GMP’s resident feminist, HeatherN, tackles more questions from our “Ask the Feminist” series.
Welcome to the second instalment of my Ask the Feminist series. The first set of answers generated a lot of really interesting conversation, and I’m hoping this second set will do the same. If you’d like to ask a question, just go ahead and do so in the comments. Alternatively, you can e-mail me at [email protected].
John and Bay Area Guy both asked about how some feminists still adhere to old, traditional gender stereotypes. The answer is that living feminism is hard. Basically, feminism’s about defying social expectations and going against the grain. The problem, of course, is that going against the grain usually results in a lot of ridicule and mockery. Plus, it’s exhausting to be constantly aware of how your words and actions are either contributing to the status quo or defying it.
I’ll give you two examples. 1) When I was in high school I once got into an argument with a guy friend of mine who really wanted to pay for my movie ticket. He was trying to be polite; I was asserting my belief that chivalry should die. We argued; I may have yelled a bit, and eventually I convinced him to keep his money and let me pay for myself. 2) Sometimes when I’m on a crowded bus, a man will offer his seat so I can sit down. I will always refuse because, as I said, chivalry should basically die. Often, the man will ignore my refusal and stand up anyway, and then look at me expectantly. I end up sitting down because it feels rude not to.
So the first example is about me living my feminism. The second is about me giving into a patriarchal system, because it was easier and more polite. So, should I argue with the stranger next time he offers me his seat? It’d be more feminist, but it’d also be pretty rude. I could just ignore it when the guy stands up, but that ends up being awkward. Unfortunately, at the same time feminists are trying to change our society, we’re still living in it.
NotJustAGirl and J.A. Drew Diaz asked whether feminism excludes men, and Alastair asked what feminism contributes to a conversation about masculinity. Actually, quite a few questions touched on the issue of men in feminism. I could probably write an entire article about what feminism has done for men (but it turns out Justin Cacsio already has, here). But of course, I will provide my own answer too. I put the question to Twitter, and a friend of mine responded by saying his, “main selfish reason to support feminism,” was that feminism, “fleshed out multiple masculinities, allowing men to realise we can be men in different ways.” That, I think, is the big thing feminism offers men: the framework in which to think about “man” as a flexible social identity, and not the gender default.
Feminists talk a lot about what’s wrong with modern masculinity. The term “toxic masculinity” gets tossed around quite a bit, and I use it fairly often myself. What feminism is also about, though, is figuring out what sorts of masculinities can replace the toxic version. To be clear, on the whole, feminists don’t think that masculinity is inherently toxic; our society has just created one that is. So we need to re-think masculinity, and figure out what bits are positive and what bits are negative. Jackson Katz’s TEDx talk touches on this issue of rethinking what it means to be a man, specifically in terms of being bystanders to violence. He asks, “How can we change the socialization of boys and the definitions of manhood that lead to these current outcomes?” And that’s a very feminist sort of question. It’s precisely the sort of thing we’ve been asking about women in feminism, and now it’s something we’re asking about men too.
Photo: Flickr/Droid Gingerbread
Archy: “Finally would you want to talk to people whom your previous experience showed them dismissing your opinion because they were male and had “privilege” if you were a male? Where shaming n silencing goes on because HeatherN this actually happens quite a lot online to many men, I wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of males commenting right now have had the tactics used against them.” It’s been awhile but I just had to jump in here. Archy, I can’t help but find major common ground with this opinion because that’s what happened to me as well when talking… Read more »
That’s a good analogy. I have yet to hear a self proclaimed Femenist call out another on anything either said or written no matter how outrageous the statement. HeatherN referring to Jezebel as “problematic is about as strong a statement as you’ll get.
Heather, I wanted to ask where larger social concerns come into the picture. I ask as an individual who was involved in a lot of radical (Anarchist) political activism in my relative youth and who could, at that time, ask a room of leftist Anarchists if they were Feminists and get a “yeah, duh!” reaction without any concern whatsoever. Why is it that I’m now not allowed in Feminist spaces? If you asked me outside of the PP clinic we counter-protested every third Sunday each month, I would have (and, if you want to get down to it, still probably… Read more »
As several people have said, feminism is a lot of different things. I don’t think anyone can say feminism is academic feminism and not the feminism that gets discussed on-line at sites like Jezebel or Feministe. Likewise, you can’t say that on-line feminism is feminism and academic feminism isn’t. And talking about on-line feminism, it’s important to distinguish between the typically somewhat reasoned blog entries at Feministe, for example, and the often times nasty discussions that ensue. However, the people running Feministe know who their audience is and so they can’t say their discussion pieces are more representative of their… Read more »
Re. male feminist allies.
In order to be one he must deny women’s agency and participation in the cycle of violence and also argue that women are generally the victims and men are generally perpetrators and male victims and female perpetrators deserve little or less recognition compared to female victims and male perpetrators, so how is this male not a “patriarchal male” given that he is promoting the same sexist gender stereotypes and assumptions that are said to underpin patriarchy?
HeatherN, I just read a comment on Jezebel on this article ht tp://jezebel.com/if-mras-actually-wanted-to-mobilize-behind-the-issues-t-477351877 “What I’m getting around to, is that there are two types of MRAs: the naive kind and the arsehole kind. It’s worth repeating ourselves over and over again because if the former kind of MRA is listening to the right thing at the right time he might realize he is really a feminist.” If some people are willing to label someone ELSE as an MRA or a feminist then you can pretty much assign any online trolling to whatever group you want. The comments that apparently threaten… Read more »
In my articles I only refer to people as they present. For protesters of CAFE events, I refer to them as protesters, not feminists, unless they identify as such. If they DO identify as feminists (or communists, or libertarians, or some other large group) I identify them as self-identified feminists, since then that just highlights how they choose to label themselves and preemptively prevents the knee-jerk response of “not all feminists (communists, libertarians) are like that. I talk about people for their individuality and who or what they choose to represent themselves as. Christians can disagree on Christian values for… Read more »
Thanks for the comment. That is how it should be, and this is why I have issue with people saying MRA’s a hate movement based off unknown people’s action. 4chan, etc troll the FUCK out of everything they can from what I understand, how many of the threats were from MRA’s and how many from trolls? I see manboobz has a new article that at least doesn’t apply the label unless they self-identify, but just says mra-ish and other terms which is an improvement.
That level of precision and objectivity and constructiveness will just not do around here. You might confuse me with facts. : – )
http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/sexism-definition/ Anywho, on to the rest of this. The idea that women are not longer the “underdog” and that men are thinking ‘you passed me,’ and so that is alienating them…from what I’ve picked up from all these conversations and what-not, a lot of that is class-based. A lot of what I’m seeing non-feminist men claim as “proof” that women have it better, or at least that men have it worse…aren’t gender based oppressions, but rather class based oppressions. With the introduction of the idea of intersectionality, you get a lot of feminists now talking about how a white, middle… Read more »
In my opinion I think privilege varies greatly throughout the time in history ,the area where you live, your culture, your workplace, etc. As for an overall privilege it’s evident maybe in Afghanistan but in the west I think it’s starting to become very vague as to who truly holds privilege. For instance men outnumber women in injuries on the workplace but they also get more money in male-industries. Violence against women is a big issue but far more men die from violence and violence is a bigger risk for men, how do you balance that? Who holds privilege there?… Read more »
What makes it even harder to weigh privilege is that we keep finding it everywhere. Everyone looking for privilege in other people has found privilege in other people. The test always comes back positive, and there’s no way to disprove allegations of privilege. Even my writing this paragraph can be used as evidence of my privilege.
True. The accusations of privilege has pretty much turned into shouting matches of, “I know you are but what am I?”. Oh but if you believe it hard enough then you can declare someone privileged and then use that to dismiss all sorts of stuff and stat all sorts of facts and truths and suddenly certain groups actually do have it worst than other and certain voices actually do matter more than other and certain voices actually do deserve to be shut out. The test always comes back positive, and there’s no way to disprove allegations of privilege. Oh but… Read more »
Some privileges are pretty evident, like I can’t think of a single privilege that aboriginal people get here but I can think of privileges women get. Race, able-bodied/disabled, mentally/physically ill vs healthy, rich vs poor all have extremely clear privileges but the male-female one is far far more tricky in my country, in Afghanistan from what little I know it’s far more evident that men are privileged bigtime. Hell shorter people have privilege on planes, more legroom and comfort!!! But then I have more privilege in being able to see over crowds and possibly earn more money in my life… Read more »
I can imagine someone suggesting that male aboriginal Australians have male privilege especially if they are in any way “assimilated” into Euro-Australian (is that a word?) society. Anyway, if an aboriginal person claimed that he had privilege, then privilege theory as it’s usually applied would say that we are obligated to believe him. Self-definition is always accurate if you say you have it. But, if you say you don’t have it, then you are in denial, and your failure to detect it is actually proof of your privilege. I know at least one person that I would label a “privilege… Read more »
Heather I’d like to ask you about your opinion on the continued relevance of the feminist label. In the recent Jezebel article, that was posted elsewhere on this page and which received a good amount of praise in feminist circles, the author bemoans that while she would love to be able to just be a humanist the patriarchy just won’t let her. Her argument seems to be that until all people are “equal” we mustn’t throw away the feminist label just yet. I find a number of problems in this position. Firstly, I don’t think a perfectly equal world is… Read more »
Well, it’s not all they do.
Still, their fundamental message is that men and masculinity suck, and that only by “drinking from the chalice of feminism” (as Marcus once put it) can they be saved.
I guess I should have said, “most of the time.” All of the time was just a figure of speech. I stand by my point. Every time I read a Hugo Schwyzer article, I’m tempted to mockingly flagellate myself with a belt and scream, “I’m sorry for being male!”
Now as funny as that is and with how understandable such a statement is (but frankly that attitude does exist) I have to take a moment to be thankful that there are those among them that really don’t believe that.
Re: Feminist Men Frankly, I’m very skeptical of the notion that feminists are welcoming of male voices in the debates on gender and masculinity. The only men whose opinions they deem acceptable are men such as Hugo Schwyzer and Jamie Utt, who spend all of their time either bashing men or apologizing for their own masculinity. Most men are not feminists, particularly not the openly man hating brand espoused by the likes of Schwyzer and Utt. So how can feminist women truly claim to be interested in hearing men’s voices or input when they only consider a minority of male… Read more »
Hold on. Now I’ll be the first to agree that the male feminists listed there have said some out there things (and I wonder if any non-feminist men have crossed their minds) but at the same time I wouldn’t say that that is all they do.
A question on privilege and representation: you’ve often mentioned the concept of male privilege and men’s perspectives being represent in mainstream public forums. I find this particularly interesting, because I see the logic in the theory, yet I have observed, in my own life, that reality does not always conform to theory. I know of many white, cisgender, straight men who have not been granted the privileges you speak of. Could it be possible, that if such men fail to comply with expected behaviours for their cohort, that they could end up being stigmatized and ostracized by their own societies?… Read more »
Heather I appreciate the time and thought you put into answering my question. I can certainly understand how living an ideology can be inconvenient or even lead to social suicide at times. I have very strong views, but when I’m around new people or people I don’t know or trust very well, I remain silent because it’s not worth alienating people just to prove a point. That being said… I still think it’s a bit of a cop-out for feminists. Feminists have fought tooth and nail to ensure that women enjoy representation in high paying jobs, politics, and various other… Read more »
Assuming that were true, that we keep an unequal balance in dating on purpose, should that nullify the need for feminism and equality?
Can’t we appreciate the equality that feminism strive for, and also keep striving for more equality for all?
@ Joanna
So long as feminists don’t cherry pick the kind of equality they desire. All or nothing, in my book.
If there is such a thing as human nature, it’s human nature to pick and choose what works for you from larger ideologies, political movements, religions, cultures, customs, and ideas around you and try to ignore the ones that you find less useful. Very few people are totally ideologically pure, completely consistent, and in total alignment with the larger collective. That’s the exception rather than the rule. Just about everyone goes through life like a cafeteria line, choosing some things from the menu and setting aside others. (They may not be fully aware that they’re doing this, of course.) Every… Read more »
I can’t really criticize. I pick and choose which parts of feminism are in my self-interest and which parts I find inconvenient. I don’t see why anyone of any gender shouldn’t be able to do the same thing. Ideally we would all have equal opportunity to be self-servingly selective…..
I agree with this to a point, in that I definitely think that rigidly sticking to an ideology is a problem. I’m also generally not too worried about consistency, so long as the person who has changed their position can explain why they changed their position. I’ve changed my opinions about issues quite a lot…but I always try to think it through and consider different possibilities. To me, when it become hypocrisy and “cognitive dissonance” is when someone doesn’t realize they’ve changed their position. Or when someone is unwilling to admit that they’ve changed their position. “I used to think… Read more »
Of course, other people are going to pick and choose what most benefits them.
However, I’ll be damned if I’m going to sit back and let them do it with impunity.
There is ABSOLUTELY such a thing as human nature. To deny it flies in the face of science, common sense, and every day obesrvations
“I have very strong views, but when I’m around new people or people I don’t know or trust very well, I remain silent because it’s not worth alienating people just to prove a point.” I can’t help but think that you JUST acknowledged that you do this, and then question why feminists do the same thing. In dating, for better or worse, the stakes in the first meeting are quite high…first impressions are quite important. I might not have ever dated men, but I’m familiar enough with the whole dynamic to know that women who approach men first are ridiculed… Read more »
Heather, it doesn’t matter what reason those feminists give for sticking to gender scripts in dating, they’re still hypocrites. Did feminists worry about driving men away when they decided to pursue careers and other rights that allowed them to better control their lives? You can’t then turn around and use fear as an excuse to justify blatant hypocrisy, all while claiming that your all about getting rid of gender roles. Would feminists accept this sort of excuse from a man who engaged in sexist behavior because he was afraid of what the other guys might say? In most cases I… Read more »
Did feminists worry about driving men away when they decided to pursue careers and other rights that allowed them to better control their lives? You can’t then turn around and use fear as an excuse to justify blatant hypocrisy, all while claiming that your all about getting rid of gender roles. Would feminists accept this sort of excuse from a man who engaged in sexist behavior because he was afraid of what the other guys might say?
Very well said.
I see this complaint from guys all the time but really what guys are saying is that they want attractive, most desirable women to pursue them. If women really pursued as much as men do, however, 90% of the time you’d be getting hit on by women who are not attractive to you. You’d have to tolerate older, fatter, unappealing women asking you out. Is that really an advantage? I think you would quickly tire of it.
Then I humbly submit that you are only listening to certain guys. For a lot of us it actually is a desire to be pursued by women, no more no less. Yes it would be idea if there were women we found attractive among them (though not the “most desireable women” as you put it. You’d have to tolerate older, fatter, unappealing women asking you out. Is that really an advantage? I think you would quickly tire of it. This is the proverbial man who has loved and lost telling the man who hasn’t loved at all that what his… Read more »
Those guys aren’t necessarily saying “I want good looking women to hit on me”, they’re saying they are tired of always being expected to play a role that usually require them to do all of the initiating. Equality can sometimes mean giving Up certain privileges and if that means that men will now have to deal with undesirable women hiting on them then so be it.
Those guys aren’t necessarily saying “I want good looking women to hit on me”, they’re saying they are tired of always being expected to play a role that usually require them to do all of the initiating.
Again, very well said, Jack. Many guys are simply tired of being invisible.
Wait, there are guys who get hit on? Do they have rainbows with gold in their pants or something?
@Sarah Radford “I see this complaint from guys all the time but really what guys are saying is that they want attractive, most desirable women to pursue them. ” Not at all. Actually, I’m fully cognizant of the fact that, even if women en masse started to ask men out tomorrow, I would likely not be one of those men asked. I don’t say that women should ask men out as some sort of attempt to improve my own chances in the dating sphere. I say that women should ask men out in the hope that maybe, finally, women as… Read more »
No one who is asking someone out politely and in good faith deserves to be treated rudely, I agree with you on that absolutely. I guess I just wanted to point out that being pursued rather than the pursuer will probably not increase your chances of finding what you want. Dating is hard because you have to find someone with mutual attraction and compatibility and that is just really really difficult. You can’t force anyone to find you attractive nor can you force yourself to be attracted to people you aren’t attracted to. Basically 80% of the population is chasing… Read more »
In response to no one in particular: I assume that everyone in a dating situation has some sort of strategy, at least in the early days of a dating relationship. If a strategy has worked well for one group of people or shows benefits to one group of people, I’d expect other groups of people to adopt it and adapt it to their purposes. (Which is why I see a great way to test the idea that one sex has all the privilege in dating. If you really think women have all the power in dating, then borrow their strategy.… Read more »
Which is why I see a great way to test the idea that one sex has all the privilege in dating. If you really think women have all the power in dating, then borrow their strategy. Act “like a woman” in your dating, then, if it’s such the dominant strategy. Same with women – if you think men have all the power, then use their strategy. If the script is everything, then use the winning one. But that would never work or be an accurate experiment, because men could never implement female dating tactics and enjoy the same success that… Read more »
Then I must be missing part of the equation. (Wouldn’t be the first time….) If women have all the dating power but using their powerful strategy doesn’t work for men, then there must be some other even more powerful factor at work here. If men attempting to change the rules of dating would have no impact on the dating scene, then that’s pretty fatalistic. If that’s the case, then we can’t really criticize women for not changing their strategy. No one can really complain about how unfair it all is, because that would be like complaining about gravity — can’t… Read more »
“because that would be like complaining about gravity — can’t change it, just have to deal with it. Unless we’re expecting women to simply give up all that power just out of the goodness of their hearts, as pure altruism. Not bloody likely.”
But isn’t this precisely what feminism is suggesting from men? Aren’t they saying that men have all the power and privilege and should just give it up?
Currently as women are the pursued, men are the pursuers women’s attempts to draw attention to herself are how she often starts the dating process. Her job is to look pretty enough or interesting enough for the man to notice and start talking to her, whilst she tries to signal him via various body language. Once that occurs it’s up to both of them to jump through each others hoops. For casual sex the marketplace has far more men willing which gives her enormous power. I’ve heard that men apparently hold power in finding a relationship however since more women… Read more »
I’ve heard that men in Scandinavia are passive in the dating scene and women have to make the first moves as a result. I don’t know if it’s true since I’ve never lived in Scandinavia, but I have read several places that the dating scene there us quite different than in the U.S. If men all stopped pursuing women then women would have to become more aggressive. That seems logical. As long as sone men are willing to be aggressive then many wonen find it more beneficial to sit back and wait to be approached. You have to look at… Read more »
“From her perspective, everyone is pursuing her. Meanwhile, a less attractive woman has fewer offers but she may see it as a self selecting mechanism. She knows that most men aren’t attracted to her, so taking the initiative won’t do any good. She might as well wait for the occasional man who is attracted to show himself.” Then that women has just understood the male experience, men probably largely do not feel attractive as they aren’t pursued, men that aren’t hitting on anyone and getting success have no way to know they are attractive really. The first time I ever… Read more »
I suppose the difference is that women can wait around and hope someone eventually shows interest, while for men, if they wait around they will just be ignored. That does suck, I agree. Maybe one thing men don’t understand is that women need more interaction (as a rule) to feel attraction. It’s not just a visual reaction like “he’s cute I’ll talk to him.” I NEVER feel strongly attracted to a guy no matter how objectively good looking he is. At best I might think, “he ‘s rather good looking” but I have absolutely no sexual interest. It’s purely aesthetic.… Read more »
“My point being, I don’t know any feminists who purposefully stick to the gender script for dating for any reason except that they don’t want to scare a guy away.” Hmm I dont think so. Majority of women ( and feminists ) think why they should not approach men because that’s what men should do. Because they think men who have no courage to approach her are not worthy as a partner ( but women who have no courage to approach men are worthy ? ), because they think its unmanly for a man to have insecurity and lack of… Read more »
Love the bus example Heather. Perfectly illustrates the messiness of the issue, and the fact that there are gray areas. We want to live out our beliefs, but at the same time not every hill is worth dying on, and the fact that you choose your battles doesn’t make you a hypocrite. Thanks for illustrating that in a simple and clear fashion.
Thanks. 🙂 It’s actually something I had to learn how to do, pick my battles.
I also have another example, actually…because sometimes a feminist might not always recognize whether what she’s doing is reinforcing patriarchal norms or not. Once, I was on a late night train that was really crowded and there was no place for me to sit. I was going to be on this train for 10 hours. A man offered me his seat. I asked him how far he was going and he said he it wasn’t very long, though he didn’t give me an exact time. So, sleepy person that I was, and not knowing when the next seat would become… Read more »
I use to want to be chivalrous but I cut that shit out because it’s actually pretty damn sexist and causes a lot of issues. I give up my seat to those less able-bodied, or if I get that instinct that someone else needs the seat more like someone more sleepy than I am.
When these (socially desirable items) are distorted, we have patriarchy, and that has indeed been a bad thing, although I’d argue probably inevitable, given historical scarcity.” ______________________________ Why do you believe this to be true? Do you believe patriarchy exists? Why do you think it is evil? It fascinates me when men turn against their own sex. I know the feminists love it, but what about you? _____________________________________________________________ “But we do need people who are strong, who can stand up bravely, and who can unite with others to defend if necessary the group.” ________________________________________________________________ We both know that men cannot… Read more »
Tim– bourgeois society (industrial production) led to an intense patriarchal ideal. Men would be paterfamiliae; women would be ideal mothers. Before that, women and men kind of balanced off against each other in separate realms. Women are justly now getting into positions of political and economic equality, and I have no problem with that. If you track my comments here, you’ll that many are problematic to feminists. I don’t believe in male or white privilege, for example. (It would probably be more accurate to say that I do believe in privilege but I believe that there are always many privilege… Read more »
I have a few probably disconnected thoughts. Even though I’m probably what would be called a gender essentialist, I have been an ally of feminism since the early 70s. I believe that women and men should have absolute political and economic equality. I think that the issue for me is when we get down to roles, culture, and biology. I do think that there’s something immutable to the male body, the male psychology, and many male roles. When these (socially desirable items) are distorted, we have patriarchy, and that has indeed been a bad thing, although I’d argue probably inevitable,… Read more »
What happens when femininity is corrupted or is the feminine always pure?
“The answer is that living feminism is hard. Basically, feminism’s about defying social expectations and going against the grain. The problem, of course, is that going against the grain usually results in a lot of ridicule and mockery. Plus, it’s exhausting to be constantly aware of how your words and actions are either contributing to the status quo or defying it.” I get that. I think this is certainly a key aspect in the history of feminism. There’s that rebellious, insurgent, underdog streak in feminism. At the same time, a lot of men feel alienated by (some brands of) feminism… Read more »
P.S. And, as I read a famous quote attributed to Gandhi, being mocked may be a sign of progress:
First they ignore you.
Then they laugh at you.
Then they fight you.
Then you win.
[from memory, don’t know if I got that exactly right]
Actually this reminds me of something someone was saying in the discussions of same-sex marriage at the Supreme Court. So there’s this argument floating around that gay people are so politically powerful they don’t need the court to rule in their favour because a vote will sort it out. But, of course, the catch 22 in that is that the only way for anyone to get their case heard before the Supreme Court is to be politically powerful enough. So someone pointed out that chances are there are marginalised groups we’re not even aware of right now that really need… Read more »
On a more down-to-earth note…really, though, no one likes to be mocked. No one likes to be singled out and taken down…it sucks. So here’s a broadly generic question for everyone. With that in mind why do people engae in all these take downs in the first place? Odd really. Why do something to someone knowing full well they don’t like it? Sure you can say that “some people deserve it” but even then its usually the thoughts that need to be taken down but the line between taking down a thought and taking down a person/group seem to be… Read more »
Honestly, Danny, it’s because at the end of the day we want to feel like we’re as big as we can be.
And in our current culture, it’s easy and often too fulfilling to take an ideological position and beat someone else down over it for the sake of our own ego.
I heard that feministing is a moderate feminist website. Yet I see things like this. “Are Danny Brown’s misogynistic lyrics relevant to the analysis of his alleged (by someone else) assault?” http://feministing.com/page/5/ First if a person has to allege a sexual assault before it can be considered such, there are many pedophiles in prison right now that shouldn’t be there. There are people in prison for murder / rape that should have their rape convictions overturned, etc. Just because someone else says it, does that make it not rape? Second we’re constantly told that nothing a person can say, do,… Read more »
Feministing is not, in my mind, moderate. I wouldn’t quite say it’s “radical” but these are all such subjective terms.
Of course Heather and I would agree that no matter who the victim is, NOBODY ever deserves rape. I don’t care who they are or what they do.
One so-called radical voice does NOT represent the movement.
Moderate or not or radical or not it is a largely accepted feminist space.
One so-called radical voice does NOT represent the movement. Sorry, Joanna, but I grow weary of hearing this No True Scotsman argument from feminists and feminist apologists. Feministing is hardly a fringe, radical site, as Danny pointed out. Neither is Jezebel, for that matter. Both are prominent feminist sites and have large readerships. When feminists want to tell us men about how their movement is wonderful and wants equality and liberation for all, then “feminists” are a monolith. But when confronted with examples of feminists who are repulsive or man-hating, we’re told that they “don’t represent true feminism.” In other… Read more »
Alrighty, the thing about reporting sexual assault (or really any crime at all) is that until there is a conviction, a journalist is really meant to talk about it as “alleged.” That’s just the way that works.
Also, the link you provided took me to an article about Elizabeth Smart, not Danny Brown. So I can’t comment on that part of it.
It’s under weekly feminist reader. It links to another article (I didn’t read all the way through because it’s dripping with rape apology, but I think it’s actually another feminist site so feministing will “give it a pass” besides the fact that feministing doesn’t believe it was a rape). O take issue with the way feministing framed the story. 1. They assert that it’s less credible since the accusation was made by someone else. 2. They don’t use the term sexual in the description of assault. Kitty Pryde did not characterize it as an assault. She categorized it as a… Read more »
UIh, because we’re, as a culture, enlightened enough to discuss criminality with an assumption of innocence? What makes sexual assault and rape so special that we ought to do away with a concept of proof?
What are some moderate feminist sites?
I wonder. If that had been Danni Brown would we dare ask if her, well her anything, had any relevancy to her assault?
I’ll have to go read that article later but that question seems to do the usual “When something bad happens to men its because of hatred of women.” dance where one must bend reality to link everything back to the hatred/devaluing of women.
It can’t be that this woman thought that as a woman (and him being a man) she had the entitlement to do that to him right?
Kitty Pryde answered that question. When she had her pants pulled off on stage, people reacted with outrage. No need to imagine. “Detailing her own experiences of the Minneapolis concert, Pryde continued: “I’m mad that when two dudes pulled my pants down onstage, other people got mad too, but when it happened to Danny the initial reaction was like one big high-five. I’m mad that people are treating ‘The Thing’ like it’s some legendary event. I’m mad that even though they know exactly who the girl is, nobody in the media will even talk to her.” http://www.nme.com/news/various-artists/70093 I would have… Read more »
@wellokaythen
Gandhi said that? It was also said by Robbie Williams in his rather good song Tripping!
Look at how uncultured I am! ^_^
With regards to ridicule and mockery: I didn’t mean that ridicule and mockery were the reflex of those that were wrong. Rather, I meant that ridicule creates pressure not to act a certain way (rightly or wrongly). That’s just the way people are…we don’t like being ridiculed and mocked, so if we know we’ll face it we feel pressure to change our behaviour. But also, I tend not to be for mockery and ridicule, even of things I disagree with. Critique, certainly. And I’ll snark at someone sometimes…but ridicule, not so much. It’s not constructive. Anywho, on to the rest… Read more »
How does that square with the fact that there are government programs available to that “rich white woman” that are not going to be available to men, regardless of how poor that man is, or his sexuality or race?
How does that square with the idea that, because of her gender alone, that woman will have more social sympathy for her plight (whatever it may be) than the poor gay etc male?
It’s interesting that “people being blind to their own privilege” never seems to apply to women.
A man in the same position as she is, would still have more benefits than she does (because all other things being equal, men are the privileged gender).
__________________________________
No – this is certainly not true. If anything it is the opposite. This idea is extremely important to you, but it is false. It is this false ideology that keeps men down and the war going on.
When I first heard feminists talking about intersectionality (in the old days it was Kyriarchy), I thought maybe they had a point. They still might, but feminists have advanced this theory less to explain how differences interact to affect our situation in society and more to justify keeping their core tenet, that men are NEVER systematically discriminated against based on sex. Even when faced with a situation that only affects men like male infant circumcision in the U.S., most feminists will use the excuse that it’s not really discriminatory because the effects don’t rise to that level. They never explain… Read more »
What feminists don’t see those as systematic problems?
Cites?
What feminists don’t see those as systematic problems?
Cites?
http://jezebel.com/5992479/if-i-admit-that-hating-men-is-a-thing-will-you-stop-turning-it-into-a-self+fulfilling-prophecy
Yeah, she does admit that men have to contend with hardships on account of being men, but it’s hard to believe that she’s sincere when she puts it in such a mocking, condescending tone, and dismisses male hardships as solely being collateral damage from “the patriarchy.”
And no, I will not buy a No True Scotsman argument. She’s not alone in believing that men are not systemically hurt as men.
And considering how well that post was received among feminists I think we can say that West is not alone in thinking that. Not universally of course but there wasn’t much questioning of it.
And of course let’s not forget the way that even when male hardships are recognized they are often not recognized as parts of a system that hurt men via imposing restrictions on men but are actually the result of imposing restrictions and limitations on women. Aka, it only happens because of hatred/disregard of women. Or collateral damage is you will.
@ Joanna Although Jezebel is probably bottom feeder feminism they did talk about this incident. http://jezebel.com/13-female-correction-officers-accused-of-handing-comple-479742429 Although she says that the corruption is a systemic problem. “But instead of commenting on the state of the prison institution and the shocking fact that this level of corruption went on without detection for several months, comments like Gladden’s lay the blame squarely on the shoulder of the female CO’s and their femaleness. ” She doesn’t even categorize the sex assaults as rapes or even wrong. She does not see this as a problem. I guess it’s just a perk of the job.… Read more »
I do not defend Jezebel or accept it as a representation of what Feminism is, broadly.
Well thats convenient. Jezebel’s readership says the same thing about you and this site, too. Funny how anytime someone makes the group look bad, instead of addressing that issue, you guys try to pass the buck. See also, Jezebel/GMP on “Big Red.”
I do not defend Jezebel or accept it as a representation of what Feminism is, broadly.
That’s great, Joanna. Unfortunately, many, if not most feminists don’t share your sentiment in this regard.
What would you accept as a representation of what Feminism is, broadly?
wellokaythen I’m with you. I also think class has a lot to do with it. Whether true or not (and unfortunately I think it is true to an extent), feminism is seen as being populated by primarily upper middle class to upper class women. Working class and poor men (myself, most of my friends) don’t feel like these women are particularly “oppressed” compared to us.
P.S. This makes it very hard to be a working class, male, feminist. But I’m trying.
“P.S. This makes it very hard to be a working class, male, feminist. But I’m trying.” Why, even if you just look at the definition of masculinity and femininity you’d see that feminism is already deeply flawed? It is generally accepted n the MRM (as far as I could tell) that masculinity and by extension femininity is defined by each individual person. That eliminates the gender binary which is what is so restrictive and should result in a more welcoming atmosphere for LGBTQ individuals. Should masculinity be the same for a gay, trans, and CIS male? Should masculinity be the… Read more »
Actually, a lot of women who aren’t middle class, straight, white, European/North American, women have historically had issues with feminism too. That’s something feminist groups are still working on today…better inclusion and listening to the minorities within the movement. This is where the concept of intersectionality becomes so important.
Heather I’m well aware of the Feminist movement’s attempts to grow in this regard. I appreciate it and hope they/you/we keep trying. I just think it’s important to point out how this overlaps with the hesitancy by men to identify with and support the feminist movement. I really don’t think the impact of having your most well known advocates being well-to-do can be overstated. It really makes it hard for a man who is struggling to stay employed, etc to feel any solidarity with the oppression of women John Not sure what you want from me. I’m a man. I… Read more »
Are you trying to recruit me to the MRM? Or just telling me that every man gets to define masculinity fr himself?
It’s not like those two are mutually exclusive of each other.
Oh, yeah, I didn’t mean it as proof that feminism was trying to grow. I meant it more to be like…yeah this problem isn’t *only* alienating some men, it’s *also* alienating some women. So yeah, it’s a continuing issue.
I just bought this book by Allan Johnson called “The Gender Knot,” which is about men in feminism. I haven’t read any of it, but it’s an explanation of gender inequality from a man…specifically about how patriarchy affects both men AND women. Looks like it could be good, so I’m throwing it out there as a possible read for people. 🙂
@ Lukeindetroit MRAs believe that each person has the right to define and seek their own happiness. If you choose to label your self a feminist and it’s important to you more power to you. I’ve found many aspects of MRA philosophy to be quire superior to feminist theory. For example MRAs don’t elevate sex to some mystical standing. Sex is an aspect of a person’s life. They set the level of importance. You’ll hear MRAs and feminist argue over affirmative as opposed to enthusiastic consent. Many feminists argue that any sex that is unwanted is rape. MRAs believe that… Read more »
@ Lukeindetroit Hopefully, my previous comment gets approved or this will sound strange. Let me just clarify the job example. I could love my job, but don’t feel like coming into work today because I have low energy. I go to work to keep myself in good standing with my job, but that doesn’t mean I was abused. I could like aspects of my job, but not other aspects. If I find more value in the aspects that I like so that it more than makes up for the things that I don’t, am I being abused because I don’t… Read more »
In answer to a lot of these questions:
There is nothing useful one can say about what “feminists do.” There is only what is done by:
Some feminists
A lot of feminists
Most feminists
Seemingly every feminist I’ve every met
Some self-proclaimed feminists
The authors I’ve read in my Women’s Studies classes
The women frequently branded as feminists
All feminists according to my definition of feminism
Feminism, at least the way I see it
Etc.
“The answer is that living feminism is hard. Basically, feminism’s about defying social expectations and going against the grain. The problem, of course, is that going against the grain usually results in a lot of ridicule and mockery. Plus, it’s exhausting to be constantly aware of how your words and actions are either contributing to the status quo or defying it.” Kinda not the point. When you (as a group) are the ones loudly proclaiming a particular standard, and condemning people for failing to live up to it, you will be held to that same standard. This is no different… Read more »
So first, the comparison to the Republicans and traditional values is a bit problematic. For one thing, feminism isn’t about “values” or morals, really. It’s not about being a “better person” or a “good person,” even…whereas traditional values are about what you think is right/wrong and good/bad. Secondly, I’m reminded of a Quentin Crisp quote (which is apparently an old joke): “I don’t like peas and I’m glad I don’t like them, because if I liked them I’d eat them, and I hate them.” This is not exactly the same, but a similar – ‘I don’t like feminists and one… Read more »
Absolutely not a call to radicalism. It’s a call to consistency. And I don’t dislike certain feminists because they aren’t being radical enough, I dislike them because they aren’t willing to apply the same standards to themselves as they are only too keen to do to everyone else. If someone (in general, not necessarily at yourself) is going to spend their time lecturing me, then I think they should at least be able to take what they dish out. If that person then plays a “But it’s haaaaard!” card, I’m entirely unsympathetic. If they can’t handle the heat they’re dishing… Read more »
Like I pointed out in the first set of answers, feminism is highly variable. Sometimes what one person considers feminist, another doesn’t. So take for example the issue of women taking their husbands’ last names. Some feminists think this is patriarchal and perpetuating gender norms. Some feminists think it’s fine if it’s their choice and their marriage isn’t blindly perpetuating gender norms. So a feminist who takes her husband’s last name isn’t going to be ideologically consistent with a feminist who doesn’t…but they are both ideologically consistent with their own concepts of feminism. The thing about feminism is that, like… Read more »
Heather,
If Feminism is “highly variable”. then why is it that there exist zero-sum, entry-cost ideological positions for entry? can one be a Feminist and reject Patriarchy Theory as being too simplistic? Can one be a Feminist and also reject “Rape Culture” because it’s a subset of larger violence and power issues within our culture and thus provides insufficient assistance to those who require it?
I think that people sometimes forget that they’re dealing with people and not machines. People make mistakes. People will give in to weakness. I’ve made a ton of mistakes and I’m certain at least a few are going to be repeated, but when I’ve made mistakes, I generally own up to them. I remember making a couple comments and essentially having a woman call me a horrible person. The funny thing is within the comment I had already mentioned that I was either wrong, changed my opinion, or had serious doubts. It’s OK to be wrong. The problem is staying… Read more »
On most other progressive/liberal causes, you would never ever get away with dismissing anything as “only 10%” of cases. You would never get away with dismissing LGBT people by saying they’re only a small percent of the population. (Nor should you get away with it.) Let’s say for the sake of argument that male rape victims were “only 1%” of all rape victims. That means what, half a million men? By the “it’s only 1%” logic, then we don’t really have an imprisonment problem in this country. We have “only” 1-2% of the population in jail at any given time.… Read more »
In order to embrace gender equality, and be involved in the discussion on gender issues, must one be a feminist?
Nope.
Supposedly no but in my experience its amazing how much feminists will hold that against you. If they didn’t have a problem with it I don’t think we’d see as much material on the topic of “I’m not a feminist but….” angle.
Well, when you have studies that show 80% of respondents identify as desiring and believing in equal rights between men and women yet also only 20% responding that they identify with the label “Feminist” then we have a cognitive dissidence.
But the issue is that the ideological movement can’t accept that their goals and desires have made it “mainstream”. It’s an in-club, and that’s the issue. It isn’t ever really about “leveling the playing field”, it’s about packing your clubhouse with people who nod in agreement.
It’s an in-club, and that’s the issue. It isn’t ever really about “leveling the playing field”, it’s about packing your clubhouse with people who nod in agreement. I hope not but I worry that what you say here may be true. I think what is happening is that when we come across numbers like this, “Well, when you have studies that show 80% of respondents identify as desiring and believing in equal rights between men and women yet also only 20% responding that they identify with the label “Feminist” then we have a cognitive dissidence.” people are very quick to… Read more »
To be honest, Danny, I got stick of being told that I “Didn’t get it” when my own education and understanding of Foucault, Bell, Said, etc., was far more extensive than the individual making the claim. I *understand* all of this quite well. I understand Patriarchy Theory and the concept of Rape Culture. And I actually agree with some of the underlying ideas presented. However, my issue tends to be in the fact that these Feminist Tenets are simplifications and they lack a mature and complex idea of how all sorts of other oppression act to support and modify the… Read more »
To be honest, Danny, I got stick of being told that I “Didn’t get it” when my own education and understanding of Foucault, Bell, Said, etc., was far more extensive than the individual making the claim. I don’t blame you for that. Its often a cop that really translates into, “Since your understanding of it is different from mine and my is the right one then taht means you don’t really understand it.” However, my issue tends to be in the fact that these Feminist Tenets are simplifications and they lack a mature and complex idea of how all sorts… Read more »
Of course. Even the use of the correct vocabulary is required. The rules are very strict.
Most gender equality folk I know don’t label as either feminist or MRA. I don’t label myself as either, too many problems between the 2 and it often ends up as a way to get prejudged. I’ve been called an MRA and a feminist but quite frankly I think it’s an asshole move to call someone else something they don’t identify as. You can say their views align with feminism or the MRA (pretty much everyone I see here commenting, including HeatherN hold views that align with both) but don’t call them a feminist or an MRA if they don’t… Read more »
Ok, I’ll bite.
Do feminists believe that men are also victims of systemic sexism?
If so, can women be perpetrators of sexism?
Finally, is it necessary to address these issues to achieve real gender equality?
What do you think about the trend (at least what I perceive) in feminism of male hyperagency and female hypoagency? In other words, the idea that men hold all the power everywhere and all gender inequalities can only be remedied by men. Thus masculinity itself needs to be re-engineered by feminists.
(This may overlap with a question already asked, sorry)
Thank you!
Men’s voices are considered the default and the mainstream automatically gives men’s voices power.
______________________________________________________________-
Precisely the opposite is true. If you are going to make a statement like this, you need an enormous amount of data and evidence to back it up. Please provide it here.
Hi Tim, So this article series is about explaining feminism, or at least, that’s my goal. Also, it’s providing short answers to what are actually rather complex issues. It’s meant to be a primer, of sorts and an introduction to feminist ideas. All that means that the “proofs” of these concepts aren’t really the point. Anyway, if you’d like to look a bit more into the idea of men as default, I suggest taking a gander at this article on the “male gaze.” The use of the “male gaze” is part of men being viewed as the default. Also, you… Read more »
I r I respectfully have to disagree,although most voices in government are men they are elected predominantly by women and speak on the behalf of women while ignoring the needs of men.VAWA was authorized by men,rape shield laws were established by men,funding to womens shelters were approved by men,we have a white house counsel for girls and women but not a white house counsel for boys and men. Billions of dollars are spent on combating female problems yet no money is spent on combating male problems.Run BY men doesn’t mean run FOR men.Earl silverman is a victim of this worldview;he… Read more »
hand** on**
I agree. It is too simplistic to just look at who has the positions of power, see mostly men and conclude that we live in a patriarchy. You need to look at who benefits from that power and who controls where and how that power is used.
I have to agree in some places and disagree in others. It seems that the dividing is the question of does “mostly men” mean the same thing as “representative of men”?
“Billions of dollars are spent on combating female problems yet no money is spent on combating male problems.”
The fact that you think of rape and domestic and sexual violence as “female” problems is exactly what modern feminism is trying to change.
Whilst the hyperbole is over the top there is an extremely disproportionate level of funding and awareness for that issue. I dare you to find me a single poster showing a female rapist and a male victim, holding women to account by saying “women can stop rape”. I know of one on an MRA site, are there any more?
Even if you swap “female problems” out for “problems that affect mostly women” the point still stands.
Domestic violence is a female problem. It’s also a male problem, but men are barred by law from receiving STOP assistance, which is the largest grant under VAWA. Much of the funding available for men under VAWA is offender treatment programs in other words even the money in VAWA spent on men is spent to benefit women.
Why isn’t it a problem that women, often acting in “women only” spaces are trying to define masculinity? I have heard feminists say that it’s important for feminism to prioritize female voices, and that a large problem with patriarchal society is that structures created and run by men often try and police the behavior of women. But how is this fundamentally different from women who self-identify as feminist talking in feminist spaces, which prioritize the voices of women (and in some instances are women-only), about how they would like to see masculinity defined? How is this fundamentally different from men… Read more »
So first, the question of whether feminists should “cede leadership in such discussions to men” kind of misses the part where I mentioned how a lot of men are feminists. You ask about male input: my Twitter friend I mentioned is male, that TEDx video is done by a man, Justin Cacsio is a man…a bunch of people I mentioned in the first set of answers are men. Hugo Schwartz just wrote a little blurb here about male feminists: http://www.hugoschwyzer.net/2013/05/08/ten-male-feminist-allies-you-should-know/ So, feminism definitely isn’t ignore men’s input. Feminism and men aren’t separate…well, I mean, they’re as separate as feminism and… Read more »
I don’t feel like my questions got answered. The base question was: “Why are feminists comfortable defining masculinity in spaces that often don’t include male voices?” The answer to this is not “There are some spaces where men speak about masculinity.” That answer doesn’t address those spaces where there aren’t male voices, which was the source of the question. In Law School we call that “fighting the hypothetical.” Even if there’s no real answer to the above question, the follow-up which looks something like “Shouldn’t leadership be ceded to men in discussions on masculinity?” is also not answered by saying… Read more »
I don’t know any feminists who define masculinity without male voices, do you, Heather?
We have a TON of male feminist allies who join in our discussions about masculinity. I have truly never been in a situation of feminist discourse (and I have a degree in Women’s Studies from UCLA) where we every tried to define or even discuss masculinity without the input of men, texts by men, or other male input.
If you’ve got a cite, send it.
Same, Joanna. Unsurprisingly, a lot of the discourse about masculinity within feminism is written by feminist men. Even something like bell hooks’ article “Understanding Patriarchy,” involves input from men. She uses the men in her family as examples, after all. And she’s actually the only woman gender theorist I can think of at the moment who specifically talks about defining masculinity. Everyone else who is coming to mind right now are men (Michel Foucault and William Pollack are the academics that come to mind, and Jamie Utt, Hugo Schwartz, Justin Cacsio, Jackson Katz, and Ill Doctrine are the bloggers and… Read more »
. That’s kind of the key to it all anyway…men rethinking their gender. _____________________________________- And that will never happen. At some point feminists must acknowledge that men will NEVER participate in the destruction of masculinity on a large scale. No one ever asks us. Our opinions are not required. Do you think we are fools? So of course you will end up talking to yourselves. Have you considered that we don’t WANT to be reinvented or re-imagined or re-educated? It is never clear if men are even welcome here (irony, indeed) That really does matter. If men don’t participate in… Read more »
Tim: Who needs socially constructed masculinaties anyways? Regardless of feminism or feminists, why are you defending modes of behaviour that a lot of men have no interest in adopting? I know I don’t. My masculinity is for me to define for myself. That is no one elses job but my own. In my experience, the most masculine of people are those who have defined their own masculinity, and rejected the old, out dated, mainstream one that others have tried to force onto them. And that can and should be done independently of feminism, as well as mainstream cultures and societies.… Read more »
That, Tim, is an unavoidable fact of life: all things must change, or perish. __________________-_________________________________ Certainly not. That is an assumption based on a materialist ideology, which I reject. It is not up to you to define your masculinity – it is the same as saying “I am going to redefine the sky”. Masculine and feminine are transcendent realities. We are the only society in history that has become so exhausted and decadent that we are trying to ignore it. The result is misery and dissatisfaction and a truly dreadful self-absorption and self-pity. As for the remarks about issues –… Read more »
Tim: good luck with all that.
Tim, excellent strong posture, thank you. Feminism does not speak for all women either nor should it. Unfortunately Feminism claims to be a place for women’s voices, but it rarely allows a woman or a man from the silent majority to speak or stand firmly rooted in what they believe. It’s one thing to discuss equal rights in the political sphere, but it is truly another to redefine femininity, masculinity, marriage, parenting, or family. To a large extent, the extreme political left and Feminists have redefined those areas and to the detriment of heterosexual men and women in the silent… Read more »
This country needs more women like you, Joan.
Heather, You bring up Foucault as a “Feminist” and I think that’s a huge misconception amongst social justice who want to employ the theory without accepting the logical conclusions. Foucault is *de*scriptive, not *pre*scriptive. There exists no inherent moral/political judgement within Foucaultian theory that stands up to the stand theory. It’s people like Said, Hooks etc., who took Foucault and decided it lacked a moral compass thus they provided it for him, de facto. The theory works so damn well from a explanatory perspective that it’s hard to reject it. It also posits that discourse theory provides the true ideals… Read more »
I don’t know any feminists in real life who think of men as the enemy. Even non-feminist men. If men (or women) were out to stunt our equality or harm us, sure. But I don’t need any men to swear to be feminists in order to consider them allies in equality. Most feminists I know in real life would agree.
Well said Joanna!
@Joanna: “I don’t know any feminists in real life who think of men as the enemy. ”
“I’ve never seen any woman get sexually harrassed walking down the street, you women are crazy!”
Do you think, maybe, that because you’re a woman and therefore not the target of the rhetoric, that you just don’t see it?
Why is it so easy for you, and feminists, to believe that men are blind to sexism against women, but so bloody hard for you to understand that the same principle might also work in reverse?
Well, I DO see it online. I see feminists who are not kind to many men. Absolutely. I said “in real life”. Certainly the vast, vast, vast majority of feminists even online are very welcoming to men and even have men writing for them. Certainly they are not the men who are saying that feminists are like nazis or that feminists hate men (that type of statement is a good way to NOT have feminists invite you into the discussion). There are bad eggs. I have written about them publicly before. But that doesn’t define a movement, particularly a century-old… Read more »
Joanna, To what extent is online not “real life”? Just to address that bit, I think the assumption that online interactions aren’t just as valid (if different) than in-person interactions is a farce. I’d agree with you that most in-person interactions allow for a better view of the individuals. You get more humanity in person than via a computer screen. At the same time, I feel like it’s a cop out to make a statement that online interactions “don’t count”. That is because the majority of interaction we have now is, like it or not, online because of the sheer… Read more »
The funny thing is, I never said anything about “online” You moved that particular goal post yourself.
Again: You are a woman, therefore you are not the target of the rhetoric, therefore you probably don’t see it. (or if you do, you file it away as “not REAL feminism.”) Online or off.
Joanna I think its a mistake to define other peoples experience for them. The only men are that welcomed are ones that are “feminist allies” – ones that put women first and deny women’s agency in the cycle of violence, there are many rules and things that a man must not talk about and believe that simply aren’t true if they are to be accepted by on line feminists. For non conforming men – which is most of the men (and women) that do come into contact with on line feminists, the reality is much like that captured on film… Read more »
I’ll just to what Joanna said for most of my reply. As for Foucault, I pointed out in the first response that he’s not a feminist, but rather that a lot of his ideas have been used in feminist theory.
But really, that kind of proves the point. Feminists take ideas from non-feminist men as well and incorporate that into their ideology, so far as feminist ideology exists. You don’t have to take on the label of “feminist” in order for feminists to listen to what you’re saying.
Aaaand, I just now re-read the bit where I lumped Foucault in with other “feminist men,” which is my bad. I was being brief and ended up being a bit inaccurate.
Totally understandable! I think too many individuals with too little understanding want to lump Foucault into the “Feminist” camp. Hell, I know people with PHDs who still see Foucault as “Feminist” because of work that was done after his own death by other individuals. Perhaps the point isn’t a “Is he or isn’t he” but that Foucault is describing HOW groups gain and maintain power. The point remains that in a Foucaultian context “Feminism” is a discourse with a lot of power, which is contrary to the “oppression” discourse being presented. In fact, Foucault-by-framework would probably be very hesitant to… Read more »
im curious, why lot of feminist women, call male feminist for allies? Arent they (males) also feminist? so why dont just call them feminists?
ok my question until now remain unanswered, somebody who is willing know the answer?
Because to many, a man can’t be a feminist. It’s from the feminism is for women school of thought.
thanks Archy.
But is there any feminist that can answer my question? HeatherN..Joanna?
Joanna since you expressed the term ‘ male feminist allies’ can you please elaborate? But the question is not only specific to Joanna, any feminist can answer….
I suspect that there are schools of thought that believe men cannot be feminists and so call them allies. I am not of that school. I think you can be an ally to women and also be a male feminist. I am an ally to the LGBT community but as I am married to a man would not necessarily call myself queer. I’m white, so I do my best to be an ally to those people of color and communities of color, but I cannot say I am of color. That’s because of actual race or orientation issues. Feminism isn’t… Read more »
I believe you can be an ally to women and not be a feminist too. It just gets really complicated and labely at that point.
I believe you can be an ally to women and not be a feminist too. Can you be a feminist and/or ally to women if you reject the “Feminism 101” kind of feminism that dominates the online discussion and practice of feminism? Rape Culture, Patriarchy, Privilege, the “male gaze”, Schroedinger’s Rapist…that sort of thing. I’ve come to reject how those things are understood and explained by a majoritiy of feminists I encounter online, whether they’re at Jezebel, Feministing, or right here at GMP by people like you, Joanna, and Heather. I reject them because I’ve read and thought about them… Read more »
Thanks Julie, thats also how I see it. Thats why I get surprised when I read ‘male feminist allies’. In the feminist movement there are plenty of men, therefore claiming (IMO) that feminist = woman is inaccurate. You can be a supporter/member or feminist person, the gender is secondary just like race or…haircut ;-). I like to postulate identifying a individual with gender and then adding the label feminist is divisive, binary and supportive of the patriarchy. In other words unfeminist. But I may be wrong since im not feminist and that means im not 100% familiar with the idea… Read more »
Interestingly, I agree but many male allies do not. There are certain men (see Jeff Perera of White Ribbon in Canada) who are not comfortable calling themselves feminists.
Many MRA’s are infact allies of women from what I’ve seen. I think the majority of both the feminists and MRA’s are actually just egalitarians, but the ideology on how to bring equality differs a bit.
@ Archy
“but the ideology on how to bring equality differs a bit.”
Also what equality actually looks like. Many feminists believe that infant male circumcision is not a violation of bodily autonomy. Although the modification is permanent and significant, they don’t believe it rises to the level of a violation.
What makes this stranger is that most of these feminists would not circumcise their sons because they feel it’s a violation of bodily autonomy so it’s a serious enough violation for them to not do it, but not serious enough to ban someone else from doing it.
Because “allies” can fall under the premise of “different but almost” (Said’s “othering theory”). It’s a discursive technique to both allow a measure of participation while also maintaining structural limits to power. It allows Feminists to control the behavior (because they aren’t women and therefore they can’t *really* understand) while creating a self-imposed ideal of not-women (because the can only help, never be actually involved in the actual solution). It destroys agency while maintaining doctrine. It provides a nice, tidy reason why they’re not as important as the women in Feminism, while also providing a nice bone for them to… Read more »
Joanna, In the most respectful way possible, I’d suggest that the definition of masculine as “toxic” is the most highly visible means of women defining men’s experience without the input of men. The recent TED talk from the founder of MVP (a program I was really involved with in 2000-era) it was “men are violent”; “men are the source of violence”; “men need to stand up to other men…” etc. that really turned me off from the talk, regardless of the good intent behind it. Feminists, via a populist standpoint, are really engaged in pigeonholing men within current Feminist thought… Read more »
…to be irrationally fearful of men and to see men as some ridiculous hive-mind that is only concerned with keeping women in their place.
And then defending that irrational fear with the thought that they shouldn’t be expected to challenge it or question it themselves but its the job of men to dispell that fear no matter how irrational it is.
Actually my question would by why are feminists bothered by men that want to rethink gender or just simply support themselves without women.
We’ve seen examples of this happen where men try to do something without women and its treated in worst faith because it doesn’t include women.
Why do women have always be a part of every single effort to rethink masculinity or to help men and why is it seen as something wrong, bad, or irresponsible whey they are not included?
It’s interesting to me tha while feminism is actively trying to include more men’s perspectives in discussions of gender, despite men being the privileged class, MRA groups are trying to exclude women’s voices, despite women being the unprivileged class.
No, they aren’t.
Unless you mean “women’s voices” as in “feminist talking points”. What about “men’s perspectives”? Does “disagreeing with feminist claims” fall under that umbrella?
AVFM has female contributors, certainly.
I’ve noticed that the attempt to “actively include more men’s perspectives” is usually in the form of using the ways in which the system supposedly helps men as cause to limit how men (and their surrounding issues) are brought up and addressed. Now as for “excluding women’s voices” I can’t speak for all MRA groups but I can say that from my perspective I’ve done that for the sake of recognizing that in the gender discourse the woman’s perspective is already quite commonplace in its own regard while the man’s perspecitive is usually presented in relation to the women’s perspective.… Read more »
Most blogs I see concerning men and men’s rights contain articles by, and members of, both sexes. You yourself have a series of posts on GMP.
Which sites/grous exclude women please? I am very intrigued to see how they do this and how they justify it.
Thanks.
“It’s interesting to me tha while feminism is actively trying to include more men’s perspectives in discussions of gender, despite men being the privileged class, MRA groups are trying to exclude women’s voices, despite women being the unprivileged class.” No they aren’t. AVFM has contributions from women like TyphonBlue, Erin Pizzey, GirlWritesWhat, NurdyDancing, WoolyBumblebee (there are more, but as I don’t really read AVFM that often, I’m going off of memory.) Meanwhile, you have feminist and women’s groups on college campuses who are *actively silencing* men’s groups and/or blocking their creation entirely. Stating “men are allowed to speak but only… Read more »
This is my own curiosity. Genuinely seeking an answer. Why is it that out of all of those, there is only one who is presumably using her own name?
I find that so curious.
“This is my own curiosity. Genuinely seeking an answer. Why is it that out of all of those, there is only one who is presumably using her own name?
I find that so curious.”
Because beign snarked online with your real name is annoying as hell, especially with the level of bigotry within the gender battle sphere on BOTH sides. Not all feminists behave properly, it’s part of the reason I don’t use my own name because I don’t want to have my “real life” trolled by bigots on either side.
I don’t know, you’d have to ask them, I suppose.
Frankly, I sometimes think I’m the only one who remembers the old days of the internet where *no one* used real names at all, not even first.
Both Typhonblue and GirlWritesWhat writes under their full name on AVFM.
The quote you reference to was in reply specifically to Danny’s comment about MRAs wanting to create men’s only spaces. We could trade female MRAs and male feminist names back and forth, but that kind of misses the point. Feminist groups are actively seeking men’s voices. Whether you like what those men are saying is another matter, but they are actively seeking them. The people in charge of my university Feminist Society recently put forth the truly idiotic idea to not allow men to join. This went over like a lead balloon…the feminist members of that society basically protested against… Read more »
Both sides have 1-gender spaces and both gender spaces too. I’ve been run out of feminist spaces which had some wanting men, and far more wanting men to stfu n leave. Some feminist spaces want men included, others don’t. Same with the MRM.
But see, Heather, that’s my point. Men should be allowed to form groups to speak about our own issues, without without feminists being allowed to have veto say on what we discuss (for example at many of the colleges who have tried to form men’s groups, the women’s groups demanded right to dictate what men were allowed to discuss) That doesn’t seem just a tad bit wrong to you? Whenever men try to discuss our own issues, one of two things seems to happen depending on where it occurs. if it’s in a feminist space, men are told “Not our… Read more »
That is not entirely true. Seeking men’s voices implies that one is interested all men’s voices, hence the lack of a qualifier. However, most feminist groups are not interested in non-feminist voices of either sex. They tend to only accept men who agree with feminist views. That is not seeking men’s voices, but seeking feminist voices. That does not really help the conversation, which is why feminist discussions about masculinity do not resonate with non-feminist men.
well Im not familiar with any MRA space for men only, I can be mistaken however.
Anyways how about from now on, we identify MRA and Feminist as people and not by gender. There are plenty of female MRA and male feminist’s. So claiming that MRA are men, and only men. And feminists women and only women, is inaccurate. Both MRM and Feminism contain members of the same gender, perhaps not at the same number but they are. So if we have to be precise and accurate identifying them as MRM/Feminist members or people is the correct way to do.
“Under-privileged” is a rather broad statement that lacks a lot of substance in these contexts. We’re so concerning with assigning inherent and gender-based ideas that completely ignore the complexity of our culture that we end up falling back on “traditional” gender ideas and roles which provide buoyancy to our arguments. It often feels as if the only male voice most Feminists are willing to accept as “authentic” is a Patriarchal, abusive voice. We can have male allies, but that’s contingent on them condemning the rest of masculinity to the bonfire. I.e. that men’s voices are only accepted when they come… Read more »
“It’s interesting to me tha while feminism is actively trying to include more men’s perspectives in discussions of gender, despite men being the privileged class, MRA groups are trying to exclude women’s voices, despite women being the unprivileged class.”
Umm, AVfM has quite a few female contributors?
“It’s interesting to me tha while feminism is actively trying to include more men’s perspectives in discussions of gender, despite men being the privileged class, MRA groups are trying to exclude women’s voices, despite women being the unprivileged class.” Did you just strawman the MRA? You are positively generalizing that feminism is actively trying to include more male perspectives (Sign me up for the next radfem meeting, I am sure they appreciate anyone’s opinion who has a penis). Men’s groups have tried to be created at universities and Had FEMINISTS protest them. Not all feminists are inclusive of male voices… Read more »
Heather, I have to echo that:
No, they aren’t.
It’s ideological on both ends. Neither “movement” cares about your identity as long as you agree with them. Full stop.
And I think you mistake individuals not agreeing with faulty theory for being hostile toward the other.
@Heather
Privileged, unprivileged. Isnt this technically what they call “Oppression Olympics” ?
I thought it was a fundamental principle of feminism as a tool of critique and analysis that privilege is invisible to the privileged class. How can you state as a certainty that “men are privileged” and “women are unprivileged” if your own privilege would be invisible to you? It’s kind of a nice privilege that your nation can’t instate a mandatory conscription and stake a claim over your life and limb whether you acquiesce to this treatment or not. You’ll certainly never know the “privilege” of being drafted against your will into fighting a bloody war of attrition like tens… Read more »
“Now feminism does prioritise women’s voices, and the reason is precisely what you said: mainstream conversations prioritise men’s voices. ” But the so-call male voices in the mainstream conversation, in the patriarchy, are not the real voices of men, they are just a script reading of culturally correct samples of a very limited model of men. Who doesent fit into the model is either a satyre or a sad case. In that light I like to postulate that the real voices of men are actually rare (GMP is one place where you can find them) and usually kept private, away… Read more »
Here, here
…one of the big problems with feminism is it believes “patriarchy” is a force of men, by men, for men. If feminism accepted that both genders tacitly endorse and succumb to the gender social code (aka patriarchy), it would be less apt to conclude that the main-stream reflects the free will of individual men.
First off, his name is Hugo Schwyzer, not Hugo Schwartz.
Secondly I note that the link you provided says “ten male feminist allies</b", not "ten male feminists". Feminism and men are aparently somewhat more separate than feminism and women.
You’re right about the name. That’s my mistake.
@ HeatherN Two comments. First, I think many feminists including the male feminists have already equated masculine with bad. So they aren’t really defining a new masculinity rather than feminizing the masculinity that already exists. How can we make the masculine more like the feminine? Second, if men get to define masculinity rather than feminist men / feminists, would feminists accept a definition of masculinity they do not agree with? As an MRA I believe that masculinity is defined by each individual person. A gay man’s masculinity may be different from a trans man which may be different than a… Read more »
As for feminist demands that women “stand up” to patriarchy…well they’re everywhere. I’m not talking about Jezebel specifically, because it’s a problematic website. In general, though, you get all sorts of arguments about whether women are being “feminist enough.” There are discussions about whether married women taking their husbands’ last name is reinforcing the patriarchy. There are all sorts of debates about whether female celebrities who show skin are objectifying themselves, or taking control of their sexuality. There are articles about stay-at-home mothers where they are all about asserting their feminism. The funny thing is, when feminism first popped up,… Read more »
It seems like your response is talking part my question. There’s a world of difference between “Have you generally stood up to patriarchy in some way?” and “Have you specifically called out your female friends in social situations when they made statements that supported traditional masculinity?’ I will give you that feminism excels at the former statement, but try as I might I cannot seem to find examples of the latter. Indeed, following the Steubenville trial, prominent internet feminist Jessica Valenti tweeted “The worst a dude expects if he passes out drunk at a party is maybe a few dicks… Read more »
So let’s see if I’ve got this right, you want me to provide proof of feminists calling out specific women for reinforcing traditional masculine gender roles? Well, for one thing that’s a very specific request that would require a heck of a lot of time to find examples that fit those criteria. But for another, it’s just not something I follow. I don’t follow the back and forth, call-out wars that happen online (whether within feminism or not). So I can’t really provide you with examples of anyone calling out anyone else, well with only a few really well known… Read more »
It’s not about taking down other women its about consistency in not reinforcing traditional gender roles and norms.
When we see feminists that will in one breath take down say, Paul Elam, because something he said reinforces traditional norms/roles but in the next say absolutely nothing (if not agree) when say Jessica Valenti says something along the same line.
It looks like the reasoning on which one to respond to isn’t about what they said being problematic but some other measure.