Will the real “real men” please stand up? Alex Bove would like to examine this unhealthy conception of gender.
—–
A recent photo shoot for the U.K.’s Sun newspaper presented side-by-side images of “real” men and athletes/models dressed only in underwear:
While we might be inclined applaud the “positive” message that “real” men don’t look like soccer stars and models, I think we ought to question whether any group of men ought to claim the mantle of the real. I endorse a maximally-inclusive version of masculinity that embraces cisgender men, transmen, men of color, gay, straight, and omnisexual men (and asexual men too), vegans and hunters, atheists and Baptists, young and old men, men of all physical and mental abilities, and yes (gasp!), even masculine-identified women. I will not accept an unexamined conception of gender.
Conversations about “real” men abound in the men’s rights blogosphere and are usually couched as battles between authentic men and limp-wristed, so-called “beta” males. A term has been coined for these men: “manginas.” Some bloggers have even attempted to parody this web site’s name, and to malign its authors. I’d like to take a moment to examine what I think that means.
I endorse a maximally-inclusive version of masculinity that embraces cisgender men, transmen, men of color, gay, straight, and omnisexual men (and asexual men too), vegans and hunters, atheists and Baptists, young and old men, men of all physical and mental abilities, and yes (gasp!), even masculine-identified women. I will not accept an unexamined conception of gender.
|
On one level, ridiculing men by calling them women is classic misogyny. The insult only works if observers believe that being a woman is a bad thing, or that displaying womanly traits is unmanly. Likewise, calling a man limp-wristed is not only homophobic but also misogynistic. After all, gay men are men. The insult is not necessarily intended for all gay men but only for effeminate ones (those whose body language approximates traditionally feminine mannerisms). Thus, what is truly unacceptable is not men who desire men but rather men who act like women.
But I don’t think the primary purpose of the “mangina” epithet is to place non-gender-conforming men in the same category as women: rather, the goal is to circumscribe the category of “real” men. This strategy still reinforces a binary, but the binary is not so much man/woman as it is man/not-man. What I find most troubling about this world view is that it almost always seeks to define the (usually privileged) category of “man” extremely narrowly. While women certainly fall outside of the realm of “real” men, so do a large number (perhaps a majority) of men.
The worst thing about being a mangina, according to men’s rights advocates, is that it requires a man to mask his true identity, all because of feminism’s nefarious influence. As MRA Jack Donovan says in his critique of the Good Men Project:
if you let women dictate what kinds of male feelings are acceptable, you’re going to get a site that’s about what men think women want to hear — not a site about who men really are.
The proposition that “who men really are” is unacceptable to women is only true if we assume an essential (real) masculinity, from which all other masculinities (along with the entirety of female experience, of course) must be excluded. It requires us to accept that all men are one specific thing. Since feminism embraces the theory that gender is constructed, and therefore provisional, it allows for the existence of more than one masculinity. A flexible notion of gender can be threatening, especially to those who believe that authenticity is the sine qua non of masculinity.
No one is suggesting that “manly” men ought not to be allowed in the club. What we are saying, however, is that we want to diversify the membership.
|
Anti-feminists sometimes frame this threat as an existential one, but challenges to traditional masculinity only threaten masculine privilege. No one is suggesting that “manly” men ought not to be allowed in the club. What we are saying, however, is that we want to diversify the membership (to torture the metaphor). One way to view the “threat” of diversity is to see it as an incursion, and to imagine that the small, exclusive club of masculinity will become overcrowded (and we all know how much men like to stretch their legs and relax). But another way to see it is as an opportunity for expansion, allowing everyone to have the same amount of space in a much bigger building.
I’m not suggesting that we take away hypermasculine men’s right to call themselves masculine. I also don’t think, as Jack Donovan does, that openly criticizing traditional masculinity is a form of “explaining to men what they are doing wrong, and what feminists think those men should be doing instead, so that women can be happier or feel safer in some way.” We must criticize elements of masculinity that may be harmful to both women and men, but doing so should not dehumanize men who identify with those traits. It’s possible (preferable, even) to discuss what has historically been “wrong” with masculinity without throwing out the baby with the proverbial bathwater.
Ultimately, it would be wonderful to remove the gender binary altogether and to see gender expression as falling somewhere along a continuum (and as fluid, open to change throughout a person’s lifetime). Why should my vulnerability, compassion, and empathy be in conflict with my self-sufficiency, stoicism, and toughness? These things don’t feel contradictory to me. They are a set of skills I use at different times for different purposes. Doesn’t everyone?
Perhaps not. Not everyone has a mangina, after all.
—
Get the best stories from The Good Men Project delivered straight to your inbox, here.
—
Photo: [main] renaissancechambara / flickr, Mark Hillary / flickr, jbcurio / flickr [inset] queerity
This, I believe, is the definitive definition of “mangina” from one of the most prominent men’s rights web sites: http://antimisandry.com/essential/manginas-betrayers-men-13392.html It clearly states that manginas embrace their “feminine” side and are products of a “feminised” society, and it contrasts manginas with alpha-males. Thus, both parts of my characterization hold up to the rhetoric of men’s rights itself. Several comments here have mentioned that the essential component of mangina status is “betrayal” of men, but that just proves my point. It suggests that there is a clear, unambiguous “manhood” that can be betrayed. How else would we know a man had… Read more »
A bit like a misogynist, Alex – used liberally to mean anything and everything
Misogynists embrace a toxic masculinity characterized by pervasive micro aggressions against the divine feminine.
Several comments here have mentioned that the essential component of mangina status is “betrayal” of men, but that just proves my point. It suggests that there is a clear, unambiguous “manhood” that can be betrayed. How else would we know a man had betrayed other men?
Of the comments I’ve been reading it seemed that the ones the talked of this betrayal weren’t talking about some “idea” of men being betrayed by of actual living breathing men being betrayed.
@ Alex Bove “They seem to think that certain strains of radical feminism are the only feminism. That’s simply not true. ” Kind of like picking one website and saying that’s the MRM. “Men’s rights sites like antimisandry.com make a lot of hay by masquerading their misogyny as a critique of feminism” Again here’s the same thing feminists always do. Don’t critique our ideas. They can’t withstand critical analysis and if you try, I’ll call you a misogynist. Maybe if feminism actually had ideas worth believing, you wouldn’t be afraid of people examining them. “The most dangerous thing about the… Read more »
“Conversations about “real” men abound in the men’s rights blogosphere and are usually couched as battles between authentic men and limp-wristed, so-called “beta” males. A term has been coined for these men: manginas.”
A mangina is a man who fights against the right of other men to be what they want to be, if what those men want to be does not involve utility to women. It is entirely easy to verify this. How can the author have missed the very consistent way in which this word is used?
(1) It doesn’t sound to me like Jack was criticising any sort of masculinity, but criticising women who think they have the right or the ability to define what masculinity is supposed to be. (2) Mangina doesn’t refer to feminine men, but to men who endorse a feminist male negative view. (3) You talk about not accepting an unexamined view of gender, but I wonder how much you have truly examined yours and how much of it was handed to you in some sociology lecture. Your use of the emotive labels of ‘misogynist’ and ‘homophobic’, indeed the waythe entire article… Read more »
I think many transgender individuals would disagree with your last point.
Science has more then demonstrated that gender has a biological component. Just look at the fact that the moment children can crawl they have different toy preferences. Girls who have a condition called CAT where scans show they have a more male brain due to exposure to high levels of testosterone in the womb have the same toy preferences as boys. Even when the caregivers and the child and all involved with the raising of this child are ignorant (even the researchers orginally) of the condition the toy preferences are that of a boy. Interestingly this has even been repeated… Read more »
Hi Adam
You tell us:
✺”Real feminism,
where the feminine is truly valued rather than women trying to elevate their masculine, has yet to
begin.”✺
As a woman I have never figured out what it is to be feminine, apart for the obvious that has to do with looks and be a kind warm person.
Will you share with us how you would describe a feminine woman?
Hi Iben,
“As a woman I have never figured out what it is to be feminine,”
In the MRM, femininity is treated the same as masculinity. It is defined by each individual person. Your femininity is defined however you’d like so you already have the answer.
You do know that the Vagina monologues condone pedophilia right I mean you are an educated man after all. Why compare anything to something that condones pedophilia?
Actually, one of the central tenets of feminism is a critique of femininity. I’ve read scores of feminists (men and women) who point out how problematic it is to make superficiality a defining trait of femininity. The rhetoric of MRAs is not new. Anti-feminists insulted women during the first and second waves of feminism by calling them traitors to their gender, by calling them men, etc. What is new, perhaps, about the mangina trope, is the assumption of nefarious motives on the part of the men who criticize masculinity. No one ever suggested that Gloria Steinem was under the influence… Read more »
Why not modularize it even further? Men kill men more often than they kill women and in terms of intimate partner homicides, about 40% of victims are men killed by women. Women who kill are about 8 times more likely to pick an intimate partner victim as a man who kills. So why not frame male violence as male violence against stranger men since that is the overwhelming statistical occurrence. Yet, there is still the desire to frame violence as men trying to dominate women. It doesn’t quite fit the narrative of the patriarchy being around to subjugate women so… Read more »
Because a tenet of feminism is that every man is the same. Or at the very least once someone is identified as male there is a basic template that automatically applies to them. Take the concept of privilege for instance. In the eyes of feminists once someone is ID’d as male they have the vast array of things known as “male privilege” bestowed upon them. Sure when asked to back up these claims of privilege feminists are quick to say that they are aren’t trying to say that they all apply but the one thing they won’t cop to is… Read more »
The suggestion that feminist men are scheming to curry women’s favor is just more misogyny. It suggests that either men are weak-willed (i.e. feminine) and unable to muster their own legitimate criticisms (because no “real” man would criticize his fellow bros),… No. You’re impliying that any and all criticism of men is a sign of weak willedness and that’s not the case. Sounds like you’re trying to set up a claim of “anyone that disagrees with MRAs is weak”. ….or that women are so gullible that they will give themselves sexually to any man who tells them what they want… Read more »
@ Danny “No. You’re impliying that any and all criticism of men is a sign of weak willedness and that’s not the case. Sounds like you’re trying to set up a claim of “anyone that disagrees with MRAs is weak”.” Funny thing is I’ve never seen an individual banned from an MRA website. I’ve never seen an individual ignored on an MRA website. If there is one group of people who don’t mind examining another view point it’s the MRM. I think it’s because the MRM knows that it’s ideas can withstand scrutiny and if they can’t, they change their… Read more »
“that openly criticizing traditional masculinity is a form of “explaining to men what they are doing wrong, and what feminists think those men should be doing instead, so that women can be happier or feel safer in some way.” We must criticize elements of masculinity that may be harmful to both women and men, but doing so should not dehumanize men who identify with those traits. It’s possible (preferable, even) to discuss what has historically been “wrong” with masculinity without throwing out the baby with the proverbial bathwater.” So why don’t we? Why do we insist on talking about “toxic… Read more »
So why don’t we? Why do we insist on talking about “toxic masculinity” when femininity would never be criticized? I would say that femininity is criticized however I have seen two big differences. 1. I’ve have never heard or seen anyone declare that traditional femininity is toxic as if it were a poisonous substance that needs to be dealt with. 2. Usually when femininity is criticized the focus is mostly on how its affecting women and not very much on how its affecting men. While on the other hand critique of masculinity seems to look at how masculinity is affecting… Read more »
@ Danny
“I would say that femininity is criticized however I have seen two big differences.”
Yes, but a lot of the criticism directed against traditional femininity is not a criticism of femininity. It’s is the criticism of the social construct of femininity. Look at the body image issue I pointed out. Feminists don’t blame femininity or the women themselves, they blame society’s portrayal of women. When violence is discussed, it’s a men’s issue and not a societal issue or construct.
I have to give you that one. The criticism of traditional femininity doesn’t flow the same as the criticism of traditional masculinity.
Criticism of traditional femininity: “Look at how women are taught to behave and how women are treated by society!”
Criticism of traditional masculinity: “Look at how society teaches men to treat women!”
Sometimes I truly do wonder how much women really do care about men. Even the ones that seem to be doing a lot.
I have often encountered this Real Man/not real dichotomy. I have not observed any similar attitude among women. Perhaps I not privy to those conversations, but I never seen even VERY conservative women accuse even lesbians of not being “Real Women”. I’m also confused by this “Not Man” status. If you have male sex organs, but the speaker feels you are “Not Real” then what exactly does he think you are? That’s without jumping into the Trans/Cis issue of which I have no experince.
“Challenges to traditional masculinity only threaten masculine privilege…” Without going into details, one of our now ex-friends went ballistic when he felt his authority in his family was being challenged…he basically screwed the lid on tighter in that pressure cooker home of his….before we cut off contact with our now estranged friends, his wife and kids were telling me the seething, threatening things he was saying to them to keep them all in line….to my husband’s face he puts on a facade of being the caring patriarch and claiming to be attending “mangina-like activities”, like therapy (but we know he… Read more »
There’s something odd about a gay man like “Jack Donovan” (which is not his real name) lecturing straight men for supposedly not being “masculine” enough. Instead of lecturing other men, he should pay attention to his own problems.
I’ve always been intrigued how someone who is a member of a group that has been subjected to intolerance can be quite intolerant himself.
The more I see what “real men” are supposed to be like, the more it looks like “real men” are ignorant, shallow, and suicidal. I’d rather not be one. I prefer being whatever man I am today instead. The wannabe studs can kill themselves and each other, but I’ve got other fish to fry.
“if you let women dictate what kinds of male feelings are acceptable, you’re going to get a site that’s about what men think women want to hear — not a site about who men really are.” So what’s wrong with this statement? Should men be able to dictate to women what femininity is? “I also don’t think, as Jack Donovan does, that openly criticizing traditional masculinity is a form of “explaining to men what they are doing wrong” Where did he say that? Did I miss another quote? In general the MRM believes that each man defines masculinity for himself… Read more »
This is a misinterpretation of the term mangina. Mangina is a man who bows and scrapes for female approval and puts womens issue first while denying or playing down the existence of mens issues.
Is what you’re saying is that a mangina is a White Knight who does not get the benefits allotted to the position of a Knight?
I’m not a big believer in undiscriminating altruism, so what would be the motivation for such behavior?
Manginas are typically white knights too, white knighting is part of being a mangina.
How about using a term that doesn’t imply negativity to the female gender’s body parts. Sock puppet, or something. The term mangina is pretty low, another term to mean the same thing would be far better and probably get used far more often.
Archy I agree, I prefer call this kind of person as, brown noser or toe licker.
I consider this far more accurate than mangina.
@ Elissa
“I’m not a big believer in undiscriminating altruism, so what would be the motivation for such behavior?”
Female approval, female company, possibly sex. I remember a quote from a coed in a coed dorm that went something like this. The guys let us get away with everything in hopes that they might get away with something.
Motivation? Ina world where being a man is a crime, being a mangina gets you of f the hook and allows you to escape the constant messages of guilt. By joining with the oppressors you get a grreater degree of freedom and legitimacy. Sort of like being a slave driver instead of a slave.
“if you let women dictate what kinds of male feelings are acceptable, you’re going to get a site that’s about what men think women want to hear — not a site about who men really are.” I agree 1000% with this. Women do not get the right to dictate what feelings are ok from men. Isn’t a mangina someone who ignores and harms men, ie rallying for domestic violence support for women that extends beyond decent into the realm of misandry whilst ignoring men need help, and helping bring in stuff like earlier VAWA which harmed men with primary aggressor… Read more »
I’ve actually seen a mangina make youtube videos claiming that the concerns of men like paternity fraud, domestic violence laws and divorce were non issues. That to me is a mangina, the constant need for female/feminist validation especially at the expense of other men. Sexual orientation has little or nothing to do with this. It’s about the intentions of their advocacy. oftentimes manginas are only motivated by getting a pat on the head from a commenter on Jezebel. They just seem disingenuous and opportunistic. let’s be honest there’s a reason why bronies have a modicum of authenticity and have massive… Read more »
My definition of a “real” man is a man that lives life in a manner that gives them the most happiness and peace, while not giving a flying f*ck if anyone else thinks they aren’t “manly” enough.
Liberace was more of a “Real Man” ™ than the most macho, hard drinkin’, hard fightin’ , so-manly-he-brushes-his-teeth-with-Drano “tough guy” that only behaves like that because he’s completely terrified that someone else might think he’s effeminate in some way.
my $0.02
I do think a basic template is laid down by prenatal hormones and genetic inheritance. Sometimes, what one receives this way can vary from one’s genitals, granted. I think we have a problem, though, when we hold up stereotypical feminine behavior as the desideratum for men. Women are taught to much more passive-aggressive, conformist, and authority loving (can support patriarchy?) than men are, typically. Remember Greer’s concept- the Female Eunuch? Why not make men’s behavior more of the desideratum for women?
Since feminism embraces the theory that gender is constructed, and therefore provisional, it allows for the existence of more than one masculinity.
Its not that feminism doesn’t allow for more than one masculinity. The problem is that, in the experience of a lot of men, feminism seeks to insert itself into the conversation on the diversity of masculinity. It does so on the premise that a proper conversation on masculinity CANNOT take place without feminism and women.
Thank you Danny. (Hey’ how is it that you can say stuff like this ? When I try it gets ‘Moderated’ out)
@ Danny
I always found it strange that even in conversations about masculinity feminists believe that women’s voices should be centered. We’re told to trust women to make the right decisions on abortion, but they seem to not want to trust men to even make their own decisions on what it is to be a man.
I think you are misinterpreting the way MRAs use the term. They feel (rightly or wrongly) that feminism denies/ obfuscates/ or is ambivalent to many of the problems men are having. To them it is a, admittedly coarse, corollary to women saying one of their own is anti-woman.
We are so obsessed with what makes people man or woman that we devalue some other traits that are needed to be just plain human. Women are often portrayed as the fun police of immature men, making maturity a feminine trait, but the ability to stop and think let’s say, before you get pissed drunk and assault a police officer to prove how tough you are, (in other words, judgement) is a trait that’s useful not only to men or women, but to humans in general and men are constantly told that being an idiot is a proof of manliness… Read more »
I wrote this in a blog last year. “Be a real man” “Be a man” “Man up” “Manly Man” I get so sick of hearing these phrases. Notice for one month how often you hear these phrases. Notice how often they are used in western society. In media, Television, books, magazines, within your peer groups, your schools, and within your family. If you’re hearing them a lot I’m sorry. I’m sorry that society has decided to portray men in a certain way, it can limit men. Especially if they buy into it. I think that society has decided in which… Read more »
I wrote a blog post about 6 weeks ago that got attacked by the “MRA” — a motley crew indeed. I think what you’re saying is spot on. I really appreciate it. I do wonder if masculinity and femininity aren’t necessarily opposite poles of a spectrum, but two different spectrums entirely that shift depending on things like environment and company. Would it be possible for someone to be both hyper-masculine & hyper-feminine simultaneously? I suppose it would depend on our definitions. Anyways… now I’m just musing. Thanks, again, for your post. It’s [clearly] given me a lot to chew on.… Read more »
In fact, psychologist Sandra Bem argued that masculinity and femininity were separate scales, not polar opposites on the same continuum. In her model, an androgynous person was someone who scored highly on both the masculine and feminine scales. So yes, it is possible, and you are in good conceptual company!
Also, I read your article about Robin Thicke. I thought it was fantastic.