Tom Matlack believes in men and the stories they tell.
In the fall-out of debate which has dominated our pages for the last week, those of who care most deeply about The Good Man Project have had to pull back and think very hard about what we are doing here and why.
This is and has always been a Project, meaning a constantly changing conversation. From the very start, we have been very clear on this idea: we do not have an absolute answer about male goodness. Our goal has always been to showcase what goodness means through a multitude of different stories. Our mission isn’t about a result; it’s much more about a process. It’s not a theory but a practice.
As such, a few important lessons have been learned though the last days.
We really are not the right format for discussing gender as a theoretical abstraction. The fight for men’s rights, and the debate about feminist doctrine, are not our mission. Our mission is about the stories and the specifics of manhood in the 21st century. That doesn’t mean we won’t comment from time to time on things like The End of Men, but our bread and butter has been—since our founding— stories about individual men, their lives, and the unique ways in which they strive to be good fathers, husbands, sons, and men.
A crucial concept here is “goodness.” While unafraid to talk about just about anything–certainly including situations where men have behaved badly–we take the view that the way to a modern view of manhood that is nuanced and constructive is by celebrating the myriad of ways in which men have looked deeply in the mirror and risen to the challenge of goodness. That doesn’t mean sticking our head in the sand. It means going into prison, into war, into the realm of lust and telling stories that break the cliche of what it means to be a man and replaces those superficial articulations with the truth as experienced one man at a time.
We have taken the big tent approach to our conversation. We have tried to tackle even the most challenging topics, from sex trafficking to race, and allowed anyone with an opinion to comment. Part of what this last week has taught us is that to have a substantive discussion about what it means to be a good man, even at the granular level of an individual story, we have to enforce conduct that is civil and respectful both in terms of the writing we publish and the commenters who get through our filters and appear on our site. As a result, a group of our writers are now coming up with a new commenting policy and approval process that will insure that all feel safe in engaging in the conversation and civil constructive dialogue enforced.
We will continue to be the place to read in-depth writings from all walks of manhood, to talk about the impact of those stories, and to celebrate men at their best, in every way they come.
We hope you will join us in that effort.
—
Submit here, or email publisher Lisa Hickey [email protected]
Outsider who just shoed up and read the comments look like no real men involved in leadership of this site but the man in charge. Kind of like the real world where the few men in power afforded the benefits are the target of feminists but the men who are not in power bear the brunt of the actual pain. mods female Post by erin too numerous to count almost saying she is a feminist in each one for the most part. Maybe a name change is in order. Most good men are not in jobs where they can be… Read more »
Greg,
I’d correct your barely coherent response if I had time, but I’m too busy “modding” the other comments, editing articles and writing some of my own. In addition to that, I work my full time job and parent my children. Are you saying that I’m not a “real man?” Is it because I’m educated enough to write lucidly? Before criticizing others, you may wish to shine the light of judgment upon yourself.
Pre nuptial agreements are on the rise, but are legally next to worthless, and easily over ridden in the divorce courts.
The sad thing is that people can easily renege on the moral vow they make to another and as far as feminists thought goes this is considered a good and desirable thing and empowering for the woman as she is breaking free of patriarchy and punishing the man for his maleness at the same time
Weird. I think I’ve mentioned I’m a feminist (like a thousand times, sorry), but I think that’s just bad. A contract should be binding. It’s only fair.
I wonder what the answer is. It seems like something that needs a lot of attention fromthe legal community. But why would a lawyer do the right thing when the other option is money? (Heh. Lawyers, amirite?)
Probably not a “real” feminist , if patriarchal oppression is not a core belief Erin.
Greed is an unfortunate motivator of much of human kind and is is a trait that appears to be over represented amongst legal professionals. I’m sure the evolutionary psychologists have a take on that but I have forgotten what it is at the moment.
“In Canada at least, we do have an actual marriage contract. The bride and groom sign it, and the best man and maid of honor (usually) sign as witnesses.” I think if you have a look at what is actually signed during a wedding ceremony it is not a “contract” but a register, confirming only that a ceremony has taken place and been witnessed. If in fact it was a legal contract (as it should be) then that would make all the difference in terms of “contract law” , because divorce law is the only area of law in which… Read more »
Hmmm a quick google suggests you’re right. Shows what I know. Thank goodness the fiance and I are doing a long engagement… I don’t know anything about this stuff! However, that same quick google says the use of marriage contracts is on the rise. I think it would be great it these were required by law. If they were, no one would have to feel like they’re being cruel or unromantic by bringing it up, couples would have a chance to sit down at the get-go, while things are still rosy, to come up with some fair (or as fair… Read more »
“Patriarchy theory” or why I am suspicious of any feminist presuming to have a role in defining masculinity.
http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/about-the-blog/
Great question: is this a men’s site where I can feel safe to open up, express, and get support? I struggle in my individual plight and would love to get insight and encouragement from men like myself. As iron sharpens iron…I can take a class if i want to be lectured about anything. Being a man in the 21st century has been tough personally for me and that’s my main frame of reference.
What kind of support do you seek? Not from me, per se, since I”m a woman and you may not be asking me, but I am truly interested in hearing what has been difficult, why, and what supports you, and men in the 21st century need?
Sometimes I wonder if it’s ever been easy to be a man, to be a woman. What point in history has it ever been easy for the “average” person? Kings and Queens, sure. But given tooth decay, plague, serfs and lords, wars, natural childbirth…golly, maybe we are all lucky that we live in a time when some of the issues we face are existential? 😉 Slightly tongue in cheek, of course, as I realize there are real health care, parenting and work issues out there for all of us. But life may be hard by design.
I’d like to add to what Julie said, and note that I think you deserve the support you seek, but that I also think everyone deserves support. You deserve support from women should you pursue it as much as you deserve support from men. Women also deserve the support of other women and of men. Of course no one is entitled to anything, but we’re not doing so hot as a society if we can’t turn to each other when in need. I hope that if I or any of the other ladies here can do anything for you, whether… Read more »
jefeocho says: December 26, 2011 at 12:56 pm Great question: is this a men’s site where I can feel safe to open up, express, and get support? ————————————————– My impression is YES – this website is open to critics against feminism. You can submit comments or articles, also anonymously, about any men’s related problems – even if feminists do not agree with that – to the GMP without being worried that your text will be deleted or edited and I think you can also feel safe against scornful remarks or being belittled. The GMP is changing recently somehow and even… Read more »
Isn’t bad enough men have lost protection under the Bill of Rights, and due process in the courts, do we also lose the right to speak on a site allegedly for men? Men haven’t lost anything. They’re simply so accustomed to the system insisting that women cater to them, reflect them at twice their natural size, that women’s attempt to be seen as actual human beings FEELS LIKE something’s being taken from men. It’s like that study that showed when women talk for more than 30% of the time they’re viewed as dominating the conversation and not “letting” men speak.… Read more »
You hear that guys?
Nothing bad EVER happens to men. Men ONLY think so because we are SO
OO spoiled.
What was the figure for men? 20% ? 40? 30% same as for women? Or did they simply not even bother to ask?
I think its implied that the men are speaking the other 70% of the conversation.
I think he’s wondering if the researchers looked into at what point women found that men dominated the conversation. As in, when the men spoke 30% of the time, did the women feel the men dominated the conversation? Or did they feel that no matter how much the men spoke? Or did the men have to actually dominate the conversation (in terms of amount of time spent speaking) before women perceived it? I think David and I are assuming the researchers monitored multiple conversations with either participant speaking for varied proportions of the conversation. Man, I hope that study’s not… Read more »
Its possible that 70% domination by the man would seem normal to both. Can’t say. Can’t get a word in edgewise to say. LOL (Just kidding, everybody on the planet.)
Okay, Cara. Where is this study anyway? Google just brings up 30 Rock.
Hahaha, Yes, so when she moves towards actual vocal equity (as opposed to vocal ecstasy) he feels dominated? Oh such a world!
“Men haven’t lost anything.” Thats Dogma! No seeing the other side or bridge building there! This is the sort of rubbish that should be removed from the comments here!! if anything is to be removed. Ask the fathers and children forcefully denied an ongoing meaningful relationship in contravention of UN treaties on human rights and the rights of children . Ask who drives the legislation that enables a corrupt family court system and domestic violence industry that facilitaes these crimes against humanity. Feminism is the enemy of good men and the enemy of society (IMHO) and if some find that… Read more »
I’m glad you make a distinction between feminists and radical feminists (I hope I’m interpreting that correctly based on your specification of “radical feminists”), because the adversarial attitudes toward men are radical. That said, I don’t think references to the Holocaust further our discussion. I understand you are trying to express a victim/predator relationship, but you’re very articulate, and I think you’re able to better and more accurately describe the relationship in your own words without referring to a Nazi/Jew dynamic from WWII. I only say this because it’s somewhat disrespectful to Holocaust survivors to use their experience of suffering… Read more »
ok how about feminists have as much to offer men in defining our masculinity as the KGB- (or 1.insert any other example of an oppressive ideological regime/group that tolerates no dissent) has in defining ideology of dissidents sent to the gulags (or insert the name of the group subjugated, discriminated against, mis treated by the group in 1. etc)
The underlying message that the courts have a bias for seeing women as primary care givers and fathers as secondary is probably valid. That needs to change. But the conflicts that cause divorce and the way those divorces play out are a function of how the two adults choose to behave. As a divorced man and a father, I can tell you that it takes patience and kindness to create a sound co-parenting relationship with your child’s mother and former spouse. You have to own your own failings and seek to good of the child over some perception of justice… Read more »
Sorry Mark, “function of how the two adults choose to behave.” , thats the myth, right there. It should be a function of how 2 “adults” choose to behave, but is often the function of how one chooses to use a system set up to aid and abet them in their childlike pursuit of revenge. Them women most often initiates the proceedings, the divorce industry knows all the tricks, start with a domestic violence order against the father and go from there. Here is a piece I wrote about it recently : http://www.f4e.com.au/blog/2011/11/17/michael-flood-when-equality-becomes-the-new-enemy-of-feminism/ Or you could check out Baskervilles Book,… Read more »
Sounds like bad blood between you two. I’m sorry it went that way. Looking in from way over here, I can only guess how much this must hurt. But civil and humane divorces do occur. Mine was one such case.
Here’s my story: http://megasahd.com/2011/02/23/hello-world/
Congratulations Mark, you have achieved an ideal that few do. Consider if you ex was staunchly against the concept of co parenting , how far do you think you would have got?? Co parenting demands a high degree of co-operation between the parties, unlikely to eventuate where one party has already perjured themselves to falsely accuse and obtain a DV order against their horrible partner, then uses this to marginalise the father from the children . Family law reforms in 2006 in Australia introduces a starting point of rebuttable equal shared parenting, despite this In 2008/2009 residency for “a majority… Read more »
I don’t think it’s always women or always men sabotaging the other. For that matter, I think generally people aren’t that sinister. Men and women both are just people. Most people are inherently good, but we’ll all act like jerks once in a while, and yes, there probably are truly evil people out there. Thankfully they’re few and far between. But generally, for most of us humans, being unkind doesn’t provide much reward.
But when someone treats another the way you’re describing, it’s obviously wrong, and I’m sorry to hear you had that experience.
@Eriin “I don’t think it’s always women or always men sabotaging the other. For that matter, I think generally people aren’t that sinister.” Yes most men treated badly by women through the divorce system USED to believe that as well, obviously we married, had children with and in most cases did all the things we thought we were supposed to do to support the family. However where a system exists that “enables” one to abuse another for there own personal gain , they will use it, with little regard for the consequences. This is what many women do in divorce,… Read more »
You mentioned family law in Australia specifically. I have noticed a lot of comments over time on this site and others around the web where men from Australia in specific have had really terrible experience in divorce courts. I’m wondering if family law in Australia is substantially different from where I am (Canada). I’ll note that I have heard stories from Canada, the US, and elsewhere where the divorce courts have been unfair to men. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen elsewhere. I’m just wondering if bias preferring wife and mothers in court is significantly worse in Australia. I’ve had… Read more »
@Erin I don’t think, it is significantly better or worse in Australia, complaints we notice from MRAs in Australia are about the same as from UK . Simply said, all depends on the woman. Up to her. There are many women of course, who want to go their own way after divorce and say good-bye and all is over and finished. And there are some others, not so few, using existing laws and biased execution of laws and even known legal loopholes and are demanding, demanding and demanding – a mealticket for life. We know cases where men are forced… Read more »
I will openly admit I have very little knowledge of family law, aside from my the experiences of those close to me. I know especially little about the UK and Australia aside from comments I’ve read online. I completely agree that it is up to the woman. Some women will do the right thing, some won’t. People in general are like that. My point is that I think the system that creates the conditions for inequality is flawed. I’d be very interested to read a study or some investigative journalism tackling the flaws of family law. The example you give… Read more »
In reality there is no such thing as a “marriage contract” , people make “marriage vows” and hence give moral commitment to another person to behave in a certain way. These vows are made in a religious or civil ceremony in front of witnesses ( friends and family). The church or registry office at which the vows are made then have nothing to do with what happens, if one party wishes to break the vows. That is adjudicated by the divorce courts in cases where the individuals can’t or won’t sort it out them selves. Most western nations introduced “no… Read more »
I can’t reply to your comment below (we broke GMP!) but here goes. In Canada at least, we do have an actual marriage contract. The bride and groom sign it, and the best man and maid of honor (usually) sign as witnesses. I’m really glad you posted your comment, though, because I learned a lot from it. I’m still thinking over all this new info, but to me, it seems that a “no fault” divorce should involve splitting possessions that each person had before the marriage, and splitting possessions acquired during the marriage 50/50 (does that make sense?) It seems… Read more »
The bigger questions needs to be this: What are we all creating together? What is the tone of our discourse? Is it to win dogmatic arguments or find solutions? We live in a culture that has been trained to argue. Sometimes so contentiously that we seek only to damage those we are in opposition to. But this method of discourse only prolongs our own isolation and pain. We have a responsibility to future generations. We must control the strong urge to speak from a place of anger and fear. Start forming bridges, not lobbing grenades. Lobbing grenades is easy. Forming… Read more »
Yes! You and me and a chunk of people on this thread, pal 🙂 Let’s do that.
Of course, we all have the potential to make mistakes and speak out of anger or offend each other, but if we can build and maintain the kind of discourse you’re talking about, we can probably manage to let those occasional slips become learning experiences, instead of jumping all over each other when they happen.
Thanks for this.
I agree heartily. I will also say that a lot of male voices here are very reactive. A lot of men here are being hyper sensitive to the conversation. I don’t find any of the women here to be heavy handed, with the possible exception of Rosanne Barr on the original Twitter discourse. She was not being very nice to men in general. But, what you gonna do? Eh?
If you censor comments you may as well just disallow them altogether, because rather than conversations you will simply be presenting unchallenged dogma.
Your mauling by the feminists, should be a wake up call, its time for men to define our own individual masculinity, and stop conforming to feminist ideals typical of much of the material on this site.
One thing I can tell you is that good men speak up and speak there minds irrespective of attempts to constrain and repress them, and good men denied a voice will seek an outlet elsewhere.
I don’t think they intend to censor comments. I think they’re just trying to prevent hate-speech being lobbed back and forth from either side. Everyone deserves a voice, but some things don’t need to be, or shouldn’t be said. (I’m referring to insults, threats, and other forms of “communication” that don’t really involve communicating, but rather intend to end discussion or derail it.)
When I see people’s point of view characterized as “dogma” I have to ask myself how it is we choose to characterize someone’s point of view that way and why. It seems to me its a blanket rejection of everything from that quarter of the conversation. It’s a process that values adversarial binary arguments and entrenches inflexible (us vs. them) approaches to discourse.
Win the fight. Feel shitty. Yay.
Tom wrote an article about how men are blamed for everything, and he got blamed and shamed for doing it. How ironic is that? The first tenant of equal rights is that the other side gets to speak. The anti-MRA’s would have none of that, I do hope when you speak of increased moderation it would be to filter out those who would not let others speak. Isn’t bad enough men have lost protection under the Bill of Rights, and due process in the courts, do we also lose the right to speak on a site allegedly for men? Is… Read more »
I’m very interested to hear about your experience, and I’m sorry to hear of it. You’re right, no one should be telling anyone else to shut up. I appreciate that you made the distinction of “rad-fems” versus “feminists,” because supremacist totalitarianism is radical whether you’re on the girls team or the boys team. Or no team at all. I’m glad you’re helping make the world safe for people. Not every man does, but to you and those who do: thank you. I try to contribute to a safer and happier world, myself. I tend to be more of a shoulder… Read more »
Hmm, Erin your distinctions between certain feminist sects makes me think that feminism is structured like a religion or something.
Haha well I wouldn’t give feminists that much credit. I wouldn’t really use the term sects to begin with. I think most feminists have their own unique set of ideals based off the larger idea that we need to work toward male/female equality. Much like morality in general. For example, people in our society for the most part agree on a certain set of values (don’t hurt or kill people, don’t steal, don’t lie) but there are other issues like abortion rights, gay marriage rights, etc. that not everyone within the framework of the value system agrees. Feminism is like… Read more »
Reading more of E.Belfort Bax’s anti-feminst views from the end of the 19th century (mentioned above). Not often a guy gets published only by either modern Conservative men’s sites or by marxists.org A lot of what he has to say is eerily mirrored today. Just thought it was funny. For example feminists saying women were property…. The talk about the wife being a chattel, for example, is so palpably absurd in the face of the existing law that it is nowadays scarcely worth making (although we do hear it occasionally even now). But it was not even true under the… Read more »
Sorry to go on…. just funny (to me) to see so many of the same arguments and points of contention going on over 100 years ago. Here’s an example that I see a lot where someone thinks I am attacking women when I have actually made a criticism of “feminists” or “feminism”. As regards Mr. Roe’s letter, I have to point out a misquotation. I wrote “noisy feminist section of the party,” not “noisy feminine” section. Many feminists are men, and for aught I know some of them may be among those men of whom Mr. Roe tells us he… Read more »
Spose we should all read up on our history, thanks for that.
Mostly I’ve only read the feminist stuff from that period. I was unaware of any anti-feminism from a left (socialist / communist) position. Bax is against the majority of socialists in making any objection so I’m trying to pin down his thinking, specifically about saying women shouldn’t vote. In 1904 he seems to go with just prejudices about women being mentally inferior but he seems to realise the case is weak. By 1909 he says women shouldn’t get the vote while they have so many legal advantages over men: Their idea of equality is, I suppose, “All yours is mine… Read more »
Alright just one more. This one is a debate on male privilege! If Mrs. Montefiore seriously calls in question the privileged position of woman as against man in the present day, I am afraid it shows that she reads her newspaper with an eye blind to all she does not wish to find there. The law and its administration reflects an influential section of public opinion. This public opinion regards it as axiomatic that women are capable of everything men are capable of, that they ought to have full responsibility in all honourable and lucrative functions and callings. There is… Read more »
I think it’s very important to teach our children history so they can avoid making mistakes that have already been made. That said, I’m an experiential learner (to my mom’s chagrin), so I’ve been known to try things out for myself when they’ve been mistakes in the past. Either way, I end up learning. It’s important that our kids know that women (and often children) were treated as property in some societies. It’s also important that our kids know that men suffered barbaric consequences for things we used to condemn, and that sometimes men were punished for their wives’ actions.… Read more »
Tom, Lisa, all article and comment writers on GMP (feminist through to nonfeminist) – Merry Christmas from the UK
You too Jameseq! Thanks!
How can we have a “Good Man Project”, demanding that “Real Men Please Stand Up”, in the absence of attributing equal accountability to women? Neither good nor bad men happen in a vacuum. I suppose this demands the question… so what is it that women can possibly be doing that’s bad? Is a woman’s culturally-sanctioned option to be provided for for her entire life (as has existed over the millennia and across cultures) necessarily “bad”? No, it’s not… but it does come with a package of other responsibilities – it implies a contract of some sort. Let’s take a look… Read more »
Yes. You’re right. I’m here for a lot of these reasons. They way I relate to my fiance and the men (and, in fact, women) in my life is what I contribute to the world. The way I eventually raise my children (in a few years at least 😉 ) will be a big part of that contribution. I try to be conscious of the choices I make not just for me, but based on my ethics. I think some women make bad choices sometimes. I have. And men have, too. We’re all responsible for trying to learn from mistakes… Read more »
Tom, I’m so glad that you identified it as a process, and not an end result…we’re so conditioned to always seek a “goal”…when oftentimes, the process IS the goal. If we can recognize that it would allow us to be more accepting of what is and remain present. I see a “good man” as someone who isn’t afraid to speak their truth and express themselves fully…and also support other men to do the same. This support for each other is, I think, the most important thing. As long as I see this happening here, I’m glad to be a part… Read more »
I am surprised. I saw Tom’s post and didn’t have time to respond. … you now … Shopping, feeding Rain-dear and Pardoning A Nut Roast! It’s a busy time of year. I was a little surprised when I came back and found 64 comments. That has in the past indicated Battle had Commenced. So I started to read….. and It was and is a delight. Respect, Rational, even funny and No Holds Barred. I had to check the URL to make sure I was in the right place. P^) I’m wondering what next? As Tom apparently says often – “Onwards”!… Read more »
“Real man”?
“Real man”?
Oh? Do you not know the meaning of “real” or “man”?
Real, in the way used, indicates “Authentic” – as in not false or copied; genuine; real.
It also implies sincerity as in free of deceit, hypocrisy, or falseness; earnest even.
It also has clear connotations of unpretentious, trustworthy, unaffected, forthright, guileless, heartfelt etc.
I like “guileless” – meaning free of insidious cunning in attaining a goal; not crafty and free from artful deception; No duplicity.
I’m sure I don’t need to break down the meaning of man, or do I?
That’s the question. I think you have to read the article to find out if there even is an answer 😉
hmm, quiet after my last post… curious.
Maybe we can start by appealing to some “fact” as we know it (defined by the font of all wisdom, Wikipedia of course!)
I would like to assign this as mandatory reading for anyone actively participating here.
Masculism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Do I need to read all the links? P^)
Yours a “Meddling Rational Archivist”.
Aaaaaugh. You didn’t really just dump an entire wikipedia article as a comment did you?
He did and I meant to comment prior to festivities not to do that. Please just provide the link or significant quotes C Chu. Thanks!
I went back and changed it to a link. And so, –> “Attention, alert commenters!…as Julie mentions, a don’t copy paste anything more than an paragraph or two — link instead. Or write a post about the idea itself that you are trying to convey, and submit. thanks.”
I think some apologies are due. Apologies and amends. Anyone know about the four step apology? Always popular among the professionals, and fairly difficult to deploy in a situation, it is something that all good men should carry with them.
Any one know what i”m talking about?
Anyone ready to actually apologize?
Man – we totally need a certified facilitator here to call out the nonsense and to bring the critical issues to focus. How’s that sound?
I don’t know about the four-step apology, but I would be interested in learning more. Would you be willing to write a post about it? In a grounded way, with an illustrative story, or stories?
Who do you think should be apologizing and for what? I am asking this with honest intentions, as I’d like to figure this out. thanks.
Well, a 4 step apology has to start with an intention to make something better – and that something was somehow broken (be it trust, or a lamp, or peace…) So you have to (1) want to go back to before, and acknowledge the feelings of others (2) in such a way that you connect with them in a genuine way. And if possible, (3) offer to repair or replace that which was broken, and (4) agree to try to avoid doing it in the future. this presumes the objective is peace and love and granola. If the objective is… Read more »
I am familiar with the Process you outline – but the way you phrase it is more “Attributive” that I have heard it phrased in the past. It’s a little confusing. So if you are clear that you have not been in error, just misunderstood by others? How does that play out. You can say I take ownership of misspeaking, but the error was in others perception of your message. How are you responsible for their perceptions and reactions to their own perceptions? It’s easy to say I Don’t understand and easy to take misunderstanding into the realms of the… Read more »
I agree with MediaHound on two fronts here 1) I’d like to know why you say “I think some apologies are due.” I’ll take it as a given that if an apology is due, amends are also. 2) In the four point apology, number one is the crux. And that gets to what MH is saying too, about “so if you clear you have not been in error, just misunderstood.” Because if that is really the case — if you have been misunderstood — then I’m not sure why you would want to go back to before. Because in the… Read more »
Lisa we seem to be on the same Hymn Sheet. I am aware of cultural differences that do affect the 4 stages. The 4 stages are different in Arab Culture for example. It makes it odd and interesting to deal with such matters, because in some Cultures stage 1 is really a defining stage that takes quite some time. It’s almost a set set of Nots “Not This, Not That, Not The Other” so that it is made clear what stage 1 is about. … and Not about. I think that is way French is the western International language of… Read more »
Happy Happy! i just want to make absolutely clear that I have no idea, C Chu, whether you are suggesting that I, me personally is 1) The person that should be apologizing 2) The person that should be getting an apology from someone else or 3) someone on the periphery of a situation where others should be apologizing / being apologized to. In my mind, what happened was 1) The Good Men Project’s intentions were questioned, along with the founder’s intentions 2) We did not have a crystal clear view of what feminism’s goals and objectives were at this moment… Read more »
Dear Tom, Thank you for taking on this monumental task and keeping the discussion open…In my humble experience, I have known such great feminist guys…they said they supported strong women and gave their wives much support and love….(and these are some of my closest friends)….but once they got really deep into marriage and then kids came into the picture, the men changed (I believe, into their fathers)….more stressed, more rigid, and stern (and really hostile to me!)….I look back and I can’t believe that the great guys I knew 20 years ago have become what they are today….I’m not saying… Read more »
Read an interesting study a while ago…..it boiled down to ..due to human perception of the self and the other…..That in household chores most people over-rate their own input and under-rate their partners… It seems if in any shared task you don’t perceive yourself as having done at least 60% Most likely you haven’t done 50%.
It rings true, and many households end up having a hardening of positions over the years….media tells us that you can never get a man to do his share, yet studies that include both home and paid work, it comes very close to even.
Leia my experience of marriage is exactly what you describe. If you have read my first person pieces you will understand how hard it has been for me to come out of my shell and really understand how to be a good husband. I am not sure that experience has all that much to do with the most recent go round. In a way I suppose I was writing about the very same kind of empasse I observe in my friend group that you are talking about here where the guys feel pretty defeated and the wives unfulfilled and misunderstood.… Read more »
Tom, sometimes I wonder how much of feeling defeated and unfulfilled has to do with aging, a country that chews people up and spits them out based on monetary worth, a consumer culture that insists will be happy, proud, and fulfilled by having more, spending more, accruing more and far, far less to do with gender. Obviously, if men and women are married to each other inside the system then its quite easy to look at the other and think, YOU are what is the problem. I suspect that long term gay and lesbian couples hit this defeated and unfulfilled… Read more »
Puts on his Dr Phil hat… I wondered if Leia’s story had a hint of the unintentionally hostile friend problem. Wife and husband argue. They can’t talk to each other about it so wife talks to her bff and husband probably talks to nobody. The wife’s friend is always getting negative reports about the husband. The reports are negative biased because its when the marital relationship is inaccessible due to a fight, that the friend is most needed. When the marriage is going great the wife does not feel the need to go tell her friend how wonderful her husband… Read more »
David – could you just write the book?
It would be easier and faster! P^)
… and a best seller.
I don’t believe in ‘real men’ as I’ve written about here before at GMP:
https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/the-myth-of-real-men-a-response-to-eliezer-sobel-by-quiet-riot-girl/
But good luck with the project it certainly seems more constructive now.
“But good luck with the project it certainly seems more constructive now.”
Hmmm …. Articulating Feelings is better than Throwing Them About…. IMHO!
It’s just that Articulation takes time and throwing seconds. C’est La Vie!
One of my favorite Subversive Images – http://s.elcomercio.pe/uploads/0/0/0/1/9/19188.jpg
It just sums it all up. P^)
I support this direction. I think that many have misjudged this publication. I think what happened is that rather than it starting out as a propaganda outlet for extreme messages from a certain political movement – members of said movement co-opted the publication and saw it as a good place to pontificate to men. One flash point. Dishonesty about abuse data by members of a certain political group. There was a recent article here where a ex writer tried to mislead about what the new CDC report was telling us. I would urge TGMP to be mindful of members of… Read more »
DavidByron says: December 24, 2011 at 1:59 am Perhaps I should have noted that in another place Tom called the feminists “insane” too. My point was that Tom is biased. Which is 100% fine, but it makes it harder for MRAs to trust they will get a fair shake. ….. But … how do other MRA folks feel? Do you feel like an insider here or more like a visitor? —————————– Good question, I don’t know yet. I think, MRAs are facing an entire new situation concerning the GMP. I can only speak for myself, and maybe a little bit… Read more »
As men we are learning to express our emotions. Women may be ahead of us. Yet, they as well as we need to understand how men express emotionally is not always the same as women. One of the most powerful experiences of a men’s group is seeing men get angry. Often a man needs to express in ways he never expressed. When he does it can be life changing. That said, doing that on a blog is not healing. It is inflaming, impersonal, and inappropriate. I am all for letting people fully express themselves. Doing it when the person who… Read more »
Btw just how international is this site? I keep thinking in terms of most people being Americans (ie the USA) so I draw my examples accordingly. But I’ve become aware more and more that there seem to be a lot more folks from other countries than on many internet sites I visit. (I’m a US citizen immigrant from the UK btw).
12% are international, with the majority coming from (in this order) Canada, England, Australia, India, Germany, New Zealand, France, Ireland.
I am from Australia:P
“England”?
Do you perchance mean “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland” or “Britain” for short?
See this for context http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/1038758.stm
You don’t want to inadvertently stir up the divided. P^)
Yes, there are people here who are not from USA and are not living in USA.
About myself, I am from Central Europe and I am living in Asia, most time in Japan.
I am sure, there are others also around, especially from English speaking countries, Australia for example.
Canadian 🙂
DavidByron says:
December 23, 2011 at 7:44 pm
(2) Tom is a feminist and has described (in an otherwise reconciliatory article) the MRAs as “insane” and other insults (no doubt some the other way).
—–
As MRA myself I see no problem with that, we are accustomed to insults. But openly said, somebody must do this ‘dirty work’ otherwise nobody will listen to men’s requests and only make fun out of men or belittle them.
I wonder what is ‘insane’ with men asking for their rights. Maybe somebody can explain this within the GMP?
It’s actually not the issues any of you MRA bring up as men’s issues. We did a great post once by Zeta Male, here, of the Top 10 Men’s Right’s Issues. https://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/the-top-10-issues-of-mens-rights/. And I believe in every one of those, and I think most people would at least acknowledge that we should be talking about those things. The problem — if there is one — is the sometimes repetitive way in which the MRA group as a whole tries to hammer those home. It just makes some people not want to listen. Which is the *exact* same issue some people… Read more »
Thanks for your comment, sounds almost like an invitation to me to write an article concerning the Men’s Rights Movement during Christmas/New Year and to send it to you.
Absolutely Yohan. I will commit to publishing if you write it. Email me at lisa at goodmenproject.com
Lisa
You do know that the MRA movement is an odd mixure of right and left ideologs. They’re just as devided as any other movement.
I’ve being banned from .many MRA forums.. Mostly for supporting abortion rights
Some christian mens groups try to co-opt MRA/FRA rhetoric and make it their own.
I should say that this is all IMHE
We are not embracing the MRA idelogies any more than we are NOT embracing the feminist idelogies. We are not categorically saying “X is right and Y is wrong” or “A is bad and B is good.” What we are saying is that we are willing to publish stories that relate to the male POV the male perspective *wherever* they come from. Often those stories are about issues that are potentially polarizing — violence and unemployment and homelessness and anger and rape and race. And we want to continue those stories into an intelligent thoughtful, discussion around the issues. We… Read more »
Didn’t want to give the impression that I was accusing TGMP of embracing MRA idelogies. If I did, I apologize.
Thanks. We want to be a place where we can figure out how to talk about the issues related to men. Obviously, the MRA has a lot of men who have been thinking about things from the male experience for a long time .We would like to continue talking about the issues — especially from the standpoint of individual stories and narratives — irrespective of labels. thanks
Perhaps I should have noted that in another place Tom called the feminists “insane” too. 😉 My point was that Tom is biased. Which is 100% fine, but it makes it harder for MRAs to trust they will get a fair shake. So for example every time a comment goes to moderation, if you are MRA it’s easy to think, “OK now I am being picked on for my politics”, all the easier to believe because that’s how every other feminist site operates. OTOH if any moderation is seen as coming from Lisa, (the CEO of GMP) who identifies as… Read more »
I’ve felt for a while, that the mag is more interested in what members of a certain political movement want and have to say, than what their readership wants. Hopefully that will change and in the New Year it will feel more like a men’s community, than a place where the feminist movement promotes its problematic ideology and misinformation about reality and abuse. There are lots of good writers out there that are writing about men’s issues, were tgmp to shake this image of it being an outlet for feminism and non feminist mens issues voices being mainly unwanted and… Read more »
Jan our goal is to make GMP a place where men feel comfortable telling their stories and all feel comfortable having a constructive conversation. We aren’t really interested in the labels or the polarization that happens on a theoretical level around gender.
I know you might see us as being at odds because I’m a feminist, btu I just wanted to jump in (and say hi!) and vouch for the men who are feminists. Because there is no right way to be a man, only the ways men are expected to be by some people, and some men on here are feminists rather than men’s rights activists, and this place is for everyone in every part of the spectrum.
“Tom’s vision for getting men’s stories told is the important thing. That’s a truly radical act towards equality (and not just gender equality either).”
Thanks man. That is the only thing I care about.
Yes, I am biased in the sense that I am human. So when I get attacked I take it to a certain point and thing I have to click off and consider the other person less than sane, no matter what the label is, because my intent is good and I am getting bashed for reasons that I don’t understand.
Tom,
FWIW, I read through that twitter exchange. If you were “getting bashed for reasons you don’t understand” I would blame the medium as much as anything that was said. 140 chars is just not enough to make a clear and unambiguous point, and it was as hard as Hell to follow – it seemed both you and your interlocutors were talking past eachother because your points had been compressed past the point where they were clear. If you’re doing a “lessons learned” exersise, may I suugest
…sorry, autorefresh fail. I was going to say, suggest that not having in depth conversations on Twitter is a good one, no matter how trendy it is.
Also, happy Christmas!
Agreed. That struck me as a medium that creates misunderstanding
If it makes you feel any better, mine go through moderation, too.
See, as silly as it sounds, that DOES make me feel better.
I have no idea who else is modding posts, but I’ve been doing it when I’m at the computer. I’ll come by and see things stuck for a couple hours and approve them. There isn’t really a huge conspiracy here folks. 🙂 I have been approving lots of things I disagree with. The only things I know NOT to approve are things that basically call someone a horrible name, attack a writer or the site (as in “This site sucks donkey balls etcetc) or I’ll hold up things that are really really long/multiple links and I’ll let Lisa or Ryan… Read more »
I obviously can’t see the unpublished comments, but I think you guys do a pretty stellar job of keeping things lively but civil. I see a lot of comments I disagree with, but they’re respectful. It’s very cool that you guys manage to maintain such a diverse comments section that allows for so much expression of so many different ideas, but allows me to feel safe commenting. I don’t worry about getting called nasty names or being threatened. I hope the MRAs on here feel the same.
Ok — hang on. David Byron is right — there was a bit of a “conspiracy” going on with his comments. David — let me explain directly to you. People had complained to me about the confrontational and repetitive nature of some of your comments. I didn’t see it. However, I will say that on the very first comment you ever made on one of my posts, you challenged me, and that made me uncomfortable. Once I got past that discomfort, I realized that you were challenging my worldview, but doing so respectfully and thoughtful. It’s just that at that… Read more »
Ah, and I’ll say if I saw them in mod, I approved them because they were all great comments. Sorry for the confusion Lisa and David.
When I think conspiracy, I think, “I just don’t like him and so will hide his words.” or “We as a group will block anyone who has red hair/green eyes/etc.” And I for one am not doing that. I am often in disagreement with comments I see, but I don’t block them on that merit because that would be wrong.
My understanding of why we are putting together a commenting team is to help limit the amount of “conspiracy” in general. Clear concise policy, trained staff to deal with it, no personal agendas against individuals. Other sites do this. People may or may not be flagged if they are being rude, purposefully derailing or attacking, but banning based on irritation or “sides” isn’t anything I’d approve of.
Exactly. We’re working on it. I actually didn’t mean to imply there *was* a conspiracy in place, only that I could see how it could feel like one on David’s side since he didn’t have all the information.
I’m always watching the comments come through, and I try to approve any comments “held for moderation” as quickly as possible. The only time there is a lag time of more than an hour should be between midnight and 7am.
Appreciate everyone’s suggestions for making the comments section better, C Chu, others, thanks.
Bwahahahaha!
If it means you and/or Lisa HAVE to read all my comments I’d PREFER to be on moderation 🙂
Aw, you know I can’t quit you, DB.
Erin says: December 23, 2011 at 8:48 pm I agree with you that comments that are critical of feminism should be allowed, within reason. —— What should this mean? Within reason? Such definition is open to wide interpretation. I personally consider feminism in its core as a non-productive movement, which is based on the principle of ‘to give as little as possible and take as much as you can’ solely because we are some certain groups of women and they are men, companies and government funds. I see feminism as an aggressive movement which has nothing to do with equality,… Read more »
I can’t speak for what the GMP thinks, but I don’t think what you said is worth banning someone over. You expressed your views against feminism, but you clearly stated what your problems with it were, and you noted that it’s your perception. You weren’t name-calling or resorting to unproductive behaviour. In fact, your comment makes for a good catalyst for discussion. While your perception of feminism is that it’s an attempt to gain benefits for women, only, and that it’s unproductive, I see feminism differently. I call myself a feminist, but I believe in equal rights for men and… Read more »
As a mod, I agree. That’s not something I’d ban or even hide.
Hide meaning “moderate”
My hypothesis is that feminism is a hate movement. Feminism has a sex war ideology whereby everything is seen in terms of good women fighting evil men. Another alternative that some suggest is that it is essentially like say the NRA. It has an agenda which is to benefit women and it has nothing to do with equality. So that mostly it works against equality because it only works for women. And again it’s men vs women. And then you view it as something “focused on women” and containing “man-hating meanies”. No matter which view you have why would you… Read more »
Erin,
“”Some feminists may be man-hating meanies, but I haven’t personally met any, or been exposed to that kind of behaviour or speech if I have.””
Doe’s that include what goes on in teh internet? If so, I really do find that hard to believe. Maybe you just don’t see what I see.
No, it doesn’t include the internet. You’re right on that count. I meant I haven’t met any in real life. Thank goodness I haven’t met anyone in real life of any stripe (feminist, men’s rights, regular folk) as full of hate as you can find online. Well, not since middle school.
i think debate- in itself- is good. It helps to keep alive discussions about important issues. So the big picture is, that it keeps any website alive. However, debate can turn to be unproductive mud wrestling, over a point, that’s why modearation is needed (but only in gloves, and rarely).
“What should this mean? Within reason? Such definition is open to wide interpretation.” You make a valid point that is often asked and hotly debated – what is “Within Reason?”. It’s a lot like defining Pornography – in so many ways it defies definition, but people know it when they see it. It may not even be the mix of sexes and sexualities that are for you sexually stimulating, but you can still recognize it. P^) I have a blind friend who just does not get Pornography – no frame of reference – and subtitles just don’t work. I used… Read more »