Are men really allies, or are we just repackaging male privilege in a different form?
–––
This article originally appeared on sherights.com
The sort of language used to assert men’s dominance over women has a pretty recognizable pattern across the cultural landscape. Men, we are told, are in charge of things because they have something women (supposedly) lack: physical strength, honor, higher cognitive facilities, or the mystique of the male organ itself. Women, sadly “lacking” these qualities, need to be “protected” from the all-consuming lusts of strange men.
This can be spun as noble chivalry, brutal domination, or a playful battle of the sexes, but at the root it’s the same: women are denied the freedoms that men take as a God-given right, assigned subordinate status, and coerced into performative gender roles.
In this dialectic, men’s protective abilities and ravaging urges come from the same place and are both aimed squarely at women. Language, of course, did not create the patriarchy, but language is a powerful method of inscribing the possible, shaping how and what we think, and justifying the status quo.
Thus, perhaps it’s no surprise that feminist outreach towards the traditional opponents of women’s liberation – i.e., cis-gendered heterosexual men — utilizes the same language as that of domination.
I believe we are the better for them, but I also believe that they do not go far enough, and we all must, as feminists, radicals and progressives, push against our comfort zones.
|
Rather than attacking the institution of masculinity itself, several recent campaigns have attempted a sort of masculinity triage, trying to eliminate violence against women, while still flattering men with the label of protector. These campaigns, such as “real men don’t buy girls,” “my strength isn’t for hurting,” are various incarnations of “how would you feel if someone said that to your mother/sister/girlfriend,” and have proven to be enormously popular, achieving prodigious re-blogs, conferences, and media airtime.
They are, by many metrics, successful, and have gotten institutions long silent on the rights of women to speak up. I believe we are the better for them, but I also believe that they do not go far enough, and we all must, as feminists, radicals and progressives, push against our comfort zones.
In these campaigns, the masculine mystique is still very present, albeit a kinder, gentler version. By flattering men’s strength and asking them to use it to protect women, we once again place men in the driver’s seat of culture, asking for them to renounce violence and be less vile guardians.
Common to all these messages is that men CAN rape, hurt, buy women, catcall or what-have-you, but they SHOULDN’T. Men, we are told, shouldn’t hurt women, not because of any intrinsic rights women may have, but because other men might do it to THEIR women, and that would be awful.Male privilege is re-defined, but not negated, in a way that leaves masculinity unchallenged and still dominant. The wonderful, complex, and multifaceted language of generations of queer, trans, intersectionalist and sex-positive feminism and human-rights dialogues is thrown aside completely in favor of a request that straight, cis-gendered men join the rest of the world at the big-kids table.
Again, this isn’t to say that these campaigns haven’t done good, but rather, that they should go farther. There is certainly something to be said about using the language of the patriarchy to subvert the patriarchy, or of using privilege to end privilege, but it’s not clear that’s what’s being done. Rather, it looks as if men are given a privileged place in the feminist movement, one where they are praised for simply not being terrible and their much-vaunted power remains intact.
Moreover, the bar for male allies has been set tremendously low. In contrast to the sacrifices, acts of bravery and daily fights women and L.G.B.T.Q. people are expected to take on to achieve equality and justice, men are asked simply not to buy people, physically abuse people, or rape. The fact that this counts as progress is a sad indictment of how much work there is left to do, but that, I believe, is all the more reason to not sugar-coat it or water down the message.
Feminism has made great strides against patriarchal oppression in much of the world, and perhaps to finish the job, to make a world of true equality, the message cannot be compromised or simplified. Males in the movement should (and can) be challenged and encouraged to act not like a virtuous “real man,” but like humans.
About the author: J.A. McCarroll is a NYC-based writer, anthropologist, and baker. He works in reproductive rights and volunteers with Canimiz Sokakta and the Rules. Tweet @jamccarroll.
The Good Men Project wants to know:
How do you feel about men as allies?
What are you saying? What freedom is afforded to men that women don’t have? If there are certain things women are afraid due to physical strength, I emphatize. But how does that make all men culprits? What are we supposed to do about it? More than we already do by protecting women more than we protect other men? Patriarchal oppression? Opponents of female liberation? There are so many unfounded presumptions here. It is like “What did you say right after you beat your wife?” I agree with the premise of good men doing good things. But this is a terrible,… Read more »
Why is everyone so afraid of the word feminism?!
If we can use words like Mankind- which I presume includes women and girls and other genders. For many new feminists Feminism includes men, boys and other genders as well as women and girls.
Disliking the way something is practiced doesn’t equate to fear.
@Women, it has nothing to do with fear and everything to do with our simply not wanting to be part of it. Give my 5 … no, strike that, give me three areas where men have benefited by feminism. When I say “benefited,” I’m talking about a platform where feminists have taken that relate directly to men/boys? Have we changed VAWA language to be all inclusive to protect men/boys? Have we opened up battered men/boys shelters? Have we seen a movement to make the playing field more level for both dads and moms with respect to child custody? From the… Read more »
And to qualify “especially battered mothers trying to protect their children from abusive fathers who aggressively litigate against them, using family court to stalk, harass, punish, and impoverish their former partners and children” Men have countless evidence showing that much of what’s stated here is often times false accusation. False accusations that have resulted in many men being jailed. Did you know that on a percentage basis, women are more in arrears then men when it comes to child support? I say percentage in that it’s obvious that men make up a much larger number where child support is ordered.… Read more »
I’m sure everybody here has heard of the “Don’t Be That Guy” campaign, or the numerous examples we have posted of male feminists holding signs about how “they are different”, that they don’t hit women (as if the majority of men do, or it is condoned when such an occurrence happens) and are all for “equality” because they are feminists, too! We have also shown you how those men are looked down upon by their female counterparts, and how men will never be welcome in the feminist camp. Here is another such example, and yes, they are serious. From the… Read more »
So you aren’t a feminist, (whatever you percieve that to be it apparently means we think all men are bad). That’s ok, I get that it’s a bad word to a lot of people. I identify as a feminist, and I’m saying lots of us don’t believe that at all, but I don’t expect you to belive me at this point. But I’m just trying to understand if you think a campaign to make customers of sex workers think that maybe they shouldn’t be buying children is a bad thing? Because you don’t want to know about such a thing… Read more »
@ jgd333
Why not legalize sex work? Labor laws seem to be affective in preventing the exploitation of underage workers in other industries. Could it be that when men have the ability to purchase sex on the open market, it reduces what non-prostitute women can demand for it? Like I said before why is sex between two consenting adults suddenly illegal or wrong because money changed hands?
But I’m just trying to understand if you think a campaign to make customers of sex workers think that maybe they shouldn’t be buying children is a bad thing? No. I’m not saying that stopping people from hiring child sex workers is a bad thing. I’m talking about the way its being done. For a movement that is supposedly all for not trying to shame men they have no problem turning around and using that exact same language when it suits them. I mean really booing at, “Real men drink (whatever brand) beer.” but then turning around the cheering for… Read more »
This article and others is in part why I’m weening myself from this site. I’m really getting tired of the “all the bad” men articles. Continuously pointing out the shortcomings of men and the never ending rehashing all the feminist propaganda spewed for years. “A conversation that no one else is having?” Many of the articles that appear come from writers from all over the internet, or at the very least referencing what someone else has written and there is no problem with it but to say “no one else is having” is no longer true. These subjects, topics, articles… Read more »
Sweeping generalizations are always wrong. All women, all men, all feminists, all frat boys…I don’t understand how we enlist male allies when the overwhelming defense mechanism is “all men don’t!..” or “all men are assumed to be..” I don’t assume that being born male means that you want to be, or are in *ANY WAY* destined to be a bad person or as Danny says a “traffickers, abusers, and rapists”. I know many men have deep compassion for the victims of these people. However, I don’t know how we have a discourse about how those men can help when the… Read more »
@ jgd333 “However, I don’t know how we have a discourse about how those men can help when the defense of your entire gender and the feeling that all women (or at least all feminists, which is a huge and diverse population) are lumping you all in as bad guys seems to be the biggest issue to so many men.” One way to do it is not lumping all men as bad guys. The “biggest issue” is resolved. Now look at the rest. Question, are there no women who patronize underage prostitutes? Why shouldn’t that be addressed? When someone paints… Read more »
Another reason for men to leave feminism. Even when you think you’re helping, you’re still the oppressor and you’re not even human, you must be taught how to act properly! If a woman doesn’t tell you how to act, well how will you know how to be human? Amazing. It’s OK guys, you can let go. You don’t deserve this abuse. It’s time to stand for your rights as a human being. In feminism you are just..well, you read the above. How dare you not support women more! You should do more! But not too much because then you’re the… Read more »
As usual…no matter what men do, feminists will declare them evil and wrong. The ONLY thing feminism will ever accept is their own final control
And please refrain from including all gay people in crap like this. I am a gay man-and I find feminism hateful and appalling. It is sexist, misandric, dehumanizing to men, infantalizing to women and has NOTHING to do with equality.
Political Cynic … First off,I like your name. And feminism is slowly redefining what they want men to be. It’s smoke and mirrors. We’ve been under a microscope for quite a while. This is clearly a feminist site and all you have to do is look at the articles and you can see that there is a clear attempt to redefine men, masculinity so as to fit the feminist ideals. Traditional male images are often times slammed. Instead of encouraging those roles and expanding them, they want to completely shut them down.
indeed
male allies cant catch a break in that movement, can they?
from the outside looking in, how they are treated and regarded is quite abusive
I never understand how we are supposed to approach anything in enlisting male allies, when the overarching response tends to be immediately “but *all* men don’t!.” or as you put it “We’re treated as if we are going to inherently do those thing from birth and we have to be deprogrammed of those innate desires” I don’t believe ANY rational woman believes that all or even *most* men are buying little girls or beating women. I certainly don’t believe their is inherently anything negative about being a man. However, it is true that the primary consumers of underage prostitutes are… Read more »
So how do we have any discussion without this automatice defense of your entire gender kicking in and derailing any helpful discourse? By both sides actually listening to each other rather than each side demanding that the other remain silent unless spoken to. By not holding up certain ideas as gospel. For example you say, “I certainly don’t believe their is inherently anything negative about being a man. However, it is true that the primary consumers of underage prostitutes are of the male gender etc.” Despite the fact that the vast majority of men don’t engage in those behaviors the… Read more »
I think the first problem is you define dominance in only traditionally masculine terms. Men are in charge of society because they make the money. What about the women who spend it? Sure, men are captains of industry, but the women decide which companies survive based on where they spend the money. If you’re wondering it’s why commercials often make men look foolish and women look capable. Yes, but men create the laws. True, but women create the laws within the home, raise the future men, and vote for the men who create the laws being 53% or so of… Read more »
I’d say women’s power to decide who gets born and who doesn’t is just about the most fundamental form of power there is. (I think they _should_ have that power, by the way. I just think it should be recognized as a form of power.)
In these campaigns, the masculine mystique is still very present, albeit a kinder, gentler version. By flattering men’s strength and asking them to use it to protect women, we once again place men in the driver’s seat of culture, asking for them to renounce violence and be less vile guardians. Charging men with protecting women on the condition their manhood status hangs in the balance is not putting them in the driver seat. If anything in this set up men are not the wagon driver, men are the horses trying to chase the carrot. Rather, it looks as if men… Read more »
Moreover, the bar for male allies has been set tremendously low. It depends on who you ask. Some well-known male ally FAQs online set a very difficult bar indeed. They require a man to only speak when first spoken too by a woman, and shut up otherwise. And of course they have to explain the world according to the feminist axioms: This means that if a woman kicks a man in the nuts and the audience laughs, the proper term to describe it is misogyny. If a woman rapes a man is it also misogyny. I find that utterly impossible… Read more »
I may be thinking far too literally once again, but I think this interpretation of these campaigns is a little off. Or at least a little imprecise. “Real men don’t buy girls” and “my strength isn’t for hurting” are not necessarily about dominance and protection. They may flow from similar sources as the dominance-and-protection ideology, but they are not the same. They are actually much more internally directed, focused on men’s choices, self-esteem, and self-respect. These campaigns certainly assume some sort of male distinctiveness relative to women, but then most feminist ideologies do that also. A dominance/protection slogan would be… Read more »
“Could you give an example of what an anti-violence campaign would look like that is NOT subject to the criticism that it fails to challenge male privilege?”
It doesn’t exist. No matter what you say or how you say it, there will always be a way to say that it plays into the patriarchy. In fact, this needs to be the case or you may actually bring about a situation that could be viewed as “successful” or “complete” and thus negate the need for an organization that has proven to be a great cash cow.