsibility” comes from (feminist) situations in which responsilbity basically means = help women. And this is coming from folks who regulary claim to be working for the betterment of all people. I would be fine if everyone was willing to do their part to make the two-way communication and compassion a reality. But its going to be a long road as long as there are people on (all) sides expecting to be able to keep their grudges alive.
Eagle:
“You think it’s really productive to tell a male survivor like me that he should feel guilty for the few who above who share his gender? After what he’s been through? ”
Zorro:
The problem I see here, is that you’re taking this personally and putting your defenses up because of your past experiences with women or whatnot, so truly this is not productive for you or for others!
That may be so but I think its a valid question. If nothing else even if you say Eagle is taking this personally its matter of him taking personally because he is part of a specific group, in this case male victims. So how productive is it? If we were talking about a woman who was pushed out of her children’s lives by her exhusband and was then told she should support a cause that uses the tagline, “Women can stop Parental Alienation” I would not blame her at all for taking it personally.