Justin Cascio names five ways feminism helps men.
Can’t think of a single reason why men should support feminism? Here are five.
- Gives us equal partners. For men who have women in their lives as co-parents, lovers, wives, partners, clients, and associates, it means that our partners in these relationships have equal power.
- Provides a model for consciously changing gender roles. Women have changed what it means to be a woman. Even women who don’t call themselves feminists have had their ideas of themselves shaped by feminism. Women who imagine themselves pursuing a career, or even imagine themselves having choices of whether and when to become a wife or a mother, owe their freedom to choose to feminist thought. As men, we have had our lives changed just as helplessly as the women have. We have the same power, as men, to consciously shape what we think a man should be, and how to live up to the standards we create. Feminism taught us it can happen.
- Provokes us to consider the many identities that yoke us, sometimes in competing directions. Through feminist dialogue and consciousness raising, women began to realize that their identities as wives, mothers, daughters, and sisters were colored by their other identities: as human beings, citizens, workers, artisans, people of color, people with disabilities, queer people… the list of identities goes on, and the ways they overlap filter our experiences and to some degree determine who we are. Men are as subject to these double and triple yokes that tell us what we should be doing or caring about.
- Encourages us to speak in our own voices.Betty Friedan identified a problem without a name, and began a conversation that hasn’t stopped. There are problems that men have that don’t have names, because we are not encouraged to talk with one another about our lives in the same ways, and because we want our stories to fit into the patterns that already exist: to make sense of them. By having the courage to talk about our experience, even when it doesn’t match our ideas of what a man does or feels, we can begin to learn what our common experiences are, and to name them.
- Makes us all more free. Unless all of us are free, none of us are free. As long as women still feel the pulls of gender roles, men are forced by the laws of physics into an equal and opposing position. And as long as anyone in our world is subject to limitations because of an identity like those we construct around sex and gender, race and ethnicity, and our deeply held beliefs and loyalties, then any of us is subject to being limited for who and what we are, or for what we believe in.
—Photo credit: cliff1066™/Flickr
Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free
For the record I’m just picking nits now. Feel free to ignore if you want. HeatherN: Now then, as for your experience with that double standard…I think that applies to feminist narratives surrounding domestic violence and rape. I think it can apply to feminist narratives surrounding parental custody. In general it can apply to feminist narratives surrounding men and violence, versus women and violence. But let’s also remember that the other problem with a lot of feminist narratives surrounding men and violence is that they can fail to break away from traditional gender norms. I, personally, think that the places… Read more »
I’m actually getting ready to go out…but I’d like to comment on the bit you have in parentheses there. I’m not saying feminism was fine until bad people used it. Feminism (as with all ideologies and ideas) are creations of human beings. Not everyone who created it was a great person. My comparison to Darwinism was more to try to say something like this: The criticisms of the ideology itself are different than those of individuals who use that ideology to justify their own crap. (Individuals, or governments, for that matter). So with evolution…that is a theory which is still… Read more »
And to that effect I need to correct myself in that section of parenthases. Even though you say otherwise you reminded of the folks who want to paint this illusion… Should have been: Even though you say otherwise what you said reminded me of the folks who want to paint this illusion… I can dig what you are saying. It just grates my nerves because of the times I’ve seen what you say (being critical of the movement, the different types, and/or the people of the movement) used as a moving target so that it becomes next to impossible to… Read more »
Backwards on the comment thread a really excellent point was made about do we talk about christians and communists and other movements as monolithic or not. One poster angrily responded that despite her being a christian she was not anti-gay. The problem is that Christianity has a written set of rules, that states homosexuality is a sin. Even though an individual member may not be anti-gay, they are still in cohoots with orgs that practice anti-gay discrimination in ordaining priests and sisters and other affects. Which lead me to thinking. Does feminism have a set of rules in general, or… Read more »
Couple of points: With regards to homosexuality and Christianity and gay men/women rising in Christian organizations, I present to you Gene Robinson. Not to mention all the Christian churches around the world that are pro-lgbt rights, or at the very least not anti-lgbt rights. But Robinson is such a great example because he’s openly gay and a bishop of a rather mainstream denomination. He didn’t have to go create a non-denominational church or something…this is a church with around 2 million members in the U.S. that has been around since the colonial era. So even in an old organization with… Read more »
And given how many amazing comments in support of men you’ve made, I’m sad you feel that you have to put that caveat there.
“And given how many amazing comments in support of men you’ve made, I’m sad you feel that you have to put that caveat there.” Why is that? Men here continually out caveats in their posts, it is part of trying to have a delicate discussion where many people don’t put in caveats because they don’t intend them. I salute her for doing so. “Because I’d like to discuss this and not have to defend myself and prove (again) that I’m not some man-hating wack-job. :)” That is a much appreciated sentiment. Much of at least my problem with discussing male/female… Read more »
I suppose it’s because as moderators Heather and I are very familiar with the various voices on the posts. I rarely need to get those caveats from particular people because I feel that i know them. She’s here every day (or nearly) as am I, working for the site, expressing positive sentiment and given that she’s commenting in good faith, it struck me that she might be putting that caveat up not because of openness, but because she’d expect negative response from people who may already have seen her positions. My take on it. I know that I feel that… Read more »
Pretty much, yeah.
That make sense if you are a moderator Julie and I can see from that reference point where you would make that point. Not all of us are moderators or have been here for 9 months. I am just getting that Heather is a ‘voice of reason’ after only several days here, so for me her caveat is appreciated and gives me some context about who she is and where she comes from. I’m imagining Heather is not writing to or for the moderators specifically and perhaps not just for ongoing conversations with other long term members but for anyone… Read more »
Heather is a moderator as well. And both of us write to members new and old, purely for the discussion. Context is vital, you are right, but it is still concerning to me (and it’s only my opinion) that so many of the conversations wind up so fraught. All in the interest of moving forward, I do understand that, but often it is tiring to work so hard to be understood, on either side of things.
“I do understand that, but often it is tiring to work so hard to be understood, on either side of things.”
Amem to that Sister 🙂
And given how many amazing comments in support of men you’ve made, I’m sad you feel that you have to put that caveat there.
Its the result of backlashing. Despite popular belief the waking up one day and listening to a Rush Limbaugh podcast marathon is not the only way someone can become overly critical of feminism.
We just have to learn how to dial it back.
Julie and Heather (and other contributors and volunteers of tgmp) who count themselves feminists: I don’t have a problem with you. You are doing the good work of fighting for true equality. I am talking about the aggregate direct affects upon men of feminism. And the grouping of rules around which the “movement” in aggregate seems comfortable. One of those rules is that fighting for men is not “mandatory” to the movement but optional upon individual members or groups of members. The second rule seems to be that when a group of self-identifying feminists fight for anti-male change under the… Read more »
” What I do know is that they have advocated for changes that benefit men.” The link you point to is about changes that (purportedly and as you can see by the responses have not been experienced by men as doing so) benefit men and only in ways that are ancillary and perhaps unintended, i.e. they changes that were advocated were intended to benefit women (which in and of itself is a perfectly laudable goal). How often do women’s groups advocate for men’s rights when they might be at odds with or abridge women’s rights when clearly the men’s rights… Read more »
Alright I’ve a problem with the phrase “abridge rights.” No, of course, no equality-based organization is going to try to abridge rights. What they will (and should) be trying to do is abridge privileges. That’s something of a semantics issue, I know…but I think it’s important. Allowing for ‘financial abortion’ doesn’t mean abridging a woman’s rights…neither do any of the other things you’re talking about. They could abridge privileges, though. Now, as to the meat of your comment…I just don’t know. I’m not a political feminist. My feminism is very academic in nature. I’ve heard all the arguments that point… Read more »
Alright I’ve a problem with the phrase “abridge rights.” No, of course, no equality-based organization is going to try to abridge rights. What they will (and should) be trying to do is abridge privileges. That’s something of a semantics issue, I know…but I think it’s important.” Actually I think it is a great point and goes beyond semantics. “There have been feminists throughout history who have refused to get married, not because they were lesbians, but because they wanted to prove that a woman could be financially independent. In my own high-school feminist way, I did the same thing…when I’d… Read more »
My point was just that there are women out there who are aware that the idea that the man always has to pay is unequal and that they aren’t just letting it go. Anyway, what you’re saying about actually liking to pay, is all about choice. You want to fulfil a role traditionally held by men. That’s fine. If you’re with a woman who wants to fill a role traditionally held by women, that’s also fine. Past iterations of feminism have had issues demonizing women who chose to be stay-at-home mothers and fill the traditional ‘feminine’ roles. However, that has… Read more »
Interesting. I don’t know if my point is I want to fulfill the traditional role anymore then I want the woman to and anymore then many women I deal with to. The trick I think is to figure out how to embrace less traditional regimented roles (me work and pay and protect you stay at home and have kids and cook and clean) and still maintain some of the very core ways that men relate to each other that make one another feel good and reaffirm their identities as men/women. I just don’t think there is any reason to throw… Read more »
“Hopefully your second wave is a gentler one, I’d be happy to ride it if so.” – We’re into the third wave, now. And I don’t really agree with everything that’s labelled ‘third wave’ either. But thanks for the sentiment. 🙂 The examples you are giving are, I would suggest, about individuals with individual shortcomings. i.e. in the case of a woman who’s ‘independent’ when it suits her but wouldn’t help pay for an expensive dinner…that sounds like a person who is just really selfish. In the case of a mother who slags off the father because he ‘just had… Read more »
“People take and use all sorts of political ideologies and academic studies in all sorts of messed up ways. Darwinism, for example, got all sorts of twisted and screwed up as a way to justify viewing hunter-gatherer populations as primitive and less human. Now that’s not because evolutionary theory is wrong or bad itself…it’s because people who didn’t quite understand it used the bits they wanted in order to justify their screwed up actions and beliefs”
THis.
The examples you are giving are, I would suggest, about individuals with individual shortcomings. I guess you can call it my misfortune of what feminists I came across but I simply don’t think these things can just be written off as individual shortcomings. That makes it sound like things are fine except for a few renegade idiots, in short damage control meant to dodge implications of a larger problem. Especially when it seems like there is a gendered double standard when it comes to good and bad behavior among a lot of feminists. When men do something bad or when… Read more »
I’d have thought my comparing it to the use of Darwinism as a justification for systematic oppression based on ethnicity and systematic colonization of non-European regions would have clarified what I meant. 🙂 The examples he gave, specifically, seemed more about individuals, but that doesn’t mean that a misuse of feminist ideology can’t become a systematic problem. Now then, as for your experience with that double standard…I think that applies to feminist narratives surrounding domestic violence and rape. I think it can apply to feminist narratives surrounding parental custody. In general it can apply to feminist narratives surrounding men and… Read more »
One problem with arguments that I see among people about feminism and mens’ rights activism is that people will conflate feminist and woman as identities, and likewise MRA and man, as if all women are feminists, and all men are MRAs. That’s the problem with most arguments that revolve around some individual actor who supposedly represents one of these movements. No one person can represent either of them, and very often in these stories, the supposed representative never identifies him/herself as an MRA/feminist. It’s just presumed based on their behavior, which is interpreted by someone with an ax to grind… Read more »
“in the case of a woman who’s ‘independent’ when it suits her but wouldn’t help pay for an expensive dinner…that sounds like a person who is just really selfish” Well there must be a lottt of selfish women then 😐 That doesn’t begin to do that situation justice; it is a woman (and representative of the majority of single women I come across) that believes in equality when it suits her purposes. That isn’t an aberrant attitude, in my experience it is an epidemic one. I don’t suggest it is a feminist *position* I suggest it is how many women… Read more »
I feel pretty certain there are a lot of very selfish self serving people out there. That has nothing to with feminism or anything else I guess, but there are people who justify all kinds of shitty angry behavior on whatever they like.
I think you might be missing the point. You can’t just keep explaining away the kind of behavior on basic human ‘rationalizaiton’; you must see that a good part of the female population has adopted the parts of feminism that works for them and rejected the rest, which goes to the HEART of almost every ‘complaint’ or rebuttal here. Saying that people can use anything (the Bible, Mein Kampf) to justify behavior just becomes too easy a way to dismiss that very critical point. When (some) men say that women who dress provactively “asked for it” we don’t just reject… Read more »
Michael – being an independent woman and being a feminist are not synonymous. Independent women (like independent men) don’t need (or want) to depend on anyone else, man or woman, to take care of them. Thus, I think that most adult women consider themselves to be independent at some level, yet most of those same women don’t consider themselves to be feminists. Thus, they are likely enjoy/prefer (even expect) men to be the ones to do the asking out, the paying (at least initially), the opening doors, etc. Being independent and preferring/enjoying those things aren’t necessary contradictory, as they are… Read more »
“However, feminism rejects the gender roles concept;”
That would entirely depend on which feminists you speak with. the vast majority of those with political influence very much do NOT reject the gender role concept, they only reject the enforcement of gender roles upon women where they do not wish it to be enforced, and actually encourage gender role enforcement on men, where it best suits women (male as provider in custody/maintenance).
“After being married for 6 years, they chose, together, to raise a family. Now, if that’s not a product of feminism, I don’t know what is.”
There is no connection feminism and a couple making important decisions together.
Nobody could possibly be less influenced by feminism than me yet Mrs. Eric M. have always made important decisions together, as have my parents and their parents. There is no point in being married if you’re not going to discuss important things.
I was talking about that entire paragraph being a product of feminism…as in my mother stopping a career to have a kid. As in, she had a career at all and that’s a product of feminism. Also, the fact that they both decided to have kids, and weren’t just falling into default societal roles, is most certainly a product of feminism. I’m not saying prior to feminism all women were forced to have kids and none of them made a choice. What I am saying is that feminism made that choice more obvious, and more accessible to average, work-a-day people.… Read more »
I don’t want to make any assumptions about your parents specifically, but I’d point out that while in the situation you mentioned ‘the man’ may not have made his choice to have a family for the reasons you mentioned (family name, heirs, hands in the fields) but his choice to have a family resulted in only one decision for him; to support them. In cases like that the choice the man does not have is ‘Hey, I want kids, you work for the rest of your life supporting me and them and I’ll take care of them and the house”.… Read more »
“I was talking about that entire paragraph being a product of feminism…as in my mother stopping a career to have a kid. As in, she had a career at all and that’s a product of feminism.” There is abundant evidence that feminism had nothing to do with women’s choice to work. Women have been working for 100 years and longer. As evidence, my own great-grandmother had a “career” as early as the 1920s, such that she retired with a pension, just like her OLDER sister who started her career during World War I. Women have had the choice to work… Read more »
Thanks, Justin for this thought-provoking article. I wanted to share just a few thoughts. The issue of men struggling to find a voice (#4 in your list) is an issue close to my heart and one I frequently see in my therapy work with men—in particular, the struggle to find a voice that is allowed freedom from the grip of our masculine, internalized restrictions. Sadly, too many men continue to remain estranged from their emotional needs, and these men often appear confused when I suggest that they actually have a rich inner world that is going unnoticed, one that consists… Read more »
Justin, Your thoughtful essay dovetails with my analysis of how feminism has distilled in the collective mindset of Baby Boomer men. Here’s an excerpt from my book, “Generation Reinvention: How Boomers Today Are Changing Business, Marketing, Aging and the Future.” (2010) Boomer men were and are widely supportive of feminism, especially those aspects of the social movement focused on economic equality and full participation in institutional society. Many recall early encounters with feminism during their teen years: perhaps a polite request not to open the door for a young woman passing by, or a more vociferous denunciation by being called… Read more »
Hello Everyone,
Just letting everyone know that we’re a couple moderators short this week. If your comment ends up in moderation for an extended period chances are that’s the reason. Please have patience. Thanks.
I know that I’m coming WAY late to this discussion, but I’m super confused about what’s going on here. Sure, there are a TON of problems with feminism, but does that mean they have to be brought up every single time that feminism is discussed? Is it really so hard to accept that feminism served a legitimate purpose and has benefited society? Maybe this is an offensive comparison (and I apologize if anyone undergoing treatment is offended), but I think that analogizing feminism to chemo therapy is very apt. There are extreme problems with it, but the pervasive misogynistic attitudes… Read more »
When someone starts describing the beneficial effects like losing ones hair (so they don’t need to shave now) or the constant retching and nausea (great for weight loss), are we allowed to speak up then? What about when they start talking about the good effects, like making your teeth whiter or strengthening the immune system? Because that is precisely what this article did.
Mark, I respectfully disagree. I honestly believe that this piece falls firmly in the “it cured the cancer” category. I will happily posit that feminism may not have a place in modern society. I will gladly stipulate that there are myriad problems with feminism. If you look at my other comments on this site, you will see that I genuinely question the continued existence of Gender Studies as a field of academic inquiry, and furthermore condemn their methods. But “First Wave” feminism also began in the 1800s. Is there serious doubt that it played a part in “creating more equal… Read more »
Yes, each of those points I have debated. https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/five-ways-feminism-helps-men/comment-page-2/#comment-157659 But I suppose the first can sorta be seen from the point of view the author is trying to push… after all, for the supposedly oppressed to transfer to the position of oppressor, one must inevitably get closer to parity. Is this a benefit to men? To believe it is, we must first reject the (gender) feminist notion that men seek to oppress women (I’m ok with this, but to believe feminists will in order to honestly claim this is a benefit for men… for most, that’s hard to believe given… Read more »
I think it is much more accurate to say that a fair amount of misogyny and oppression rose out of role models that were NOT based in oppression but on biological necessity. Otherwise almost every culture ever developed would not have risen around it. Biology IS destiny. Women’s bodies and therefore brains and drives were based on reproducing and caring for the young. Men’s bodies were built for strength and to protect/provide for women while they carried, bore, and cared for children. That is indisputable and how all societies (minus the 2 or 3 you can quote from Wiki) were… Read more »
Feminism doesn’t believe that men oppress women, it believes the patriarchy oppressed women (and some would argue, it also oppressed men in some ways too). The system itself placed women in a role with less power than the role it placed men in. Isn’t it best if we can all be free from being placed in pre-decided roles altogether so we can all have the same opportunities?
Feminism doesn’t believe that men oppress women, it believes the patriarchy oppressed women (and some would argue, it also oppressed men in some ways too). If that’s the case then why do so many feminists blanketly label all men as oppressors and all women as oppressed? And of course there is the very prevalent thought that men cannot be oppressed because of gender and even when they do grudgingly admit that men can be harmed in any (except systemic) way there is still a change they will somehow try to say its a side effect of what’s happening to women.… Read more »
Very well put. I have thought the same things. I’ll have to think about the “feminism as chemo” analogy. Interesting.
Mike L: I think your analogy is almost perfect, with one possible exception and this coming from a woman, Feminism didn’t cure the cancer , it simply transferred it to men and in some ways children. So while the person who was sick doesn’t have cancer anymore, she simply passed it on to her child OR her husband/brother/father/uncle.
“Look — I just don’t understand — what exactly is the negative talking about feminism as a movement accomplishing?” I think there is a level of feminism = good so anything under the banner holds more weight in passing. Calling into question the negative aspects would actually increase trust for the movement I think. Look at the common complaints of feminism in the comment section, so many find it hard to trust the movement entirely because of a lack of feminists themselves calling out the negative feminists such as the gynocentric-gone-crazy (gendered laws which ignore or harm men, gynocentric alone… Read more »
Archy, I appreciate your dialogue on this topic.
The only think I can say is that we will try to talk more about the issues — both positive and negative. But it’s similar to what I’m trying to get all our writers to do about political issues — don’t bash the other political party, or the individuals in the party, but instead talk about why you think the issues themselves are important and what needs to change.
Is pointing to damaging or hostile policies considered bashing? If I point to a school whose women centre is spouting rhetoric to try and deny a men’s centre, can I not point out 1: the opposition is clearly an example of discrimination against men? and 2: that the rhetoric is both hostile towards men and, in many case, entirely untrue. 2a: that the rhetoric is based off of many of feminism’s claims?
As long as you are talking about a specific issue and and arguing in good faith, it’s fine. The problem we have is that it becomes obvious that people’s whole goal is to discredit the entire feminist movement. And that’s it — every argument they make, pushing their own agenda. We did not build this platform so that other people can use it for their turf wars. And it’s not allowed in our comment policy.
Also, commenters who help create a positive environment for everyone are more apt to be heard and given the benefit of the doubt.
We did not build this platform so that other people can use it for their turf wars. And it’s not allowed in our comment policy. However, I’m sure you can understand that the various commenters here feel aggrieved because it was only until relatively recently that this policy actually was fairly implemented. I mean, there are still plenty of posts by Marcotte, Schwyzer, Futrelle, and others, who clearly used TGMP to bash MRM groups, calling us misogynists… among other things. This doesn’t justify a backlash, but it does contextualize it. Men in the MRM have long memories and bitter experiences.… Read more »
I do get the context, Zek. As the publisher, I take responsibility for that context. Everyone here has been invited to write for us. We ask that all the time. Write about your experience, add your voice to the complete, multi-siced, cultural context we are forming here. I just replied to Random_Stranger on a different thread. I’m ok with approaching it this way: Now, whether feminism has been on the whole, good or bad for the well-being of men is up for debate and worth exploring. It informs the direction of the men’s movement -are we as a gender able… Read more »
“We do not allow negative generalizations of groups of people based on their beliefs. So, we do not allow critiques of either individuals nor groups based on their religious beliefs. Nor do we allow criticisms of groups based on nationality — you can say “In France we tend to…” but not “All Frenchmen are…” We encourage people to criticize political issues but not individuals or groups based on their political beliefs” So let me understand; you can and will post an article that discusses the merits of the political issues of a particular group, feminists, but then discourage, moderate and… Read more »
Exactly. If someone wrote a post talking about the how they see any organization, movement or group as something that benefited them and the people they identified with, and men in particular, we would certainly consider publishing it. But we would not consider publishing an article that bashed those same organizations. Look — I just don’t understand — what exactly is the negative talking about feminism as a movement accomplishing? What have you, personally, accomplished with it Michael? I can tell you a ton of things we’ve accomplished with The Good Man Project — reached over 4 million people from… Read more »
“Exactly. If someone wrote a post talking about the how they see any organization, movement or group as something that benefited them and the people they identified with, and men in particular, we would certainly consider publishing it. But we would not consider publishing an article that bashed those same organizations.” That isn’t even splitting hairs Lisa it is downright dishonest. I did not ask to have an article which attempted to “derail” feminism published. YOU published an article that attempted to explain 5 different ways in which tat group has benefited men. I refuted each and every one of… Read more »
I am not going to respond to someone who accuses me of dishonesty.
You can either come to this discussion as equals. Or not at all.
“Look — I just don’t understand — what exactly is the negative talking about feminism as a movement accomplishing? ” Accountability. It’s the same reason many rape hysteria groups keep talking about toxic masculinity, to try and hold men, all men (or at least all who don’t reject their own masculinity) accountable. In both case, there are in fact members of the group that commit the acts which are attempting to have accountability assigned, the difference is, men, or at least the vast majority of them, despise rape and rapists, and do what they can to stop it, in most… Read more »
“As long as women still feel the pulls of gender roles, men are forced by the laws of physics into an equal and opposing position”
As long as women have the options of any gender role they want, men are forced by the laws of physics into whatever position suits whatever woman at whatever time, even the same woman at different times. It is not the ‘pull of gender roles’ that is the issue, it is the insistence that it all be about ‘choice’ and female choice at that.
I am trying to figure out why a post I made refuting Justice Casio’s ‘Five Ways’ was moderated and removed.
We do not allow negative generalizations of groups of people based on their beliefs. So, we do not allow critiques of either individuals nor groups based on their religious beliefs. Nor do we allow criticisms of groups based on nationality — you can say “In France we tend to…” but not “All Frenchmen are…” We encourage people to criticize political issues but not individuals or groups based on their political beliefs. Nor to we allow criticisms of groups based on affiliations with what people do — we do not allow negative generalizations of “all teachers”, for example, or “all union… Read more »
We actually are very conscious of not allowing generalized criticism of men. But we talk about men — the good and the bad, because we are a site with discussions of men at its core. We are not a site with discussions of feminism as its core, although — like with all issues that our audience feels strongly about one way or another — we do seek to better understand it.
Why am I being moderated to death for simply posting comments about some of the harm against men feminism has caused even when I state the proper disclaimers to identify the subsets of feminism I am talking about?
John, I found one that was not approved and approved it. It sounded like it was the one you are talking about — not generalizing, proper disclaimers.
Thanks Lisa for the very quick response. I’m sorry to be bending your ear so much lately.
I will endeavor to stick to the letter and spirit of the posting standards.
I wish there were a way for comments to come up hidden stating “under moderation” with a highlight of the offending section & an edit button.
Understood. We are short on moderators these days because — believe it or not — it’s a REALLY hard job. Thanks for your patience.
There have been many of those in comments and even entire articles, such as those on “rape culture” and “the patriarchy.”
If a new leaf is being turned,, I’m very glad to know we won’t be subject to those generalizations any more. Applause!!
We really have a full team of editors checking and double-checking for triggers and generalizations in ways we didn’t in the past.
“We actually are very conscious of not allowing generalized criticism of men.”
Applause!!!
Lisa, I am glad to hear that. But, this sounds like a new leaf is being turned because many comments regarding the so-called “rape culture” and the “patriarchy” and even articles were/are generalized criticisms of men. I won’t miss those.
It doesn’t make any sense to talk about modern men without talking about feminism. That movement has had the single largest impact on men than any other. To generalize about men and not generalize about feminism cripples the discussion. Also, to allow positive generalizations of feminism and to not allow negative generalizations of it cripples the discussion.
Well feminism as a belief system differs person to person, to some it means equality for all, to others its equality for WOMEN only and a few it’s probably female supremacy. Would you run an article the 5 ways (insert any group that has done good and bad) etc helps men/women with positive generalizations about those groups where some of their actions are seen as negative. You see feminism get’s this good reputation on all of these points but the truth seems to be quite a lot of feminist power/lobbying has doubts over it. As many have said things like… Read more »
I do understand why people are confused, and we are going to think carefully about how best to approach this issue in the future while still talking about it. I understand the concerns. I think most people here would simply like to move past where we were into a new eqalitarians for equality place. But we’re not quite sure what that looks like yet.
Wow, Archy. This is why I love reading your responses. They put into words more eloquently what I feel. And you’ve done it again, my friend. Very succint. It’s what I feel as well. Like I said, in an earlier comment, I believe in the egalitarian side. It exists, yes. Feminism is something I don’t object to as a whole. What I object to is invalidation of its other side. Particularly because I was rejected by this other side harshly due to membership in the oppressive class in their eyes. Regardless of my struggles. Archy: “You may notice in these… Read more »
“Take all of those points. If there was a group that was not called feminism — would you want those things? For yourself? For others? I would be really interested to know what you thought.” I’m uncertain why there needs to be a group in order to want these things? If there wasn’t group at all, could I not want these things? What if there are two or more groups? My problem here is that these particular things are being attributed to feminism without justification. Sure, some feminists may believe these ideals, but to claim these ideals are “because” of… Read more »
I don’t think that anyone was insinuating that they were ONLY because of feminism. And it wasn’t even meant as a “you should feel grateful” as an explanation. But I understand your concerns Mark. I’d personally prefer to stand by those ideals and not even take credit for them.
Onward.
“I don’t think that anyone was insinuating that they were ONLY because of feminism”
Actually, his opening line very much insinuates it:
“Can’t think of a single reason why men should support feminism? Here are five”
If these ideals are not feminist exclusive, why should we support feminism because of them? Also keep this phrase in mind when you read the bolded beginnings of each of his points. It basically comes down to:
Men should support feminism because feminism …gave, promoted, provided, etc.
I just looked at the article “Dad wars, you say? Are dads are winning.” on GMP and started to wonder. If feminism really provided a model for constantly changing gender roles and feminists taught us it could happen then why are men who are the primary caregivers to their children not as well respected as women in the workforce? If I believed that it’s possible to change the gender roles for myself, wouldn’t I then believe that it’s possible for others to do so as well. Every woman in the workforce would necessarily believe that men could choose fatherhood. Every… Read more »
This reminds me of a ‘debate’ I had about 10 years ago while watching a show you all might remember called ‘Alley McBeal’. Two of the characters worked in a law firm together and eventually got married. Then they got pregnant. The man assumed his wife would quit and take care of the baby. She informed him that she planned to continue her career and that they would have to both be full time parents. He rebelled against the thought as he demanded a classic role for himself. Unfortunately instead of exploring this intelligently, they decided to make him seem… Read more »
In Illinois fathers rights activists fought to criminalize interference with child visitation. It was vigorously opposed by the feminist lobby here. Their reasoning was that it would prevent mothers from keeping children away from unfit or abusive fathers. I think their real objection was that women would have to prove that the father was unfit or abusive to deny him visitation or force supervised visitation. Women should be the ultimate deciders after all they are more ethical and would never knowingly keep a man’s children from him out of spite or to obtain some financial advantage. I’m being sarcastic.
“In Illinois fathers rights activists fought to criminalize interference with child visitation. It was vigorously opposed by the feminist lobby here. Their reasoning was that it would prevent mothers from keeping children away from unfit or abusive fathers.” But this is the same logic that is used across the board, including requiring women to at least *inform* the father that she planned on aborting his child. It is entirely antithetical to our justice system to deny any group of people justice or civil rights blamed on their potential or presumed innocence. This is profiling writ as large as you can… Read more »
It seems like much of the criticism about feminism here suggests an all-or-nothing approach, that you can’t accept any particular aspects of feminist ideas without accepting ALL versions of it. Like, somehow NO part of feminism can be mutually beneficial to men and women because some strands of feminism act at the expense of men. Like all parts of feminism are therefore tainted by the extremists, somehow. Besides reminding me of a religious point of view (any compromise with Satan is just playing into Satan’s hands), it also reminds me of the anticommunism in the U.S. during the Cold War.… Read more »
Seems to me you are doing to the comments here precisely what you accuse them of, just with the use of “much” in the opening line, and the lack of any particular comment being singled out as a way to dodge criticism. Your last paragraph in particular gives me this impression. But here’s my response non-the-less. The problem is the double standard of monolithic generalization that is being perpetrated. We are being told to accept that feminism (as a monolithic group) has done these good things, but when we point to examples how that assertion is wrong, instead of acknowledging… Read more »
If a powerful social movement had discriminated against you from birth, you might feel differently.
Isn’t this just an argument against communism? I mean if communism wasn’t so terrible to the people under it, we would have accepted these ideas more willingly. Likewise if the big F wasn’t so terrible to men under it, we’d be more inclined to give it the benefit of the doubt.
“This article, for example, isn’t saying that these are the only ways feminism has helped men, or that feminism hasn’t potentially also harmed men in other ways. As much as feminism isn’t a monolith, there are some general statements that can be made about feminism as a social ideology, and the ones Justin listed are part of that. It’s speaking in general terms, but it’s not a generalization”
Ok, fine. But then why can’t we talk in general terms about how feminism has harmed men???
More specifically will an article titled “10 ways feminism has harmed men” ever be published here?
I mean judging by the precedent set here our article would have WAYore concrete data lol
I have to admit he has a point folks, if it’s fine to generalize on the good that feminism has done for men then we need to discuss the harm feminism has done for men as well. Unless you want to specify and say certain feminists under the banner of feminism helped men, which would separate them from other feminists under the feminist banner who harmed men (by what others here are saying). I have no troubles seeing an article discuss the negatives or positives, as long as both are labelled generalizations or specified in some way. Considering feminism is… Read more »
In their own words:
“Gives us equal partners”
http://londonfeministnetwork.org.uk/what-weve-done/letter-writing-campaigns/we-object-to-plans-to-grant-anonymity-to-rape-defendants
“Provides a model for consciously changing gender roles”
http://web.archive.org/web/20070708213232/http://michnow.org/jointcustody507.htm
http://www.now.org/nnt/03-97/father.html
“Provokes us to consider the many identities that yoke us, sometimes in competing directions”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/womens-prisons-should-all-close-within-a-decade-7240659.html
“Encourages us to speak in our own voices” —
http://thetyee.ca/News/2012/05/03/SFU-Mens-Centre/
“Makes us all more free”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/659dkrod.asp
You may be misunderstanding me. I wondered how it would be possible to find more people like myself to get in positions of leadership in feminism to change the system. The ultimate roadblock is going to be the ones in leadership that rail against your ideas one feminism. You wouldn’t be the first feminist that’s been treated like a traitor because you went against the mainstream portion of the movement. Either they have to recognize the error of their ways, be removed, or fade from the forefront over time. A lot of women who are feminist (or consider themselves such)… Read more »
“Gives us equal partners” — Feminism is not about equality, it is about privilege for women, and persecution of men. There is nothing “equal” about a man and a woman who step into a family court, or a criminal court, or any government institution. Or a college, or a school, or a hospital. “Provides a model for consciously changing gender roles” — Feminism is above all else a movement to marginalize and criminalize masculinity. Even when a masculin trait is adopted by a woman, it is repressed (for example, 20% of children who are compelled to use Ritalin/amphetamine are women).… Read more »
Hitting on all cylinders!
““Encourages us to speak in our own voices” — Silencing criticism and preventing discussion is the heart of the feminist movement. There is even a lexicon of terms used to enforce this kind of censorship, such as “mansplaining”, “man facts”, and “step up/step back”.”
This one was so pertinent! I’d even expand on it bringing in the topic of rigged gender studies that don’t use random groups and gender studies that showed results counter to the feminist agenda being expunged. That’s not encouraging us to speak in our own voices!
What personality killing medication in particular?
Ritalin and amphetamine. About 4 million boys are currently cumpelled to take psychotropic personality suppressing (=killing long term) drugs as a condition of attending public school. The vast majority are boys, although some girls with “masculin” behavior are also targetted for personaility destruction. Typical “crimes” that result in enforced drug regime include drawing pictures of “masculin” objects (tanks, Jedi knights) and being too energetic in class.
I am on amphetamine for Adult ADD, I haven’t found my personality changing at all. It’s helped me with focus issues, I am more productive and my quality of life has increased. What do you mean by personality suppressing? They are used to increase dopamine levels in the brain to normal levels to help limit impulsive behaviour and major attention problems, but the baseline personality should still be there. But like all medication it probably affects each person differently, some of the anti-depressants I’ve tried made me feel numb and screwed my personality up a bit. Just wanted to let… Read more »
Are you a young boy whose physiology and personality are still developing? Sorry Archy, but think about it, these drugs are restricted in Australia for a reason. In Canada, they are restricted by age (under a certain age can’t be prescribed them, though they are being prescribed.).
They’re restricted due to being stimulants and they can be abused when used in higher dosages. I was on ritalin as a child though with only positive effects. I think it’s a case by case issue, some will be ok with the drug, others may not.
“Makes us all more free”.
Free from what? Too many self-identified feminists lean toward Marxian-influenced communitarian politics. However much I favor gender egalitarianism, I will not drink the Marxian Kool-Aid, however much diluted.
To everyone who is saying that feminism actually wants to reinforce old gender norms, I say this: Join me in the third wave and post-third wave. The water’s fine. Seriously, though, yes a lot of feminism through the second wave failed to fully grasp the limitations of traditional gender norms for both men and women. A lot of the older policies and political movements reflect this. It is changing. Who do you all think is fighting for women to be able to occupy combat roles in the military, for example? It’s feminists. Feminists who want women to be able to… Read more »
I’m pretty sure the third wave and post-third wave have some problems of their own Heather. Slutwalks and women’s studies groups posting profiles of men on their campus as potential rapists to “raise awareness” come from the third wave and post. Moreover, it’s hard to embrace one less-flawed form of Feminism when her big sister Second-Wave is instituting primary aggressor laws, refusing to fix VAWA, promoting discrimination in DV assistance as well as rape counseling, and generally advocating for their own interests (read: rich, White, hetero) no matter who suffers — men, people of color, children, the poor, immigrants, religious… Read more »
Zek, I said that there are valid criticisms of all forms of feminism. I specifically said it wasn’t perfect. My point is that it’s changing specifically with regards to adhering to traditional gender norms.
Okay, I agree it is changing. That’s a good thing. But that still doesn’t change anything for us in the here and now. I’m not going to stop naming, challenging, and speaking out against serious problems caused by Feminism/Feminists, nor the questionable issues undertaken by various Feminist groups and individuals, just because change is coming. I’m sorry, but I don’t have the patience to wait for Feminism to change. Many men don’t even have the luxury of waiting for change. And we cannot assume that it’ll change for the better. I need to be proactive, just like the rest of… Read more »
I didn’t say sit around and wait. And I didn’t say stop critiquing it. I’m saying, when you critique it, make sure those critiques are accurate. And it’s inaccurate to say that feminism is about reinforcing old gender norms.
I’m not saying you did. Not at all. I just think your attitude is not going to be productive for people like me, and the rest of the commenters here, in helping to fuel further change in the realm of gender equality. It’s a function of your own privilege to be less insistent than we are being, and to question the commenters here as to the accuracy of their critiques. Moreover, you may believe that Feminism isn’t about reinforcing old gender norms. But for many men, that’s the net effect. Men are still required to be disposable, still required to… Read more »
“It’s a function of your own privilege to be less insistent than we are being”
Nail. Head. Thank you.
Zek writes: That could just be a f”unction of my confirmation bias, or limited experience, but then I see that millions of people — and not just men! — recognizing the same problems I do, and I realize that it just ain’t right anymore.” Good point. From what I have read on fathers and families press releases nearly half the members and board members are women. Glenn Sacks stepped down and was replaced by Rita Fuerst Adams as executive director. Does anybody have the membership by gender of NOW for example of dues-paying members? I sincerely doubt it is anywhere… Read more »
“Wasn’t perfect” is a distortion and a gross understatement. It is affirmatively biased against men and pursuing a discriminatory legislative strategy to deprive men of their civil rights in many cases involving alleged crimes against women.
“I say this: Join me in the third wave and post-third wave.” No thanks, feminism had it’s chances. The men’s movement is stepping up to plate now, and so I say this: Get your house in order and work with us on terms we deem acceptable, or it will get steamrolled. “Who do you all think is fighting for women to be able to occupy combat roles in the military, for example? It’s feminists.” Is that fight still going by feminists, or just the individual female soldiers that want to fight? Last I was aware, feminism got the combat pay… Read more »
“Last I was aware, feminism got the combat pay for women, and got the access to promotions that combat entails, and that was good enough for them. What about registration and the draft?”
I’d like to see one area where feminism has ever fought for not only te same advantages that men have but also the same hardships and responsibilities.
Please prove me wrong 😉
Oh for goodness sake. We’ve had discussions about the whole draft issue. The reason women aren’t included in the draft IS NOT because feminist organizations weren’t trying to get women included.
See Nick, Mostly’s piece on it. Early April I believe.
Feel free to provide a link. As to heather and “oh for goodness sake”,You claimed feminism has been fighting to get women into combat roles. Can you please explain to me what feminists have done toward this end since succeeding at getting women combat pay and promotion opportunity? I merely pointed out the draft as an example, and it seems that’s the ONLY thing in my post you felt the need to, or comfortable(?) taking issue with. In fact, I began by asking if the fight to get women into combat was still going on, to which you didn’t answer,… Read more »
Submitted on 2012/04/12 at 12:26 pm | In reply to Ginkgo. Quoting Nick, Mostly, 1) “We have people making assumptions about NOW’s position on the draft when even the most cursory Google search would reveal their position. And if you really cared to know, they actually joined with the ACLU in Rostker v Goldberg which attempted to find a gendered draft unconstitutional and, as President Carter proposed, have women included in the draft. They also filed an amicus brief in Miller v Albright supporting the petition that the requirements of 8 U.S.C. § 1409(a) were unconstitutional because they disadvantaged fathers.”… Read more »
Thank you Julie and Nick, mostly.
“Using that stereotype Congress passed a law automatically granting citizenship to illegitimate children of U.S. citizen mothers, but denying it to children of U.S. citizen fathers, unless the father first proves he is indeed the father and documents his commitment to care for the child. Such a statute should have been held to be a violation of equal protection under VMI given that the government has not and could not advance an “exceedingly persuasive justification” for it. That’s not just some token nod to men, that’s an attempt by NOW to have the Supreme Court invalidate a law that disadvantages… Read more »
It’s great that NOW took that stance. It’s great that you can post your ideas.
However, NOW and other political self-identifying orgs have take an about-face on their support of men since this lawsuit.
I detailed some of the worst talking points, unfortunately I can not post my ideas as I am being moderated to death on this board for no reason I can fathom.
I did not use broad generalizations of feminism or any type of stereotypes or attacks, yet for whatever reason my comments keep getting deleted.
I too have been ‘moderated to death’ John and after making what I’d consider some well considered and written replies to other posts here.
It really is disappointing when people choose to dispute an example and ignore the point. NOW’s position on the draft, that is over 30 years old and established before women were allowed into combat roles, and so were denied combat pay and promotion opportunities, was a position attempting to get these things for women. But the fact is, since women got access to these things (pay and promotion), what has NOW or any feminist organization done to challenge the gender discrimination of the draft and/or registry. Sure, it’s easy to say “supreme court ruled, nothing can be done”, but that’s… Read more »
Thank you for providing this. I think it’s interesting that they failed in both cases, perhaps this really was just a token nod that they didn’t put much effort into at all. I guess the more telling question is, where have they fought for men and succeeded?
Because half-hearted fighting just so you can say you did something isn’t nearly enough,. In fact, that’s worse than doing nothing.
How do we know it was half hearted? You assume that, and I suspect you want that to be true. What I’m sensing is that there isn’t much anyone can offer to you that would be evidence of positive movement for men. So even when issues are brought up, you decide they aren’t good enough, when we don’t know the reasons for the failing. It would be worth both of us investigating in terms of history.
Take care.
“The reason women aren’t included in the draft IS NOT because feminist organizations weren’t trying to get women included.”
Does this sentence make any sense? Reading it is a lot like having some one ask you to hold water.
Using a little free license I would re-write the sentence you are confused by to read:
“women were not included in the draft *despite* NOW’s best efforts to have the male-only draft overturned (and replaced with gender-neutral draft or the draft thrown out), not because NOW fought to maintain a male-only draft.”
1: Incorrect. ” it means that our partners in these relationships have equal power.” What it actually means is women have AT LEAST as much power as men. What you are doing is going over the “what men have” checklist and seeing women have all those things, and saying “look, they are the same”. What you aren’t doing is completeing the comparison and checking if men have all the things women have, and that’s where feminism failed. The single sided gyno centrism of gender feminists have only succeeded in reversing the dynamic. 2:Gender feminism may have promoted these idea’s, may… Read more »
I dispute feminism’s definition as a movement for women’s equality. So therefore I have to dispute this article. Feminism is about securing women’s release from their traditional obligations while maintaining their traditional benefits. And the way you maintain women’s traditional benefits is ensuring that men maintain THEIR traditional obligations. So any benefit that men get from feminism is incidental, not intentional. 1. You are not equal partners if you are still expected to earn more money, pay for the majority of items and provide physical security. You also are viewed by the court system as inferior in terms of parental… Read more »
The claim in the article that feminism has helped men and its supporting argument are completely hollow. 1) Gives us equal partners—-Absolutely false. Women generally go for superior men for partnering, and after that fails may opt for equals, but never the inferior men. So equal partnership among genders is not found in natures. 2) Provides a model for consciously changing gender roles—- The changes in the gender roles have been brought in by the economic and technological changes rather than any ideology like feminism. Any ideology cannot work without favorable economic conditions. 3) Provokes us to consider the many… Read more »
This article is making some general statements about how a social/political movement has done some positive things. General statements, in themselves aren’t necessarily problematic. This article, for example, isn’t saying that these are the only ways feminism has helped men, or that feminism hasn’t potentially also harmed men in other ways. As much as feminism isn’t a monolith, there are some general statements that can be made about feminism as a social ideology, and the ones Justin listed are part of that. It’s speaking in general terms, but it’s not a generalization A generalization, on the other hand, takes a… Read more »
It’s absolutely a generalization, an inaccurate one at that. It claims feminism has helped “men.”
I’m a man; so, that must include me, and every other male – since he didn’t say some men, and claim that it was referring to men in general. So, yes, it is a generalization – an inaccurate and negative one.
Justin implied in a previous comment that his article was a response to some of the criticism feminism receives in the comments here. I suppose my problem with the list (and lists in general) is that it oversimplifies a complex issue. Every ideology affects people in different ways, and to side-steps the ways an ideology negatively affects a group does everyone a disservice. The only way we can honestly understand how anything impacts society is by looking at all the ways it affects people’s lives, not just the ways that favor our opinions. Likewise, while I understand that few people… Read more »
Well first, this isn’t a thesis, it’s a short article. I mean really you could teach entire seminars and write entire books about the myriad of ways feminism has affected men throughout the decades. So yes, it is a simplification of a very complex issue, but I read it as a response to some very specific comments. It’s not meant to be comprehensive, but rather a jumping off point. I read the first line to mean something like – Feminism isn’t just what you think, it’s done these good things for men. Not that this list was exhaustive, and not… Read more »
Heather, as I said before, I understood the intent. I just think that it is the wrong response to the comments Justin wrote about. To use my Christian/gay analogy again, I think it is wrong to respond to gay people’s criticism of Christian ideology by saying what good things Christianity does for gay people. That response side-steps the complaints instead of addressing them. To get back on point, saying “Feminism isn’t just what you think” implies that the people making complaints do not understand feminism or are mistaken in their understanding. Yet could not the same be true of those… Read more »
Well said, sir!
To use your Christian/gay ideology, though…Christianity itself, as an ideology doesn’t actually hurt gay people. There are, actually, plenty of gay Christians. It’s only some denominations that hurt gay people…and really Christians get painted (unfairly) with an anti-gay brush much of the time. As for whether the people who defend and identify as feminists are just misunderstanding…well here’s the thing, that goes back to something Justin said about how the people who identify with a certain identity are the ones who define it. Yes, as I’ve mentioned, there also needs to be recognition of the times that group has screwed… Read more »
” I read the first line to mean something like – Feminism isn’t just what you think, it’s done these good things for men”
Not for nothin, that’s like telling the Marlboro man what good cigarettes did for him. You’re not going to convince anyone except yourself lol
“Also, negative generalizations are often much more harmful than positive ones. I know, theoretically, they should both be treated the same…but that’s just not how it works. ” Promoting double standards that happen to support your ideology, I thought you were better then that. We’ve had discussions about generalizations, about the use of and need for quantifying with “all” or “most”, where I said when someone says feminist are mate haters, it is not “ALL” feminist, but feminists (with room for exeptions). You argued this was unacceptable because it wasn’t clear enough. I’m disappointed your changing your tune now that… Read more »
“This article, for example, isn’t saying that these are the only ways feminism has helped men, or that feminism hasn’t potentially also harmed men in other ways”
Why did you use the word “potentially” to qualify the harm that feminism has caused men (especially considering all of the men in here posting comments that it HAS harmed us) but you don’t use it to qualify the ways it has “helped” us (especially considering all of the men in here posting comments saying that it HASN’T helped us)?
Do you get to decide how things affect men? Or do we?
@ HeatherN “If I hear an inaccurate generalization about a group I’m part of, I’m less likely to take issue than if I hear a negative one.” I was wondering when you’d join the discussion. It’s more fun and often enlightening when you participate. What if the characterization was all white women are exceptionally smart? It may be complimentary to the group named, but simultaneously denigrates the other groups. When he says feminism taught is this. He immediately negates any other influences that may have caused a person to have arrived at that decision. Many individuals on this thread seem… Read more »
Well first, thanks. 🙂 And secondly, I still maintain that this article has general statements, not generalizations. But as to the rest…I think it’s all about the subtleties of the author’s meaning. That’s why I usually try to ask a clarifying question before going on the offensive. When I read the statement he makes about ‘feminism taught,’ for example, I don’t think he’s saying feminism is the ONLY ideology that teaches these things. He may be saying that these ideas originated with feminism…or that feminism has made them more popular. But I don’t read what he’s saying as meaning that… Read more »
@ HeatherN
“but rather that feminism is the ideology that can take credit for either starting or popularizing these things”
I think the civil rights struggle actually started and popularized the idea that people don’t need to follow society’s proscribed role for them. Just like suffrage for male slaves made people face the question why could a poor, black man vote, but not a rich, white woman set the stage for women’s suffrage.
I was talking about all the different bits on the list. And, as I said…”popularise” it too. Feminism took the idea of not adhering to prescribed social norms and they were the first to apply that to gender. But that’s really besides the point anyway. In addition to what I said, I’d also like to add that there is a big difference between making a general statement (good or bad) about feminism and making a generalisation (god or bad) about feminists. Discussing an ideology in general terms is much less priblematic than generalising about the people who adhere to that… Read more »
Feminists believe and support feminism; separating them is nonsensical. You are trying to divert attention from the errors in this article of inaccurate generalisations by falling back on a tactic of claiming personal attacks. No-one has been threatened with harm, only their ideas and beliefs have been called into question. Your appeal to protection is,sadly, a hallmark of feminists when their debating strategies fail. When people believe something and someone disagrees with them, that is not a personal attack – its called debate. What is being criticised is Feminism and people who believe in the inaccuracies of the article. Feminists… Read more »
In addition to what I said, I’d also like to add that there is a big difference between making a general statement (good or bad) about feminism and making a generalisation (god or bad) about feminists. Discussing an ideology in general terms is much less priblematic than generalising about the people who adhere to that ideology. And again, it comes down to that sense of judgement and personal attacks. But things get hairy at that point because it seems the actions and words of the people that make up feminism (aka feminists) are being pushed aside at select times. Feminists… Read more »
I don’t see the treatment of the men’s rights movement on the GMP that you’re suggesting is the case, Danny. I do see a lot of feminism-bashing in the comments for this piece, however. Your point about the difference between white supremacists is an interesting one. I have always been so repulsed by them that I never looked at their theory. Maybe it would be interesting. But what is more interesting to me, and relevant to our lives, is the effect of the theory on how many people act, particularly white racists who don’t actively ally with such groups and… Read more »
I don’t see the treatment of the men’s rights movement on the GMP that you’re suggesting is the case, Danny. I do see a lot of feminism-bashing in the comments for this piece, however. In this piece, certainly not. However there are past posts here by Marcotte (and Futrelle as well I think) that do just that. But what is more interesting to me, and relevant to our lives, is the effect of the theory on how many people act, particularly white racists who don’t actively ally with such groups and wouldn’t be able to quote their theories, but rely… Read more »
Justin, before you call it feminism-bashing, look into the many issues raised in the comments. Bashing implies the real experiences of men who have suffered the ill-effects of feminism are being untruthful. If GMP is really a place for men to share their experiences then, when they do, shouldn’t we all listen and consider what they have to say? Even if it challenges our own view of the world?
Feminism has done some fine things for women; its benefit and applicability to men is in grave doubt. There is evidence in many legislatures, if you look into it.
@ Justin
“I do see a lot of feminism-bashing in the comments for this piece,”
I took issue with this line also because it implies an unfair criticism; however, I’ve seen many people, like myself, provide very specific repudiations of your thesis.
I see the odd bit of feminism-bashing, but mostly I just see feminism-critics and from what they are saying I say it’s 100% warranted. You generalize about the positives feminism has done (done by feminists regardless of type) yet you take offense to negative generalizations of what feminism has done for men (done by feminists regardless of type). So which is it? Feminism is a monolith when it’s for good, or do you mean Some parts of feminism (by some feminists) have benefitted men? It’s funny that quite a few feminists I see have NO trouble negatively generalizing about the… Read more »
I wrote an article about negative depictions of men in media that was rejected.
To my mind tgmp is steering away from talking about the many ways political and cultural forces harm all men.
“his article, for example, isn’t saying that these are the only ways feminism has helped men, or that feminism hasn’t potentially also harmed men in other ways” You are missing the point and simply abusing the notion of ‘generalizations”. Your comment about makes it clear that you consider the Judges opinions to in fact be axiomatic. The passionate objections to the article are not that a) she didn’t also cover the ways feminism hurt men or b) that she left out some ways that feminism has helped men. It is that a) we reject the very points she made as… Read more »
Alrighty well I’ve pretty much taken myself out of this conversation because I feel like I’ve said what I came to say and it’s not really getting anywhere. I do want to point out that Justin wrote this article and he is, actually, a man. So there’s that. As to feminists embracing men’s rights…it’s happening. Where I first heard about men’s rights was in a gender & sexuality studies class, actually. And also, pointing out the ways feminism has helped men doesn’t necessarily imply that men can’t also form their own groups to advocate for men’s rights. It’s not either/or.… Read more »
I have never been encouraged by feminists to speak with my own voice, either as a man or as a sexual abuse survivor. I have had more feminists try to silence my voice by blaming me for my own abuse (on which feminists and I coincidentally agree), accusing me of lying about past and my post-abuse treatment, accusing me of being an abuser, accusing me of silencing women and of sexism against women, and using sexist terms like “mansplaining” whenever I talk or write about an issue. As for the other four items on the list, none of them are… Read more »
The problem with this is, are these actually the issues men would have wanted addressed? If they’re not, then it’s not really ‘helping’ men. It’s simple paternalism dressed up as ‘help’. None of these examples are even concrete. You can’t show us anything quantifiable – feminism hasn’t helped keep families together, and it hasn’t helped men stay in their children’s lives (quite the opposite, really). It hasn’t made our quality of life better; it hasn’t increased our income, it hasn’t increased our life expectancy and it hasn’t increased our happiness. It hasn’t made us more free (with perverse ‘domestic abuse… Read more »
In 1983, I could not have dreamed of the Internet, and so I could not have asked for it. Today, I have it and I love it and am very glad it exists. I’m sure glad Al Gore gave me the internet*, even though I didn’t ask for it. History is full of gifts like this. My religious tradition includes telling the story, every year at Passover, of a series of gifts that we didn’t ask for, but for which we are grateful. I make a point in my article that both women and men are the beneficiaries of the… Read more »
I just did make a real argument. You chose to ignore it.
That was an amazing argument lol and he completely ignored it.
I especially liked:
“In my experience, whenever someone has to resort to abstractions like this, it’s because they don’t have a real argument to make.”
Because while everything you said is a concrete actual REAL negative effect that is has had on men, he responded with a reference to Al Gore an some jive about “roles and self-discovery” and then claimed YOU didn’t have a real argument.
Aaaaahh the irony!
@Justin Cascio: “Since I’m talking about the effects of a movement on mainstream society, I’m also saying that we got these gifts even without claiming an identity as feminists.” So, if I get it right, you were talking about feminism as a historical movement (and its consequences on society at large), not much about feminism “right now”. In this sense, I mostly agree with you: feminism has (on average) changed our society for the better, and men have gained something from it (I know I did). Then, talking about recent feminismS (plural) and the new “female privileges”, would be another… Read more »
Wow, way to ignore pretty much every single comment posted (exclude the two or three that agree with you) with your “real argument” line. Dismissive much?
Your choices are to take the criticism constructively, or you can assume every single person who disagrees with you is wrong. It’s just a shame you’ve chosen the second choice.
“Feminism helped women learn to be who they want to be, and it’s had two effects on men: one is that as women change, men must also; the second is that men can learn to make the same personal investigations that women have under the tutelage of feminists.” This is not even close to a true generalization. Fact is, the vast majority of women agree with me. For example, my wife is a woman and she says that feminism did no such thing for her. She knew who she wanted to be, and still knows, and rejects feminism. And neither… Read more »
Soullite writes: “It hasn’t helped us be who we want to be – it’s helped women do that, but it hasn’t made a dent in any real male gender-norm.” In fact, Warren Farrell pointed out in the Myth of Male Power 19 years ago that no-fault divorce laws originally helped crafted by some feminist-minded advocates (to help women leave loveless marriages) have actually worsened the male role. As Farrell points out, by creating easy one-stop-shot divorce for women to leave less-then-ideal marriages you have have an *intensifying* of the male role. When a father initiates or has initiated upon him… Read more »
I will say this again. The point of our conversations is not to derail feminism. It’s not. If you want to do that, go somewhere else and have the conversation.
If you don’t like the way feminism or The Good Men Project is doing things — start your own movement. That’s what we did.
Lisa, When twittergate happened and Hugo left, my respect for the volunteers and staff at tgmp grew a lot. I have been posting here for over a year. While I still respect you and Tom a lot and have a lot of respect for what you are doing, I have one problem with what I am sensing is a trend here at tgmp. It seems that when (A) voices for men and (B) the *popular* narrative of feminism butt heads (that narrative being feminism=equality 24/7/365), you are beginning to back away from the rabid support of men that I saw… Read more »
I think your last bit is more on the nose than the first bit….or rather, that yes they’re trying to make it so that people don’t go around making hyperbolic statements about any group (feminists, MRM, whatever). It’s not that they’re supporting feminism over male voices, but rather that they’re supporting non-hyperbolic statements. After all, there are men (like, oh yeah Justin…the author of this article)…who are coming out in support of feminism. Which means this article, itself, is the voice of a man. Not all men speak with one voice.
Hi John, Hah! “You are stepping on a lot of toes and are getting a lot of flak.” — that’s the nicest thing anyone has said to me all day. Thanks! I am going to write a post about what you have said above. But the truth is — we only have one mission — we really really really really want to make this a great place for men to tell stories, and, in the process, help men. We have no ulterior motives. We are not a secret feminist-funded organization. We are not doing this to change men — we… Read more »
But talking about the flaws of feminism is not our goal. I can understand that but bear in mind that more than likely a lot of the folks here have a lot of experience with the flaws of feminism being actively denied. And what I think has happened is that when the feminists here actually do acknowledge it folks that have been holding out for the chance to find feminists that would actually listen to them go overboard. Which while it does ease some of the pain is ultimately useless. Let’s face it the snobbish and conceited feminists that refuse… Read more »
“Let’s face it the snobbish and conceited feminists that refuse to listen to men that disagree with them on certain things while claiming they are our best allies are going to continue doing the same and no amount of telling them is going to change that.” I agree, but I have a different take on the utility of debate. My comments refuting Feminism’s sometimes bald propaganda are intended for men who might still be on the fence. If the only dialogue concerning Feminism lauds its benefits to men, then those on the fence might believe the movement has no negative… Read more »
Thanks Danny, Here’s the thing. I am fine with people talking about any side of any issue as long as they come to the table with good intentions and follow the rules of civil discourse. But I was personally called names during the comments on this article — it escalated quite quickly into more than attacks on feminism but attacks on me personally, along with GMP, and I won’t allow that. And that’s the thing. We do listen here. And not only do we listen, we want to help solve the problems. We want to help create the change you… Read more »
“But talking about the flaws of feminism is not our goal. Talking about men is.”
Understood. I’ll try to keep that in mind from now on.
Lisa, I appreciate you want to stay on message regarding men. I think this article crossed a line; it presented Feminism’s benefits to men, thus it is an article about men so it passed muster. Yet because the article is about Feminism, and GMP won’t permit discussion of some of the failings of Feminism, the core logic of the article becomes unassailable in comments. Yet the article concerns the relationship between men and Feminism, it is the spine upon which the ribs of the five points are fixed. In this case I believe GMP’s protection of Feminism creates an unimpeachable… Read more »
Hi Transhuman, I do understand what you are saying, and if I had to do it over again I might have thought about the article differently. But part of my dilemma is this. Most people out in the mainstream see feminism as a system of beliefs that where men and women are treated as equals. Men don’t go out and “sign up” for feminism. They don’t become card-carrying, registered feminist. They just believe that men and women should be treated equally, and the tell others that they should. That’s the feminism I know, and honestly, until I met the people… Read more »
Lisa What about those feminists I spoke of in my article about bullying? You know, the ones who called me a priveledged white male, minimised what happened to me since I’m an anomaly compared to what happens to girls and women, nullified my story due to their opinion that since I’m a part of a group that is at the top then my problems don’t matter? I see feminisms benefits. I see the egalitarian side, yes. But I can’t forget how those feminists treated me as well. Because it’s real pain. Real invalidation that I didn’t need. That’s what I… Read more »
But, Lisa, an article such as this one that extols the virtues of feminism in the opinion of some does just that – makes the conversation ABOUT feminism, not about men. By contrast, the article could have argued that the five points were good things, not mentioning/crediting feminism. Then the discussion would have been a debate about how men are or are not helped by those five points. See the difference?
I do see the difference Eric. And I actually think we need to do two things (and are working on both). 1) We need to talk about what the points of this article would look like if they were part of an eqalitarian movement. So if we are going to generalize, it should be: “here’s what an ideal world should look like”, instead of how it was taken: “here’s proof of what has been done.” 2) Write an article which addresses some of the specific things that feminism has done. There are two additional points I want to make, however.… Read more »
First, I appreciate what you are doing here and how hard you work to make it happen. “1) We need to talk about what the points of this article would look like if they were part of an eqalitarian movement. So if we are going to generalize, it should be: “here’s what an ideal world should look like”, instead of how it was taken: “here’s proof of what has been done.” I get what you are saying but feminism must be removed from such discussions in order for that to happen, since many of your readers are convinced that many… Read more »
Well said Eric.
“The first is that the reason we wrote the article in the first place was because the community at The Good Men Project kept asking for it. “What has feminism ever done for men?” has been a recurring theme over and over in the comment section, wouldn’t you agree?” It has been a recurring theme here, but I do not feel this article answers that question. This article is telling us to support feminism because feminism has done a number of things, but not once amongst those examples was any evidence provided to support the assertion those are done by… Read more »
@Lisa
“But talking about the flaws of feminism is not our goal.
Talking about men is.”
This is a curiously inconsistent policy for a blog site that has a whole section dedicated to “men & feminism”.
An examination of men is necessarily an examination of gender. I don’t think you can seriously explore the status of men in the 21st century without fostering discussion on a movement that has held an intellectual and political monopoly on the question in the western world for decades.
(sorry got distracted, continuing…) I don’t think anyone seriously disputes that men have been affected by feminism, nor can many dispute that men have been largely a means of ancillary consideration for the movement and not an end in their own right. Now, whether feminism has been on the whole, good or bad for the well-being of men is up for debate and worth exploring. It informs the direction of the men’s movement -are we as a gender able to build on feminism to meet our social objectives, or must we build an alternative movement “in a different voice”? I… Read more »
“It informs the direction of the men’s movement -are we as a gender able to build on feminism to meet our social objectives, or must we build an alternative movement “in a different voice”?”
Actually, that would be great to explore, big picture. Would you volunteer to write to post, at least pose some of the questions so people can answer just that?
And…er, Random_Stranger, I don’t believe we’ve met.
I am also very interested in this question, and hope you will consider writing at greater length on the subject, Random_Stranger.
Men can build on the egalitarian feminism, but I don’t think taking tips from gynocentric feminism would help at all. Egal-feminists seem quite willing to work with men however the latter seem too busy with their own stuff and can’t really afford to share their resources (not saying that is right or wrong). I personally don’t see much value in having too much gendered resources especially on abuse, etc as working together would accomplish more. ht tp://www.frasercoastchronicle.com.au/story/2012/05/04/men-suffer-in-domestic-abuse/ This link is what happens when we have too much of our domestic violence information gendered and only showing one gender as victim,… Read more »