Tom Matlack envisions a place where men can share stories of their struggle for goodness man-to-man apart from what women or feminists might say about that story.
Here’s the basic axiom: power conceals itself from those who possess it. And the corollary is that privilege is revealed more clearly to those who don’t have it. When a man and a woman are arguing about feminism—and the women involved happen to be feminists and the man happens to be an affluent white dude—the chances that he’s the one from whom the truth is more obscured is very high indeed. That’s as true for me as it is for Tom Matlack.
— “Words are Not Fists” BY HUGO SCHWYZER
♦◊♦
“No fucking pictures!” the captain screamed. Soldiers have gotten violent with me when their comrades have been killed. I took a few frames then put the camera down and started helping to bandage the most badly wounded soldier. He had taken a lot of shrapnel, and his face looked like hamburger. We checked his torso for wounds, but there were none. He was pleading, “Doc, you got to give me something. I can’t take this pain. I can’t take it.” His friend was lying dead against his legs, but he didn’t know it. He couldn’t see through the blood in his eyes, and he felt nothing but the stabbing pain.
The scene was eerily quiet, save for a radioman calling for a medevac. A minute later, the soldier’s sobbing began to mix with the birdcalls in the stifling, still air.
I slowly walked over to the captain and told him that I was going to do my job and that he could take my cameras later if he wanted. He nodded to me, maybe knowing that no one was going to move through a minefield to stop me anyway. I walked among the wounded men, shooting as I went and trying to lend a hand where I could. Platoon members carefully put the wounded onto litters and carried them to a landing zone for the helos. Then four young men lifted the dead soldier’s torso gently into a body bag. One bent down and began to rip the gear off his comrade’s flak vest. Then he thought better of it, reached up, and quietly zipped the bag closed.
— Shooting The Truth BY MICHAEL KAMBER
♦◊♦
The end result is an unshakeable feeling that Tom and the men he claims to speak for are simply angry that their unquestioned male privileges are being eroded. It’s not that men are being edged out of the conversation at all, but that women are beginning to have a say that appears to be the problem. Watching privilege erode, even slightly, can be disconcerting for the privileged. But the bare minimum of being a “good man” is not conflating the erosion of your privilege with genuine oppression. The good men I know in my own life enjoy the challenge of shedding sexist stereotypes like “nagging wife” and “naughty man-child” to enjoy going forward with women, hand-in-hand, as equals and as friends.
— As Equals and as Friends BY AMANDA MARCOTTE
♦◊♦
One day, after I started going to the seminary, I was walking toward the chapel when up ahead of me a guy got stabbed really badly. Everybody just kept walking. “It ain’t none of your business,” someone said. Guys were jumping over the body and the pool of blood. When I got to the man he was bleeding out onto the floor and, I swear to God, I could not walk over that blood. It was like something was pushing me to look at this man, look at what was happening here. Guys were like, “Yo! Yo!” But I could not move. All I could do is say, “This shit has to stop.”
The guys looked at me like I was crazy; at one time I was involved in half the stabbings at the prison. They started swearing at me, saying, “What the hell are you talking about?”
I said it again: “This just has to stop, man. We have to stop killing one another.”
Everything changed for me at that moment. Finances didn’t matter anymore. It didn’t matter if I traveled around the country, or if I could do whatever. It didn’t matter. It was like, how do I not help people? How do I not stop and look at the humanity in each person, man? How do I recognize that these are all God’s children, man? And how do we become part of that human family so that we don’t kill each other?
I got the guy up off the ground and got his blood spattered all over me. The guards came running to us and got me out of the way. They didn’t question me because they saw what I had done. They thought I was crazy for helping this guy.
— Blood Spattered by JULIO MEDINA
♦◊♦
A few months ago I was interviewed by Tom Ashbrook, of NPR’s show “On Point.” I am a frequently listener to Tom’s program and have always admired how he can talk about controversial topics—from abortion to Middle East peace to Presidential politics—and remained inquisitive without bias. That’s what makes his show go. He gets people from both sides of an issue and is great at getting them to explain themselves clearly while letting listeners decide what they think without spoon-feeding them an answer.
I was excited to meet Tom and talk about the Good Men Project at the Boston Book Festival before a live audience that numbered well over 800.
Everything was going fine, I was telling my story and the story of our Project, when something remarkable happened.
I was in the middle of explaining the national context in which GMP sees the need to clarify what is going on with men. I referred Hannah Rosin’s headline grabbing article and book by saying, “And then you have female sociologists saying that men are over. If you think about it, if a male sociologist came out and said women were over we’d all be criticized for it.”
What I thought was a pretty non-controversial point.
Ashbrook cut me off to say, “We did that for like 5,000 years.”
I kept rolling, talking about the importance of feminism and how in a way what we are talking about at GMP is feminism in reverse: women were trying to get out of the house and men are trying to get back in as fathers and husbands.
But inside I was boiling. The guy who I thought never took a stand had just slapped me down. Hard. He’d made clear that any conversation of manhood had to be premised on an acknowledgement of the primacy of feminism in that conversation.
It caught me so off-guard that it was only in watching the video of the interview that I really appreciated the depth of his taking a side, something I so respected him for not doing, on the issue closest to my heart.
Quite honestly it made me want to puke.
♦◊♦
My formative experience as a man came as a recovering alcoholic. In church basements there is a very clear message that men help men and women help women. Falling in love is not going to get your sober. There are plenty of mixed sex meetings but in the end I always found myself gravitating towards all male meetings. And I had a series of male sponsors who saved my life.
On a daily basis I heard men tell a deep and painful truth about themselves that stirred my soul, made me cry, and often laugh at my own lunacy. After a lifetime of hating myself as a man, bit by bit I began to see that I was not alone and that in fact I might be able to live my life in a different way. My first sponsor often told me that the psychic change required to transform a hopeless drunk into a sober and recovering alcoholic starts in the head but ultimately happens in the heart. What happens when one drunk tells another the truth about themselves is that both the teller and the listener are forced to look in the mirror. And drop by drop what they see moves from the head into the heart. It’s an agonizingly slow process for most, but in the end the soul itself is transformed and the man who couldn’t put down a drink or tell the truth about anything becomes a useful member of society.
For years I went to South Boston to sit in a room full of men very far away from my Yale degree and venture capital firm. The guys I met had done hard time. They’d hit bottoms just as painful as mine but often much more tragic. They wore ink and gold and spoke with thick accents often with poor grammar. But what I learned in that classroom (the meetings were held in a school) was that all my book smarts didn’t mean shit when it came to my life. I wasn’t going to think my way out of my problems. I had to listen to what these guys were telling me. And in a fundamental way they have figured out stuff about themselves that I had just begun to examine.
The bond I felt in those rooms was palpable. It wasn’t anything like the way I saw men portrayed on TV or in the media. These were total strangers who had every right to hate me but instead, loved me unconditionally. They taught me how to take responsibility for my actions, how to tell the truth, and how to stay sober. They taught me to aspire to a completely different kind of goodness than I had ever contemplated in my prior shadowy world of immobilizing fear and quick fixes. They taught me the courage to look deep inside for the answers, to help another man no matter what, and feel my emotions.
Could any of that have happened if women had been in the room with us? Absolutely not. Did each man in that room leave with the very direct intention, reinforced by their brothers, to treat women categorically better than they had before entering? Absolutely yes.
***
As the founder of The Good Men Project I’ve spoken about manhood well over a hundred times by now, in places as diverse as a treatment facility for teen prostitutes to a Hollywood premier. Inevitably the question comes up: “Yeah, this is all really interesting but what exactly does it mean to be a good man?”
At the beginning I would bumble around with a long-winded explanation about the importance of personal narrative, moments of truth in every man’s life, and the infinite possible definitions of goodness.
Now I just say that I don’t know.
I can see the disappointment in people’s eyes. They want some magical formula for being a good father, husband, and man.
I usually go on to explain that I am not a particularly good man. I aspire to a personal goodness that I have caught glimpses of through my own path to manhood, including plenty of blood, sweat and flat-out failure.
♦◊♦
My son Seamus goes to a Jesuit High School. I was brought up Quaker, so anything with a direct pipeline to Rome is highly suspicious in my book (not to mention having a close friend who was a victim of sexual abuse at the hands of a priest). Over the last four years I have come to greatly respect my son’s teachers and the Jesuit institution he attends.
The cornerstone of everything that goes on at my son’s school is the simple concept of becoming a man for others. On parents’ night I talked to his biology teacher who made clear that they would indeed learn some biology in his class but the real topic was manhood. On Veteran’s Day the teacher made all the students interview a veteran on videotape and come into class and do an oral report on what they learned. More than once, Seamus’s biology homework the weekend was to do two hours of service work.
This last spring break Seamus and a dozen classmates went to the Dominican Republic on a service trip. They went to the Haitian border to witness men attempting to buy life-saving food to save their families before having their bags of rice slit by border guards. They held deformed children in an orphanage. They sat with kids who spent their life picking metal out a huge trash dump. And they helped plant coffee in a subsistence hill village.
Certainly this idea of compassion for those less fortunate is an appealing one when thinking about male goodness. But even service, as the charismatic woman who led my son’s trip explained so movingly, is about personal connection. It comes from the heart not the head. So you can’t tell someone else how to do it, only try to listen to your own soul.
♦◊♦
My original motivation in founding the Good Men Project had little to do with what I thought men should do and more in realizing what we were lacking. What I saw in myself, and many of my male contemporaries, was a sense of confusion and depression over the male landscape. And I also saw a lack of conversation about what was really going on just under the surface for men in a very wide spectrum of circumstances.
My goal was not to proselytize in any way, shape or form. It was simply to bring individual stories of manhood to the surface in hopes of inspiring others to share their stories and, while doing so, become better men. That, in the end, is how it has always worked for me. An abstract discussion of manhood is boring as dirt to me. Listening to a guy spill his guts is transformational. At least to me.
And when I started The Good Men Project, it happened for me again. I sat with Julio Medina as he told me about being a Sing Sing inmate for years until he picked up a friend who had been stabbed off the prison floor and in that moment changed forever. I traded hundreds of emails with Michael Kamber from the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan and ultimately the day his best friend, Tim Hetherington, was shot and killed taking combat photographs. I met Ron Cowie at an outdoor café and listened to him weep as he retold the story of losing his wife to a rogue virus. As he wiped away his tears, their toddler daughter asked for a bagel.
These stories, and scores of others like them, changed me forever. They made me a better man. They gave me more insight into how to connect man-to-man in ways that are too often shunned by us collectively. I don’t know whether it’s by nature or by training, but men who reveal such personal stories, particularly those including failure and sadness, is, in my view, far less common than it should be.
I may not know what being a good man is but I am quite sure that a key part of any process to figuring it out is a deep level of honesty and self-revelation that we all too often pass on for more superficial pursuits.
♦◊♦
So how does all this relate to women and, more specifically, feminist doctrine? I know I led with that big headline and have made you wait to get to the heart of the matter. But since I know this topic causes a lot of people to lose their minds, I wanted to at least explain the path by which I found myself in this feminist sinkhole.
Going back to being a man for others, the clear implication of that goal is the “other” is generally someone who needs your help and may in fact be less fortunate. That most certainly includes orphans in the DR and teen prostitutes at the Germaine Lawrence School right at home in Boston. And God knows it means, just to me now, looking at the way that race, gender, sexual orientation, and wealth play into systematic discrimination and oppression.
I have often said that the conversation amongst men about what it means to be a good father and husband has obvious benefits for wives and mothers. The aspiration is to figure out how to do and be better men, and that means in relation to the women in our lives.
But here comes the problem. The stories that transformed my life where not told by women. They were told by men. My fundamental view is that there is a male experience that is too often squashed in our society by a culture that perpetuates a deeply flawed view of manhood. What I hope to do is not dictate what replaces that simplistic view of what it means to be a man, but simply create the space for a more nuanced discussion.
♦◊♦
The most disappointing, and in fact dangerous, aspects of the Good Men Project’s success, in my view, has been the extent to which we have been sucked into a debate over gender theory in general and feminism in particular. Whether or not you agree with any of the wide variety of definitions of feminism, the Good Men Project is not about gender theory and it certainly isn’t about feminism. Or at the very least that was never my goal in founding it.
I realize to some that the litmus test of being a good man is being a card-carrying member of a strident form of feminism that puts the burden of proof on every male for the sins of their brothers. But to me that is the most extreme form of the same old nonsense which keeps men from searching their souls for what manhood is really all about, to them. If you define manhood purely from a female perspective most guys are just going to turn off. And in my view, rightly so.
That’s why it saddened me to engage in such non-productive debates with the likes of Hugo Schwyzer, Amanda Marcotte, and Roseanne Barr who all attacked me for saying that being a dude is a good thing.
Perhaps even more significant than my fist fights with feminism over manhood has been the steady stream of highly trafficked pieces on our site about the female view of men, from gas lighting (one of our most popular pieces ever—“Why Women Are Not Crazy”) to the constant drum beat of posts in which manhood is viewed in the context of gender theory. Stuff like, “On Women’s Rights: Yeah, Yeah. Blah, Blah. Whatever.” And “A Rant.” And “Five Ways Feminism Helps Men.”
None of this is to say that a healthy debate of feminism isn’t a valid enterprise and one that is important. It just saddens me that it has become such a core part of what we are doing at GMP.
To be crystal clear what I wanted most is a nationwide discussion of manhood and god knows we have sparked that. We have over 400 regular contributors and a vibrant community of readers and commenters. In the end I do not decide what gets published nor do I even moderate comments. I am a sometimes contributor and very interested reader. There’s a team of amazing people behind the scenes making the magic happen. And you, the readers, first and foremost decide what you want to talk about. If nothing else the web is a purely democratic vehicle. I can say that I want you to read first person accounts of men at war, in prisons, and recovering from addiction but unless you read those stories we won’t likely do a lot more of them.
I have often said that the demographic which I most want to reach is not the guy at any extreme but the non-famous father, husband, and worker trying to figure out what the heck is important to him whether he is a venture capitalist (like me) or a stay-at-home dad or an inmate or a soldier coming back from Afghanistan.
I just have a really hard time seeing how debates over gender theory advance the ball in that guy’s thinking. Sure pretty much every discussion of manhood involved a discussion of sexuality and men as they relate to women, but a man-to-man discussion of those topics, in my experience, is very different than one set up to be in the context of a woman’s point of view. It may very well be that it ends up coming to conclusions very in line with what feminists believe but the process is a very different one.
I often think of Kent George, one of our originally contributors whose story I read for the first time early one Saturday morning while drinking my first cup of coffee while still in bed. I almost fell out of bed because I was laughing so hard. And that was before I started crying. His story is about being beat up physically by his older lesbian sister and abused verbally by his Irish Catholic mother in working class neighborhood of Boston. The story is funny because of the gender reversal and the way he tells it. But in the end it’s sad because it’s clear how much damage Kent suffered and also how much compassion he has for his mother, who he later found out had a profound mental illness, and his sister.
What’s the feminist moral to that story? I don’t know. But I do know that Kent is a damn good man and his brutal honesty, and humor, inspired me to be a better man and treat the women in my life the best I can no matter what the circumstance.
♦◊♦
I had a female at GMP read an early draft of this piece and her response stopped me cold:
Here’s the thing — and you may not like me very much for this.
—Women shouldn’t be in the conversation about men IF women are viewed by men as sexual objects instead of just people.
—Feminsm’s whole reason for being is to stop women from being viewed as sexual objects.
To me — it’s as simple as that. And so a phrase like — “In church basements there is a very clear message that men help men and women help women. Falling in love is not going to get you sober.” — reduces women to “the other” — someone who cannot be helpful because they are the ones you either fall in love with or have sex with.
And I just don’t get that.
The reason it stopped me cold is that in my AA example, I did not distinguish by gender. My language was intentionally gender neutral. The reality is that new sober alcoholics of every sexual orientation and gender behave the same way—they’d prefer to take a hostage and have sex than do the real work required to get and stay sober.
But the female reader assumed that I was viewing women in this context as sexual objects even though the words that she quoted quite clearly didn’t say that and in fact that is not the case at all—men and women are both grabbing for anything to fill the hole of addiction.
So even a colleague who has read countless pieces I have written and I think understands what I was getting at slapped me just as hard at Tom Ashbrook. And completely without merit.
The further discussion I had with the reader was around this idea of single sex discussions and whether or not my going into Sing Sing with Julio on the first stop of our book tour to meet with a room full of men sentenced to life would have been different if a woman was present. I tried to explain why I thought an all male conversation was different than a mixed gender one: “It’s about a level of honesty that men wouldn’t reveal with a women there.” She responded:
I’d love to know WHY that is. And I think so many women are interested in GMP because they want to know why also. That’s the crux of everything. Honest discussions about the difficult issues. And … If men can’t be honest with women, and men are the ones in power … I think that is part of what feminism is also.
It is the crux of the issue indeed. This idea that just because men want to have a discussion about manhood on their own terms that they are lying to women about it. There are plenty of forums for women to talk about men. I have made my way over to Jezebel more than once and gotten my ass handed to me.
What happened in that classroom in South Boston and in the bowels of Sing Sing with those inmates was a kind of man-to-man honesty that benefits women but isn’t going to happen if the frame is feminism or, when men are grappling with the deepest darkest secrets of their lives, if women are present. At least for me, there’s a kind of deep bonding that happens when a guy looks me straight in the eyes that is different than a similar conversation I might have with a woman. The transformation is only possible when I see that I am fundamentally not alone in my struggles to be a good man.
I don’t know but I expect women feel the same way. There are plenty of all women support groups in recovery and out in which I am quite sure men’s presence would disturb the safety of the boundaries established by the group.
All of this isn’t to say that the GMP should be a single sex forum. Far from it. Women are welcome for sure. But to my mind if the topic strays from a discussion of manhood in men’s own words to a feminist critique of manhood, my initial inspiration and hope for the Project is completely lost.
♦◊♦
From a macro perspective The Good Men Project was founded just as The End of Men went to print and the likes of Tiger, Charlie Sheen and John Edwards hit the front pages. In other words just as most men I know, and the thousands I met during the course of working on GMP, were digging deep for real answers to the questions about meaning and importance as a man, our whole gender was getting thrown under the bus.
According to the media we are less employable, less educated, inferior stay-at-home parents, and sexual deviants to boot. We are really good at going to jail, leading our country into meaningless wars, and taking down massive financial institutions.
The stereotype of what it means to be a man actually crystalized into a narrower stick figure as the ground under our collective feet gave way.
I look at the revolution in the work and family life patterns of men as not the end of men but the birth of something new and better. That is what GMP is all about: exploring that potential from every possible angle. And why viewing manhood from the perspective of a feminist wrecking ball, that leaves every one of us men guilty of gender oppression, a death spiral in my view.
In the end I think we all want the same thing: a new kind of macho in which men are allowed to express themselves as fully formed human beings who change diapers, are capable of intimacy, do meaningful work, and aspire to goodness in whatever way they define it.
But I refuse to see the world with a reductionist lens that dismisses the possibility that men can have their own stories of struggle for goodness that can be shared man-to-man in a way that changes the teller and the listener alike quite apart from what a woman or a feminist might say about that story.
@ Julie …. Sorry I didn’t respond to the following sooner. You said “Do you see any correlation between jobs and stagnant rates of pay, credit card culture, laws that allow for interest rates to hike on cards, etc influencing the ability for one person to stay at home? Given the salaries my husband and I both have, and given rents and home costs, food costs and bills, both people need to work. I agree that if men can’t get good employment that causes a piece of the system to move towards both people working, but I think there are… Read more »
All these -isms certainly seem to promote fruitful dialog and harmony. Maybe we need more. An ism for everyone! For example, I will be a Ulyssesist.
DeLani: Ok, first, if you “reject feminism,” than you are saying you do not believe in gender equality. That’s what feminism means. And I’m not accusing anyone of saying that! I can believe you don’t mean to accuse anyone of saying this however…. How does that follow in the first place? How can it be said that someone that rejects feminism does not believe in gender equality? Did feminism somehow get the corner on the gender equality discourse to the point that if it one does not identify with it then they must be against gender equality? This is the… Read more »
Boy, the comments are off to the races! I’d just like to comment on the original article, the author’s statement that being a good man is not a feminist issue. First, I respect your right to define your motivations for yourself. So, for you, and I’m sure for many men, being a good man is not about gender equality. OK. But, from my perspective, as a feminist, a wife, and a mother of a son, the act of being a good man *is* a feminist issue. Too many different interpretations of how we should achieve gender equality have muddied the… Read more »
“First, I respect your right to define your motivations for yourself. So, for you, and I’m sure for many men, being a good man is not about gender equality. OK.” Another example of the feminist monopolization of equality belief. Why is it, being a man and rejecting feminism means, for him, and many other men, being good is NOT about gender equality? Are you saying that he isn’t allowed to see being a good man as including gender equality? Or isn’t capable? Why? “designed to keep men and women separate and unequal.” Separate I can see. I don’t see where… Read more »
Mark, I don’t think you understood what I was saying. Your words: “Why is it, being a man and rejecting feminism means, for him, and many other men, being good is NOT about gender equality? Are you saying that he isn’t allowed to see being a good man as including gender equality? Or isn’t capable? Why?” Ok, first, if you “reject feminism,” than you are saying you do not believe in gender equality. That’s what feminism means. And I’m not accusing anyone of saying that! I am NOT saying that “he isn’t allowed to see being a good man as… Read more »
“Ok, first, if you “reject feminism,” than you are saying you do not believe in gender equality.” Wrong. Feminism is an ideology that contains a great many theories and belief structures. One can reject many of these theories and belief structure while still maintaining a belief in equality. To believe feminism maintains a monopoly on egalitarian thought is both arrogant and dangerous, as it sets up a position of moral authority without the ability to question that authority. There are many examples of large feminist organizations working against the idea of equality (generally, NOW vs fathers rights being the easiest… Read more »
I’m confused why you admit at the start of your post that there are many kinds of feminisms (” a great many theories and belief structures”), but then slide back into referring to “the tenets of feminism,” singular, and “feminist belief,” singular. I’m troubled by atheists who have told me, “I oppose the beliefs of Christians,” because I have no idea what brand of Christianity they’re talking about. What if their qualms are completely removed from how I live my Christian life? I agree with you that no two feminisms are alike. And no two feminists, either. But then why… Read more »
“I’m confused why you admit at the start of your post that there are many kinds of feminisms (” a great many theories and belief structures”), but then slide back into referring to “the tenets of feminism,” singular, and “feminist belief,” singular.” Because there are some belief systems and theories that are consistent throughout most/all forms of feminism. I do not accept the patriarchy and male privilege theories as outlined by many feminists. I think kyrarchy theory has its flaws and it’s injections of negative motive onto men/masculinity, but it is far closer than patriarchy. but many feminists still embrace… Read more »
To clarify: I am not contributing to the discussion on equality. I have nothing to say on whether feminism should or should be equal. But here I’d really like to talk a little more about why the way you’re talking about this makes it impossible for me to feel like we’re having a conversation. “Many feminists,” “NOW,” and “Simon Fraser University’s women center” do not my feminism make. And yet because these are the feminisms you’ve encountered, you’ve concluded that it’s all right to use the shorthand “feminism,” (not even “much of feminism,” or even more accurately, “the feminisms that… Read more »
I’ll finish responding to the remainder of your post when you answer these two questions:
1: What is feminism. In particular, what is feminism to you.
2: Why have you focused on my use of feminism despite the similarly monolithic not-monolithic use by other posters. Why is DeLani’s use of feminism to mean ” At its core, it is simply the belief that *men and women should be treated equally in all aspects of life*”?
Wow. I am stunned that it has gotten to the point where simply stating that, despite all the different forms and schools of thought within feminism, the idea of feminism is that men and women should be treated equally, that this statement has become controversial. I had no idea that the divisiveness around feminism had gotten this bad.
It’s obvious we can’t have any kind of conversation if we can’t even agree on our terms. Since my opinion isn’t welcome anyway, I’m bowing out.
I dont think somebody is attacking feminism as a personal philosofy, but most of the attacks are against the political and accademic arm of feminism (witch to me at least they are similar to the “good old” politburo from soviet times). The political branche (NOW Vawa ect) who goes strictly against equality and the breaking gender roles; and the accademic who borders on biggotism (male privilege, scroedinger rapist ect). Personally? I think a internal debate in feminism is necessary. Necessary to figure out how and why’s the movement has lost it course and what to do with the politicans (who… Read more »
“where simply stating that, despite all the different forms and schools of thought within feminism, the idea of feminism is that men and women should be treated equally, that this statement has become controversial. ”
The controversy stems for the significant visible representatives of the feminist movement, and many of the internet variety, do not conform to that idea of feminism, but in fact, work against it. How can a movement “be about” something a great segment of it actually works against?
The fact you’d rather claim the victim and leave is disappointing, but not unsurprising..
Well it’s not hard to show your opinion is false (or at least it wouldn’t be if you stuck around to read responses). You just have to look at some of the most representative work of the movement (in the US) and there’s a lot of sexism in it. Lobbying for anti-male laws for example. Not by “extremists” alone but broadly across the board.
DeLani, do you support financial abortion options for men? Just curious.
You are conflating feminism and gender equality. I’d say they were opposites. At any rate they are not the same thing.
“That necessarily means men should be allowed to explore and express all parts of their identities and interests, even those not acceptably “manly” enough for our patriarchal culture. Examples include caring for children, being honest about one’s feelings, showing compassion, etc.”
I agree. And it also means that men should be allowed to explore and express all parts of their identities and interests, even those not acceptably sensitive enough for our feminist culture.
I’m late to the party and have admittedly only skimmed the comments, but this article brings a possibly contentious Tyler Durden quote to mind. “We are a generation of men raised by women. I’m wondering if another woman is the answer we need.” It seems that most of the comment threads at GMP on posts such as this one invariably feature an incarnation of the same flawed paradigm: masculinity is something to be contended with/explained/fixed. That is, prejudice bifurcates men into the enlightened and the unenlightened. Given the inherent flaws with that dichotomy, why must the conversation so often revolve… Read more »
I don’t think you understood your feminist friend. Were the men in the AA group worried about being sexually attracted to and blindly covering up their emotional pain through sex with the other men in that group? If the sexual attraction has nothing to do with the women’s-only groups and the men’s-only groups, why even put those statements side-by-side if fear of attraction has nothing to do with it? Would a gay man maybe have liked to be in a group with other women? If he needed that for recovery, could he then not become a courageous good man among… Read more »
@Lisa re the comment “The internet is great because how else could you organize 25,000 people per day (which is what we do now — to talk about important issues. How else? Every day? **snip**” I think many of us are trying to figure out and learn what happens, we have claims from both sides and people are still trying to go through the proof to see what the problem is exactly. We need to know what the problem is before it can be fixed, that means posting the proof of how feminists dismiss mra’s or men, and the reverse,… Read more »
Archy — I do see you doing a LOT of that — and I’ve seen you defending us on *other* sites. Which is great. But I’d love to see you write more articles. You’re always on here. You have a *great* voice. I read almost everything you write. I’ve seen you change over the past few months — amazingly — in your thoughtfulness, your understanding and your ability to see both sides. In fact I’ve seen *everyone* on this thread learn and grow together. So it just pains me when I see arguments where people just try to defend their… Read more »
Life hit me pretty hard with the cancer recovery, well mainly the tiredness that followed it. My stamina and also my mental focus has been terrible for 2 months but I’ll try write something once I repair fully. Yeah I defend on other sites because I believe in this one and hate seeing people skim comments or see 1 article and assume the entire site is represented by it, I LOVE the fact that there’s so many different views and opinions here and I think on other sites people assume that if you post an article (like the female privilege… Read more »
You can be apart of a group but still have different thoughts & idea, and different ways to go about advancing them.
When a someone tells me what Feminism is about, i see it as THEIR view of Feminism.
A major problem is the refusal to acknowledge that some thoughts & ideas of Feminist are harming men.
Anthony Zarat, if you are reading, I am curious. Do you self-identify as MRA?
@ Danny from wayyy above “Actually this happens at MenRights Reddit. It’s happening right in there with the anti-woman sentiment. But for some odd reason when feminists talk about that reddit only the negative exists. No mention about supporting the Brian Banks documentary, or giving props to that single fathers groups in Japan, pointing out true double standards in the realm of gender….no somehow only the negative things can be found.” To be fair are the MRA’s talking about the positives feminist brings much? But yeah the focus on negative in both camps is annoying and causes so much heat.… Read more »
To be fair are the MRA’s talking about the positives feminist brings much?
A fair point.
But yeah the focus on negative in both camps is annoying and causes so much heat. But controversy is more fun to read vs good stuff right?
Basically. And not only is it more fun to read but it gets more hits.
My problem regarding these types of arguments are twofold. First: If feminism was doing what it claims to do, there wouldn’t be a men’s rights movement, or at least, nothing worth mentioning. If the equality for all was apparent in mainstream feminist actions, there would be no complaints about feminism from the MRM for their failure to live up to their claims. Second: When I first began discussing men’s issues, I didn’t identify as MRA, I identified as egalitarian, and I wasn’t anti-feminist. But I could not raise a men’s issue in any form without being attacked and/or marginalized by… Read more »
“I’m just going to comment on the above…first with pointing out that feminists DO critique feminism…all the flipping time. For goodness sake, that’s been going on since first-wave feminists with women’s suffrage. The suffragettes critiqued each other 10 ways till Sunday…and they weren’t even always nice about it.” I realize they call them out, but I’m not sure it’s enough. I’ve NEVER seen a feminist critique apart from here of the way they interact with MRA’s or how they marginilize men’s issues on topics like rape, abuse, etc. I’ve seen many comments detailing annoyance of feminists who don’t speak up… Read more »
@John Gottman, you have a site and or blog?
Tom a courageous article and well said. If what you are saying is that male dialogue and sharing a male narrative can happen exclusive of feminism I whole heatedly agree. In fact I believe it is imperative. For men to see the landscape of masculinity as defined by men that experience it, is to survey the potentials for understanding and changing it personally. Much like the women’s movement in the sixties and seventies it was about education and self awareness for women. Men for the most part were excluded from that political development. I myself remember often being called a… Read more »
Wow, this thread really proves Tom’s point.
I’m not sure how much longer I can commit to following this thread, but I do want to say that it has been an enriching experience to engage in this discussion. There are definitely several things that came up that I still do not agree with, but contrarily I heard a lot of things that resonated and that will influence my future conversations about equality. Thank you to all who shared your feelings and your stories.
It’s a lot to take in Kacey. Most feminists new to this thread assume that anybody opposed to feminism must be an evil brute.
The story of the male side and the anti-male advocacy of (some) feminists rarely gets talked about in most feminist spheres I have encountered.
Thanks for keeping an open mind, asking questions and seriously contemplating things from the male point of view.
“Thanks for keeping an open mind, asking questions and seriously contemplating things from the male point of view.”
A male point of view. A male point of view. Or alternatively: male points of view. There is no single male point of view…just as there is no single female point of view.
“Most feminists new to this thread assume that anybody opposed to feminism must be an evil brute.”
Also, I’d argue that from what I’ve seen most feminists who are at GMP assume that men who are opposed to feminism just don’t really understand feminism all that well.
Well, of course I don’t mean that I singular own the male point of view. However, if I were having a face to face conversation with a woman, I would be the one more uniquely positioned to talk about the issues and benefits of being male. That is all I meant. “Also, I’d argue that from what I’ve seen most feminists who are at GMP assume that men who are opposed to feminism just don’t really understand feminism all that well.” Once again this goes back to the discussion of how you weigh the merits of feminism. By the theories… Read more »
My point is that, many of us MRA’s understand feminist *theory* fine. But, when that theory gets applied in a “boots on the ground” sense it is not anything remotely an egalitarian result. Communism sounds good too, but when the theory gets applied you have Stalin’s great purge. It is not my understanding that is lacking, but the majority of silent feminists who refuse to oust the haters under their banner. Systems may be perfect but they are executed by people who are very fallible. I can understand and forgive that some leaders in feminism might be bad apples. What… Read more »
Thank you Kacey for participating. I hope you stick around GMP, Sorry if I came off a little strong. As John D stated, you seem very open minded, and I think a place like GMP, where you can hear from both sides, will be of benefit to you.
Again, I recommend girlWriteWhat on youtube. about a dozen 20-30 minute videos introducing men’s issues and she does so in an informative to newcomers kind of way.
John D., You said:
“My problem is that the theory of “male privilege” washes out relevant history which is overbriming with tales of male disposability (in other words both sexes were objectified, but at least women were treated as treasured objects that shouldn’t be risked in cavalier ways, while men were treated as blunt hammers that could and should be used until broken. When that man was broken with ptsd, injury, or death f*ck it there was a million more where he came from).”
I really get this. Thank you.
Just so you know: My grandfather on my mothers side won two silver stars (he was a medic) for pulling guys out of heavy fire in WWII. He was abused by my grandmother (she once emasculated him in front of a woman who gave him free day old donuts because she felt bad for him because he had 8 kids to feed). She accused the woman of trying to seduce my grandfather and basically totally emasculated him. There is also a time where she pushed him down a flight of stairs. My father was drafted into vietnam and came back… Read more »
And THIS is why we need our own space to discuss. Imagine women’s problems as apples and men’s problems as oranges. Now, you get apple worms, and that’s cool! Might wanna go talk to some apple farmers about that. I get orange molds, so I should probably talk to the orange farmer. The problem is that some people (women AND men) have decided that apples are either the best or the only type of fruit out there. I’d try to get into the specifics you’ve brought up, but that’s frankly completely unproductive. There’s no point to suggesting to someone that… Read more »
“There’s no point to suggesting to someone that their views might be incomplete if they’ve already made up their minds.”
Ah, but…that applies in reverse too then. Would not discussing men’s issues as if they exist in a vacuum outside of women’s issues also end up resulting in an incomplete picture? We aren’t living in separate worlds with separate problems. We all interact with each other all the time…our issues are interconnected. Ozy’s Law: for every crap stereotype about one gender, there’s an equal and opposite crap stereotype about the other gender.
@Heather … You said ” We all interact with each other all the time…our issues are interconnected. Ozy’s Law: for every crap stereotype about one gender, there’s an equal and opposite crap stereotype about the other gender.” The difference is that the crap steriotype of males is siocially acceptable in todays society. In addition, main stream feminism adds fuel to the fire through their campaign efforts against men.
Your statement is false Tom. It’s absolutely false. Mainstream feminism does NOT add “fuel to the fire” through “campaign efforts against men.” Mainstream feminism doesn’t, actually, campaign against men. FFS, much of they time they’re campaigning FOR men. Hello paternity leave and an attempt to get women as part of selective service!
Not sure if they’re mainstream or not but some feminists in Australia are trying to push gendered domestic violence laws “the plan” which I’d say is against men, at least from what I’ve seen of it genderizing it and leaving men up shits creek without a paddle for help. I think from what I’ve seen and heard that Feminism mostly just campaigns for women and much the stuff where men are harmed is because they were left out. Is it possible though MSF campaigns both for and against men? Someone talked about NOW campaigning against men getting recovery jobs, shovel… Read more »
Dunno about Australia enough to comment on that. As for the U.S., I am not saying feminist organizations are stellar at always helping out men. And I’m not even saying they’ve historically been concerned with men’s issues, because they haven’t. I’m saying that now, today, feminist groups have fought for men’s issues, including the draft and paternity leave. They have screwed up when it comes to DV and father’s rights in family courts. But where they’ve screwed up is largely when feminist organizations are unable to recognize where they’re actually adhering to the patriarchy/traditional gender roles. Also, and I can’t… Read more »
But where they’ve screwed up is largely when feminist organizations are unable to recognize where they’re actually adhering to the patriarchy/traditional gender roles. Unable to recognize? I’m going to chalk it up to varying mileage but I think an inability to recognize only goes so far. There’s a big dose of active denial, a bigger does than folks are willing to admit. Also, and I can’t emphasize this enough, the people actually making all of these laws aren’t feminists. Yes, feminists have a big lobby…but their influence is still limited. But at the same time even if those law makers… Read more »
Wow that’s just really…cynical and places a lot of negative motivations on people. I mean, “feminist still support such actions, when it suits them,” sounds like there are a bunch of feminists sitting around a table talking about how some law may hurt men and saying, “but it’ll further our cause so we will push for it.” Or talking about how some politician is actually proposing a law that’s really not all that feminist, but saying “oh but women benefit so we’ll support it.” It’s not some conspiracy, or even an active attempt to push their agenda at any cost.… Read more »
” I mean, “feminist still support such actions, when it suits them,” sounds like there are a bunch of feminists sitting around a table talking about how some law may hurt men and saying, “but it’ll further our cause so we will push for it.”” I’m curious then, how does NOW come to decisions about what and when they send out action alerts, or which politicians and/or policies they wish to openly support, if they aren’t sitting around a table discussing it in terms of how it will and won’t benefit women? I think we have already demonstrated quick clearly… Read more »
Wow that’s just really…cynical and places a lot of negative motivations on people. I mean, “feminist still support such actions, when it suits them,” sounds like there are a bunch of feminists sitting around a table talking about how some law may hurt men and saying, “but it’ll further our cause so we will push for it.” Or talking about how some politician is actually proposing a law that’s really not all that feminist, but saying “oh but women benefit so we’ll support it.” It’s not some conspiracy, or even an active attempt to push their agenda at any cost.… Read more »
RE: NOW, Ah ok. Guess they’re unable to do much now? “I’m saying that now, today, feminist groups have fought for men’s issues, including the draft and paternity leave.” Just to clarify, do you mean some feminist groups or all? Or all the major ones? Also has anyone got a list, side by side of all feminist groups and all mra/masculists groups? I have a feeling that the fathers groups could be classified as egal feminist in action, as in they help both genders. Also because feminism has multiple meanings, a list stating if they are gynocentric or egalitarian would… Read more »
“RE: NOW, Ah ok. Guess they’re unable to do much now?” Unless someone comes up with some new case or argument that the Supreme Court is willing to actually hear, yeah there’s not really anything that can be done. And that’s not likely, particularly because no one is expecting the draft to be reinstated. As for women in combat, I know that feminist organizations (I don’t know which ones exactly) are currently working to make it so women can occupy all the same positions that men do in the military. As for the list…I don’t know of any list, but… Read more »
Hmm, yeah that could be a problem. The labels are subjective and mean different things to different people. Personally I think there are a lot of MRA’s but not many actually identify as MRA, possibly because they see how quite a few feminists in particular talk about them and don’t want to be thought of like that. Same in reverse too, it’s why I don’t label as an MRA + feminist even though I do MRA and feminist stuff.
MRA/MRM has a very specific meaning, really. Men’s rights have been discussed and examined for quite awhile, but the MRM itself is a largely internet-based group of people that does not include everyone who is actually fighting for men’s issues. The Men’s Movement and masculists (from what I understand of the term) are not necessarily synonymous with the MRM/MRAs. In fact, I’d argue a lot of MRA writing I’ve seen is very much not masculist (insofar as masculism is about removing the traditional gender norms which are detrimental to men). A lot of MRA stuff I’ve seen is actually espousing… Read more »
For one thing, they are not “fighting” anything about the draft. No campaign but simply a position. The NOW convention ???? For men’s rights? “Hundreds of women’s rights activists and supporters from every corner of the nation will converge in Baltimore, Md., this weekend, June 29 – July 1, at the National Organization for Women annual conference. This year’s conference, entitled “Energize! Organize! Stop the War on Women,” “”Today, more than ever, we are fighting for issues that are critical to the well-being of women and their families,” said NOW President Terry O’Neill. “It’s time to strategize for the 2012… Read more »
As the Good Men Project is not a feminist space, introducing feminism into it can have unwanted effects. I have seen the following pattern of discussion: – Good man Gunther tells a story from his life – Feminist Kriemhild interprets it using a concept like “male privilege” – The Grim Hagen challenges claim of the existence of male privilege using some statistics – Kriemhild and Hagen argue about male privilege leaving Gunther’s story behind As I see it, the problems are. 1. Kriemhild interpretation presumes the existence of male privilege and not everybody here agrees that male privilege exists. To… Read more »
I did have a thought inspired by a conversation on another board. I wonder if part of the issue is that we expect men to become more like women, when the opposite might be more appropriate. Women’s culture, including parts of feminism, can be passive-aggressive, judgemental, and controling. Much of the “scolding” on this site has come from women. It’s probably clear that I personally don’t agree with much of it. I’d say that I’m libertarian on the personal level, but socialist at the corporate level. The libertarian in me would like to end moralizing control of non-harmful behavior of… Read more »
“I did have a thought inspired by a conversation on another board. I wonder if part of the issue is that we expect men to become more like women, when the opposite might be more appropriate.” Um, no. I’d argue there isn’t really “women’s culture” and “men’s culture,” anyway. There are mainstream cultural norms that prescribe behaviour for men and women…and some of the behaviour prescribed for men is objectively positive, and some that is prescribed for women is objectively positive. A lot of the problem is the “prescribed” aspect, so that anyone who doesn’t conform to their gender ends… Read more »
Actually there are somewhat different biological templates underlying both mens and womens behavior. And it’s demonstrable. I think the mistake the ev-psych people make is believing everything is a reflex of this.
“It’s not that “men should be” more sensitive…it’s that men should be able to be more sensitive without ridicule. There is a difference.”
thats also the way as I understand it. It’s about having a choice and being able to carrying it out without social stigma.
I just want to jump in and say this is a really important point and I agree completely.
I don’t think women’s suffereage has any relevence in the debate anymore. There probably aren’t that many white women alive who have never had the ability to vote.
Besides, Feminist women keep telling me the Draft isn’t particularly relevent, despite the fact the draft is a lot more recent the female sufferage, I still had to fill out a draft card at 18 (and they didn’t) and a draft being reinstated is far more likely then women losing the ability to vote
I’d say the draft is relevant in the way it intersects with how women still aren’t able to hold “combat positions.” But yes, I do get what you’re saying about voting…it’s not relevant until someone jumps in and says something about how women shouldn’t have ever been given the vote because…whatever sexist reason they come up with.
Mind, it’s still important to understand the history of suffrage (all suffrage), I think. So if someone is discussing it inaccurately, it’s worth making sure all the facts are understood.
Selective service is still around, and there are a lot of penalties for men not to fill them out when he turns 18.
Making good man is as much feminist issue as supporting vegetarianism be an issue for butcher’s association. Feminism thrives on raising false alarms and demonizing men as oppressors of women. They have no interest in helping any man, good or otherwise. Their usual complaint is that men have oppressed women in the past and so on. But can any unbiased person claim that men have not sweat and bled for their womenfolk. Where is the gratitude?? Feminism is a creation of bored upper class women who had nothing better to do.
The bond I felt in those rooms was palpable. It wasn’t anything like the way I saw men portrayed on TV or in the media. These were total strangers who had every right to hate me but instead, loved me unconditionally. They taught me how to take responsibility for my actions, how to tell the truth, and how to stay sober. They taught me to aspire to a completely different kind of goodness than I had ever contemplated in my prior shadowy world of immobilizing fear and quick fixes. They taught me the courage to look deep inside for the… Read more »
I’ll agree that it’s probably not the case that it “absolutely” couldn’t have happened with women in the room… but why is it so easy for women to believe that women act differently and speak differently when men are around yet apparently it’s unfathomable to believe that men might be the same way when women are around?
Well I’ll hop in here and say I think it’s silly either way. Maybe it’s because I’m queer…and a feminist…and a liberal…an archaeologist/anthropologist…and I dunno, some other category of something…but I tend to purposefully be aware of whether I’m treating someone differently based on their gender/ethnicity/whatever, and then cut it the heck out and treat them like individuals. This includes when I’m in a group.
On second thought, maybe it’s because I understand that gender is a social construct.
-On second thought, maybe it’s because I understand that gender is a “social construct”.
If you only knew the POWER of a Uterus…
Dude, I’ve had cramps…believe me when I say I understand the “POWER of a Uterus.” 😉 lol.
It’s a metaphysical metaphor.
“Dude, I’ve had cramps…believe me when I say I understand the “POWER of a Uterus.”
LooooooooL that was the comment of the day 😀
@Heather …. recognizing a gender, ethnicity or whatever IS recognizing that persons individuality. I’m a guy and I don’t want you to treat me like a women. Your purposely treating me the same is an insult, I’m a guy and what’s wrong with that? After 38 years of marriage, I still have to remind my wife that I’m her husband, not her girlfriend. One of the areas clinicians are educated on is the differences in cultures, genders and ages. Specific training is done in these areas so that we can better work with clients. I think that because you try… Read more »
What does it mean to be “treated like a woman”? What does it mean to be “treated like a man”?
Yeah, no offense Tom but you lost me on that one. Ideally, everybody should be treated with respect, unless they’ve given you a reason not to treat them with respect.
@John Gottman …. that’s okay. Things are kinda crazy in here. I was responding to what Heather was saying …..”Well I’ll hop in here and say I think it’s silly either way. Maybe it’s because I’m queer…and a feminist…and a liberal…an archaeologist/anthropologist…and I dunno, some other category of something…but I tend to purposefully be aware of whether I’m treating someone differently based on their gender/ethnicity/whatever, and then cut it the heck out and treat them like individuals. This includes when I’m in a group.” I was simply explaining that all these things makes them individuals and by ignoring them, you… Read more »
“What does it mean to be “treated like a woman”? What does it mean to be “treated like a man”?” I would imagine ‘being anything’ would deal with fitting into a grouping of culturally expected behaviors. What does it mean to be Goth? What does it mean to be Emo? If being goth is a subculture then being a ‘man’ or a ‘woman’ would be aligning yourself with the traditions and expectation of that (Main)culture. Several articles on this site talk about how the cultural narrative of being a man or woman are starting to blur/shift and as a culture… Read more »
@Bobby …. expanding the existing man cuture is different then denying men aspects of their existing culture because it “appears” wrong to the softer male. Metrosexuals were praised where the beer swigging log cutters are still mocked and percieved as idiots.
It’s hard to admit weakness, ESPECIALLY in front of the gender you are attracted to, at least I feel that’s the way for men. We want to be seen as strong, stoic, confident, so I guess it’s fear on how women will judge us.
Sometimes it’s just the fact those men go through a similar experience to ours more so than a woman would, so it may feel awkward with a woman in the room?
@Kirsten … because there would be womenin the room. Why is that so hard to accept?
Something else that came to me from a few of the testimonials is that men who hate others tend to have no love for or even hate themselves and their group first. Women, being a subset of “others” would be hated too and thus misogyny.
That might be why the man up, be a man strategy to “fix” lost men doesn’t work, it’s missing the point.
In a “the beatings will continue, until morale improves, sense”
Tom Matlack is the hero Gotham deserves.
Tom, this article resonates almost TOO much. It will come as a harsh reality to some that consider themselves above the discussion.
I am actually at a lose for words, as everything was already just said by you.
Paul