Justin Cascio believes there is a difference between an attack and a criticism. This is his criticism.
EDITOR’S NOTE: As Publisher, CEO, and an Editor of The Good Men Project, I was concerned with running this piece. Not because I wanted to stop the discussion, not because I wanted to dismiss Justin’s concerns, and not because I am not willing to take criticism. I disagreed with Justin’s portrayal of some of the events — 1) I did not “refuse to run Hugo’s piece” as Justin’s says below, I simply wanted to have a conversation with Hugo about it first 2) The name of another post, “The Wrath of the Feminists” came from Jenn Pozner herself — if it is “disrespectful and dismissive” it is really important that people understand that Jenn herself used it as a title to describe the twitter discussion. In fact, I talked to Jenn about it, she told me to make sure we linked back to the place she posted it and put quotes around it. But it was her title. 3) Tom did not call empathy to women “bullshit.” Justin couldn’t find the tweet, but I have since looked it up. What Tom said is that “So the only way to be a “good” man is to imagine how hard it is to be a woman? What a crock of shit.”4) I do disagree with Justin’s definitions of “criticism” vs. “attack”, as Justin correctly points out. 5) Justin is a contributor who is helping to build The Good Men Project together with us. I don’t expect him to agree with everything we do. But I do expect him to support our intentions.
But I told Justin I had concerns I wanted to discuss before running this piece, and so Justin and I talked on the phone. Justin and I disagreed on all of the above and reached an impasse. But he finally said one thing that I could rally behind. He said “This is the truth as I see it.”
One of the criticisms of Tom Matlack’s original post “Being a Dude is a Good Thing” (the post that started this all) was that some people didn’t see the world as Tom did. I do not see the world as Justin does. But he has this POV, and I’ve heard others give interpretations to the events which are similar to Justin’s.
We are not censorious. We do not shut down discussion. And one of the things I’ve learned from being at this a while is: “We can’t get at the truth until we allow people to tell us what they see.”
We have since decided to run Hugo’s original post unedited, here. Below is Justin’s post, also unedited.
♦◊♦
There’s a storm brewing on The Good Men Project, and it’s not just the feminists and the men’s rights activists going at it in the comments again. Although both of these issues relate to The Good Men Project’s editorial policies, the matter of Tom Matlack’s public image and that of the site he founded have been cast as being about feminism, when they are really about goodness.
Hugo Schwyzer’s explanation, “Why I Resigned From The Good Men Project,” posted to his own blog, describes Tom Matlack as anti-feminist, but upon further reading, the accusation is more critical to the GMP mission. The problem has never been that Schwyzer and Matlack are men, or that they both call themselves feminists, or that like other men and feminists, they disagree with one another on occasion. I’m also a man, a feminist, and in disagreement at various times with both Hugo and Tom. And while I agreed with some of Tom’s points—that all men do not deserve to be regarded as rapists—my principal concern with his defensive stances and gaslighting in “The Wrath of the Feminists” were not that they are anti-feminist, but that they are disrespectful.
Lisa’s response to Hugo’s post, and her explanation, “So a Male Feminist and a Female Humanist Walk Into a Bar” don’t make it much clearer to me exactly why she rejected Hugo’s response. Was it that his essay was really so harmful to the brand?
The reason I started writing for the GMP was because a piece infuriated me: the author describes terrorizing his wife and small children, on a site specifically about becoming good men, and so I wrote a piece in response, in which I attack the more subtle and unexamined ways in which men bully and extort the women in their lives. It got people riled up, too; not everyone got my satirical sneer, or agreed with what I had to say about the culture of domestic violence. Undaunted, I’ve gone on to write here about being queer and trans, about children’s sexuality, and about the culture of silence around sexual abuse. These are not anodyne perspectives, and each time I’ve had a thrill of fear that maybe this time, Lisa would not accept my submission. She always has.
Why wasn’t Hugo’s gaslighting essay run without question? He does not attack Tom Matlack, founder of the GMP; he criticizes him. And maybe this is the problem Lisa and Tom are having: distinguishing the two. Even in naming it “The Wrath of the Feminists,” the editorial voice of the GMP was disrespectful and dismissive of the writers who were invited to participate in the discussion. Tom even calls empathy for women “bullshit.” His tactics throughout the conversation are derailing: tactics not befitting a good man, feminist or not.
Recently, I co-edited a section on the GMP, “Presumption of Male Guilt,” with Joanna Schroeder. When I received Tom’s submission on the topic, “Being a Dude is a Good Thing” (which is the article that kicked off the “Wraths” discussion) it originally included a phrase that I found transphobic. Although he made the change, based on his recent opening salvo in “The Wraths,” I still get the sense that the guy who wrote “Eunuchs Are Not the Answer” (and didn’t respond to my comment criticizing the conflation of gender and character) thinks that “real men” are as unlike women as possible. This is one of those times when I prefer Schwyzer’s formulation, that the opposite of a real man is a child, not a woman.
When @sjjphd criticized Tom’s introduction of whiteness to his argument about presumption of male guilt, she made a valid and very well known point about institutionalized oppression, which Tom derailed by claiming he has none of these privileges, because he was born poor. By bringing up his class as an argument in a discussion of race-based privilege, he was derailing. It also showed the work that Tom hasn’t done, because this kind of ignorance about the benefits that accrue to men, or straight people, or white people, or cisgendered or able-bodied people, is what Tom’s friend Steve Locke explained months ago on the GMP in his letter, “Why I Don’t Want to Talk About Race,” Locke says to his friend, in essence, Tom, we’re friends, but this work of educating you on your privilege is not the job of every person of color standing near you. There are books and lectures: this work has been *done.*
Like Locke, Schwyzer has the right to opt out of educating the straight, white, cisgender, able-bodied man who so far refuses to recognize his own privilege. Hugo’s defection has me wondering what I must say about this matter before we can go forward: about Tom, and the image of The Good Men Project, and what it means for me to be associated with them.
I’m concerned about the future of the Project. Are we here for each other, imperfect role models, or are we building a monumental substitute for one man’s personal growth? Being able to receive criticism is crucial to the work of becoming a good person. Tom Matlack can lead by example, as he did when he ran Steve Locke’s letter, by allowing this to be published on his site.
—Photo jonseidman1988 / flickr
Agree with Lisa that I am not trying to attack anyone, only shed some light on my perception of what actually happened and why communication broke down.
I do want to add that the intention is not to have this be perceived as an “attack” against Justin, any more than I wanted so many people going after Tom’s words from multiple sources. In the end, the decision was made to run the piece because of the difficulty of “seeing” the truth. And because if we look for truths in absolutes, we will only see what we want to see. And — if someone has a point of view that is not the truth as you see it — and you counter with your own truth what is… Read more »
Lisa – this is a really beautiful response and one of the reasons I’m very proud to be affiliated with The Good Men Project.
Oops, not specific enough! I mean, your editorial note is awesome, Justin’s thoughts and comments are awesome and your comment, just above, rocks.
What Joanna said.
Finally with regard to my supposedly saying empathy for women is bullshit that is simply not true. If you read the body of my work you will know that a recurring theme is learning as men to be better husbands and fathers (to girls in particular as I have a 17 year old daughter) and doing so with great empathy. The exact exchange to which you refer on twitter amid heating discussion about why I had committed some kind of mortal sin was: @TMatlack: WTF. So the only way to be a “good” man is to imagine how hard it… Read more »
@Amanda Marcotte: Imagining the POV of someone you’re in conflict with is bare minimum of being a good person, yes.
Did you by chance come across four rather demonic looking horse riders after getting that Tweet? Or nine because after reading AM trying to drop this revelation on someone else is a level of hypocrisy that borders on either the coming apocalypse, or the return of the king…
Danny – you reminded of this little ditty I came cross some years ago: The lord of the Web-Rings. Three Rings for the server-kings in thier clean rooms, Seven for the Cyber-lords in their comfy chairs. Nine for Mortal readers doomed to die, One for the Blog Lord on their Blogging throne In the Land of Blog where the Shadows lie. One Web-Ring to rule them all, One Web-Ring to find them, One Web-Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Blog where the Shadows lie. It was pre-twitter, and when web-rings were… Read more »
with regard to Hugo’s piece. he and I exchanged emails on the afternoon of December 19th about the difficulty of the exchanges that had transpired. I urged him to move on and write about other things having already written once about me and my perceived lack of understanding in “Serious Discussion is Not “Wrath of Feminists””. I didn’t feel we needed to continue the mud slinging any more since it was, in my view, personal about me and not about him, Amanda or any of the folks who so passionately disagreed with my views. His response at the end of… Read more »
Justin: A bit of clarity here. YOU actually edited the piece which created the firestorm here. So it’s kind of strange for you now to be critiquing me or my response to the feedback I got for it. To refresh your memory here is the exchange after I submitted the piece to you. You wrote: “Hi Tom, I read your article, “Being a Dude is a Good Thing,” and liked it. There is one thing that stuck out for me, and I hope you don’t mind me asking you this. I was wondering if you’d consider changing this sentence: “How… Read more »
My main points in this piece are not about “Dude,” but about your Twitter conversation. And while you didn’t ask my permission before posting this email exchange, I’m glad you did. I sweated over that letter.
I enjoyed your article, “Grew Up as Girls, Married as Men” (which Lisa highlighted above) and I was wondering why your bio mentions you are gay, but does not mention you are trans. OK it mentions the trans magazine. I don’t know who puts the bios together but I assume you OK-ed it at least. Is that intentional? Accidental? Is that from a sort of who you see yourself angle? As a reader it’s information I’d want to have on a bio. I hope my contribution is more than just being “the transsexual,” So should you mention it? Well for… Read more »
My bio says that I’m queer, not gay. I wrote it when I submitted my first article on the site, in September. It’s a very short bio, but I have a long history of writing on the internet, so if you wanted to know more about me, you could google my name.
Justin I was frankly responding to the comment that my piece included a sentence that was “transphobic.” In order to simply clarify that point I felt it appropriate to include our email exchange so that readers could see the orignal sentence I wrote, my response to your comments, and how the replacement “gender studies professor” came about. While perhaps you were talking more about the twitter exchange than the my original piece, make no mistake that Hugo, Amanda et al were tweeting (along with the many who then piled on to make clear what a scumbag I am) were all… Read more »
I would have suggested going the other way; keep the trans example and the Navy SEAL but add a third example so it is clear you are NOT pairing two opposites.
To the editor: You say, “I don’t expect him to agree with everything we do. But I do expect him to support our intentions.” You show no evidence and make no arguments to show how, where, or when Justin does not “support our intentions.” You simply state that he does not. You do not define “us.” You do not state what “your intentions” are. Is this an attack on Justin? Is it criticism? In either case, shouldn’t you at least define what he is not supporting, and back up what you say regarding his lack of “support”, with something beyond… Read more »
Sorry if that wasn’t clear. I had meant “to support the intentions of the goals of The Good Men Project as a whole.” A site that Tom Matlack founded with the goal of collecting stories of men, stories that talk about the changing world as they see it, from a viewpoint that is honest and insightful. And to engage in provocative discussions around issues that are often difficult to talk about. This is a community site, built by our community, with content that is written by the community and topics that they think are important at any given time. We… Read more »
Hi, Lisa. Sorry if that wasn’t clear. You display a double standard in taking issue with Justin’s definitions of “attacks and/or criticism” and then attacking him for having attacked “the site as a whole” without definitions, vigorous arguments, evidence, or examples. (You still haven’t supplied these despite your comment above attempting to clarify.) Vague, broad accusations of “attacking the site as a whole” (whether you intended this for Justin or others) certainly come across as attacks despite you denial below in the comments section. Your position of power at this site makes such accusations even more serious for writers whose… Read more »
Hi Catherine, You make some fair points. I am in agreement that our section on race was one of our best sections — it is certainly one of which I am most proud. We also continue to work hard on getting new stories on fatherhood, sexual orientation, dating and breaking up and family. All of those we will be continuing to write about — one of our contributors is running a three part series leading up to Valentine’s day. Sexual orientation gets big play around Gay Pride week. Fatherhood we work hard on in the weeks leading up to Father’s… Read more »
“Grew Up as Girls, Married as Men”
Just read it!
https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/grew-up-as-girls-married-as-men/
Now one of the articles is on “respectful grinding”? Is that meant as a joke?
No it is serious question – for a young man.
I didnt reply to it, as i did not know how to advise him. Im 36, my era was house and rave. So the hiphop grinding dancing that i see young people do in nightclubs is outside of my ‘experience of manhood’, as i sure as hell refuse to dance like that.
I could see grinding etiquette in a nightclub being a serious question, for a young man
You say: Regarding examples of excellent articles, I began reading the site because of the great writing and variety of viewpoints offered in the series on race. You offered thoughtful, important, and eloquent articles on issues affecting men of all ages on fatherhood, sexual orientation, dating and breaking up, and family. Followed by: Now one of the articles is on “respectful grinding”? Is that meant as a joke? Wow what a way to contradict yourself. I would think that a young man trying to get advice on navigating a the club scene in a decent manner would be an example… Read more »
Actually, it was very clear Lisa. On the other hand, thank goodness the GMP has at least one crabby, agenda-driven, beetle-browed spelling-and-grammar nazi among its readership. The thousands of devoted readers who read it every day for enjoyment and enlightenment should be balanced with the other sort, for variety’s sake if nothing else.
“Criticism’s”? Basic spell-check would have caught this error by the publisher and EDITOR of this web site. I get more and more distracted from this site’s content every time I see the awful spelling and grammar that goes on here. These errors, which are widespread here, are very definitely an indication of the care and standards of excellence you do or do not set for yourselves. They detract from the writers’ ideas and material.
Noted, changed, we’ll look out for that moving forward.
If the primary purpose of Feminism is not education, how will they succeed?
What is cyber mobbing? Did you just make that up?
“Cyber Mobbing – Cyber-Mobbing” is to my knowledge and experience a well known phrase that relates to patterns of Cyber Harassment and Bullying. It seems there is a divergence in language between US English and UK English. Perhaps I’m more familiar with it due to my works streams in Equality and the Net. On the other hand – a quick check of Wikipedia does show an in depth analysis of Mobbing, and even addresses the psychology of those who instigate mobbing ! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobbing For example: “In the book MOBBING: Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace, the authors identify mobbing as… Read more »
Wow.
Wow bad or wow good? Can you explain?
Several wows.
Good, bad, one was kind of sidewise which I will share. I was pretty surprised – and maybe I’m totally wrong here – but it seemed like you were pretty angry, which I’ve never seen before, so that was pretty spectacular.
I was angry. I’m human. I was not angry at Justin, I was angry at this: “I’m concerned about the future of the Project.” That is the thing I have to constantly battle — the future of the project — turning it into a business, getting it noticed, building community, building traffic, getting it to succeed, and getting it to succeed in a way that honors everyone as well at the mission we started out with. It makes me angry for anyone to imply that this will not succeed. Ask Tom. He’s seen me angry at that very thing as… Read more »
Its kind of funny. It would be easier for you if you were totally feminist or the reverse but you have staked a position right in the middle and you get flack from both sides. I think the site is pretty useful however I don’t know if its primary use is really “Good Men”. After all the pieces that get the most comments are NOT the ones about good men. They are the gender pieces where feminists, anti-feminists and others generate a debate. I believe this is because this site is the only site which is neutral ground for feminists… Read more »
I responded to a similar comment on a different post, but this one goes into depth a little more so I’d like to talk about it hear as well. I agree with what you say here, and thanks for articulating it. I don’t think it’s *always* boring to talk about Good Men — after all, we talk about both the good and the bad, and we look for stories from individuals that have a moral dilemma at their crux, to give the story it’s dramatic tension. And that I DO think is interesting. However — the stories themselves in isolation… Read more »
I criticize because I care, distinguishing myself from People Who Troll (PWT) through my consistency, transparency, and fairness. I also try to take deep breaths and come from a place of love, but that doesn’t happen 100% of the time. I thrive on lively debate about important matters, and how to be a good man is one that matters a lot to me, for personal reasons that are biographically obvious. That this site is a place where people of diverse opinions can come together and share our personal stories and our opinions (and we need both) is a joy to… Read more »
Thank you so much Justin. I really appreciate that. And I agree — I keep hearing the words “nobody else has a site quite like this” and “you’re doing something different” and “nowhere else on the web”. We are doing something different. It’s an important conversation. It’s a conversation around an idea. Sometimes it’s damn hard and we screw it up. But it’s obviously a conversation worth having.
Justine – It may have been something if Hugo had even started hos won piece with the right facts: He said: “One of the most popular articles of the year (and certainly one of the most-viewed here at GMP) is Yashar Ali’s now thoroughly viral Why Women Aren’t Crazy. Referencing an old film, Yashar **coined”” the simple term “gaslighting” to describe the way in which men undermine women’s self-confidence through subtle (and not so subtle) insinuations that women’s feelings are unreasonable.” **highlighted for clarit** Could we just get it on the record again – Yasher did not coin or create… Read more »
As a queer man in 2011, I aspire to live in a culture so evolved that Tom Matlack and the Good Men Project (which, in spite of its allegedly anti-feminist “straight, white, cisgender, able-bodied man who so far refuses to recognize his own privilege” founder continues to encourage and publish work by gay men, lesbians, transsexuals, straight men, straight women, and disabled persons without bias or censoriousness) is my biggest problem. Likewise, I aspire to someday live in a culture where the original mission of the GMP (to promote a serious dialogue on manhood and what it means) has been… Read more »
Would somebody kindly inform readers about what is going on in the editorial team of GMP and what is the stand of each individual. It is getting really murky.
I am the Publisher and CEO, Ryan O’Hanlon is the Managing Editor. We are the only full-time employees and make up the “Editorial Team.” Tom Matlack is the Founder, a business strategic advisor and a writes a weekly column called “Good is Good”. We also have a community of 350 Writer/Contributor/Evangelists who write the bulk of the articles here. Those 350 write articles, help with the editorial “packages” such as “Presumption of Male Guilt”, “Male Heartbreak” or “Fear & Courage” (running now). Those 350 contributors also are invited to our weekly conference calls, help with the content calendar, help with… Read more »