Shawn Maxam explains how power dynamics and issues of privilege can distract us from the real conversations men need to be having.
When I was first diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder, the therapist I was seeing while in crisis was a woman. She said something very profound to me. The statement she said was, “you need to develop close intimate relationships with other men.” She was right for a myriad of reasons and today, nearly five years later, my therapist is a man.
When you talk to other men about life issues and masculinity there’s a built-in shorthand. Men don’t necessarily interpret things the way women do. I have no idea why women are so obsessed with how men think. I often want to process my thoughts, emotions and fears with fellow men who understand my experience.
I personally don’t think men can be feminists. We can be allies for equality, but that is a different experience. An experience I may empathize with but not one I want to understand because I am too busy trying to figure out myself. I think feminist issues and issues of masculinity are not synonymous. Is there an overlap? Of course, but being a good man is not completely framed but how men interact with women.
Power dynamics and issues of privilege can distract us from the real conversation. The theoretical distracts from the practical. I am also not a fan of pandering or soap-boxing. Men need to have safe spaces where we can have conversations for ourselves and among ourselves. Forceful exclusion is not the same as non-active inclusion which means just because I don’t invite you to the conversation doesn’t mean I am discriminating against you.
We either can be idealistic and politically correct or we can be pragmatic and realistic. Life is murky and messy. There are certain parts of me that I only want to share with my brothers. Not with my wife, my sisters, female colleagues or other women.
I like being a man. I don’t want to have to apologize for being a guy. There isn’t some original sin inherently associated with the fact that I am a man. I won’t let society define me by the worst acts committed by some people who share the same biology as me. If we want to have debates or discussions about gender identity, theory and so forth we have the classroom and other academic forums.
I don’t know of anywhere on the web where conversations that the Good Men Project is having happen. The questions being asked, the stories being shared and the vulnerability being exposed are important and exciting. I think we have to continue to foster an environment where men can have a forum and not have to defend and explain themselves in ways that are not affirming or validating.
Photo courtesy of andrijbulba
Feminists, MRAs, Liberals, Conservatives and the Soap-Box Syndrome
About S. Maxam
I can dig this.
Contrary to what others might say there is reason for men to have their own spaces that aren’t dictated by what they think we need to be talking about or doing.
This is why is bugs me when upon hearing about an male only space (or mostly male space) they start the complaints almost immediately. Why do they do this? Right here, ” I won’t let society define me by the worst acts committed by some people who share the same biology as me.”
I think the ability to have spaces where a group (racial, religious, gender, sexuality, class etc.) can have the opportunity to discuss difficult issues is important and not necessarily discriminatory if those conversations are come from a place of good intentions.
Agreed. My problem is all too often (in the realm of gender) women’s spaces seem to be automatically defended as being bastions of high level conversation and discourse that are vital to equality for all people who men’s spaces are automatically attacked as being retched hives of scum and villainy that exist only to eradicate women.
Example: Simon Fraser University.
Dang Mark. It’s like you reached into my head (an amazing feat considering my rather…uh…aggressive….Afro sitting on top) and pulled that out.
And video games.
Simon Frazier Univ? Explain, please?
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/05/16/reverse-sexism-at-simon-fraser/
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/05/20/robyn-urback-on-shocking-anti-male-hatred-on-the-sfu-campus/
This is a good article as far as touching on the importance of identity politics amongst men. I love the statement about not being apologetic for being a man: there is nothing inherantly wrong with us and we are not to be judged based on the worst of our kind.
The only gripe I have with this article is that it didn’t answer why men can’t be feminist? As someone who considers himself a feminist, I often struggle with the term. My understanding is that feminist is someone who actively supports feminism. I want to be clear as to say I don’t think all feminist have the same relationship to feminism–race, class, gender, sexuality, they all play a part. If men can’t be feminist, as this title suggests, then why? I find that being out and open about being a proud (male) feminist has done a lot of justice the way I can discuss feminism and patriarchy with any gender, and to leave the feminist title strictly to women reinforces the sentiment that feminism solely a women’s issue.
I definitely don’t want to come off as being dismissive of the authors article, Shawn Maxam has a lot of useful insight. But if you title an article “Why Men Can’t Be Feminist” than why not elaborate on the subject. Of course men need our space to talk to other men about issues that are unique to men, but how does that exclude us from the feminist label?
You are right Kaleb. And actually you can be a feminist. We all have the right to support the causes we deem worthy and to apply the applicable labels that come with that support.
I personally think I have too much work to do to call myself a feminist. I am an equalist. I feel we need to equity and social justice for everyone. Of course those who privilege and power (men, white people, straight folks etc.) have to acknowledge this but I am not sure if GMP can only be concerned with telling people how to feel.
I think we can have constructive conversations not based upon shaming which seems to happen in dialogues between (passive) oppressors and the oppressed.
Thanks for being honest and compassionate in your comment. I appreciate it Kaleb.
But in the way you have framed this, is far from saying that you can’t be a feminist. If you are an advocate for equality, then you’re pretty much three-thirds of the way in. Another matter is whether you want to dedicate a lot of time to this particular cause -or understanding womenhood, however you wanna put it- or to things you feel more close to your heart, which is completely legitimate. And of course one sometimes needs of a man and sometimes of a woman, but in my opinion, sometimes you can talk with each of the same things, but with a different framing or something like that, it’s all about the balance in the end (well, except for gastrointestinal issues, that’s a definite no-no with women) Great Insight! Good Luck and Support from a fellow man also with one of those brains (OCD for me)!
I completely agree with Kaleb. The most basic, true definition of feminism is that you believe in equality of the sexes (all sexes, not just M/F). By that definition, I would say that a high majority of people are feminists, or as Shawn said – an equalist, whether they know it or not. Unfortunately, not everyone (for or against “feminism”) understands that, so the idea has been skewed throughout the years. I consider “feminist” and “equalist” to be the same thing.
“I feel we need to equity and social justice for everyone.” – YES!
“The most basic, true definition of feminism is that you believe in equality of the sexes (all sexes, not just M/F).”
Most dictionaries define it as believing in equal rights for women. Many MANY feminists do not actively seek equality where it benefits men, and a large segment even opposes it. Are you suggesting NOW isn’t really feminist because you say so? Or are you going to, instead, suggest that the definition of feminism is subjective (given the next line you acknowledge it’s your definition of feminism)?
“By that definition, I would say that a high majority of people are feminists”
That’s by your subjective definition. As it is subjective, it only applies to you. Furthermore, even if feminism was about equality (and I will fight that definition tooth and nail, because it is not. It is about female empowerment, nothing more, nothing less, and the degree is entirely dependent on the individual feminist), feminism does not have a monopoly of egalitarian thought, and just because we may have similar beliefs doesn’t make me a feminist, and I find the assertion offensive on several levels. That’s like saying “if you believe god should be a strong part of your life, then you must be a KKK member”. I believe in equality, and even if your definition was correct, that doesn’t mean I also believe in the other philosophies of feminism, such as patriarchy theory, male privilege theory, etc. To suggest I can’t believe in equality without also believing those things insults me, and it lays claim to a concept that many feminists have openly rejected and opposed. To claim I DO believe in those things just because I believe in equality insults me. Don’t label other people to make yourself feel better.
” consider “feminist” and “equalist” to be the same thing.”
Don’t. They are not.
Editor’s note:
comment removed by request.
From your earlier comment:
I completely agree with Kaleb. The most basic, true definition of feminism is that you believe in equality of the sexes (all sexes, not just M/F). By that definition, I would say that a high majority of people are feminists, or as Shawn said – an equalist,whether they know it or not.
I think this is the issue that some folks have. The idea that someone is basically telling your that you are a feminist/equalist/whatever despite them saying they are not. It brings up a few things.
1. Why is it so important to declare someone as such, even to the point of trying to override the fact that they don’t ID as such?
2. There seems to be some implication that being told one is a feminist whether they know it or not (or agree with it or not) is some grand compliment. Which puts on this illusion that striving to be a feminist is the pinnacle of showing support of equal rights. And this basically is an attempt at trying to wash away the negativity of that movement.
(Not that you are actively doing these things Cassie, just pointing out what people are facing when they going around telling people they are feminists whether they know it or not.)
That’s a really good point, Danny. I certainly wouldn’t want to tie any negative connotations to someone if they didn’t agree. I definitely get not wanting to align with a broad tenet if you don’t align with some of the aspects of it. I guess what I was trying to get at is I don’t believe in all of the tenets of feminism, but I call myself a feminist because I believe in what I feel is the overarching goal of feminism (which, for me, is equality of all sexes). And the only reason that I even thought of that is I hear all of the time people who say, “I’m not a feminist” like it’s a dirty word, but when I explore further, it’s pretty clear that they have no idea what feminism even is. Which is understandable since it’s been skewed by people pushing for their preferred piece of “feminism”, but just calling it feminism instead of what it actually is (male privilege, radicalism, etc.). That being said, I really like the term equalist – I’ll have to start using that more frequently. I’m all for the rights of men, women, and everybody else, and it is a less contentious word.
Also, I wanted to delete my response to Mark earlier (Shawn, maybe you could do that for me?). I made the rookie mistake of responding right away while irritated at the tone of the comment. Had I waited, I would have expressed that I love hearing opinions and healthy debates, but felt attacked for my viewpoint. I apologize for that.
I was going to reply more to what you said, but you requested it be deleted and so I will only make one point, to respect that request. The reason I took such a tone is because you choose to use a subjective definition and apply it universally. I addressed this in the start of my second paragraph. After all, if it’s “for you”, then why do you feel it can be applied to others?
I hear you Cassie and I’ll cop to being a bit heated when I saw this exchange as well.
Thank you Danny. Though you missed
3: It attempts to lay claim and total monopoly to the term equality. If I cannot believe in equality without being a feminist, whether I like it or not, that means equality is owned by feminism. And that is something I will not accept.
Feminism means 2 quite separate things, I guess it depends what version of feminism you mean. I get the feeling from some people that this “ally” term is basically one of shutup and listen to us, we are the only ones that can define something, you must sit n listen n support us. What exactly is an ally? Wouldn’t a male feminist ally, just be a feminist?
Archy when I did a workshop on sexual violence especially in the LGBT/Queer community they said straight men we could be allies but that the experience was their own.
Now I am not sure if that dynamic is transferable to gender dynamics and power roles. But in that instance I took the ally label to heart and felt it would be inappropriate for me to define how I would be a participant in equality and social justice issues within that context.
I don’t know if my explanation is sufficient and I am not even arguing that is correct. Just stating my opinion. Thanks for reading.
To me from what I see in the usage it seems to be that a man can’t be a feminist, but only an ally for those that use the term. But that tends to be by those who treat feminism in the gynocentric way, not those that treat it as basically the term for egalitarianism.
Then we’re told feminism is required in the defining of men by those same feminists that don’t think men can be feminists (as well as those that do). ind of scary thought that those who deny men entry to feminism feel entitled to define masculinity.
Personally, I would hesitate to use apply the “ally” term to feminism. An ally in the LGBT community is someone who isn’t a member of the L, G, B, or T (or QIA..) but supports the case. The difference here is that an LBGT ally is someone outside of the community as far as identity, but dedicates themselves to the cause. Feminism, however, includes anyone who wants to dismantle patriarchy–and that could be whoever because we are all victim to patriarchy in some way, shape, or form.
You can fight sexism and sexist domination without calling yourself a feminist. And in that regard I respect your decision to not identify as a feminist. I would still not be okay with patriarchy even if I weren’t a feminist. My commitment to gender justice is more deeply rooted than the label that I subscribe to. The labels may vary, but the fight should be the same.
Yes, many egalitarian men would not be considered ‘feminists’ by default… but it’s still possible for men to be feminists. All it takes is an interesting in working on women’s issues and improving the welfare of women in society–bingo, you’re a feminist.
You don’t have to BE a woman to advance the cause of women, any more than you had to be black to work for civil rights, or gay to promote equal treatment for gays. It’s not my cause, but it’s still a cause that anyone can participate in.
Absolutley correct. At the bottom of a lot of MRA complaints – male disposibility, cultural demonization of men, men’s unequal standing beofre the law – is a rejectionof the patriarchal attitudes and social conventions that inform and support those inequalities, and very often their criticisms of feminisms are on issues where those particular feminists have clung to and even used patriaarchal attitudes and social conventions rather than rejected them.
You may be correct in fact, but you’re wrong about what MRAs think. The great bulk of MRA sentiment is that men are suffering because of feminism in itself. Not because of any issues feminists might agree with patriarchs about. Patriarchy either doesn’t exist to the MRM or it’s the natural order of things and to be enforced.
prove it. You’re claiming he is wrong, then making an assertion yourself. prove it. I know a lot of MRA’s do point to the issues feminism has created. Much of that anti-feminism stems, at least in my personal experience having done it, from the fact that, if I just try to talk about men’s issues, feminists come along, tell me I’m a woman hater, tell me men have no issues, then proceed to claim moral superiority and a monopoly on egalitarian thought. So I point out feminism’s failures and harms to demonstrate it’s self interest in maintaining the status quo.
As to patriarchy, it is a theory, not a fact. In fact, many feminists have abandoned patriarchy as well, in favor of the kyrarchy (sp?) theory.
How exactly are you defining feminism because I don’t necessarily see anything in my understanding of feminism that objects to what you say.
Who would want to be a feminist? Feminism isn’t so hot around my parks. Even those who hold up egalitarian ideals don’t like calling themselves feminist which is saying something.
“Power dynamics and issues of privilege can distract us from the real conversation.”
“I don’t want to have to apologize for being a guy. ”
“I am a writer living with Bipolar Disorder.”
Well this explains a lot.
Please be careful about insinuations – the best person I know suffers from bipolar and it changes nothing about who he is as a person or a man.
Of course on one level men must be feminists if the goals of feminism are to be achieved. To be a feminist means to formulate your own vision and world view about gender equality that is completely your own and not dependent on the world view of someone else. That means that is incorrect to speak of men being “allies for equality” as you put it. You are either an active part of the process for change or you are not. Does feminism have anything to do with being a good man? It’s not the only part of it, but I think it is obviously a very important part. Does male privilege make it impossible to be truly authentic as a feminist? Well I think on one level it is besides the point because standing on the sidelines and saying your an “ally” doesn’t advance equality either and it is not an authentic option.
Privilege can indeed distract from having meanigful conversations.
Just one question. How would you react to “white men only” spaces?
I think that a lot of times people are hard-pressed to discuss their own privilege. So when people say privilege makes it hard to have “meaningful” conversations I get a little weary because I constantly see people have enriching conversations that address privilege. It makes people feel guilty but what’s guilt gonna do? The moment people realize “Oh wait, theres a difference in people discussing privilege and throwing privilege in my face. The people who do the latter are more often than not not worth talking to,” they’re good. It’s when people let their guilt from privilege get the best if them that conversations actually become less enriching.
Shawn, while I mostly disagree with you, I think your argument is probably the only one I truly understand and am willing to admit makes sense.
cool. we can disagree. thanks for being understanding though. I genuinely appreciate it.
My best friend and significant other might be hurt by some of the claims in this article. All of his closest friends are women, and he’s regularly harassed by well-meaning men and women asking him if he’s gay or at least bisexual. He prefers female company and is only attracted to women – I’m the pansexual one, so I know to respect what he says about his own sexuality. It’s too bad that society’s expectations don’t match up with his friend preferences. We’ve talked about it for hours at a time. Regardless of who he likes to make friends with, he’s still the best man I’ve ever known. Your logic chain seems to be men mostly don’t think like women, so they can’t be feminists because of different experiences of the world (I’m inferring this from your paragraph structure). So can my significant other be a feminist? He frequently empathizes with women and women’s experiences. But he’s a man.
I disagree: I think that men and women are fundamentally the same (maybe with a few superficial differences) but it’s not something I can easily prove so I’ve a heck of alot of space for this kind of article.
I also disagree with the idea that feminism is necessarily all about women and their experiences, I think there’s quite a few people on here for whom it’s also about men’s equality, but there’s also the idea that feminism should be about women and men should have their own movement (as you argue) so I’m fine with that too.
Shawn, once again you have ‘hit it on the head’ so to speak. Feminism is about rights for WOMEN.
From dictionary.com:
“feminist
adjective
1. advocating social, political, legal, and economic rights for women equal to those of men.
noun
2. an advocate of such rights.”
Of course men can be feminists. Plenty of men, in fact, DO advocate social, political, legal, and economic rights for women equal to those of men. Shawn may not be one of those men, but that doesn’t preclude other men from making different choices and taking different actions.