Below is an edited version of the Publisher’s introduction to our weekly Good Men Project community call. Listen to the whole thing above, or join our next call by becoming a member of our community here.
♦◊♦
As you know, in addition to expanding our reach to go past even 3 million unique visitors a month we are really trying to develop a core community of people who understand and internalize our views. People—like you—who care deeply about this conversation about the changing roles of men in the 21st century, who believe that it matters in a way that few other ongoing conversations in the world matter.
And I want you to think about that for a minute. That we have been having this conversation now for 6 years. And it hasn’t been easy. Especially in the early days — we were told that on one had we were too masculine, too macho and on the other we we too wimpy. We were told both that we were women haters and that we were too feminine. We were called manginas. That we were too “fringe”. That we didn’t appeal to the quote unquote normal guy, to which we replied “there is no such thing.” We were told that we were too “gay”. That came up a lot—. On one of these very calls someone said “is this the Good Men Project or the gay men project”. I had radio interviews and Twitter attacks and comments in articles that were written about us that tried to attack our manhood. Oh, The Good Men Project—their biggest problem is that they are not manly enough. How funny is that.
But we persevered. We persevered because we believed that an open, tolerant, inclusive conversation about what masculinity in the 21st century is one of the most important conversations the world could have.
And the funny thing is—RARELY are we called us those things any more. People get what we are doing now. Why it is important. How they changed. It took years. Not everyone agrees with us. People in the comments section still fight for us to not talk about the Man-Box. They don’t even want us to mention the word, because it might somehow imply that they are not, as men, good enough.
But our goal is just the opposite. Our goal is to say, that any definition of masculinity that you could possibly want is good enough. That you don’t have to be rich, you don’t have to be physically strong, you don’t have to watch sports or drink beer, you don’t have to hide your emotions, you don’t have to be competitive to be a man. But you can be ALL of those things and we will love you still. We just don’t want anyone to police the behaviors and tell people that there is any one way to be a man. (And in case you didn’t notice, we’re changing millions of women as well as men. This is a human problem we are trying to solve — to make manhood a more inclusive, tolerant, more conscious, more compassionate place to be.
In order to sustain this conversation, we need resources, and that means we need to charge for some things that used to be free. So in order to keep getting reminders for these calls, you are going to need to be a Premium Member of the Good Men Project. For as little as $5 a year—$5, think of what other things you spend $5 on and then compare it to the importance of this! So if you stop getting reminders, that is why. People who have been coming to these calls for a while can continue to join in—we’re not going to kick anyone off—but we really want people to be members.
♦◊♦
I want to quickly spend some time on the Democratic National Convention because last week we talked about the RNC.
And to me, one of the best most powerful lines of the convention came from Michelle Obama’s speech where she said: ‘I wake up every morning in a house built by slaves’.
And I heard that and I thought, wow, that is the way to talk about racism.
“I know I’m called ‘middle-class Joe’—and n Washington that’s not meant as a compliment.” It gets back to what I said in the beginning, how a man’s identity can be fractured (luckily Joe Biden’s was not) if he is led to believe: “i’m not good enough, I’m not man enough.
I think the Dems made a huge mistake not reaching out to them earlierAre there a lot of bigots in that cohort? Yes. And many came by their bigotry simply by their age — 60 and older, the segregated generations –not everyone at that age is a bigot — absolutely not — but I think it’s important to understand that for that generation they had to work consciously to NOT be bigoted, because it was so normative.
What reason do they have to think they could possibly relate to or belong to the Democrats? No Party for Old White Men.
They have no jobs, no money, no future. They are easy to flip. And their contributions are devalued or ignored.
All those men — they played by the rules. They did what they were told to do. Served their country, took civil service tests, got pensions, mortgages. Cut their lawns. Fed their kids. And now? Now the Dems tell them they are Anti-intellectuals. Racists. Irrelevant. And their pensions are gone. They look up, to the highest office. They don’t see themselves anymore. So along comes Trump. And he speaks the way they do! OUT LOUD. He’s got the American Dream they were promised.
The beautiful wives. Money. Tough talk. And he knows who stole their manhood. Their identity.
And he promises to get it back.
“Hillary? Please! She’s not giving me back my manhood!! She’s cutting what’s left of my left ball off.” they say.
We know this narrative is false.
That the rising tide of equality lifts all ships.
♦◊♦
And finally — I just want to note a couple of things about Hillary herself.
One of the stories her husband, Bill, told was about the way that early in her career she was working in he went to South Carolina to see why so many young African- American boys, I mean, young teenagers, were being jailed for years with adults in men’s prisons. And she filed a report on that, which led to some changes, too.
People with disbilites could not go to school — because they were not thought of as strong enough to be economically viable. And that goes back to what we talk about with the Man-Box —- that normative gender roles uses to say you had to be an able-bodied man who would contribute to the economic workforce so you could be “productive” in our society. And —- believe it or not — in Hillary’s lifetime, disable people were not seen as that so she set out to create that change.
And finally, when she said “where there are no ceilings, the sky is the limit.” — she said that in the context of why it was not just a historic moment for women, but for men and boys too. And I think that is really important to remember.
That’s the rising tide of equality that lifts all ships.
♦◊♦
Listen to the recording to hear what our community says.
Better yet, become a member of our community and join us for the next call.
Photo: See-ming Lee / flickr
BTW DJ, I know your questions were not rhetorical but they will be seen that way. I’d be shocked if someone actually answered them.
Through the years I’ve asked one simple question. Name 3 intentional movements/campaigns that feminists have presented that were focused on the betterment of men? I never seem to get an answer to that question.
Yes. There is no answer to my questions, Tom. That is the entirety of the problem. That is also not a hit on GMP. None of what I said is. It just is what it is. The world is changing faster then any of us can keep up with, and we are all scrambling to catch up. It’s going to hit us guys, and its going to hit women just as hard as we move forward. I don’t want more, but I damn sure don’t want less, being handed a tin full of crumbs while everyone else gorges on a… Read more »
“Especially in the early days — we were told that on one had we were too masculine, too macho and on the other we we too wimpy. We were told both that we were women haters and that we were too feminine. We were called manginas.” __________ First guy through the wall always gets bloodied. There will always be those that react viscerally, attempt to dismiss with pithy language and catch phrases. If I had a nickel for every time I’ve been called a misogynist for speaking on men’s rights, I could support this project singlehandedly. Mangina is the classic… Read more »
As always DJ, you are a sage.
Nailed it DJ. Good on Ya.
I always enjoy reading your responses DJ but I have something that you said that I want to address. Sadly, contrary to how it’s being painted, the SAHD movement, although evolving, was not an “intentional” movement but something that happen because men wanted it but because of the economic turn which unemployed countless men. Don’t get me wrong, it turns out to be a good thing but I think we have to call it what is was. I know many feminists that want to take credit for its surfacing and evolution but you and I know that’s not the case.… Read more »
Hiya, Tom. Yes. I didn’t explain that well enough I think. I meant that it was acceptable to the gender crowd (not equity feminist, but you know the type), meaning that they did not challenge it as they do, say, divorced father’s rights. The reason is not that they support men, or SAHDs, but because it is perceived to be a power move by allowing more women to go out in the world and continue the quest for economic and social dominance over men (their agenda, not my way of thinking). We both know why it happened, and we both… Read more »
One of the main reasons I try and be on the Friday calls when I can is to hear Lisa’s commentary on what stands out to her. She offers a unique glimpse into what is important in our world and provides a safe place for people to connect and respond. I like that we’re getting to know who is on the call so we can read their work or write to them. The community is getting stronger as our ties to each other grow stronger. It’s going to be a challenging ride, as the world goes through its changes, and… Read more »
People still call you these things, your censorship’s just gotten worse over the years.
Equality, by definition, can only sink all ships, as no one is clearly superior to another. It seems like her definition of progress is being nicer to people and smoothing over conflict. Why is that progress? We need endless competition to determine (and create new) social hierarchies, not degenerate to sameness.