GMP’s resident feminist, HeatherN, tackles readers’ questions about men and feminism and how society sees men’s issues.
Welcome to the weekly series in which people ask me questions about feminism and I endeavour to answer them. If you’ve got a question for me about feminism, go ahead and ask it in the comments below. Alternatively you can e-mail me at [email protected].
Last week, OirishM asked the following: If feminism is for men, why do feminists assume anyone speaking for men’s issues isn’t feminist?
I suppose one way to answer that is to point out that though feminism is also for women, feminists don’t assume that anyone speaking about women’s issues is a feminist. There are plenty of women out there who make a living telling other women that it is their feminine duty to have children and be home-makers. These are women speaking about women’s issues, and yet they aren’t feminists. The reason for this is because of the position they are taking on the issue. Generally speaking, someone’s only assumed to be a feminist if their position is a feminist one, i.e. if they’re promoting ideas which dismantle patriarchy.
I think another way to answer that is to point out that the Centre for Gender and Sexuality Studies at my university is going to have a workshop on Wednesday. The first lecture is on “hegemonic masculinities,” so it’s definitely about men’s issues. Now since this is academia, I don’t know whether this particular lecturer takes on the label of “feminist.” However, this is certainly a lecture that a lot of feminists will be attending, and no one has suggested that a lecture about masculinity isn’t appropriate. In fact, there’s a great deal of discussion about masculinity in gender studies right now.
Finally, though, I’ll address the trend in more activist-minded feminist spaces in which mentioning men’s issues is sometimes met with aggression. Part of that has to do with the fact that an activist space is going to be focused on a narrow topic and wary of potential derailing. Part of that also has to do with the way in which women have been silenced, both historically and now. So sometimes when men talk about men’s issues without acknowledging their social privilege as men, it can seem as though they are trying to divert whatever attention feminists have managed to obtain for themselves.
John Anderson asked: Why is it when something affects women it’s viewed as a societal issue requiring societal solutions, but when something negatively affects men it’s viewed as a personal failure requiring each individual man to correct his behaviour? Like the question above, there are a few different ways to answer this. This first bit is going to be a bit abstract, but stick with me. In the fifth episode of the new Starz series Da Vinci’s Demons, we find out out that da Vinci’s love interest, Lucrezia, is being forced to spy on the Renaissance man. She very explicitly states that she is not acting of her own free will, and that she has no choice but to follow her orders. It so happens that the person to whom she says this is also under very explicit orders regarding what he’s supposed to do to da Vinci. However, he disregards his orders and decides on his own course of action.
There are many other examples of this type of scenario, particularly in our entertainment and media. A woman is forced into a situation in which she has no choice but to do what she’s told, while a man is forced in a very similar situation but entertains more freedom of choice. Think of just about every arranged marriage depicted on television, ever. The point I’m trying to make is that it’s patriarchy which denies women’s agency and decision making abilities. Patriarchal systems assume women are docile and unable to do things for themselves and therefore they are more susceptible to outside influence. Patriarchal systems place pressure on men to always be in control of their lives and assume that when something negative happens to a man, it’s his fault. That is all part of patriarchy.
I also feel it necessary to point out that the trend of assuming men’s issues are all about individual failing is a dying one within feminist circles. “Toxic masculinity” and “hegemonic masculinity” are two phrases that are often used to talk about the social pressures which affect men’s lives. There are other, more specific examples, but the point is that feminism and gender studies completely recognize that society affects men.
In general, I don’t think most feminists would say that women are more affected by social circumstances than men. Rather, I think they’d probably argue that the social circumstances which affect both men and women recognize a greater degree of human agency for men than they do women.
Photo: Flickr/Heather Cowper
> Part of that has to do with the fact that an activist space is going to be focused on a narrow topic and wary of potential derailing. Except that feminism is supposedly about gender equality. It should be dealing with many of those issues already. Feminists frequently gender discussions of rape and domestic abuse so they’re M>F, for example. > Part of that also has to do with the way in which women have been silenced, both historically and now. Except for the part where women have wielded immense politcal power even before they could vote, and their issues… Read more »
I think there’s a real difference between 1) society treating women like they have no agency and 2) women not actually having any agency. In the example you mentioned, Lucrezia has enormous pressure on her and definitely feels somewhat trapped, but in reality she does have some agency, because everyone has agency. She can still make choices, however restricted her choices are due to the gender context. (She is used as a spy precisely because as a woman she is underestimated, and unnoticed.) Patriarchy creates a difference in the level or degree of agency, sometimes an extreme difference, but it’s… Read more »
Many men discussing men and their issues are clearly feminist, like Michael Kimmel and Michael Messner.
When they suggest men stop repressing emotion, stop defining manhood in terms of things that dominate others, for instance, they’re talking about both men’s and women’s humanity and dignity, and it encourages equality.
>they suggest men stop repressing emotion, I’m pretty sure I’ve seen Kimmel saying men should prioritize the feelings of women at least once, which implies they should suppress their own. I know I’ve seen Katz saying it, and many people have said that a male feminist must suppress his own opinions and let women speak. >stop defining manhood in terms of things that dominate others “The Patriarchy” actually demands and sometimes requires men be willing to take a disposable, sacrificial role for the benefit of families and society, barring a few men at the top, and even they’re often expected… Read more »
Yes, of course.
You know, I often feel that Feminism has been pushed into a particular corner recently (in the last decade or so) where the majority of Leftist movements essentially lost their steam/membership/activity and there came a big huge vacuum that was filled by Feminism. I wouldn’t call it an argument as much as a curious hypothesis. OWS was quickly shown to be ineffective. Scott Walker and his ilk still continue their crusade against their constituents on the behalf of business. There exists minimal pressure, as we claw our way out of a recession, to address economic issues of inequality and the… Read more »
“Workplace fatality rates are a prime example, because they affect men far more than any other gender identity. At the core of preventable workplace fatalities you have issues surrounding companies (owners) not willing to pony up money for safety. It’s a class issue. The “disposability of men”, which is another MRA talking point, is primarily economic. It isn’t gender issues that force men into a place where they’re overworked, underpaid and then let go as soon as they get too old/burnt out/bothersome, it’s an economic issue primarily surrounding productivity creep, stagnant wages and the elimination of any individual thought.” The… Read more »
The “disposability of men”, which is another MRA talking point, is primarily economic. It isn’t gender issues that force men into a place where they’re overworked, underpaid and then let go as soon as they get too old/burnt out/bothersome, it’s an economic issue primarily surrounding productivity creep, stagnant wages and the elimination of any individual thought. There’s a lot to be gained by examining these issues in a Feminist lens, but the discourse that needs to be addressed is, again, economic. I have to disagree if for no other reason that the expectation is that men go out and work… Read more »
“So regardless of the economic situation the expectation is that the man should do the overworked/underpaid job.”
Yeah, because goodness knows being a stay at home parent isn’t an overworked/underpaid job!
You know I was going to go into the external provider/internal provider differentiation but I figured that I’d brought it up enough times around these parts that people would know what I was talking about without making it all about women.
Congratulations Heather.
Damn.
You were arguing that the “disposibility of men” issue is gendered and not primarily economic because men go out and work underpaid jobs. And then you made a very blanket statement that men are working all the overworked/undervalued jobs. ALL. You didn’t say external, or out-of-the-house, or whatever…no, you said all. Which, by the way, also totally ignores how many women have traditionally (yes, traditionally) worked outside the home in overworked/underpaid jobs. I’m thinking, of course, of nurses and house-cleaners and maids. Traditionally women; traditionally working outside the home; traditionally overworked/underpaid. Also, traditionally quite disposable. And as for mothers in… Read more »
And then you made a very blanket statement that men are working all the overworked/undervalued jobs. ALL. You didn’t say external, or out-of-the-house, or whatever…no, you said all. So I said all even when I said, “you see women engaging in such conditions”, in acknowledgement that there are women that work such overworked/underpaid jobs? Which, by the way, also totally ignores how many women have traditionally (yes, traditionally) worked outside the home in overworked/underpaid jobs. I’m thinking, of course, of nurses and house-cleaners and maids. Traditionally women; traditionally working outside the home; traditionally overworked/underpaid. I actually did account for those… Read more »
Sorry but i respectfully have to disagree.Men are expected to be protectors and providers.Men are judged by their ability to provide for women and a failure to do so makes the man a pathetic figure in societies eyes.It’s no surprise that suicide hits men the harder than women when they lose their lobs.That is how we measure up mens worth.Women?They have inherent personhood which is why the provisions we put in place to ensure female safety are humongous compared to do for men. The existence of campaigns such as “men can stop rape” prove the existenc of male disposability.As men… Read more »
Can we please stop pretending that being a stay at home parent (SAHP) is a job? Does it require effort and work? Yes. Are there important responsibilities and obligations involved with being a SAHP? Yes. Just because something is hard work DOES NOT make it a job. A job is a very specific social, economic, and legal relationship that involves the negotiation and exchange of rendering service for monetary reward. How much is the work of being a SAHP worth? Give me a number. $30k? $50k? There is no economic demand for the work of a SAHP because the labor… Read more »
Lol uhoh, you went there. I think that parenting is a job that varies. Some kids are awesome and sleep through the night, relatively well behaved, etc. Other kids keep you up, they scream, they break stuff, etc. I was an ADHD kid and always got into trouble and was a lil bastard quite frankly. I have a friend with 2 of her 3 kids has autism, that would be an incredibly hard job. I know of people who seem to be able to watch tv or do their hobbies, even run home business whilst minding the kids and others… Read more »
Wow. You’re not supposed to say that out loud! : – )
The comedian Bill Burr has a whole routine on this. One of my favorites of his:
“Any job you can do in your pajamas is not the hardest job in the world.”
On average the SAHP role is easier than the working role. Hundreds of years of tech have made running a household physically easier. In the 1880’s US middle class women hired help to run the household as there was a lot of physical labor required to clean clothes and produce 3 meals a day, Beat rugs clean…etc along with all the still needed roles of the SAHP. One of the reasons women went into the paid workforce is they could……chores at home had become easier. Not fewer…that number of individual tasks still seems to increase. And before I get jumped… Read more »
One indication of how much people respect childcare is the amount of money they are willing to spend on it. Consider what parents pay babysitters and nannies. Clearly there are many parents who don’t have too much respect for the demands of childcare, because many of them are willing to pay teenagers really low wages to babysit their kids. In some ways, people really do vote with their pocketbooks, and parents are just as guilty as anyone else at undervaluing childcare. There is some inherent tension, maybe even some contradiction, between people’s desire to have “affordable child care” AND to… Read more »
I’d just like to point out that having a high school kid watch your child for an evening falls more under the “pocket money for teens” rather than “living wage to feed your family”. Childcare is prohibitively expensive if you’re looking at the professional “9-5 Monday to Friday” sort.
I know many families where they look at paychecks versus childcare costs and one parent decides to stay home because the cost of having their kid(s) in daycare all workday long is more expensive than what they bring home from working that job. It’s primarily a lower-economic class problem, certainly.
My first, quick thought is that a lecture on hegemonic masculinities sounds like pretty standard feminist fare. I’m not saying it isn’t valid or interesting, but it may not be the best example of feminists tackling a “men’s” issue. Or perhaps it is, which kind of diminishes you point about evolving feminism.
interesting
I really wish people would stop using fictional movies and TV shows to illustrate problems in real life and to use them as though the movie or TV show was real.
No one is suggesting that the characters are real people. However, they were created by a real person, living in the real world…and in the case of Game of Thrones, George RR Martin is quite deliberately creating a story and a world which examines all sorts of social systems. Art, whether it’s a book or a painting or whatever, reflects the society and culture in which it was created. It might reflect a sub-culture, or it might reflect discontent with the mainstream…but, regardless, it cannot be divorced from the culture in which it was created. So part of understanding that… Read more »
OR it could just be a work of fiction with no context whatsoever.
As the old saying goes “TO a hammer everything look like a nail”
Well we’re moving away from feminism, strictly speaking, and into literary theory…but no piece of fiction is without context.
Found the original. And it didn’t contain the generalisation, so my original question was a misquote.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/c8f82812d705a4842f27bebf14cad1d7/tumblr_mk4yd25h2j1rluoaco1_1280.png
http://siryouarebeingmocked.tumblr.com/post/46114727201/if-feminism-fights-for-men-too-why-do-so-many
‘If “feminism fights for men too”, why do so many feminists assume anyone talking about men’s rights and issues is not a feminist?’
“Think of just about every arranged marriage depicted on television, ever. ”
Like Game of Thrones where the man didn’t have a choice? Let’s not forget in many situations of arranged marriage in media THOSE MEN ARE SOLDIERS WHOM HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO FIGHT. It’s only very recently that conscription has been removed in many countries, men’s agency wasn’t as much a many think.
It’s kind of funny because I was going to use the Game of Thrones wedding as an example…it just would have made the thing too long. But so yeah, let’s look at Game of Thrones…when Robb Stark is ordered to enter an arranged marriage with one of the Frey women, he has his choice of which woman he will marry. On top of that, he’s shown to posses enough free will to actually back out of that agreement and marry the woman he actually loves. Then, when he orders his cousin to marry one of the Frey women instead, his… Read more »
Rob Stark IS NOT A NORMAL PERSON. Comparing men to Rob Stark is as silly as comparing women to Cleopatra. He has choice because he’s at the very very very very very top level of society. His underling had zero choice in who to marry. Even the underlings aren’t really representative of people though. Do the peasants get to marry, and if so do they choose? Your example just shows the elite have agency.
It’s a story, Archy. The reason I highlighted that I was talking about representations and not real life is because there is always a disconnect between the two. The Robb Stark example is about what sorts of stories we tell about men and agency and women and agency. In theory, everyone has every choice…I could take what little money I’ve got, fly to New York and try to find work in a deli. Or I could shut myself away in my room and never leave the house again. I could get married to a British person for immigration reasons so… Read more »
Now I’m not a Game of Thrones watcher so I don’t know what was actually covered in the episode, but what I would ask is it that the reason they didn’t highlight the woman’s choice in the matter because their choice in the matter wasn’t important to the rest of the central plot? If the story is about Robb and his cousin and about the dynamics between them, then it doesn’t really matter about the woman’s sentiments for the purpose of this specific story. What would the story be like if Rob had been female instead? I’ve seen that troupe… Read more »
I’m just simply going to reiterate what I’ve said in another comment: “There is a narrative that men have agency and choices, and women don’t. It’s a patriarchal narrative. One of the examples you can see this particular narrative play out is in our representations of arranged marriages. One example of a representation of an arranged marriage which fits this is the Red Wedding. That’s what I’m saying.”
I understand that is one of the narratives and I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree as to whether or not that narrative paints an accurate picture of the way the world actually works. The problem with your example is that the narrative uses that example to purport that the narrative exists. I then argued that there are many examples that directly contradict the example being used to argue for the existence of that narrative. The narrative you argue exists, in my opinion, only exists if you ignore the examples that directly contradict it. This is the… Read more »
Literally every narrative about the way the world works is an oversimplification. Even intersectionality, which is all about addressing the very complicated ways in which various narratives interact with each other…is in itself a simplification of the huge variety in humanity. But these narratives which are critical of mainstream narratives are useful ways in which we understand power dynamics and general cultural themes. The world is too complicated and diverse to attempt to understand it without using frameworks and narratives to narrow things down a bit. Patriarchy theory is one way in which to understand a given piece of literature/situation/whatever.… Read more »
Heather your point about it being just one example is fair, and came from what seemed to me as an ambiguous shift in your comment from talking about how the feminist perspective would examine that example to the statement that men’s agency is recognized while woman’s are not. It sounded to me that you had shifted from describing how the feminist perspective would read that situation to an assertion that men have agency in society while women do not. I see now that you were giving an example of how a feminist would read the red wedding and not an… Read more »
A better way for me to have phrased it would be every narrative is a “simplification” of the way the world works. Oversimplification does, indeed, imply that the simplification is negative and harmful to our understanding. And while some feminists out there certainly oversimplify the various systems of oppression at work, I totally disagree that it’s “most” or that it’s mainstream to do so. The very complicated intersections of colonialism and feminism, and capitalism and feminism, and queer theory and feminism, are constantly being talked about and worked through right now. Plenty of Facebook memes and what-not are oversimplified, but… Read more »
It’s less the simplification that I mind and more the lack of recognition of the caveats associated with the simplification. That is the problem with “bite-sized” journalism. It’s naive to say that a meme is reserved specifically within a target audience memes are intended to be shared, spread, and imitated. If it is not imitated and does not spread it is not a meme. While some memes are innocuous and clearly sarcastic, like the Ryan Gosling meme, others result in quick and massive spread of misinformation that have larger political and social consequences. Even more damaging is the spread of… Read more »
Using television, movies, etc. as examples of different social systems is kind of abstract sometimes. It’s more like an analogy, rather than an apples-to-apples comparison. This is one set of characters in one set of situations which I am using to highlight a single aspect of the way our society talks about gender. I could, similarly, talk about Arya (who is adamant that she won’t get married), and Loras (who has no choice in his engagement to Cercei), and Maegery (who strategically uses arranged marriages to her advantage). They are all examples of different ways in which marriage and gender… Read more »
Of the arranged marriages in Game of Thrones, the ONLY male that I can think of that get’s choice in the arranged marriages is basically so high in society that his actions cannot reflect on men. Daenerys, Cersei, Tyrion, Rob’s cousin, and the partner’s of each with Z E R O choice in who they married. Rob get’s choice but he’s pretty much in line to be king. Most men n women do not get agency, only power in the most extreme form grants it and that depends on how lenient your father or leader is. The patriarchs (Tywin, and… Read more »
So I’ll reply in two ways. First, I’ll reiterate what I said to KC Krupp: “You’re making the mistake (and really a lot of people make this mistake) of assuming that when someone uses a single example to explain a point, they’re also trying to use is it as PROOF of their point. They’re not, or at least I’m not, using an example to prove anything.. Were I to try to prove what I’m saying about gender and agency, I’d do a hell of a lot of research, reference a bunch of different critical thinkers (not all of them feminists),… Read more »
(It’s also important to note that I was deliberately talking about DEPICTIONS of arranged marriages, not necessarily the realities of arranged marriages in the real world). Which is an important point because those two does not match up. In the real world the narrative about arranged and forced marriages we hear about through media is almost always about women being forced into marriage. The grooms-to-be to be are almost completely absent from any public discourse. Do they all think the situation is hunky.-dory? Do those young men enjoy the freedom the popular depictions/fiction of arranged marriage/forced marriage depicts them as… Read more »
Heather, the “patriarchal system” doesn’t crush Robb Stark. War and jockeying for power/economic benefit kills Robb Stark.
And the “arranged marriage for political purposes” vs. “love” is a huge theme in many of the characters within the books (Daneys, Robb, Theon, Cercei/Jaime, Jon Snow’s parentage, Ed Stark, etc.).
Not, “the patriarchal system,” but “a patriarchal system.” And, as I said, that is when one views it through a feminist lens (I think the exact words I used were, “from a feminist perspective.”) Right so, war and jockeying for power within a patriarchal system are what kills Robb. And as I pointed out, I could go into great detail about all the different arranged marriages in the books, and all the different ways in which the characters involved react and what-not. The point of using an example isn’t to say, “this is the only way things are.” The point… Read more »
Then, perhaps, “a patriarchal system” isn’t the right discourse to employ in totality. There’s no reason why Feminists can’t step outside of the “Feminist” lens when it ceases to be the most apt means to provide commentary. In fact, I suspect it would soften a lot of this back and forth if the wide scope of Feminism could look outside itself when dealing with things that have ended up on it’s plate (see my longer comment below). One becomes no less of a Feminist because they can engage with class/race/economic/cultural discourses. In fact, I’d probably argue that it prevents the… Read more »
Certainly. I’m all for engaging in a multitude of frameworks and discourses. In this case, however, I was answering a question about feminist discourses surrounding a specific gendered issue.
I am happy to see a space on GMP dedicated to men and feminism. And as a male feminist, I wish these answers had more clarity. I often find that articles which address feminism without any clarity provide discussion fraught with hostility and misunderstanding. I would like to address the first question and response. The question itself implies a very alarming generalization: feminist represent one group that generally considers men’s issues non-feminist. I whole-heartedly challenge this assumption. Over the past decade (at least), there has been a focus on men and masculinity under the umbrella of feminism. Feminism provides a… Read more »
I don’t think the big point of contention is whether or not there should be space for men’s issues in feminist but exactly what form should that space take on. I’ve crossed paths with feminists that want men’s issues to be on the table…as long as they don’t become the main focus. Well how can a movement be about everyone if you’re too busy trying measure and dole out focus? I’ve crossed path with those that want men’s issues to be on the table….as long they are only looked at in certain, self serving, lights. (I see this a lot… Read more »
I agree with what you’re saying about the problems with the construction of the questions. Just, a bit of self defence here…but I’m generally trying to provide a range of perspectives for these questions, so it can be a bit unclear at times. And, also, I’m trying not to make these answers too long…just a few paragraphs each.
Aaaaaanyway…got any questions you’d like addressed for next week? I’m always looking for more topics to cover.
> The question itself implies a very alarming generalization: feminist represent one group that generally considers men’s issues non-feminist. >Simply put, the question assumes a generalization that “all feminist” think one way or another, and that should have been the focus of the answer. My original question included “so many feminists” in there, and was misquoted. Feminism, for most of its existence, has focused pretty much exclusively on women’s issues, and reacted to suggestions that discussing men’s issues should be discussed with hostility. Even today, more than one feminist claiming to care about men’s issues only wants to discuss it… Read more »
Yikes, fame at last! I should clarify (if I didn’t already) that the remark was pulled off a meme on Tumblr – make of that what you will – and is obviously a hasty generalisation. But I suspect it rings true enough in the experiences many have of feminists to be worth repeating, IMO. With respect to the latter part of Heather’s answer about potential derailing, I will also refer people back to the first part of my comment: M.A. Melby: The “What about the menz?” phrase is general pulled out not to belittle the men’s topic brought up, but… Read more »
So sometimes when men talk about men’s issues without acknowledging their social privilege as men, it can seem as though they are trying to divert whatever attention feminists have managed to obtain for themselves.
I wonder if this becomes a point of contention because of the question of when does this social privilege exist (as in what topics does it affect) and does there always have to be an acknowledgement of even if it does exist.