Alex Bove explains the effect of “toxic shock syndrome” when it comes to the criticisms of masculinity.
___
A Facebook friend recently asked why gender scholars and activists focus so much time on creating and emphasizing new masculinities and so little on dismantling traditional masculinity. I understand her frustration, and the frustration of all non-masculine people who have lived with the consequences of “toxic” masculinity, rape-genic culture, misogyny, and other manifestations of millennia of patriarchy. I’m sure it’s frustrating to make claims about the transgressions of men as an abstract group and hear the “not all men” defense, or to have criticisms of male privilege transformed into nonsensical concepts like “female privilege.” Deconstruction of traditional masculinity can be interpreted as a personal attack, and some men react defensively when they feel their identity threatened.
A common explanation for men’s defensiveness when confronted with feminist critiques of masculinity is that men are trying to protect their privilege. This explanation assumes, however, that men are aware of their privilege. That is not always the case. In his landmark book, Masculinities in Theory: An Introduction, Reeser (2010) argues that masculinity functions as culturally invisible, or “unmarked,” so that men do not see their gender as something to be considered. If men seem reluctant to acknowledge their privilege, it may be because they don’t recognize it, not because they are willfully protecting it.
This explanation assumes, however, that men are aware of their privilege. That is not always the case…Reeser (2010) argues that masculinity functions as culturally invisible, or “unmarked,” so that men do not see their gender as something to be considered. If men seem reluctant to acknowledge their privilege, it may be because they don’t recognize it, not because they are willfully protecting it.
|
What are the sources of men’s resistance to masculinity critiques, then? Social identity theory provides one explanation. It argues that humankind’s innate pattern-making acumen (an evolutionary byproduct) translates into the social realm in the form in-group/out-group categorization. These patterns then guide our social behavior. Though we should not minimize out-group discrimination, studies show that in-group favoritism is more universal, and a stronger motivator for behavior. Tasdemir (2011) argues that a desire for assimilation or “belongingness” is our main motivation for differentiating (positively or negatively) between social groups. The need for “belongingness” is especially important for men in our culture, since male intimacy can be so elusive.
♦◊♦
Intimate, homosocial activity among males was much more common in the West before the 19th Century. American industrialization combined with Victorian sexual puritanism to trap men between Scylla and Charybdis: just as the distinction between social spheres (domestic vs. occupational) began to calcify, compelling men to spend most of their time in male-only social spaces, homosexuality came to be seen as the major threat to masculine integrity. As homophobia increased, male intimacy decreased. At the same time, men continued to feel a desire for “belongingness.” Since their needs for intimacy could not safely be met by identifying closely with individual men, men increasingly built their social identities on the collective “man.” This trend continued throughout the 20th Century and into the 21st, and it explains why men often hear critiques of men as a whole (i.e. the institutional, historical “man”) as attacks on their own, personal identities. In this context, “Not all men” is an attempt to redeem one’s social identity by defending the collective (the “brotherhood” of men).
The final piece of the puzzle is Gender Role Conflict theory. In 1981, Joseph Pleck introduced the Gender Role Strain/Conflict paradigm to explain the psychological consequences individuals face when they feel they are not living up to the cultural norms for their gender. Because gender ideologies are culturally pervasive and present a limited range of acceptable gender presentation and behavior, and because individuals are aware of the prevailing gender ideologies and understand the negative consequences of violating them, when faced with threats to normative gender expectations, men and women both experience strain. Since masculine ideology is more rigid than feminine ideology, males tend to experience this strain more intensely. Gender role conflict theory has been confirmed in multiple studies over the past 30 years.
♦◊♦
In 2012, Jones & Heesacker found that priming a group with a 4-minute comedic video that challenged traditional masculine norms produced lower scores on the GRCS (an instrument designed to measure one’s identification with traditional masculinity). They argued that we should consider masculinity to be a “state-like,” rather than a “trait-like,” condition. Men’s enactment of their masculinity, then, is situational and highly sensitive to contextual factors. This means that men who seem to demonstrate defensiveness, or even anger, when faced with challenges to traditional masculinity might not be exhibiting a fundamentally masculine personality trait (i.e. stubbornness) but rather might be in a (possibly-temporary) state of highly masculine identification.
For Western men, however, nothing exists outside of masculinity. A threat to masculinity is an existential threat to the self.
|
If we assume that men are motivated by a desire to maintain their social identity, which gives them a needed sense of belonging (i.e. intimacy), and that failure to live up to the expectations of masculinity can cause role strain, we can begin to understand the consequences of rejecting traditional masculinity. It is not ostracism men fear: an ostracized person may move from an in-group to an out-group and find acceptance in the out-group, which then becomes the locus of his/her social identity (his new in-group). For Western men, however, nothing exists outside of masculinity. A threat to masculinity is an existential threat to the self. For many men, the masculine in-group is the only group. One of the goals of projects like the Good Men Project (and, shameless plug, Talk Like a Man) is to provide men with alternatives to traditional masculinity so that they will feel they have a place to go if they decide to reject some, or all, of its tenets. Thus, deconstructing traditional masculinity is not enough and may even be counter-productive, if done in the absence of alternative models.
None of this is to say that men should not be challenged to examine their privilege. Nor should criticism of “toxic” masculinity, of rape-genic culture, etc. be discouraged. However, in attempting to craft messages that will resonate with men, we must understand that what we perceive as resistance may be motivated by something other than a desire to maintain power and dominance, and that breaking down walls before one has built at least the framework for a new house might leave the occupants feeling homeless. As with all of our endeavors, empathy must be our guiding principle if we want to be heard and understood.
_____
References
Jones, K. D., & Heesacker, M. (2012). Addressing the situation: Some evidence for the significance of microcontexts with the gender role conflict construct. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 13(3), 294-307. doi:10.1037/a0025797
Reeser, T. (2010). Masculinities in theory: An introduction. Oxford, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell.
Taşdemir, N. (2011). The relationships between motivations of intergroup differentiation as a function of different dimensions of social identity. Review of General Psychology, 15(2), 125-137. doi:10.1037/a0022816
_____
Photo credit: JD Hancock/flickr
Not only that john but the actual gender wage gap for people of same overall experience in the same job is now about 3% which may be from other factors, but certainly not the 23% gap currently cited and repeated by those who should know better. That difference came from the late 60’s and has been steadily shrinking at an increased rate. But there are folks who don’t like to talk of such things for the inconvenience of it all.
You made some good points John Anderson, and I also agree with Alex Bove’s point that men’s defensiveness is not because they are willfully protecting a male privilege taht most don’t even know they have. If there is anyone in our culture who really does know they have the privileges we’re talking about here and use it all the time it is women. They can do anything they say a man can do, and everything they have done in traditional femininity, yet are so quick to judge any man doing anything that is not considered to be traditionally masculine. I… Read more »
I agree with you Mark that it is neither defensiveness nor lack of self-awareness, but rather incredulity. Comparisons are made with peers – for near everyone gets that the less fortunate are indeed less fortunate, due to either circumstance or luck of the draw. The peer-to-peer comparison of either advantage or disadvantage is by no means clear cut and the insistence that it is clear cut, drummed via gender politics, leads to incredulity and dismissal – as it should. An open minded assessment and comparison of a typical N.A. woman/man should reveal little to no situational difference if all relevant… Read more »
@ elissa
“Traditional masculinity is a tool of the oppressor, while traditional femininity is a shackle imposed on the oppressed. ”
But only because the metrics used favor traditional masculinity. Ever wonder why when people discuss the “wage” gap, which is really an earnings gap, it is limited to a single year. If we look at the lifetime earnings gap, it becomes much smaller and depending on what metrics are used, women by virtue of living 5 to 7 years longer than men may actually “earn” more on average during their lifetimes.
The 72 cents cite certainly has incredible staying power. The meme is approaching Easter Bunny mythological status. Another common theme of pseudo difference is objectification. The common approach is to restrict it down to sexual, or advertising or within pornography, or some other method to limit and exclude, then point to the difference as a disadvantage with the flip side being a privilege afforded to men. Another is who within a family spends the most time caring for the children – because on our death beds we will mostly reminisce on the amount of overtime we worked on weekends rather… Read more »
@ Alex Bove Here is something that may interest you and other readers at GMP and may even warrant an article of it’s own some time. It was the experience of several boys in the midwest prior to about 1980. I thankfully had just missed it by about 5 years, but remember speaking to a man in his 60s when the story broke in the Red Eye about 10 years ago. You should have heard the pain in his voice when he said I could never understand how they could get away with that. Boys and only boys were required… Read more »
Fascinating story, John. Horrible, but also fascinating. I wonder what the rationale was for this policy?
From what i may recall Alex the purpose was to break us down to some degree as the military does and to bond us together in the simplest terms of being boys.
@ mark @ Alex Bove
I’ve heard that also from guys in England, but in the states from what I’ve heard and read the rationale given to the boys was that fiber from their swim trunks clogged the filters. Most of the guys were taught not to question authority so it went unchallenged, but as they got older, many were no longer silent that it was utter BS unless the girl’s bathing suits were made from something different.
@ Alex Bove I think the problem most guys are having with feminism is that feminism approaches the problem in the same manner some fiction writers and K12 students do. They start from the conclusion and work their way backwards. K12 writers will then look for supporting facts to back their conclusion. In comparison when you get into grad school, you’re expected to research a topic, both evidence that supports and contradicts a position, and weigh the various bias that could impact the impartiality of the evidence, before arriving at a conclusion. What you had with feminism was a group… Read more »
@ Alex Bove It’s good that you want to examine how to get men out of the man box. I suspect though that you’ll never succeed as long as you look at the man box as hurting men and not oppressing men. There still seems this pervasive belief that men should just be able to overcome the man box. This belief that women don’t also support the man box. Why is this concept that men are oppressed so threatening to women? I suspect that when you’ve gone generations counting on the strength of men to save you, it’s scary to… Read more »
Here we go again. The overwhelming majority of men in TGMP keep denying that our culture views them as superior to women, which means that they are part of the problem of patriarchy. Sad and disgusting.
@ MB
I think the sticking point is that most men on TGMP want “proof” in the form of rational arguments. Feminism was started by women who unfortunately had the societal privilege of never having to be rational. Of course once that privilege is challenged, you get resistance. Truly sad and disgusting.
MB, ‘our culture’ covers a multitude of sins and presumptions; blanket disparagements are unmoving, and hence, people are unmoved, including myself. In turn, I am disheartened that you see everything that doesn’t coincide with your gender politics as sad and disgusting, and part of ‘patriarchy’ (or, if you will, patriarchies, and other hierarchies). But the rhetoric of feminism and gender politics has become its own goal now; the unconditional approbation of the idea that gender IS the avenue of power, and that men (simply by virtue of being men) have more than woman (simply by virtue of being women), and… Read more »
Alex: Since women have historically not had their grievances taken seriously by men, it is freighted with extra meaning (and can engender extra anger/frustration in women) when men do it. I understand this. It’s not entirely fair, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable either. Having said that, I think it is a good idea for men to have a forum in which to highlight those traits that make them exceptional. Perhaps #notallmen was not the best choice of tagline, given its history. But I endorse the idea of showing that men are not always the stereotypes attached to them by… Read more »
Yes, I think a lot of the rhetoric surrounding gender and sexuality these days (at least on the Internet and in the mainstream media) is tinged with anger. I hope that’s just a short term trend, but I fear it is not.
Please check the spammer filter, moderators.
A couple of things here. For one, the whole article is founded on the presumption that critiques of ‘masculinity’ (as a gendered collective) are feasible, meaningful, and well-founded; the inherent notion that critiques of ‘masculinity’ are inherently right and just and proper; simply by virtue of their existence & and their embrace by gender scholars. Once again, it’s premised on the false notion that gender is the central avenue of power, and the denominator of power. The article mentions: “If men seem reluctant to acknowledge their privilege, it may be because they don’t recognize it, not because they are willfully protecting… Read more »
A couple of things here. For one, the whole article is founded on the presumption that critiques of ‘masculinity’ (as a gendered collective) are feasible, meaningful, and well-founded; the inherent notion that critiques of ‘masculinity’ are inherently right and just and proper; simply by virtue of their existence & and their embrace by gender scholars. Once again, it’s premised on the false notion that gender is the central avenue of power, and the denominator of power. The article mentions: “If men seem reluctant to acknowledge their privilege, it may be because they don’t recognize it, not because they are willfully protecting… Read more »
I think you’re absolutely right that a large part of this debate is the conflict between individual and collective identity. Individuals tend to experience their own identities as individuated. Culturally, however, we lump people together, so discussions of collective identity seem inevitable (to me, anyway). I also agree that gender is not necessarily the “central axis of privilege,” as you say. Surely one’s class, race, religious, and other identities are salient as well. Perhaps we agree that gender is a major “avenue of power,” though? Perhaps not. That’s an interesting debate to have. As for the presumption that masculinity critiques… Read more »
Whatever relative or situational role gender may play, I tend to think that gendered critiques always overestimate & over-emphasize gender’s impact as something that can be partitioned, understood, and applied as a collective & knowable generality. And they always underestimate the relativity and the subjectivity of their observations as they apply them collectively. You mentioned that we tend to lump people together, so discussions of collective identity seems inevitable- well, I myself think it needs to become more evitable- I think the actual value of that needs to be reevaluated (somebody once told me, and I related it before:… Read more »
@ Alex Bove
I would like to make a suggestion, which I made on everyday feminism at one time and was surprised when I read an article that utilized the phrasing. The problem is not with masculinity. If you approach a person and say you have problems with your maleness, people will tell you where you can stick those problems. If you tell people that society has problems with their perception of masculinity (men and women both enforce the man-box and have an interest in maintaining it), then the conversation can occur. There is nothing wrong with being male.
John – I think the framing you present is exactly the way to approach these sorts of discussions with men.
I would only add one caveat: it is important to distinguish between maleness and masculinity. Maleness should not be a source of shame, at least not if we want to treat men like human beings. Gender is socially constructed, so saying there’s a problem with masculinity is not necessarily the same thing as saying there’s a problem with men. It’s a subtle, but hugely important distinction.
If you have not read it, I would suggest Men On Strike by Helen Smith. For the last 40 years, men have been told that they are not needed, and are in fact the cause for all the problems in the world. Men Going Their Own Way, or MGTOW is about withdrawing from a system that has become increasingly hostile. These men don’t want power or control over anyone but themselves, and do not feel they owe society to be expendable providers or cannon fodder.
Several commenters have suggested that this article “blames” men. I don’t think I blame men at all. It is a fact that many men are resistant critiques of masculinity, especially pro-feminist critiques. I can cite studies, but we need look no further than this comments thread this to see resistance and defensiveness when men are asked to examine their privilege. I have experienced this discomfort myself. My point was that many critics claim that men’s resistance is due to their desire to maintain power and privilege (i.e. it is about defending the patriarchy, from which they are aware that they… Read more »
@ Alex Bove And I believe that you misinterpret a lot of the comments here as resistance when they’re actually critiques. Look at my comment on “not all men”. What if the feminist reaction that you seem to support? Feminists say yes all men. All men are rapists. All men are killers. All men are violent. All men are monsters. People are actually saying that it’s valid for men not to act this way or to do something else and it’s feminists who say that no it’s not valid because ALL men are X. Where is your alternative and who… Read more »
Way to ignore the point, Alex
The issue here is – what about criticism of your criticisms of masculinity? Will that be even acknowledged, or will it simply be spun as “evidence” that we’re not interested in changing ourselves?
You lay the blame for this problem entirely on the men you are trying to reach by not even considering that it might be the people making the critiques of masculinity who have the problem here.
No. Some of the framing of masculinity critiques is undoubtedly bad. I don’t approve of #yesallwomen (or any essentialist arguments about all women, all men, etc), the use of “toxic masculinity” or “rape culture” as umbrella terms, or any critiques that dismiss all of masculinity as inherently wrong or evil. However, I also refuse to accept claims that there’s nothing wrong with traditional masculinity and that critics themselves are the problem. There is a middle ground. Traditional masculinity is harmful for both men and women. To argue otherwise is to ignore reality. Traditional masculinity also has positive qualities. This should… Read more »
“Some of the framing of masculinity critiques is undoubtedly bad. I don’t approve of #yesallwomen (or any essentialist arguments about all women, all men, etc), the use of “toxic masculinity” or “rape culture” as umbrella terms, or any critiques that dismiss all of masculinity as inherently wrong or evil. However, I also refuse to accept claims that there’s nothing wrong with traditional masculinity and that critics themselves are the problem. There is a middle ground” Respectfully, I myself didn’t quite get that as the take-away from the article, until you mentioned it in the comments. On that point, I would… Read more »
No. Some of the framing of masculinity critiques is undoubtedly bad. Great, fantastic, glad to hear it – I’ll be returning to this for sure. I don’t approve of #yesallwomen (or any essentialist arguments about all women, all men, etc) So then what’s the issue with #notallmen? Not all uses of #notallmen (this is getting a bit meta, but you know what I mean) involve reactionary defensiveness, they’re about criticising unfair and stereotyped descriptions of men as a group – in other words, criticising essentialist arguments about men. Calling such arguments things abstractions seems a little disingenuous to me. I’d… Read more »
Bravo Oirish.
@ OirishM I’m willing to cut him some slack on the article and accept that his comments over ride what was written in the article. I don’t much care whether it was his intent or whether he came to a different conclusion after reading the comments. That’s what we’re supposed to be about challenging our own beliefs. @ Alex Bove I would though like to hear your thoughts on #notallmen after considering the comments. IMO if we should do what you suggest create alternative masculinities, I would think that this should be embraced by feminists as providing examples of “positive”… Read more »
Whether or not the “not all men” defense is problematic depends a lot on the context in which it’s used. If a woman says something like “I hate it when men…” and is interrupted by the comment, “not all men…,” at the very least, the “not all men” person (let’s assume it’s a man) is being rude. First off, it insults the woman’s intelligence by assuming she meant all men when she never said all men. Second, it makes the conversation about the interlocutor’s desire to feel better about his sex/gender (or about his concerns, whatever they may be) rather… Read more »
Whether or not the “not all men” defense is problematic depends a lot on the context in which it’s used. If a woman says something like “I hate it when men…” and is interrupted by the comment, “not all men…,” at the very least, the “not all men” person (let’s assume it’s a man) is being rude. First off, it insults the woman’s intelligence by assuming she meant all men when she never said all men. Obviously, but you didn’t make this distinction in the article and you only made it once you were chased up on it in the… Read more »
@ Alex Bove “If the genders were reversed, this would still be rude. If I said, “I hate it when women…” and a woman replied, “not all women are like that,” And what if the reply wasn’t not all women, but something similar that either minimized / erased your concern or made it all about them. An example would be something like men are screwed over in family court because women are unfairly viewed as being naturally better caretakers simply because of their sex and having someone respond no it’s misogyny because child care (unpaid labor) is viewed as beneath… Read more »
I wrote an extensive reply about female privilege, but it was lost in the internet aether, and I fear I will not get the ideas back in their fully-formed state. So I will attempt to briefly recapitulate what I wrote. While we can cite examples of individual women gaining an advantage simply by being women, privilege is something groups have due to systemic, historical factors. As a general rule, marginalized groups cannot have privilege. That doesn’t mean they can never have any advantage based on their class, race, gender, etc., but it means that those advantages 1) do not have… Read more »
@ Alex Bove “privilege is something groups have due to systemic, historical factors. As a general rule, marginalized groups cannot have privilege.” So when was the time that women died fighting natural disasters while men stayed safe? It always depends on how you look at things. Abortion restrictions are misogyny. It doesn’t matter why she wants an abortion. Government doesn’t have the right to control her body. Aborting female fetuses is misogyny. Let’s ban abortions for gender selection. I guess it does matter why she aborts. Girls right now in the U.S. have the right to genital integrity. When did… Read more »
As ever, the concept of privilege is an utter nonsense – the advantages we speak of for women are also long-ingrained and systemic and male privileges do not give the average man much power beyond his individual agency anymore than the average woman, but we are expected to put up with being judged on the basis of the minority of men with any real power simply because we share a penis in common. Of course the majority of social power wielders have been male, but they still constitute a vastly tiny minority of men. Yet somehow it is considered logical… Read more »
While we can cite examples of individual women gaining an advantage simply by being women, privilege is something groups have due to systemic, historical factors. As a general rule, marginalized groups cannot have privilege. So why can’t a group be said to be privileged in some ways and marginalized in others? Why such a hard dividing line that says men cannot be oppressed and woman cannot be privileged? Of course, as Mostly_123 rightly points out, our identities are not linked to only one trait. So a heterosexual woman enjoys heterosexual privilege while a gay man does not benefit from hetero… Read more »
I’ve yet to see a list of supposed “male privileges” where even a third actually applied to me. And I’m white, so I can imagine even fewer apply to members of other ethnic groups. And explain to me how a white person getting a significantly shorter prison sentence than a black or latino person is an example of white privilege, but a woman getting ~65% shorter prison sentence is not, in fact, a female privilege and is (somehow) an example of women being oppressed. The fact of the matter is, people are starting to spot the parlor tricks people play… Read more »
So why can’t a group be said to be privileged in some ways and marginalized in others? Why such a hard dividing line that says men cannot be oppressed and woman cannot be privileged?And I’m white, so I can imagine even fewer apply to members of other ethnic groups. And explain to me how a white person getting a significantly shorter prison sentence than a black or latino person is an example of white privilege, but a woman getting ~65% shorter prison sentence is not, in fact, a female privilege and is (somehow) an example of women being oppressed. Both… Read more »
I myself would not be not be inclined to endorse or invoke the theory of instersectionality; as espoused by its proponents, it is a way to reconcile some of the contradictions in gender theory that were simply too big to ignore- that individuals have varying degrees of social power beyond the single trait of gender alone. Intersectionality certainly pays lip-service to the notion that (on an individual scale) power dynamics will vary, as these other traits (such as race, class, sexual orientation, what have you) vary. BUT, it fails because it still sees gender as the apex- the primary axis… Read more »
You almost lost me early on with referring to female privilege as “nonsensical.” How you could grow up in Western society and not recognize the advantages that women enjoy, often at the expense of men, is beyond me. Nevertheless, I think the rest of the article is insightful, and I agree with its sentiment.
The presumption is that the criticisms are valid. Need something empirical on that.
A Facebook friend recently asked why gender scholars and activists focus so much time on creating and emphasizing new masculinities and so little on dismantling traditional masculinity. I’ve noticed something. Its not traditional masculinity that activists and scholars and women and feminists want to get rid of. No they want to get rid of the parts of masculinity that harm women. To the unknowing eye (or the dishonest eye) you might think those things are the same but they aren’t. Getting rid of traditional masculinity would at the least call for getting rid of the gender based obligation that men… Read more »
Danny – I used the term “rape-genic” rather than “rape culture” because I believe that phrases like “rape culture” are too accusatory and tend to put men in a defensive posture (i.e. they demonstrate the main point of this article). My argument is that we are not, as some critics claim, a culture of rapists, or a culture that rapes. However, we are a culture whose social norms, especially around gendered behavior in heterosexual dating situations, often lead to violations of consent. Thus, I think it is more accurate to say that our culture is rape-genic than to say that… Read more »
Oddly that is just how rape the term rape culture is often used so from what I gather you seem to describe the same phenomenon with a different term and that’s cool. One question I do have though. How exactly does rape-genic or rape culture reconcile the different ways accused rapists are treated? For example when someone wants to go on about rape culture a quick referenced case is Stuebenville and how the rapists got so much sympathy. Now I’m the first to agree that that shit was horrible. But at the same time there are cases like the Duke… Read more »
@ Danny I don’t know if it’s the author’s title, but wouldn’t a “Critique” mean looking at the good as well as the bad unless they’re suggesting that there is no good in masculinity then I’d say that feminists and women are just as invested as men in “resisting critiques of masculinity”. I agree about feminists only wanting to remove those parts of masculinity that they don’t believe are useful or beneficial to women. Even if you removed war, women would still demand that men risked their lives fighting wildfires to protect their property. Although feminists seem to assert that… Read more »
I believe you have buried the lede. You finished with, “As with all of our endeavors, empathy must be our guiding principle if we want to be heard and understood. If you had followed your own advice, there might be something to salvage from this article. If you expand said “box,” so that it became endlessly capacious and allowed for all types of “masculinity,” then there would be no need for “dismantling traditional masculinity” in the first place, as you put it. When you use women’s studies 101 buzz words and phrases on which to base what seem to be… Read more »
I couldn’t have said it better!
people who “critique” masculinity aren’t interested in actually liberating men from any kind of man-box, rather they are interested in constructing a new one that is more to their own personal liking. Otherwise, why would so many mock “traditional” masculine past times and personality traits?
Find me someone who speaks of dismantling the man box and can resist the urge to mock traditional masculinity. Until that happens, I will continue to roll my eyes at and ignore your blatant attempts at manipulation. Just like I do for everybody else who tries to tell me what a “real man” is.
OK, if you want to create another masculine model then isn’t “Not all men” the perfect way to do it?
I’m sure it’s frustrating to make claims about the transgressions of men as an abstract group and hear the “not all men” defense You hit on the right reason here, though I suspect inadvertantly given that you proceed to one-sidedly blame men for your failure to convince them of your arguments. The way men are often spoken about would be called a prejudiced stereotype if another group was spoken about in that way. But when men are the start – oh it’s just an abstraction! “Not all men” is perfectly valid when confronting stereotyping of men and male behaviour. Don’t… Read more »
That should read “but when men are the target….”
wish i could blame autocorrect, but i can’t -_-
It’s this simple …. men are men, all different shapes and sizes …. why can’t people just leave us the hell alone? Please take us out from under the microscope so that we can live our freaking lives.
Tom, I had an answer for you, but it’s disappeared into the internet ether. This is all too complex for me to stay appropriate I guess. Maybe this will get through. I’ve just about had it with trying to post here.
Sounds like Bove was raised by a single mum.