We’re scared to have our opinions challenged, Jackie Summers writes, but we need to keep having the conversations.
Arachibutyrophobia: Fear of peanut butter sticking to the roof of one’s mouth.
Fear:
Along with desire, it’s one of the primary motivating factors behind most human actions. Fear of scarcity. Fear of being marginalized. Fear of being embarrassed. Fear of being powerless. Fear that the way of life to which you’ve grown accustomed is changing. Fear of loss. Fear of death.
While everyone has something they’re afraid of, the important thing to remember is: fear serves a purpose. Fear preserves. Fear protects. In eons past, before humans were on top of the food chain, when your hackles–the short, fine hairs on the back of your neck–went up, it was because you sensed imminent danger that you couldn’t see or hear. The appropriate fear of things larger–and scarier–than ourselves, saved lives.
Fear told you to flee. Or to fight.
Human beings (over)compensated for the absence of fangs and claws with oversized frontal lobes. We discovered we could outthink creatures we couldn’t outrun or outfight. We found strength in unity. Families became tribes. Tribes became cities became states, and as the competition for (perceived) limited resources grew, we became less afraid of things that go bump in the night, and more afraid of each other.
♦◊♦
Hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliop
In a worst case scenario, fear can immobilize you, paralyze you, preventing any precautionary action. In an even worse case scenario, fear short-circuits the capacity for rational thought, and instead triggers preemptive action. In the words of Yoda, “fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”
It didn’t work out well for Anakin Skywalker. Deep irrational fears that you can’t even admit, triggering emotions that you don’t understand, rarely works out well for anyone. Evidence of this is overabundant in the world we inhabit.
According to the Buddha, suffering is the default human condition. His recommendation was to detach from desire. Needless to say, this is easier said than done, or everybody would be a Bodhisattva. We’re corporeal, and while we are stuck in these meat-sacks, we crave. We want food, we want money, we want power, we want sex. According to Maslow, it’s only once these base desires are sated that we seek greater enlightenment; people who are fighting for survival aren’t allowed the luxury of philosophy. Once we feel essentially safe, we can begin to seek greater understanding of the world around us, and the impact of our actions on others.
♦◊♦
Epistemophobia: Fear of knowledge.
When Lisa Hickey first asked me to contribute to The Good Men Project, it was to write about sex and relationships. It didn’t take long before Lisa challenged me to discuss topics far beyond the realm of romance. Before I knew it, I was deeply engaged in discussions on race, gender, class, and a plethora of other incredibly difficult subjects. Having already discussed the most intimate matters of my personal life in candid detail in my blog,F*cking in Brooklyn, I thought myself no stranger to controversy.
I was wrong. I was entirely unprepared for the level of vitriol my contributions would engender.
I’m not given to inflammatory rhetoric; no matter what topic, I’ve tried to tell my stories, from my perspective. At first, I didn’t understand why this would “raise the hackles” of readers. Why were seemingly intelligent people so willing–so eager–to engage in heated arguments with complete strangers?
And then it dawned on me: people are afraid. When information is presented that challenges a personal worldview, frontal lobes short-circuit. The compulsion to defend–and sometimes to attack–overrides the capacity for rational thought. The need to denigrate that which is feared overshadows the desire to understand the unfamiliar.
I sincerely believe this is the subtext beneath why no one actually admits to being racist, sexist, classist, or homophobic, and why these topics trigger such acrimony: fear that the actualization of another’s rights will infringe on existing privilege. Fear masquerading as anger. Anger manifesting as hate. The lesson of strength in unity entirely forgotten, replaced by a desperate need to feel secure in one’s own perceptions.
Also forgotten; what fear desires–more than anything–is to be overcome.
What separates The Good Men Project from other men’s magazines is: ongoing dialogue. Despite occasional pitfalls in language, the raison d’être at GMP is not to pontificate; rather it is to have an evolving conversation about the nature of goodness, and how it can–and should–affect modern masculinity. And the terrific thing about a conversation is: it is–by definition–an interchange of thoughts.
The Good Men Project aspires to create discussions around some of the greatest ills facing society. At the same time, GMP recognizes that, if you find yourself in an argument and you can’t articulate the opposing point of view as well as your own, you’re not listening hard enough. Civilized dissenting opinions are always encouraged. A safe environment where we can seek greater understanding of the world around us, and the impact of our actions on others, is being fomented.
As difficult as these conversations may be, we absolutely will not solve 100% of the problems we–for whatever reason–can’t, don’t, or won’t discuss. The floor’s open. We’re listening.
—Photo via
About Jackie Summers
Yes! “I sincerely believe this is the subtext beneath why no one actually admits to being racist, sexist, classist, or homophobic, and why these topics trigger such acrimony: fear that the actualization of another’s rights will infringe on existing privilege. Fear masquerading as anger. Anger manifesting as hate. ”
THAT.
Oh Jackie.
“And then it dawned on me: people are afraid. When information is presented that challenges a personal worldview, frontal lobes short-circuit. The compulsion to defend–and sometimes to attack–overrides the capacity for rational thought. The need to denigrate that which is feared overshadows the desire to understand the unfamiliar.”
Overrides the capacity for rational thought. Yes it does.
“I sincerely believe this is the subtext beneath why no one actually admits to being racist, sexist, classist, or homophobic, and why these topics trigger such acrimony: fear that the actualization of another’s rights will infringe on existing privilege. Fear masquerading as anger. Anger manifesting as hate.”
Fear does wear the mask of anger. This is such a true statement, all of it.
“The lesson of strength in unity entirely forgotten, replaced by a desperate need to feel secure in one’s own perceptions.”
Yes.
Also forgotten; what fear desires–more than anything–is to be overcome.”
Oh, oh, oh.
This. This. This. Should be required reading.
I think people are sometimes afraid that they will have their minds changed so much that who they are now will become a source of shame to their future selves.
Amazing comment.
Brilliant, and agreed.
JFB
That is really outstanding.
Justin, that comment could be applied to sooo many people. The day they realize their bigotry, bitterness, anger, etc will be a bittersweet day. I’ve had that day, I was an asshole before, I still am a bit but catch myself and I am on a path of getting rid of past anger and bitterness. It’s too much of a burden and doesn’t help me at all, it’s toxic and kills relationships, it’s the biggest roadblock in peace. Eye for an eye, vengeance, bitterness, anger, egos, being right, being JUST, there comes a time when you need to drop it all and restart afresh.
And yes I felt much shame of who I was, but then given the environment I grew up I am actually quite surprised I wasn’t far worse so I feel proud of the moments I stopped myself when I was so close to committing violence (retaliation from severe bullying), I probably saved a life quite frankly and that’s an extremely hard thing to admit to myself, and others….
Archy, thank you for displaying the courage to admit this, but more so, having the courage to manifest it in your life, to the betterment of yourself and those around you. I wrestle with my assholic tendencies, but I find that–for myself–a little compassion for myself and others, goes a long way.
Here’s to hitting the refresh button–before it hits you.
JFB
As always, Jacks, well done.
While I couldn’t agree you or applaud the GMP more for their commitment to continuing the dialogue, my concerns are the following:
1. The importance of self-reflection and listening (not to say this isn’t happening, but must continue and reach a deeper level than currently).
2. The *vocal* audience the GMP is currently engaging.
Regardless, I’m supremely interested to see where this goes…
Nikki, I agree on both counts. In your mind what are the best ways to address your concerns?
JFB
The use of “fear”, “scared”, “afraid” is grossly, hugely, manipulably (I made that up and you may use it without attribution) overdone.
How about “annoyed”? “Not this crap again.” “Been there, done that, and the other guy always resorts to ad hom.” “I have to wash the coffee cups.”
The use of “afraid” and its synonyms is designed to denigrate any reluctance to do as the speaker requires. If you disagree–no matter the thought and factual backing–you’re “afraid”, not possibly correct.
I mean, suppose I’m supposed to be afraid of thinking Hillary Clinton is the wisest woman in the world except for the wise Latina who is currently fixing to tell me how to live. And I point out that Her Highness actually said–I couldn’t believe she’d be that dumb, but she did and no feminist has called her on it, so presumably they’re all that dumb–that women are the primary victims of war. They lose husbands, sons, brothers, fathers. Apparently the dead guys don’t count. Sheesh. Well, no surprise.
On the other hand, I suppose I could say that people who oppose Condi Rice running for something are afraid of a strong woman, of color, no less. That might be fun.
Lose “afraid”, and approach people with differing opinions as if they’re normal people. You’ll find less defensiveness.
Richard, although it may not apply in your particular case, even high levels of annoyance don’t seem to account for the potential for highly caustic responses on certain topics. Perhaps you’ve been there, and something that’s being discussed is for the enlightenment of others? Your thoughts on Ms. Clinton are a prime example. Would you be interested in penning an essay for GMP, calling her to task on the statement and explaining your perspective?
JFB
Not trying to derail with this comment, trying to explain what I mean by feeling ignored and annoyed.
The biggest feeling I get from most comments on here of the highly volatile comment threads is a sense many feel ignored, an example would be the male abuse victims in a sea of awareness over female victimhood, and I’m sure many racial issues too would feel that way. I see that turn to bitterness and hatred, holding one group up and doing what you can to help them be free from horror whilst ignoring the other group or even worse…treating that group like the sole aggressor.
Do you think that feeling of being ignored combined with annoyance is what drives so much resentment? I can totally understand the annoyance of hearing yet another topic on feminism and wishing someone would care a bit more for the men simply because of what I see in the mainstream media in Australia, it’s mostly the issues that affect women with a bit on what affects men. I can walk into the male toilets here and see the walls plastered with the antiDV campaign portraying the male as abuser, female as victim, I see breast cancer awareness EVERYWHERREE, white ribbon campaigns and a bunch of other female awareness with the odd bit of male stuff here n there.
I adore the fact we have great awareness for women and their issues but I really have to ask, does anyone give a shit about the men on the issues that matter for them? I grew up in the first generation I think where males did worse in school than females, even now in society most people I talk to can’t understand a male can be raped.
I can see plenty of male role models, males in power etc of course but that does zip, zero, nadda, in helping me as a male feel supported in society for abuse I’ve been through. Growing up hearing how EVIL men are and how they’re the perpetrator nearly always and then experiencing life as a male in a a VASTLY different way makes me question a lot in our society.
Basically I grew up, fearing other humans and still do carry much of that fear, even females who are much smaller than me I have fear of. Fear serves a purpose but for people like me with an anxiety disorder, it’s becomes a negative and directly makes me avoid other humans much of the time. Fear has become the enemy and it’s what harms me now. I don’t feel overly safe in a society that still can’t handle the fact there is more than 1 abuse pattern, I don’t feel safe with people that can’t even listen or accept that not everything is black and white, I don’t feel safe with people who invest so much energy into talk of male privilege without listening to the person pouring out their heart because they only see them as the epitome of privilege.
The sad fact I’ve realized is some of the biggest bigots are the ones in feminism, masculism, and other equality groups who are locked onto a single agenda and there’s no room for other debate. When I read an article by someone who opposes rape whilst also minimizing and close to denying rape of a different version exists, I don’t feel safe with them. How can I if they don’t have EVERYONE’S best interest at heart? This is why I am oh so very very annoyed at many equal rights, anti abuse groups and people because an agenda seems to be giving them tunnel vision, to the point it truly feels like it’s at the expense of another despite the calls of zero-sum games.
I really really want to be proven wrong, and luckily I do feel safe with some people and some groups. I’ve seen people comment on the GMP who I feel safer in this world knowing simply they exist, I feel safer knowing that peoples vision of abuse have been changed simply because I and others spoke up on it. I feel safer knowing we have blacks, whites, men, women, probably people of all races, religions, beliefs, groups, all working together to flat out END abuse and all of the nasty things in the world that leave so many dead, injured, oppressed, outright treated badly. I feel safer knowing we finally are discussing the vast variety of topics that exist in the world and that it’s a step forward in a goal of true equality.
“I can see plenty of male role models, males in power etc of course but that does zip, zero, nadda, in helping me as a male feel supported in society for abuse I’ve been through.”
Does seeing men in power ‘empower’ men in power any more then seeing a beautiful model ‘empower’ women?
That’s a very good question. I think for some it might, but others it causes jealousy. In Australia I believe we call it tall poppy syndrome, and quite frankly if you have no money and see someone who earned 10+million last year you will envy them and hate them probably:P. So many men don’t have much power though, and are even used and abused by those in power so I guess it’s a very complex issue…
Jackie. You need an essay on HH’s statement? Really? Either people buy it or they don’t. Either people think this reflects well or poorly on HH. There is nothing more to be said.
Except, come to think of it, a commenter named, iirc, “gwallan” or something like mentioned on another thread that victims or rescuers are ungendered if they are male. If female, they are listed as women or girls, or possibly children.
If they are men, they are “victims” or “rescue workers”. Count on it. But that’s not a new thought. It’s been around for some time.
It is what it is. Why do we need an essay?
Caustic responses may be the result of impatience with hearing the same thing for the forty-’leventh time. IOW, ramped-up annoyance.
Now, if you tell me that saving Madagascar ebony is the reason the feds shut down a guitar company whose CEO contributes to the republicans while leaving untouched its competitor, whose CEO contributes to the democrats and is a matter of environmental stewardship, sure, I’ll be exasperated. Possibly even caustic because the implication is that I’m stupid enough to believe it and I hate to be thought of as that dumb. And I guess somebody might think my response is because I’m “afraid”.
Richard, I suggest an essay because that is the platform upon which ideas are discussed on GMP. The model here is to converse, in an attempt to understand. In lieu of that, how would you recommend the items that exasperate you be examined, with a view to enlightenment?
JFB
I think Richard raises a good point.
Time and again I’ve seen writers here (and elsewhere) shut their ears to genuine disagreement. Sometimes it’s because the other side is “disingenuous” (there was an entire post on the GMP about Amanda Marcotte’s use of this technique). Other times, the disagreement is dismissed because one side claims the other is “not listening.” You can listen to something and still disagree with it.
Now, in the latest iteration, if there is disagreement it is because the person holding the contrary view is “secretly afraid.” However, just as you can listen to something and disagree with it, you can also listen to something, not fear it, and still not agree with it.
As a personal matter, I found that the greatest lesson I ever learned was that, even when you are 100% right about what you are saying, some people will still hold a contrary view. They will feel this way not because they are stupid, or racist, or failing to listen, or afraid, but because the word “right” is subjective in the first place.
You gain traction by admitting that your definition of “right” is not universal. Your arguments are enriched when you identify what your opponents feel is “right” and then appealing to their, completely rational non-fear-based and well-thought-out sensibilities.
You gain nothing by assuming your definition of “right” is universal, and that anyone who disagrees must be irrational, or afraid, or unthinking.
Mike, thank you for raising a valid point. Dogma, regardless of passion or eloquence, doesn’t persuade. I think the point here is to welcome opposing points of view in a spirit of attempting to understand, rather than simply convince. There will never be a time when all opinions are universal; with few exceptions I don’t believe that should be the goal. Rather, as you suggest, we can identify more closely with our “opponents.” Maybe we’d discover that no matter what our superficial differences, we’re stronger together than we are apart.
JFB
So, Jackie. What is the essay about? That calling somebody’s inconvenient view a matter of “fear” is a manipulative scam? If so, the preceding sentence covers it.
That HH’s statement about war’s primary victims reflects degendering men? Yup. That sentence covers it. That no feminists have called her on it? Might take some research to insure that absolutely no feminist has called her on it, but that’s hardly necessary. No audible, visible feminist seems to see anything amiss. Which covers itself better than I could do.
I don’t see any necessity for fleshing out any of the ideas.
I’ll take a shot if you can give me something that would be improved by more detail.
I think one reason people may be afraid of a change of heart is because they are afraid that people will then use their past heart against them. Not to be confused with the shame Justin Cascio mentions above (although good point) what I’m talking about are those who are afraid that even if they do change their past heart has already been frozen in time. As such no matter how they change or reform or see the light they will always still be that past person.
And frankly there are cases when that fear is legit.
I like the question. But it’s too big for me to hope of getting an answer. Need to take a smaller bite first.
I don’t think I’d call it fear but yeah. You need to develop technologies for tricking the brain into not triggering those reactions.
I do like that observation. I live by that myself. I’ve tried “reading back” someone else’s comment at them a few times here and generally good results. I just repeat what they said in my own words or summarize it.
David, thank you. I’m interested in discovering ways around triggering “fight or flight” responses. I believe an earnest attempt at listening is a good place to start. Reaching an understanding from diametrically opposing points of view is infinitely easier if defense mechanisms aren’t already in place. I’m curious about your techniques; if you have more that you’ve found success with, please share.
JFB