With so many men feeling like they’re being blamed for being men, Tom Matlack wants us to embrace manhood.
As the founder of the Good Men Project, I am the butt of my share of jokes. Guys in high places love to take pot shots at me, laughing at my silly little obsession. But that’s in public. Behind the scenes the conversation is always quite a bit different. Most guys I meet in business are still socialized not to show weakness. Emotion is weakness. But behind the scenes, that same guy who made fun of me at the table always has a question. Or a story to tell.
I’ve become acutely aware of the difference between what men say in public and what they say in private. What they do to keep things superficial and the clues to what is really going on.
I’ve been doing my own soul-searching during this last week as a series of articles broke out on our site about the end of men, gender war, and whether or not men have made enough progress collectively to be considered “good” (that’s not exactly how others defined it but that’s how I think about the issue underneath it all).
Amidst all this comes the question of blame.
Why do men get blamed for everything? Well, the cynical response is, “because we can really be assholes sometimes.” I’m going to set aside gross acts of what I would call evil: rape, sex trafficking, murder, and felonies of pretty much any kind. I’m more interested in the petty shit that fills our day-to-day and ends up defining us normally imperfect human beings.
♦◊♦
So are dudes as a gender really assholes?
If you look around in the press, on TV, and in popular culture you certainly might conclude that. Again, that was the whole point of starting the Good Men Project—to provide example after example of not perfect men but damn good ones.
I am not interested in the macro here. I really think the question comes down to the micro conversation. How do men in their own lives feel blamed? How do women view men not in general but in particular?
Here’s my theory, and it’s nothing but a theory. Men and women are different. Quite different in fact. But women would really like men to be more like them.
In the locker room, in the bathroom, on the walk out of the board room, in my conversations with men of all kinds, that’s what I hear more than anything. The resignation that to be a man is to be unacceptable at some level to the woman in your life.
♦◊♦
One close friend jokes, “When speaking to my wife I always make sure to look at the ground in deference. And I make sure not to make any sudden movements.” I’ve watched him. He loves his wife.
He’s a very competent human being. But with her he’s decided the only way to survive is to submit. The female view is the right view. The male view just gets you into trouble.
So where does the blame come from?
My unscientific theory is from a fundamental disconnect between men and women at the micro level. Men know women are different. They think differently, they express emotion differently, they are motivated by different things, they think about sex differently, and they use a very different vocabulary.
Why can’t women accept men for who they really are? Is a good man more like a woman or more truly masculine?
♦◊♦
Here perhaps we have to go back to the macro picture for some explanations. God knows men have done some really bad shit. And god knows as guys we can, at times, live up to the stereotype of knuckle-draggers looking to eat, fuck, drink, and sleep. In that order. We’ve been slow to reveal our inner thoughts and feeling. But again my pet theory is that this comes back to vocabulary. Emotional language has been so dominated by women that to talk about feelings is, at some level, to become female rather than macho.
Sweeping generalizations about individual relationships are pretty useless. How a guy who teaches Gender Studies relates to his spouse is probably pretty different than how some Navy SEAL does. And I am sure there are plenty of heterosexual relationships where the gender roles are reversed before even getting in gay marriages.
But my basic point is that many men, I think, feel blamed for being simply men. That their most basic instincts are twisted around to torture rather than celebrate who they are.
One of the most interesting things about the Good Men Project is the readiness of women to talk about men. They are more than welcome here, but I still wonder why? Why such a passionate outcry by women about men?
I’ve probably done over a hundred talks by now about manhood. For the first couple years I would always say that my best audiences were women, boys (who are dying to know about manhood), and prisons (because the guys can’t leave).
But that has been changing recently. I spoke at the Boston Book Fair a few weeks back to a room of nearly a thousand. And for the first time I noticed more men than women.
It seems that the blame game in the mainstream, whether through the minimization of male life in pop culture or on television or through the continued obsession with men behaving badly, has finally struck a chord with the average guy. We are no longer willing to be blamed for being men. We are no longer willing to avert our gazes and stay silent about our feelings. We are raising our voices and telling our stories in our own male vocabulary.
To women, I assume the response is, “well, it’s about time.” But just remember when we talk it’s not going to sound like a women in a man’s body. It’s gonna be all dude. And you are just going to have to deal with that.
—Photo physiognomist/Flickr
About Tom Matlack
The even bigger problem is that I’ve noticed women seem to want to pick and choose when men are men, and when they act like women. The very same man is supposed to go to work, and be womanly. If he talks to shy women, he needs to be something inbetween a man and a woman, if he talks to confident women, he is expected to “man up” and be a 1950′s man.
Then when he goes on a date, he is supposed to become the girlfriend and act less like a man.But then when they get into the bedroom, he needs to turn into a caveman and have caveman sex.
It’s those incosistencies that make it the worst. I won’t even mention that different women want different levels of masculinity (and define the one they prefer as the good one, and all others as evil). It’s that the very same woman chooses different levels for different contexts, as if men are little dolls that you put in whatever pose you’d prefer them in for the given act.
No one expects each individual to be exactly as anyone else thinks they should. And your sensitive man in public/caveman example reminds me a lot of the lady in the street/whore in the bedroom nonsense.
You seem to me to be making the mistake of not recognizing that there all kinds of people and they all like different types of people. It’s not all that complicated, really.
That’s pretty much exactly what I was going to say. I guess we speak the same language. (Who’d have thought?)
Some men I meet expect me to act a certain way. So do some women. Apart from that all I worry about treating people like human beings. Apart from that I act like myself, and if that’s not enough for people they can fuck off.
Men don’t mind women being feminine all the time. Not behaving like a whore in the street is hardly a fair comparison to being expected to constantly vary your level of masculinity. What women want in the bedroom is more masculinity than they might want outside of it which is far more challenging for men than not wearing revealing clothing and flirting with random people is for women.
CRY ME A RIVER, YOU WHINY BOYS! this is called backlash. susan faludi won awards for writing about this over 20 years ago and it’s still relevant. whiny men, and the stupid things they say when women might show a TINY sign of making progress (like being the majority of college students).
males are 84% of congress, 66% of the supreme court, and 100% of all past and present presidents and vice presidents. men are 90% of world leaders and own 99% of world property, while women do 2/3 of work in the world. males are 96% of fortune 500 CEOs. men are gang-raping women in the congo as we speak, throwing acid at girls walking to school in afghanistan, sentencing women to lashes for driving cars in saudi arabia, and marrying 9 year old girls in yemen. STOP YOUR WHINING.
if males have problems with their feelings they have nobody to blame but themselves. don’t minimize the garbage women go through and still go through by playing the victim. the last thing on earth men are is the victim, so stop crying.
now everybody needs to go find a job. men were meant for manual labor, and they need to be worn out. domestic violence rates against women and children increase when men are out of work, this is documented fact in this male-caused recession (tell me how many women leaders there are on wall street). get to the employment office, boys.
Jackie Smith is a sexist idiot. She looks at the top of society but not the bottom where men outnumber women as well. Men just try more in the professional sphere because that is the only way to get women and have a family. Look up male rape in the congo while your at it, and in prison.
Yes, Jackie! Let’s allow Western society to keep going against nature and throw all common sense into the wind as they pretend that a woman can do anything a man can. Ask the 24 year-old prison guard in Sweden who had her baton taken from her and was subsequently beaten to death with it by a Muslim inmate. I’m sure she was of the same physical stature and strength as all the other male guards, aren’t you? Jackie, doll, listen. When (reasonable members of) society say(s), “Maybe it’s not a good idea to have female prison guards or soldiers,” we’re actually just trying to protect you, not saying that you are lower than a man. Unfortunately, mother nature doesn’t share your opinion that women and men should have similar roles in this world. But, that’s ok, go ahead and put women in charge, along with some underqualified NAMs, and watch the Chinese laugh at us as we continue our freefall.
“now everybody needs to go find a job. men were meant for manual labor, and they need to be worn out.”
Alas, I am much better at splitting infinitives at my keyboard than I am at splitting wood. As with regards to the Islamic societies (Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen) you mentioned, guess who fully supports this cruelty? Women! Not necessarily the victims, but it is rather eye-opening to read of how often women in these societies are quick to label their sisters “whores” and worse for not submitting to their “culture”, and how these women often eagerly endorse these “punishments” for not doing so. Furthermore, they EXPECT and DEMAND their men to enforce such measures, or else these same men risk being called “traitors” and “infidels.”
Now there’s a feminist for ya….what a peach.
Jackie, I think it’s only fair I give you a dose of my annoyingness because I’ve been giving it to the men’s rights folks disproportionately. I get that you’re angry and frustrated, but dismissal won’t help any of us, nor will it help us understand each other. I don’t feel comfortable with a number of things Tom said in his post, but he’s written an account of his experiences. I can’t literally walk anywhere in his shoes, but I’m trying to listen. We all say things out of frustration sometimes, and starting a comment by calling the men on this site “whiny boys” is not going to make anyone receptive to what you said. Case in point: I’m a feminist myself, and I didn’t read a word of your post after the first sentence. Maybe you said something worth reading, but I was turned off immediately by the vitriol.
Wow, that got heated. I think what you’re reacting to, AlekNovy, is that sometimes women get defensive, and sometimes men do, too. When a woman complains of being treated poorly or marginalized by men, she is probably telling the truth. But it doesn’t mean she intends to blame all men for what some men have done.
When a man asks “why am I treated this way and why don’t women trust me?” many women take that as an affront, because many women have gone through a lot (or witnessed other women’s experiences) at the hands of a few bad men. It has less to do with the man in question, and more to do with needing validation, because so many women do not receive justice when they’ve been harmed or marginalized. Many of these women have never experienced sympathy or support from a man. Whether or not they sought it out is beside the issue. Many victims will become intoverted and unwilling to seek out help and support, especially from anyone who loosely resembles the person who victimized them.
Hearing the complaint that women judge men prematurely can hurt, because it can be interpreted as though the man does not believe what the woman has experienced, or does not understand the impact of what the woman has experienced.
That said, when a woman says “men are jerks,” it’s a harmful, sweeping generalization. However, please recognize that a woman saying this may not understand its impact, and may not mean it as an attack. Consider that sometimes a woman might be saying this as a verbal exasperated sigh. It might signify defeat, rather than anger.
Again, not helpful. But my point is that no matter how a person approaches life, this adversarial approach to gender helps no one. This simple way of dealing with the problem applies throughout life, gender aside: Be patient. Before getting angry or defensive, ask a question. Ask for clarification. Ask WHY.
When people don’t understand each other, it’s because we all have different motivations, and ways of expressing ourselves. Both women and men need to stop finger-pointing, and start asking “why” when something doesn’t make sense to us.
Next time a woman says “men suck,” instead of taking offense, just ask why. I’ll bet she has a reason. And it might be a good one. And in asking why, you’ve accomplished two things: 1) you’ve started a dialogue, 2) you’ve learned something. If she says “men only want sex and treat women poorly,” ask her why she thinks all men are the same. Ask her if she really believes you’re looking for sex.
Patience and understanding would go a long way. Whether a man or woman comes to the table with a gruff demeanor, or a vulnerable approach, we can come to understand each other.
And to cap this off, I’d like to add that anyone, male or female, who treats you poorly because of your gender, and who refuses to try to learn and move the relationship forward, is missing out. And they’ll either learn their approach is flawed, or they’ll have a tougher life because of it.
“When a man asks ‘why am I treated this way and why don’t women trust me?’ many women take that as an affront, because many women have gone through a lot (or witnessed other women’s experiences) at the hands of a few bad men. It has less to do with the man in question, and more to do with needing validation, because so many women do not receive justice when they’ve been harmed or marginalized. Many of these women have never experienced sympathy or support from a man.”
And do you know why, Erin, why they have never experienced sympathy or support from a man? Because these same women SEEK OUT men who will not offer sympathy or support. I have seen this countless times; a woman falls for a guy who is charismatic but cold-blooded, rejecting any number of available nice guys in her midst, then when he treats her like dirt, she whines “WAAAAH! I’M A VICTIM! MEN ARE MONSTERS!”. Then she signs up for Feminism 101 to intellectually validate her self-pity and drama, and never once — ONCE — does she take personal responsibility for her life. Which is why so many of us regard Feminism as a philosophy built on lies.
It’s quite possible that some women put themselves in dangerous positions and fail to take responsibility for their actions. But the person at fault is still the person who harms another. And that person is not always a man.
I really can’t say much in reply to your comment, because I think it’s simply an evil point-of-view (not trying to be rude, thats just how I feel), and that a Good Man or Good Woman would want to help a man or woman who is victimized, despite how that person got into their predicament. The idea that anyone deserves to be abused or assaulted is disgusting to me.
“The idea that anyone deserves to be abused or assaulted is disgusting to me.”
Me too. And the good thing is that I never said as much. But leave it to a feminist to distort one’s words, or even outright lie, which is in fact, evil (not trying to be rude, that’s just how I feel). The question is about how somebody can ostensibly “know” another for six years and then be betrayed. My response is that if the relationship went on for THAT long, you in fact did know him, or her, but chose to ignore the warning signs that this person might be dangerous, and now you — Julie in this case — is claiming that we can NEVER know somebody, and that NOBODY can ever be trusted, which I think is bull___t.
“Because these same women SEEK OUT men who will not offer sympathy or support. I have seen this countless times; a woman falls for a guy who is charismatic but cold-blooded, rejecting any number of available nice guys in her midst, then when he treats her like dirt, she whines “WAAAAH! I’M A VICTIM! MEN ARE MONSTERS!””
Sorry if that wasn’t what you meant to say. It just seemed like you were putting the blame on the shoulders of the abused, to me.
I agree with you that the idea that nobody can ever be trusted is bullshit. I bet there are some men and some women too emotionally damaged by experiences they’ve had to trust the opposite sex, but most people just need to get over their prejudices.
I’m not trying to fight with you here. I just interpreted what you wrote in the other comment as victim blaming, and as someone who has been abused and who knows people (men and women) who’ve been abused and assaulted, I had to speak out. I’m sorry if you weren’t intending to blame the victim, I didn’t mean to put words in your mouth. I just can’t stand seeing someone’s painful experience diminished and blame placed on the wrong shoulders. I repeat, I didn’t mean to put words in your mouth, I guess I just misinterpreted your comment.
Well, I knew him to be a shy boy who didn’t ask people out, who was fun and funny and quite smart. I knew him as well as any 17 year old can know anyone, given he was a year older and not in classes and we didn’t start dating until after high school.There weren’t other women saying….girl, don’t date him. There weren’t then what I’d consider warning signs now. I didn’t suspect that he’d get so frenzied during a make out session (clothed, even) as to ignore me asking him to wait. I knew he was Catholic. Maybe that, I’ve often thought was a huge piece of his issue.
I wasn’t hurt, mind you. I didn’t feel any need to go to cops. I was angry and annoyed at him for being so…dumb. Just think, he could have gotten so much more sex if he’d waited a day or two. Sad, really.
And like I said, it didn’t stop me from taking lovers or dating and mating.
Tom, this is one of the best pieces I’ve seen on GMP.
Thanks for bringing this to light.
Cheers
This post reveals more about your over-reliance on sweeping and flawed generalizations than it does about gender issues. I’m shocked by your post as a whole. I suppose vulgarity is a human right. I don’t think this conversation is the proper place for it – but to each their own. More to the point, you assume a gender studies professional would have a profoundly more woman-like relationship with his wife than a Navy SEAL. Really? That would be laughable if not so offensive. You assume that to understand issues in gender naturally makes one a woman. You assume that a Navy SEAL cannot be a compassionate partner. You conflate understanding and compassion with femininity. You demonstrate your own actual belief that emotional connectedness is in fact weakness while claiming to be speaking out against that. YOU are the problem …”dude”. You are the quintessential angry White male of privilege. You are so blinded by your privilege you cannot see that gender isn’t about women – it’s about us …ALL of us. This is without a doubt the most upsetting post I’ve read on this blog. I’m shocked that you’re a co-founder. I’m glad my male friends and family do not espouse the same values you do. I would hate to only know the world you come from.
Oh, thank God. For a moment there, i was afraid no one was going to try to shame and trivialize Mr. Matlack’s exploration of a topic that clearly resonates with many, many evolved, liberal, pro-feminist, pro-LGBT men with shrill, trite, shopworn clichés like “angry White [sp] male of privilege” (itself surely a prime example of a “sweeping and flawed generalization.”) Well said, Andy,
Now that Andrew has correctly identified Tom Matlack and The Good Men’s Project as the vile engine of sexist oppression that it is, there’s still time to put on our Indigo Girls CD and rustle up a delicious organic mung bean noodle casserole in time for the collective’s pot-luck supper and film night.
And yes, for the record, I too am glad that “my male friends and family do not espouse the same values” Mr. Matlack does. Can you imagine how degraded the culture would be if it were populated by men who founded men’s websites dedicated to men asking themselves how to be better men–getting men to actually question their own place in the world, and what they owe to women, other men, their families, their friends, and society as a whole–men’s websites that provided a forum for both male and female writers, welcoming the latter even when the writing is critical and occasionally very harsh towards men in a way that no women’s website ever would if it were a man writing about women? Or who travels across the country, from prisons to schools and everywhere in between, asking men to take a long hard look at their lives, where they’ve come from, where they’re going, and what they owe?”
And what could such a man ever know about gender, let alone the relations between men and women, or straight men and gay men, or straight men and lesbians, or, or, or…?
No, good call Andy. You’ve demonstrated your own actual beliefs perfectly.
Michael,
You self-diminish the value of your reply by packaging it in patronizing sarcasm. It didn’t escape my notice that you then attempted to diminish my value by truncating my name to it’s shortened form. That’s a particularly savvy move on the “I have nothing to offer but vitriol” debate circuit. I suppose I could unpack what you’ve written by saying that, yes, The GMP offers a forum for discussion re: many issues. The point of the matter *here* is that Tom’s piece (and subsequent Twitter activity) is particularly troubling and offensive. His piece attempts to speak for all males and understand all women. This is classic White male privilege behavior. To mollify Tom’s writing by contextualizing it as part of the great work that The GMP does on the whole is a nonstarter. I cannot overlook the offensiveness of this piece just because other works have value.
You make a valid point that Women are given a place to write critical pieces on TGMP. This is essential and appreciated. You point out that Men are not given an equal opportunity for this on Feminist blogs. What your example doesn’t account for is the difference in power that our society has ascribed to Men and Women. Women have license to write critically of this structure because it exits. Men, on the other hand, are privileged and face nothing resembling the systemic pressures and oppressiveness that Women face.
Tom’s writing clearly demonstrates his disappointingly narrow views on how Men and Women relate, true masculinity, and what we must do as Men to move forward. Given these limitations I would very much appreciate it if he didn’t attempt to speak for me as a Male. I am on a different path. I would also appreciate it if he didn’t include any of the Women in my life in his generalized comments re: all Women. I do not know any of the Women he refers to.
“His piece attempts to speak for all males and understand all women. This is classic White male privilege behavior. ”
“Men, on the other hand, are privileged and face nothing resembling the systemic pressures and oppressiveness that Women face.”
Do you not see any inconsistency in these two claims? Reducing the complexity of our society to “men are privileged, women are oppressed” is not only doing exactly what you’re accusing Tom of (and in a fashion much more insulting to men who wish to be good), it’s also ignoring the many many other conflicting power structures people deal with.
Black men, for example, are often less privileged than white women. But if you took a well-educated, articulate black man and put him next to a high school dropout, drawling white woman, I expect you’d find the black man in question to be more privileged. How about gay white men versus straight white women? Etc. Trying to claim that only one power structure exists with a clearly-defined hierarchy, across our entire society in all places, is absurd. Yet your comment admits of no nuance, nor of any belief that some men really have a harder time of it than some women.
Discussions of privilege are useful for explaining some broad trends and for analyzing some aspects of interpersonal behavior, but usually I just see them used as dismissals by a non-privileged person of a privileged person’s views — as though oppression conveys infallibility. The white hats vs black hats mentality of most narratives of privilege might be gratifying, but it’s neither accurate nor helpful.
Rick,
You make excellent points. You’re absolutely right. I made no attempt to offer nuance to the discussion of privilege. Because of that it weakened my argument. In my defense, I kept it general because by merely mentioning privilege I was met with denial or diminishment of its existence. But yes, you are 100% correct. Privilege is not homogeneous nor, “a clearly-defined hierarchy, across our entire society in all places…” I defer to the correctness of your statements and am glad that nuance has been introduced into the discussion of privilege. This is a much better conversation to be having than the denial that privilege exists in our society. Cheers.
Yet you don’t mention female privilege at all. The privilege of living longer and enjoying better health and still having more health dollars lavished on them, the privilege of controlling the majority of personal wealth, the privilege of not being homeless, the privilege of not having to work in the most dangerous jobs, go to war, die on the job, the privilege of not having your viewpoint dismissed because of their privilege, the privilege of graduating at greater rates from university, the privilege of biased family law and gender unequal legislation that only addresses women’s concerns
Women have historically lived longer, but that might change drastically in 60 years or so, because women finally have the freedom to live their lives and enjoy vices as men always have, and increased rates of drinking, and rates of smoking increased in proportion to the number of male smokers (despite an over all decline in smokers) might bring the average life spans closer.
Women have a harder time getting taken seriously and treated for a number of ailments, from sports injuries to heart disease. If more health dollars are “lavished” on women, I’d like to know where that money is spent. Maybe on obstetrics? So both little boys and girls can be born?
Women definitely do not control the majority of personal wealth.
They do not have the privilege of not being homeless. If you’re referring to women’s shelters, they’re usually for battered women trying to start a new life by leaving their abusive partners, generally they’re full, and if you don’t have children in your custody it’s very difficult to be accepted into the shelter.
Men do not “have” to work the most dangerous jobs. You decide what job you want. Women are eligible as well for such jobs, and to go to war, and many have.
The idea that your viewpoint is dismissed is disappointing, but we all feel that way at times. It happens to both men and women. It’s not a privilege that women receive. Anyone can come up with anecdotal evidence that they’ve been marginalized, but the truth is, sometimes everyone gets talked over. It really depends on the person you’re speaking to, and if they are dismissive with you, that’s their poor character and fault, and not the fault of another gender.
University is not a privilege for anyone. Studies have shown that the greater female populations in post-secondary institutions is recent, and often the result of women paying their own way. Men used to attend universities in greater numbers than women. But there’s no need to resent an entire gender because there are more of them attending school than your gender. You don’t have to get defensive about statistics when you’re not being harmed.
I don’t even want to touch on biased family law. I’ve seen personal friends’ divorces go strangely. Yes, I’ve seen a mother get custody when I personally believed the children were better off with the father. I’ve seen it happen the other way, too. But those laws are being challenged in courts, and I believe a more equitable or subjective solution will be found. The reason the law generally grants custody to the mother is because historically, the father was not willing to take on custody, and because historically, society has looked to women to raise our children.
There are hardships for both genders, but getting sore about it heps no one. I don’t understand the resentment behind your comment. It reads as though you genuinely despise women, and see yourself as a disadvantaged, helpless person. None of us are helpless. I didn’t want to make 80 cents for every dollar as a guy in the next office cubicle, so I started my own business instead of complaining that it’s unfair. I employ one other person, a man, if you’re interested, and pay him the same rate I make. Instead of acting like the world is out to get you, why not try to improve your life, and then maybe even the lives of others?
Maybe you in particular have gone through some really difficult things, and had bad experiences and relationships with women through no fault of your own. Of that’s the case, I’m sorry for you. But many women (myself included) have had a hard time in life and with men, too. Some lash out and hate on men and complain about every advantage a man receives compared to them, and others move forward, and decide to be decent people who don’t want to marginalize anyone. The ones who turn and resent an entire gender for their experiences are the losers. The ones who try to look at people as people and make the world a better place through their own actions are the smart ones.
“Women are eligible as well for such jobs, and to go to war, and many have”
Yes the difference is that women ARE NOT allowed to fight in the front lines. I would like to see
more feminist fighting for the right of women to fight on the front lines.
Why do you assume you got paid less because you are a women? Do you know some males get paid less than other males and the general disparity in wages are shown to be due to life choices not discrimination.
First you dismiss a huge disparity like women getting 50% more degrees as insignificant then try to use your anecdote about getting paid less at ONE job as a righteous claim to superior victim hood with men making up 90% of prisoners and you expect to win the victim Olympics? I am sure you know men are 90% of the work place deaths but what you don’t recognize is that choice is built around our culture of male disposability. We have no problem with throwing away men’s lives but hurry to protect women. It’s internalized in men from a young age that they have to put themselves on the line for the collective defense or be labeled cowards unworthy of love or respect.
Women don’t grow up with that so don’t give men a lecture on victim hood who have spent the past 50 years listening to women’s complaints. Soon as it’s your turn to listen you are ready to make excuses and turn the other way. I think that is sad.
I am not referring to a specific job where I was paid less. I’m talking about a trend in my particular industry. That said, I’m sure no one would believe I went into business myself solely because I was worried about being paid less than a man. There are many reasons I decided to go into business for myself, and the biggest one is probably that it’s just the type of person I am. I’m happier finding my own work than having a traditional desk job where I have a salary. For me, the risks of working for myself are worth the benefits. Pay equity is a small part of the equation, and I am relieved I don’t have to worry about it, as long as I ask for a fair rate, I will receive it. I’m also happy that I can bring my own morality into action when I pay subcontractors, and hopefully someday employees.
I actually was not aware that women are earning 50% more degrees than men are now. If the difference is that significant, I’d think something should be done to bring balance back to the equation. I didn’t mean to be dismissive, but not having a firm grasp on the statistics (this isn’t something I’ve looked into beyond reading editorials as of yet) I can’t say much about that disparity for the time being. This is also a recent trend, and it will be interesting to see more thorough analysis.
I appreciate the vote of confidence, but must admit I also didn’t know that men make up 90% of workplace deaths. I don’t think it’s fair that society places men in a position of danger disproportionately with women. In an ideal world we’d all be safe at work. It is messed up to tell men to protect women. We should be teaching individuals to help and protect each other, regardless of gender. I hold the door whether there’s a man or woman behind me or coming out as I go in. That’s just common courtesy. By the same logic, if I saw a man at risk, I’d do what I could to help him, just as I would a woman.
I’m listening to what you and others are saying, believe it or not. I’m not trying to make excuses. I think this is more of a debate, where I state what I know and can source, and you and others do the same. We’re swapping information, albeit passionately. The key is that if we keep listening to each other and sharing experiences, we can make some really good things happen in life. I hope you don’t think I’m trying to dictate fact. When I make assertions that don’t match your own, I’m expressing what I think and know. I’m not trying to tell you how it is.
I also certainly wasn’t giving a lecture on victim-hood. I was just expressing my experiences and those of the people in my life. My comment was somewhat of a rebuttal, but I’m not standing on a soapbox yelling “It’s harder for women! Shut up, men!” I’m just trying to share what experiences and knowledge I have that can help me show you that there are reasons other people think differently than you do. You don’t have to change your mind, but it’s cool if you want to acknowledge that those reasons are valid, and that other people have lives that might not mirror your own.
I’m acknowledging that we each have our challenges, and learning from you folks in the process. I would hope that it’s a two-way street.
I personally don’t love this back-and-forth about “who has it worse?” because I don’t think it helps you or me. I’m not trying to one-up you or blow your mind with how hard women have it. That would only make you hostile toward me. At the end of the day, I don’t think *most* men or women suffer a great deal because of their gender. I think there are some very big problems with the world that we can only solve by working together, but I don’t think (but correct me if I’m wrong) that each day you or I rise from bed and look our the window and lament starting the day due to our possession or lack of a penis. I think you and I each face hardships of varying degrees at different times throughout our lives. I think we’re both better off as allies than as enemies.
I want to add that when I respond to comments like yours (excuse the assumption, but I think you’re a strong supporter of men’s rights) I try to be careful with language. I want you to know that I don’t mean to dismiss any of your concerns, but that I hope you’ll consider my concerns in turn.
If I say something you find offensive, please let me know. And if you can do a better job of being civil than I have, please do! I made a mistake once. (Sorry, that’s such a dad joke—as in literally, my dad says it all the time).
It’s good we’re all here hoping to promote a better world. We can’t all be champions of every cause. I am more suited to support women’s causes because of my own life experience and the knowledge I have from the media I’ve chosen to consume. I imagine you make a way better men’s rights advocate for similar reasons. It doesn’t mean I intend to be at odds with you. You and I support different causes, but they’re not mutually exclusive. I think you’re genuinely trying to do what you can to make the world a better place. I’m doing the same. I think feminism and men’s rights will both do better if we can come to see them as complementary, rather than mutually exclusive. That doesn’t mean I expect you to buy into every feminist cause and claim, but I won’t buy into every men’s rights cause either. But we can find the situations in which collaboration helps us both. Thanks for the brain food
I’m so glad to have found this comment thread, Andrew. Thank you, and I agree with you on the way that Matlack has conflated certain traits with femininity that sell men short: we are also compassionate and have emotional lives.
In the one telling example that Matlack gives, of his friend who yields power to his wife, I see how he holds onto some very old essentialisms about power relations between the sexes. It’s that his friend is submissive, eyes cast down, that he sees as feminine. So feminine is submissive, masculine is dominant? How is this feminist, or egalitarian, or humanist?
The point was his friends should not have to be submissive. That should be obvious unless you are trying to misinterpret his comments to favor your preconceptions. A person who must always accept the submissive role is not in a egalitarian relationship. This is so much the case with men and feminism. Instead of taking part in the conversation on equality they have reduced themselves to echoing the sentiments of women in order to appear more progressive. It’s time for men to think for themselves, it should not be a privilege reserved for women or limited to the confines of a poorly constructed social theory like feminism.
It looks to me like you don’t know what the term “privilege” means
A privilege is a special right, benefit, or immunity given to one group of people and not to others
What privileges would an educated, articulate, black male have over a dropout female?
He doesn’t have any special rights or benefits and he’s still held accountable for every mistake that he makes
White women are the greatest beneficiaries of affirmative action.
Women still only make 80 cents on the dollar a man makes, even after adjusting for factors like leaving the workforce temporarily to have children. Women also are the most likely to lose their job in a recession (as has been the case during this recession), despite being equally qualified with their male peers.
But this doesn’t need to be about men v. women, it should be about people working together, trying to understand each other and working together to improve life for everyone, and having mutual respect. Women are still considered a “special interest group” despite making up more than half of North America’s population. Some women have a hard go of it, and so do some men. Pointing fingers and saying “he/she got this/that and I didn’t and it’s not FAIR!” is childish and unproductive. Why not bother to learn why affirmative action is still relevant?
Erin, I have to ask for facts there , the consad report http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf shows that women earn the same when they work the same hours, its actually an accepted fact that women now who are single and childless in their 20s earn more than a man in the same profession, thats fact now. As for your comment about the recession, with all due respect more men than women lost their jobs, even without data of which there is plenty the “mancession” as it was dubbed saw the crunch in construction as well as many more male areas of employment that women dont flock to in terms of choices and yet even when this was taking into consideration female industries got a larger proportion of stimulus funding in relation to jobs lost than male industries. , I never thought id say this but i finally have seen a reason to post on the GMP it might finally encourage men to be GOOD MEN instead of being something less .
I’m paraphrasing from articles I’ve been reading over the past year, above, but I did some digging and found this http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/story.html?id=d3ff1593-fb00-43bd-969a-40e216d4b2b4&k=34354 and this http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/2010-30-e.htm#a7 (I’m Canadian, so these are possibly more relevant to me).
As for my statement about women losing more jobs during the recession, I stand corrected. The article I was thinking of refers to more men being hired post-recession. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/the-recession-in-pink-and-blue/
You are absolutely right about the loss of manufacturing and labour jobs, which is a shame across the board.
I wrote the comment you’ve replied to because I wanted to reply to what I saw as incorrect assertions, and highlight the one-sidedness of the post. I realize after reading your comment that my post was rather one-sided itself. You and I each refer to separate artciles and studies with conflicting findings on the gender gap. I do trust mine, for Canada, as it is a parliamentary report, but yours likely contains valid and important insights of its own.
Rather than argue about who’s more hard done by (and I don’t mean to imply that your very polite and informative post was argumentative in any way… I’m more or less anticipating further argument in this thread, though), I think it’s important that we stop focusing on the male v. female debate.
It seems clear that in some industries, men make more than women, but that the same is true in reverse in other industries. This is a failure on the part of employers. It’s most important that every individual with similar experience and qualifications is paid the same, or very close to the same, as another individual doing the same job.
While I don’t think it’s fair that women in Canada make less than men with some alarming consistency, I also don’t think it’s fair for a man to be paid less than his female counterpart.
I think this discussion is interesting, because it demonstrates how easy it is to get caught up in gender “wars” (so to speak) and blame one another for our problems, when really our focus should be on employers and lawmakers who are supposed to promote fair treatment of workers, and prevent exploitation of any individual.
I came here from A Voice for Men to read Tom’s article, but after reading some of the exchanges here I have to pose a question to you Erin. While I don’t believe the “women are paid less for the same job” argument, I will concede that there have historically been more males in the “power positions” such as CEOs, CFOs, Bankers…etc. and thus men have historically EARNED more. Why? Some great social injustice? A patriarchal conspiracy? Glass ceiling? OR…because men have to.
You see, a man, unfortunately, IS his job title in Western society. A man’s job title, and the amount of resources he can acquire is almost the sole determinant of that mans reproductive success; the more he has, the higher “value” mate he gets. Women don’t even have to work if they don’t want to. The pressure on men to succeed is FAR greater than it is for women. What I’m getting at here is that in high status positions, men will usually out compete the females. Is this making sense?
These statistics are broken down by industry and job type, so they aren’t comparing CEOs with the lady at the grocery store checkout, for example.
I understand that men are given less of a choice about working in western society. Things are changing somewhat, though. I have two friends who are stay at home parents, and one is a man. And I’ll admit I’m jealous of him, because I’d like to be a stay at home mom when I have kids, but I know that won’t be possible, because my fiance is against it. Which is fine.
I actually started my own business because I didn’t want to be paid less than male peers (more common in my industry of branding, graphic design and web development) and so I could become a job creator. I work from home for now, and employ my fiance and occassionally contract work out to old college classmates.
I see your point about men being more pressured to succeed professionally and financially, and I do think that generally, people expect men to be “breadwinners” and expect women to nurture and all that. I agree that it’s unfair.
I wist to subscribe to your blog, Tom. But I did not seem to be able to find the “SUBSCRIBE” button. Will you help me, please. Thank you…
Much as I appreciate this site and its intent, in the future I would appreciate more evidence in support of your contentions, and more specificity.
I, too, was rather affronted in this article. Of course it was because ‘I don’t experience so it must not exist’ – but it was also because you treated both genders as homogeneous units. I can respect that your intent was probably to speak to your personal situation, and to the sort of women who engage in that sort of behavior, but both men and women who are not exposed to this kind of behavior will be confused or angry at the articles presentation. For instance, my love would roll his eyes at the notion that he must ‘submit’ to me, because we can have long and involved arguments where we simply cannot agree. Such would not be possible if he were merely to submit (and what would be interesting in speaking to someone who had no mind of their own?).
As an, erm, perhaps positive critique, you may wish to use the article: http://news.ufl.edu/2006/07/13/women-attackers/ – it shows that women are more likely to commit (or admit to commiting) physical violence against their significant other. This can be used to show that women are often accepted, by society, to react violently because they are ‘harmless’, and that such reaction does not count as ‘abuse’ because, by supposed definition, abuse must be male-to-female. This of course doesn’t go into severity of abuse, but that’s not the point. The point IS, there are very many valid studies that show certain forms of female privilege and the apparent disinterest of society in revoking some of women’s power over men.
Your article just… seemed to perpetuate societal stereotypes. I see your potential meaning, but not well.
We don’t want men to be more like women. The problem that I see women having with men isn’t that they won’t talk about their feelings more. The problem is that many men either can’t or won’t see the world from any perspective but their own, or truly take others into account in their worldview. I don’t think that’s strictly a feminine ability, but experience keeps telling me that ability either isn’t valued by men or just is made more difficult by the flood of testosterone. This post chalking it up to “blame” from women doesn’t really help much either. Thoughtfulness – and adopting a wider perspective than your immediate wants and needs – isn’t that difficult. It also is probably easier for women after being second-class citizens and socialized to value what others want first. But I have to say, the fact this discussion is even happening is a positive step.
Allie,
men won’t tell you about their feelings because they are shamed for it later (check Hugo Schwyzer articles for some shaming tactics) or women tell men they are “scared” of them when men express feelings they do not approve of (sadness, anger, despair etc.).
Men can only see things from their perspective because they are-well, men. For the same reason women can only see things from their perspective. Of course, it does not mean we shouldn’t have compassion for each other, but I won’t allow myself to be emasculated, made to wear high heels etc. to “feel how a woman has to live”. I think there is an article about such a self-hating man here somewhere.
The longer I read feminist articles like “Why men rape”, “Politics of Hello” or ANY ARTICLE BY HUGO SCHWYZER I am grateful to voters in my country which did not vote for Women’s Party (it did not pass threshold).
I am from Poland by the way.
I have brutal memories of my mother’s psychotic eruptions of anger whenever I tried to “share” my “feelings” with her during my childhood, vivid and brutal enough to convince me that this notion that women want men to “open up” is laughable. Women claim they want men to “be sensitive” and “open up”, but when men actually do, they resent them. Does anybody know what women really want?
I’m really sorry that happened to you. But just as women shouldn’t blame/fear all men when they’ve experienced abuse at th hands of a few, you shouldn’t blame and fear women because your mother was abusive.
The right partner and respectful peers will encourage you to open up if and when you’re ready, but ultimately leave the decision to you. Any decent person won’t erupt in anger at another person’s reasonable self expression. I’m sorry you had to go through that, but just as all men aren’t rapists, all women aren’t emotionally abusive. The sooner you free yourself from that kind of stereotyping, the sooner you can start to heal and move forward.
@ Erin
Guffaw!!! The age old Not-All-Women-Are-Like-That (NAWALT) argument. Please tell me why all men are treated as potential rapists, child molesters, sex-abusers, and violent felons? Why are all men viewed with suspicion by women and yet when a man expresses his actual experiences with a woman he is told NAWALT? (his own mother, by the way… isn’t motherhood supposed to be some sacred goddess/ nurturing instinct that all women possess)
Well, I don’t think all men are potential rapists, child molesters, sex-abusers, and violent felons. And I have no idea about this sacred goddess/nurturing thing. I think a lot of people (male and female) have varied aptitudes in different areas and can be great and shitty at different things.
Well, I’m not going to lie and pretend to know and understand things that I don’t. As I’ve mentioned, I’m here to learn and support, but I won’t dismiss women’s causes in favor of men’s. I’m trying to find a balance.
To be fair, I didn’t say anything in the comment you replied to about “not knowing much about…”
I said “I don’t think all men are potential rapists, child molesters, sex-abusers, and violent felons.” In response to the accusation that all women/feminists/I think that.
I think there’s a problem inherant with the way you interpreted the article, based on your response. You started by saying “We don’t want…”
The issue here is that it’s a reaction in kind to Tom’s article. For one, you don’t have to apologize or explain on behalf of all women. Another thing is, you can’t. You can’t speak for the women who exist out there who do quash men’s emotions. You shouldn’t have to anyway. You can’t speak for me. I can’t speak for you. Neither of us can speak for all women.
Women are not of a single mind. There are wonderful women in the world, there are hostile women, there are wonderful women having bad days, and there are hostile women having good ones. Just as all men shouldn’t have to answer for some men’s violent acts, all women shouldn’t have to answer for some women’s emotionally abusive acts. And I don’t mean to imply men are generally violent and women are generally manipulative, but these are two core issues this site explores repeatedly, so please let them stand as unassuming examples.
Excuse me if this is too much semantics, but I just wanted to say I don’t think Tom’s intention was to make women feel personally attacked. And clearly, some women do feel attacked. But I like what you said, because it’s your perception. I’m glad you think men need to communicate more, because that tells me you want to listen. But I don’t think we can demand they communicate more. I also think that while some men won’t see the world from any POV but their own, some women are guilty of that as well.
Huh, looks like my comments about transcending the gender binary aren’t welcome here. Sorry, have fun fitting everyone into neat little gender boxes. I’m going to go cry, bake and blame my boyfriend for everything. *eyeroll*
I’m very disappointed in this site. I thought you were actually getting somewhere talking about masculinity and how it limits men. But it looks like it is turning into just another MRA website.
OHHH HAI “Older comments” button. Apologies, Ignore me. I suck.
The site is not on a crusade against masculinity. That hardly makes it an MRA website.
I’ll be honest. What I see here is someone looking outward, asking what’s wrong with his critics, rather than looking inward and honestly examining how he may have fumbled his intended message. Your piece titled “Being a Dude is a Good Thing” (and your tweets about it) engendered some heated responses. Here you attempt to understand why this happened, not by asking how you might have failed in communicating your message, but by asking what’s wrong with feminism. I think you have it backwards.
I see a repeated contradiction, both in the “Being a Dude” piece and in this one. I’m supposing that this contradiction is what’s really causing most of the confusion and frustration among the feminists who have responded. The contradiction is between your assertion that you don’t and won’t generalize about gender, and your tendency to do exactly that.
I’ll explain what I mean. You claim that you don’t believe in gender essentialism. “The variety of first person stories on our site shows, if nothing else, that I value the unique experience that every man has in negotiating his own maleness,” you wrote. Also: “I understand that there are as many different kinds of men (and women) as there are men (and women).” Most contemporary feminists would wholeheartedly agree with that. They would characterize gender strictly as a cultural construct, one which limits both men and women. So whenever we talk about gender differences, we feminists like to be very careful and very clear: these are not innate qualities we’re talking about. These are sets of cultural expectations into which all people are conditioned. The differences between males and females may be biological, but the differences between men and women are invented by society.
The contradiction comes in when you say things like this: “Why do men get blamed for everything?” What an extreme generalization! I mean, really? EVERYTHING? And then of course you claim, “women would really like men to be more like them.” Do you see how this premise is deeply at odds with your other claim, that every person is an individual? How can women be unique individuals, each expressing her womanliness in a different way, but at the same time they all want men to be more like them? In fact, that makes no sense at all. If women are genuinely different from one another — as many different kinds of women as there are women, right? — then how can they want men to be more like them? There’s no “them” for men to be like. Are you saying each individual woman wants men (or her man) to be more like her, as an individual?
No, that’s not what you’re saying. You’re saying that although there are as many different masculinities as there are men, and as many different femininities as there are women… there is still such a thing as masculinity. There is a way that men simply “are.” You never define what this quality of masculinity actually is, but you operate on the assumption that it exists. You write: “Men and women are different. Quite different in fact.” Also: “My point is that men and women are different, thankfully.” But… are they? Are men and women so different? On the one hand you say you’re not a gender essentialist, but on the other you insist that there is a difference between the genders. Is this a difference in how men and women have been socialized?
Please try to see the contradiction I’m seeing here. You say that being a man is not one single thing. Being a man means different things to different men, and is as varied as the number of men on earth. Yet at the same time, “to be a man is to be unacceptable at some level to the woman in your life.” How can that possibly be? The only way that can be true is if being a man has a single definition — which you insist it does not. How can being varied individuals be objectionable to women? It makes no sense, unless “to be a man” involves having a specific set of “man” traits. You dance around this idea, refusing to pinpoint what set of traits constitutes masculinity. Try to understand that it’s discomfiting to be told that you’re not accepting some inherent trait that your partner desperately wishes to express, but which you find distasteful — especially when that trait is never described or defined. You ask: “Is a good man more like a woman or more truly masculine?” To the mind of a person who views gender roles as artificial constructs imposed on people by their culture, that question makes absolutely no sense. In other words, to most feminists it makes no sense.
My point is that if you want to talk about the way men and women are socialized, perhaps you should say so. There is an interesting conversation to be had about how gender expectations negatively impact people, but also about the gender-associated qualities which can be positive and constructive, if we would only value them appropriately. But if you truly do not believe that men and women display inherent traits that are embedded in their genes, it’s entirely unclear from your writing.
You go to great pains to say that you don’t care for generalizations. But even the question, “Why can’t women accept men for who they really are?” is so riddled with generalizations, false accusations, unexamined assumptions about gender… It positively stings in the feminist mind.
You hint around the problem of socialization when you assert that one of the things men may have done poorly, as a gender, is being reluctant to talk about inner thoughts and feelings. But that, you theorize, is because women have dominated emotional language. It sure sounds like you’re BLAMING women for men’s perceived failure in that arena. Wait – which gender is it that’s getting blamed for everything again?
No, I don’t think you actually meant to blame women, per se. But this is the stage in the conversation in which feminists point out that, indeed, boys are socialized into a confining set of gender expectations that include not expressing their feelings readily or openly. And gender socialization is an artifact of (patriarchal) society, reinforced by both men and women — for patriarchy needs the willing participation of both men and women in order to perpetuate.
I appreciate what you’re doing with the Good Men Project, and I’ve been especially impressed with how eagerly you’ve created spaces for different viewpoints and for open discussion on your website. I hope you’ll consider that the backlash you stirred up may very well have been the result of your muddled message, rather than some problem inherent to the feminist movement. Feminism, by the way, has never in its history been one single thing, any more than men are any one single thing or women are any one single thing. Rarely is it helpful to generalize, even in asking questions.
This IS the “Being a Dude” piece.
Yes, I accidentally posted this comment on the wrong piece.
NB: Most of this comment is super heteronormative, but it’s in response to a conversation that is almost exclusively talking about heterosexual cisgendered folks. Oh, and, judging from preceding comments, this probably isn’t going to be that popular, but, whatever…
I read this post last week, around when it was posted, and had an initially bad reaction to it. I didn’t think to respond, however, until hearing of the “The Wrath of the Feminists” page, which struck me as particularly bad form. Mr Matlack, here, took criticism so poorly as to use a space he supposedly dedicated to sorting out a what a “good man” is in order to mischaracterize feminists as wrathful (because that’s never been done before).
At any rate, my initial misgivings about this article stem from my own discomfort with the tiny boxes afforded to masculinity and femininity. I’m a man. Heck, at times, I even do “manly” things (like teaching martial arts classes, working out, fixing computers and working on my car). However, I’ve never been properly masculine, according to the sort of rigid definition assumed in the OP here. Further, and perhaps this is projecting, I don’t think any of us guys fit neatly into the standard definition of “masculine” and, when we make every effort to, we deny very important parts of ourselves, even if it gives us temporary comfort to do so (because of the collective acceptance of such “masculinity”).
There’s more I find disheartening about this piece than just the male/female “quite different” binary relied upon in order to make the argument. There’s also this issue of “blame,” which is framed really oddly in the post. “Why do men get blamed for everything?” is a garbage question. Men most certainly do not “get blamed for everything,” though men get the spotlight a lot more than women with regards to both blame and credit, which could cause you to draw this wrong idea if you were more sensitive to criticism than to accolades. And this seems to be the case given the “The Wrath of Feminists” post.
I also take issue with your argument that “dudes as a gender” are portrayed as “assholes” in “popular culture.” Perhaps some men, but also men are portrayed as world leaders, inventors, scientists, doctors, and so on, to such a degree that, just a few years ago, there was real political discussion about whether or not a woman could handle being president.
This is further troubling: “But with her he’s decided the only way to survive is to submit. The female view is the right view. The male view just gets you into trouble.” First, it suggests that there exists one female view and there exists one male view, which is absolutely wrongheaded. There is more variance among men and women (in terms of world view) than between us as groups. Further, it sounds like there are things to work out in that relationship; I certainly can’t be sure what they are, but to suggest that your friend’s relationship is symptomatic of “women [not] accept[ing] men for who they really are” is quite a leap of logic.
I would suggest that the problems men face with regards to our “slow[ness] to reveal our inner thoughts and feelings” stems more from popular constructions of masculinity (where “manning up” is the same thing as stuffing your feelings back down into your chest, where boys get called “sissy” by *other boys and adult men* for being sensitive or reflective, etc.) than from any sort of fascism of femininity as portrayed in your article. As a man who was often called a “faggot,” “queer” and so on, who was told that if I want to be respected, I need to learn not to cry, I will tell you straight-up that such policing of my masculinity almost *never* came from women, but from other boys (who were improving their status) and men (who thought they were helping).
Perhaps I’m not “all dude” enough for this new “male vocabulary,” but, as I’ve matured, I’ve found that there is not one thing on my mind that needs expression that I cannot express to a woman as easily as to a man. I also feel no need to call feminists “wrathful,” so perhaps we’re just in different places in our lives.
My last point, and perhaps this is more about the “The Wrath of the Feminists” selective tweet blog post, is that it’s important, it’s critical, that we listen to one another. It’s important that the OP’s friend, who is deferential to his partner, and this partner figure out a way to communicate where both of them speak and are heard. Similarly, when your supposed allies offer up a critique of the points you’re making, it’s important to listen and not to get defensive, as was the case with regards to both feminists and people of color in the back-and-forth on twitter. There needs to be a space for women to be heard without being cast as shrews just as there needs to be a space for men to be heard without being cast as unmanly. It may just be that simple, but the OP seems more focussed on holding up classical masculinity as the thing men should be better able to express (never mind that there is plenty of space for that already). That’s more than a little disturbing when coming from the creator of “The Good Men Project.”
This is the silliest thing I’ve heard in a while.
“Why do men get blamed for everything?” “Why can’t women accept men?” “Why is ‘masculine,’ always wrong?” “Why do women want men to be more like them.” “Why are men’s voices not a bigger part of pop-culture?”
“And most of all – why can’t we move away from generalization?” If there’s too much generalization about gender, it’s because you’re writing it. Try again – with concrete examples about individuals this time. See if you can manage it.
This is funny.
Tom writes an article about how women constantly blame men,and he receives more blame as a result.
Now that your gyno masters have turned upon you Tom,you are welcome among us kind hearted MRA’s who actually believe good men do exist.
We will not turn upon you for your gender as the wymyn have done.
Open arms buddy!
Ours is a message of love and hope, not dark oppression like the rad-fems.
Yes, we do dare to speak out in our defense, it’s called basic human rights wymyn,get used to it, it’s going to be happening a lot more!
Both men and women deserve to be treated fairly. I wish your perspective wasn’t so exclusive. There are valid causes for both men and women to pursue.
Blame is thrown back and forth all over this message board. It’s disappointing, and a step backward. There’s no need to be adversarial. Women and men can work together to make the world a better place for *people*
I really think that’s the goal of both MRAs and feminists. To make the world more equitable and better for everyone. We approach it differently, support different causes, sometimes in conflict, but it takes all kinds and it takes discussion. I truly think that people do things because they believe they’re doing the right things. People try to act fairly. There’s no reason to split boys and girls up, and erect a fence in the middle and lug stones at each other. A productive dialogue would be better for everyone.
I agree so much with you on that Erin. Men and Women need to learn to stop building a fence between themselves and to stop the stupid fight and start learning to work together to make the world a better place for everybody. Why can’t we see each other as “people” intead of dividing the human race in a man-woman war where nobody is going to win? I think it would be much helpful to humanity if both MRA’s and feminist would stop throwing stones at each other and start to find a common ground to help all people who is oppresed and suffering from inequality.
Well then you feminist types might want to pay attention to the thngs men actually care about, rather than trying to foist your own ‘goals’ for men, and deny and minimize the concerns men actually have.
And you CONSISTENTLY minimize and dismiss and redirect mens actual concerns..
Let me ask you this: What do you think men care about more? Parental and Reproductive rights, or the right to wear a skirt?
Because I see a lot of feminists talking about the skirt thing, and completely dismissing mens concerns over parental and reproductive rights.
Want to guess how that plays out?
It’s plainly obvious that Feminism is about WOMEN, not men or equality, and that anything that goes against female self interest is automatically Not Good For Society(tm).
YOUR concerns are not OUR concerns. But that never stopped a Feminist from trying to tell men what to be, and what they care about….
And you folks wonder why we hate you so much…
Feminism is defined as (from dictionary.com): “The advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.”
Equality is the key word, to me. But people will interpret things differently. I know there are a lot of feminists out there who I’d disagree with on a lot of issues, and other I’d see eye-to-eye with. Just like men advocating for men’s rights have different points of view on certain issues and different approaches to advocacy.
I hope you don’t really feel like women try to tell you what you want and what to be. That’s terrible. It’s the kind of chip on the shoulder some feminists carry, too.
I wish you didn’t hate all feminists, though. That’s sad.
Erin:
Feminists deserve nothing but contempt for subscribing to their hateful religion. There is no such thing as a feminist that doesn’t hate men to at least some degree. And there is no such thing as a feminist that ‘stands up for men’ as evidenced by not only the silence from feminists regarding the radfem hub stuff, but the complete and utter failure by feminists to even give the impression that men mean anything other than disposable beast of burden to them.
Hell, you even dismiss MRAs…people who are actually speaking up about men’s issues…as ‘not speaking fo men’…THEN you folks proceed to tell us what we REALLY want…
You might say that you’re ‘not like that’. In my view, you are exactly as innocent as a concentration camp guard. You might not do objectionable things, but you enable those who do, and defend their results.
I’m glad you all turned on Tom though….it shows just what feminists mean when they say ‘good man’…
Sort of like others say ‘good dog’.
I just hope your hatred and ‘concern’ is returned to you and yours a thousand-fold. No mercy, no forgiveness.
Oh, and Merry Christmas.
For one, feminism isn’t religion. I don’t hate men. I hate people who hurt other people. Sometimes that will be men, sometimes women. I don’t hate men. You don’t have to believe me, but you also don’t get to tell me how I feel.
I’m sorry if I gave you the impression I think you’re a disposable beast of burden. I don’t think that, never said it, but if it helps at all: I don’t think that. I think you’re a person with thoughts, feelings, and a passion for men’s rights. And none of that is negative.
I don’t remember saying men’s rights groups don’t speak for men in such a simple context. I believe I have stated several times, though, that not all men’s rights groups and activists speak for *all* men.
I’m sorry we’ve invoked Godwin’s law here. I don’t see how I enable anyone to do objectionable things. I don’t get to okay the actions of others, nor do I provide a platform for anyone other than myself. I’m not even sure what you’re accusing me of here. I’m trying to listen to and understand you, and tell you I think your concerns for men’s rights are valid. I just disagree with blanket condemnation of any number of people based on shared ideology. Not all Catholic priests molest little boys. Not all feminists want to steamroll you.
I, personally didn’t turn on Tom, nor am I in any way affiliated with the people who did. You’re lumping me in with people I’m not associated with, and you’re putting words in my mouth and trying to ascribe ideas to me that aren’t my own. I’m not doing that to you.
I hope you can find some comfort and happiness in life. I hope you find people who treat you with respect, so you don’t have to be so angry and feel so marginalized. I don’t wish you any harm, I just wish we could work together instead of fighting.
I’m really unsure about the sincerity of your “Merry Christmas,” but really, have a good one. Enjoy your friends and family and whatever you do. I hope we can have more productive and mutually beneficial discussions in the future.
Feminism most definitely IS a religion, as you would know if you’ve ever debated one…in exactly the same way a fundamentalist of any other stripe behaves.
Maybe not all feminists hate men…but the only ones doing anything, the only VISIBLE feminists are the man hating kind. The only time we see ‘egalitarian’ feminists is when they are defending their religion. And they NEVER criticize feminist thinking…only it’s detractors. There is no difference, practically speaking, between you and Andrea Dworkin ( she is a co inventor of Patriarchy theory, and therefore has shaped YOUR understanding of gender…and she was a radical mandating feminist).
You do NOTHING to stop the hateful ideologues harming men…and you have the nuts to posit MRAs just don’t understand’? We understand a lot better than you do, that’s for sure.
As long as you defend Feminism, I will regard you as an enemy functionally identical to a genocidal white supremacist. Look into radfem hub to see why that analogy is 100% accurate…
Tom, thank you for your article.
It is high time men were proud of being men, in whatever collection of virtues and vices that each individual man considers define his incarnation of manhood. The time of asking feminists for permission has passed; there is no benefit to men to bow and scrape to those few women who have malignant views on men and human sexuality.
It is high time too that women who stand up to be counted amongst those humans who want true equality, that they are cut loose from the ruined reputation that is feminism. Feminism was never about benefit for all women, it was for shifting power from all women into the hands of a few women. In essence feminism modelled their matriarchy on their nemesis the patriarchy. There are some, very few, good women. Only if they are encouraged to work with men, instead of against them, will those of us who care be able to improve and rebuild our societies.
I share many of the same frustrations as you Tom. But I don’t feel this article is a good representation of my own experience with women. Relationships are very complex. We meet people who we feel want to change something we feel is essential to who we are. It’s very easy to look at gender and point our finger at it as the culprit. It’s because we are men, and they want us to be more like women. That’s the easy answer isn’t it? We don’t need to look a little deeper. If we did, we’d see that maybe they just aren’t a good match for us. Feeling that a woman wants to change your essential maleness may be that clue.
I can’t think of one day where I felt my wife wanted me to be more like a women. She’s wanted me to express myself more emotionally. But there’s been times when she wanted me NOT to be emotional because she couldn’t handle it. So what am I to say about what ‘she is doing to me’ in those times?
There is so much discussion about what women are doing to men, and what men are doing to women. There are greater forces at play here. But we never go there. We can’t seem to ever get past this “us vs. them” struggle. That blinds us, always will.
The ecosystem includes how women respond to men’s behavior AND how men respond to men’s behavior. How we ALL are reinforcing gender stereotypces. You don’t watch a football game if only one team shows up for the game. There are interactions coming from all directions. We can’t pretend like there isn’t.
Often, I feel like I am being pulled in two directions. By women and men. They both want to narrow my base of experience based on what they think a man should be. But how do I unsubscribe from both philosophies and find some freedom to evolve my own? That’s the question.
HI Chris,
What we are doing here — and what we do best, I believe — is getting a whole, diverse group to tell their stories. Of *their own* experience as men. They might be the same, they might be different — but ultimately there is something most other men — and those women who are supportive of what we are doing here — can get some insight from.
That was what was most baffling to us about the “feedback” to Tom. He was writing about his own experience. This was in the middle of a whole series about “the presumption of male guilt”, but his piece also stands alone. We want everyone to be able to express their own POV freely. I invite you to submit your own story that does the same. thanks.
Lisa,
I understand and that’s how I took it. Course that’s why we have a comments section so we can express our reaction. I think we learn the most from the feedback section because that represents a community response, and I certainly appreciate Tom’s article to spark it. If you are surprised by the reaction then that may be an insight into some of your own expectations as to how men would receive Tom’s experience.
Maybe men are not only different from women in many ways, but maybe we are different from each other in substantial ways as well. It seems expressed pretty well in all the comments above. So I hope Tom or others don’t view our feedback as threatening or as attacking because then the content of what we are saying get’s lost in the process.
Lisa:
This is a feminist website, used to try and indoctrinate men and defuse the men’s moment ( don’t try to deny it, I’ve read the Ms Magazine quote), this is NOT a place for men to talk openly. This is a place where feminists openly advocate for the censorship of men’s voices they disagree with…feminists that are Featured Writers here, no less.
And gee, what’s so unwelcoming about knowing there are just some things men aren’t allowed to say in polite company? It sure is a good thing we have you feminists here to tell us men what we should feel, how we should think, and the things we should be concerned about.
The only thing more ridiculous than the assertion men can speak freely here is the assertion that you have anything less than malicious intent behind the establishment of this site.
MODERATOR’S NOTE: This comment is an ad hominem attack and not allowed under our commenting policy. This is a warning. Further comments that are in violation will be removed. See complete commenting guidelines here.
I love what ou said here. I’m so tired of this “girls against boys” mentality that pervades the discussion anytime gender is brought into the equation. When we talk about advantage and disadvantage, generally we’re hoping to solve a problem, and focusing on whether or not something happens predominantly to one gender or another serves to polarize us and create further inequality and discord.
This article is interesting, because it really highlights the male v. female internet pissing match.
I agree that some women treat all men as threats, but demanding a smile or hello is no one’s right. Sometimes someone is just having a bad day. Also, just because you’re a good guy, it doesn’t mean any woman owes you anything. Not a chat, not a date, etc.
However, I won’t say that men aren’t sometimes vilified. But. Women, and especially feminists, are vilified, too. For every time a woman assumes you might roofie her drink, a man assumes a woman can’t run a business, or succeed professionally. For every time a woman refuses to make eye contact with you because she’s scared, a man refuses to make eye contact with a woman because he sees her as inferior. For every time a woman increases the distance between the two of you during a meeting, a man actually does inappropriately touch a woman. For every time your words are misinterpreted, a woman’s are.
This type of debate of how to best portray oneself based on the gender binary is irrelevant to progress. The key is not for men to behave the “right” way. The key is mutual respect and healthy curiosity about other individuals. Don’t ask how women expect you to communicate. Just communicate. Effectively. As in, ask questions and don’t make assumptions. Don’t feel sorry for yourself because one woman wants you to emote and another wants you to drag her by her hair to your cave. Understand that women are also subjected to conflicting societal expectation. Some men want us to be “one of the guys” or they label us crazy. Some men want us to want to have millions of babies, or else they label us heathen. And there are more labels. Oh so many labels. So try to drop the labels, and ask the individual person you’re speaking to “why?”
You might learn something…
‘Scuse the very uncool practice of commenting first on my own post, but I meant to get to something and …forgot. Heh.
When women judge prematurely and excpect all men to be macho or otherwise, and assume men are whiny privileged jerks, it’s a lot like when men judge feminists and call them demanding, spoiled brats.
And please, please don’t take every feminist article about gender relations as an attack. Women misspeak, just as men do. I’m guilty of saying “men suck” (even to my very un-sucky fiance) at times out of exasperation. But when I say those words, I’m often referring to past abusive relationships, or to a man who marginalized me and spoke over me in a business meeting.
Sweeping generalizations (like mine) suck. But sometimes we fail to communicate effectively because something is overwhelming to us. When I say “men suck,” my very un-sucky fiance asks me why I say that. And it reminds me not to say it, without chastizing me. And it gives me a chance to share my frustrations with him. And he listens, which is why he is the bomb.
Nicely said, Erin. Been there too.
Great post Erin, same here too.
‘woman’ and ‘feminist’ are not the same thing. I love women. I hate feminists.
I really want you to know that I don’t hate you, nor do I hate men in general, nor MRAs in general. I wish I could make you understand that feminism doesn’t mean hatred against men. Maybe for some women and men it does, but it’s a viewpoint that can only hurt both sexes.
Your interpretation of feminism differs from mine, and I get that when I identify as a feminist your hear “man-hater” or “anti-MRA” but I’m not that person. I wouldn’t be spending so much time here if I wasn’t trying to get a grasp of the MRA point of view. MRAs are right when they point out that their perspective isn’t represented in media. That’s why I’m learning now. Because the problems and ideas presented weren’t available to me in other media, and I feel like I need to have a balanced view of the hardships both sexes face.
It is possible to support both women’s and men’s rights. I just want you to know that it’s what I’m trying to do.
And I wish to make you understand that the dictionary or you description of what feminism Means to you has ZERO bearing on how feminism affects men. And there is plenty of feminist hate and injustice directly attributable to feminism, and feminists.
None of which is even acknowledged, let alone addressed, by ‘reasonable’ feminists. All we see is hate and condemnation. And when we tell you that, your response is meal-mouthed defense lawyer tactics, denial, and minimization.
And you’re the kind of feminist that ‘cares about men’? Gee, I wonder why you have such a crappy rep…
You deserve it.
MODERATOR’S NOTE: This comment is an ad hominem attack and not allowed under our commenting policy. This is a warning. Further comments that are in violation will be removed. See complete commenting guidelines here.
Just like he is not entitled to a smile ,eye contact or a chat neither should you expect WHY ? .if you say something and someone chooses to uses that to judge so be it .dont ask men to be respectful yet double talk and when you say some thing is viewed as assholish from a guy point of view they should stop and go but WHY .
I guess I miscommunicated. I don’t mean that I think I’m entitled to a “why.” I just think it’s more productive. And I intented to advocate both men and women asking that question to try to understand each other.
I didn’t mean to imply that it is or should be a one-way street. My entire point was that no one is entitled to anything from anyone else, but if we want the world to be better for everyone, there is something we can do in trying to understand each other and look out for our fellow people. That goes for men and women. And it’s also a choice for each individual. I think this would help us understand each other, but it’s just my opinion, and you’re more than welcome to disagree.
Transcend the gender binary by having equal compassion for men as you do women. To assume gender roles and expectations are ok for men but not for women creates a gender binary.
I don’t think gender roles are any more ok as applied to men than women.
“The key is mutual respect and healthy curiosity about other individuals.”
The entire point of that comment was to show the experience I’ve had as a woman, but to point out repeatedly that rigid gender roles harm both men and women, and that if a woman tells you how to be, it’s wrong, and if a man tells me how to be, that’s wrong, too.
I think you may be misreading what I’m saying.
Tom…you finally get it…or at least you’ve finally said so here.
Unlike so many of the current detractors on this post are saying; it has never been about “hating women,” or “wanting to go back to the good old days.” It has been about finding balance. Few men want to see women go back to the way things used to be. We don’t want to dominate our marriages and/or relationships. We want the partners we were promised…through good times and bad; through sickness and health; until death do us part. Both men and women can do the “heavy lifting” in a relationship, but lately…men have been getting the short end of the stick and many of us are fed up with it.
I want my sons and daughters (when we decide to have some) to grow up in a world where they are valued for the people they are, not for the reproductive equipment they are born with. I do not want to see young men made to feel as if they are some sort of lower life-form simply because they are male. But that is what is happening today and few people seem invested in stopping this. Young men are in crisis, especially young men of color…but who truly gives a damn? Who?
I had to backtrack a lot to find this:
Miss Representation Facebook page –> Hugo Schwyzer’s criticism –> your Twitter –> Amanda Marcotte’s Twitter –> here
Based one what I read, I am shocked that this isn’t more offensive. I was expecting something extremely different. If I’m understanding correctly, the main idea is that a sensitive, masculine man might handle a conversation differently from a sensitive, feminine woman. That being a “good man” doesn’t mean becoming more feminine, but expanding the definition of masculinity, and that shouldn’t be defined as “more feminine.”
It reminds me very much of the feminist topic that a “good female politician” is more masculine. That women debating in politics should act like the male peers. Women politicians should not be considered less effective for traits that are typically considered “feminine.” In the same vein, men should not be expected to enter formally “feminine” topics of conversation from a feminine perspective. It’s simply masculinity applied to a new front.
We’ll gladly welcome you in our ranks Tom. Your taskmasters have thrown you under the bus, it’s time for you to join your brothers in the battle against misandry.
It’s interesting that women are blamed for taking up “emotional dialogue” and for men feeling as though they have to succumb to certain gender roles. I don’t for a minute doubt that being a man can be confusing in this time and age, but to blame women for the confusion I think is a bit misguided. These gender roles have been in existence for a long time, and confusion has occurred as feminists attempt to break through the these taken for granted gender roles and fight for women’s rights. The media has played a part in confusing the situation as well; just look at how both women and men are portrayed in the media, and I think you touch on that in your article.
But are women to blame for this portrayal and confusion? I really don’t think so. Perhaps we dominate the emotional dialogue because society tells us that’s how women are and how they act? And men don’t, or feel they can’t because society tells them they can’t or shouldn’t.
Of course, as individuals, we all play a role in society and we all have played a part in perpetuating these stereotypes, and I don’t doubt that men often feel attacked, possibly by women. But this article seems to portray women, especially those who are vocal about the oppression of women, as aggressive and man-hating, and revel in the oppression of men as revenge?
Do you realize that the your friend who loves his wife and jokes about having to be deferential to her at all times for fear of raising her “wrath” is demeaning his wife in that joke? Because her anger, or her dissatisfaction with his responses couldn’t be because she has a legitimate reason for being upset, it must be because she’s so sensitive. And men have no choice but be oppressed and deferential because otherwise they will be seen as sexist pigs. Really? I think both men and women need to be given a little more credit than that.
To blame women as a whole for the so-called oppression of men as evidenced by the examples given in this article is a stretch to say the least.
I really like what you said here. You (and anyone else here) might be interested in another article on this site. It discusses what you’re talking about in terms of dismissal of women’s thoughts and feelings: http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/why-women-arent-crazy/
Great to see Mr. Matlack take a stand on women and men being different. What seems obvious to most is verboten speech for some. It reminds me of the 1960′s when I took part in some activism for women and was told by the feminists at the time to basically shut up, that I didn’t have any idea of what it was like to be a woman and to just be quiet and listen. Now these same women are telling us that they are the experts on being a man and on masculinity. The arrogance of this stance is monumental. The double standard boggles the mind.
Good men don’t let lies and liars hurt others. Good on you Mr. Matlack.
I enjoyed your article Tom, and I think it’s great that you stood up and spoke up.
I’ve seen a lot of comments, both here and on Hugo’s resignation statement, that claim GMP is become anti-feminist. Is that really a bad thing? Should feminism be without criticism? If there is evidence to show that feminism is not in practice what it claims to be in theory, should we not embrace the truth instead of denying it like some religious ideologues from centuries ago threatening to burn someone at the stake for insinuating that the earth is in fact round and not flat?
I don’t frequent this website very much due to its usual pro-feminist feel…I read the occasional piece. But reading an article like yours is refreshing. I think we need to look deeper into the way males are made out to be society’s scapegoat for just about anything evil. If not evil, then we’re at least childish, stupid and need to grow out of our Peter Pan syndrome so we can all be good providers/protectors (i.e. disposable utility) for women. If women were liberated from their roles, why are men still expected to keep up their end of the old bargain? The men who do attempt to liberate themselves and try to live life as they truly want are the ones you hear complaints about needing to “man-up”, “be a real man” and such. I suppose the female equivalent, “woman-up” is never heard because it would mean “get back in the kitchen” and we’ll never go back to that…not that we would want do. But it’s strange that it’s politically incorrect to tell women to “get back in the kitchen” while the male equivalent is so socially acceptable it’s become a catchphrase.
That’s all I have for now….happy holidays!