Thanks to Mens Rights Activists we now have safe men’s spaces, a more acceptable, inoffensive and less nebulous term used to describe what was previously referred to as “public”
OH MAN THAT’S SO GOOD
Dear labor organizer who is old enough to be my dad,
Stop emailing me personally. I know you got my email on the godforsaken May Day listserve, and I know that asking me to elaborate on my feelings on affective labor is just a ruse to talk to me more. I know this, because the last time you tried to talk to me about reproductive labor and domestic workers’ unions, it suddenly turned into a conversation about my blog, whether I would give you drawing lessons and if I liked Santana. (Is it because I’m Cuban?) No, I don’t care. I don’t care if you liked what I said tonight. I don’t even care if, like all the others, you’re just trying to be friendly. I’d just rather not talk to you and don’t know how to tell you to go away. I’ll see you at the next meeting, and just like today, I will continue to ignore you.
The thing about patriarchy is that individual men, gay and straight, are often really wonderful people who you love deeply, but they have internalized some really poisonous shit. So every once in a while they say or do something that really shakes you because you’re no longer totally certain they see you as a human being, and you feel totally disempowered to explain that to them.
“
| — |
This happens to me all the time, and it always hits me like a slap in the face. (via lasluchasdelcorazon) I should stop being surprised. |
A word on misandry
The responses to this doofus picture compel me to post about the concept of feminists hating men. Within those notes, there are a number of comments about how real feminists don’t hate men, or how everything on the left is okay except hating men, or how the picture is wrong because it doesn’t acknowledge that men can feminists too (and therefore, presumably, are not worthy of hate).
I often say that I hate men. It’s false in the sense that there are men I love and care for dearly. Men as a group, however, antagonize me, and I do hate a lot of what falls under masculinity and manhood. When women say they hate men, it is not a simple statement. Women hate men because they are abused by men, because they are raped by men, because they are marginalized by men, because they are murdered by men, because they must live their lives constantly being judged by men. Moreover, it is male-dominated society that teaches us that all of this can be avoided by becoming submissive to men, by being nice and quiet, by letting them into our spaces, by giving them access to our bodies, by making ourselves attractive, by giving due consideration to their opinions no matter what they are. It is exhausting and overwhelming. I do not blame any woman who reacts with hatred, because such reactions are often the product of years of exhaustion. No woman is rewarded for airing her hatred of men. She only invites more judgment upon herself.
Many women reject the idea of hating men as valid for two reasons; one, because the patriarchy itself tells us only ugly, hopeless dykes do that (and they have taught us that being an ugly dyke is a horrible thing), and two, because we fear it is like hatred of women. Consider, however, why men hate women. They hate women for not being sexually available. They hate women for not being attractive to them, or inaccessible to them if they are. They hate women for not dressing the way they would have them dress. They hate women for being smarter or more successful than them. They hate women who have authority over them. They hate women who challenge them. They hate women who have no intentions of yielding to them. They hate women who have no interest in men. They hate women for not handing over full control of their bodies and minds. They are conditioned to do this from childhood. It is socialized behavior that is regularly rewarded. It is not the product of suffering, and it is not comparable.
Finally, I would add that I do not believe men can be feminists. Men can most assuredly be loving and considerate supporters of women who challenge misogyny and sexism. However, allowing them to assume the title of feminist is dangerous. It places any woman who challenges or disagrees with them in the absurd position of looking anti-woman. It allows them to air their opinions side-by-side with women, and asserts that their opinions on sexism and the needs of women are just as valid. It also undermines a very important factor critical to the success of women; i.e., it deprives them of a space in which they can fumble and grow without the judgment of, or competition from, men. Men who truly understand sexism understand the need not to interfere, and recognize that they will never fully understand what it is to be the target of it. Feminist ends cannot be achieved if men are not willing to surrender space, power and their egos. A man who is truly acting out of love for women accepts this, and does not require a special title or recognition to maintain his commitment.
In short: stop having kneejerk reactions to women who openly and unreservedly air their anger about how they and the women they love have suffered at the hands of men, because what the hell do you think sexism is, when you get right down to it? Consider why your first reaction is one that works to appease and protect the feelings of men, rather than recognizing the validity and origin of some women’s emotions and reactions.
Thumbs up to all this (except I must add the specification of *cis-men, but that’s my opinion). At this point I’m convinced that cis-men who identify as feminists, without respecting any clear boundaries/limits/understanding of what they can and should contribute to feminism, serve to disorient the rest of us. I’m over accommodating them and patting them on the back for showing up— as many have done with Hugo Schwyzer, for example— and it’s just generally fucking my shit up right now.
To privileged people who went through bad things
I acknowledge that you went through bad things. I really do. I am very sorry you went through that. You didn’t deserve it in any way.
But you DID NOT go through those bad things because you’re male/white/able-bodied/middle-class/cis/straight/etc.
But people have gone through horrible shit, and horrible shit was made worse because they were female/PoC/a person with disabilities/poor/trans*/same-sex loving/etc.
That’s all people are saying when they rant about oppression, privilege, and social justice issues. This, in no way, negates what you went through. If you think so, then your thinking is severely warped.
However, you ARE negating what marginalized people go through when you rant on and on about all the terrible shit you went through and talk down to marginalized people for focusing on their problems or for needing to have trigger warnings on certain things. And it’s a pretty emotionally manipulative move, to be blunt.
Not to say you can never talk about what happened to you (actually, you should, and you have spaces to do so), but if you use it to shut marginalized people down, then there is something seriously wrong with YOU, and YOU need to “go to therapy if you can afford it.” Because all you’re doing is being a straight-up bully. Not to mention oppressive.
hold on, gotta post this on my fridge
Yeah. “But [this thing] happened to me too!” is one of the worst responses to someone hurt by systemic violence. I’ve been on both sides of the situation; when I’ve done it to others, I thought I was just ~trying~ to relate, but to be real it’s just a way to absolve oneself of the responsibility for perpetuating said violence. Not to mention when somebody with a certain kind of privilege over me has said it in response to my own hurt, of course I got pissed. How could they really know?
Resources for Male Survivors
I posted last week asking people if they knew of some good resources for male victims of sexual assault. Here is the list people came up with:
http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/
Thanks everyone!
rosinhabela ha contestado a tu publicación: So after abruptly leaving organizing meetings, or after getting into arguments about tactics, or after running into unsavory characters (aka sexist shitheads)
I dunno what exactly you’re referring to, but I’ve been to a few all-city student logistical meetings and I feel the exact same way. Mostly white dudes yelling at each other, ignoring everyone else and then preaching on equality. What.
Oh, we’re probably thinking of the same people. Also, speaking of dudes yelling and interrupting people, this happened:
“A comical/unbelievable/maddening thing that happened afterwards was that this man… who interrupted us, came up to our group and wanted to talk. [One of] the members present, talked with him. He told her that while he recognized that he had interrupted us and that he was using white privilege, he was using his white privilege to speak on behalf of marginalized voices, and that we as women should respect what he was trying to do.
Men’s physiology defines most sports, their needs define auto and health insurance coverage, their socially designed biographies define workplace expectations and successful career patterns, their perspectives and concerns define quality in scholarship, their experiences and obsessions define merit, their objectification of life defines art, their military service defines citizenship, their presence defines family, their inability to get along with each other—their wars and rulerships—defines history, their image defines god, and their genitals define sex.
“
| — |
-Catherine MacKinnon At first I assume she’s just making a rather direct statement about [cis]men’s bodies functioning as the default to which everyone accommodates to. And then, because of the first world-y nature of these accommodations, I wonder if she really means to question the very things that accommodate male bodies, from functions of capitalism to physical activities, and how they have come to define men themselves. |
Through the first quarter of 2011, nearly 600,000 college-educated white men ages 35 to 64 were unemployed, according to previously unpublished Labor Department stats. That’s more than 5 percent jobless—double the group’s pre-recession rate. That might not sound bad compared with the plight of younger, less-educated workers and minorities, but it’s a historic change from the last recession, when about half as many lost their oxford shirts. The number of college-educated men unemployed for at least a year is five times higher today than after the dotcom bubble.
Lower than the national rate, lower than the rate for women, lower than the rate for minorities, and like 1/4 the size of the rate for college grads. Why is the story “ZOMG EDUCATED WHITE DOODS LOSING JOBS WAI GOD WAI”, and not “Hey, this economic disaster has been more egalitarian than past economic disasters, interesting”. If I see one more “End of Men” article, I will become a serial arsonist. Or have an aneurysm.
I bolded the sentiments that resonate with me the most. They seem to panic the most when things are getting just a tad bit more equal. (Although it doesn’t make the situation any better.)
I really enjoyed this article. I recently wrote a paper about how in a lot of literature about sexuality, men are often the subjects who actively desire, while women are often portrayed as the objects or recipients of desire. This also plays itself out in the art world, where women are on display, and yet so mystified. Not to say that these definitions are concrete, but such literature has had implications on what is deemed as “male and female sexuality.” What I liked about this writer is that he talked about desire through a queer lens, and he questioned why identifying as a man and wanting to be an object of another’s desire made him unusual. “I came to see that our cultural myths about desire hurt everyone,” he writes.
Growing up I would always feel a tinge of shame about wanting to reach out and touch someone, among other things— even though I’m a very assertive woman, and it feels natural to actively express my desire. But I also get a thrill out of being desired. I like the constant exchange of power, I like reciprocating desire, as if it were a dialogue. That’s the beauty of sex, or at least my understanding of it.
I also always wondered why male bodies are often the objects of disgust. (The whole article could be one big gender-essentialist claim. But besides the article, I personally admire things about most people’s bodies and don’t necessarily project desire or feel disgust towards a certain gender as a whole.)
But given this claim that men were brought up to view themselves as gross and undesirable, I also wonder what that says about boys who love drawing penises everywhere.
I was walking through a really crowded entrance to the Dufferin subway station and walking towards me was [redacted cultural studies prof] with his arm around a really young Asian girl. She could not have been older than twenty five. I am guessing younger. So we pass and I keep walking, the whole time i just keep thinking about how (in my mind) this is probably some predatory conquest of one of his undergrad classes or maybe even a really young grad student. So i turn around and yell (at this point there is about 100 metres between us and hundreds of people) “[redacted cultural studies prof] YOU SEXUAL PREDATOR, LEAVE THE YOUNG GIRLS ALONE!!!!!”. I know he heard me because he turned around but i don’t think he saw me because after i yelled everyone starting looking around everywhere…
“
| — |
- A good friend and personal hero (via criticalculture) People should call these creepers out more often. |
I know older men in comedy who can barely feed and clean themselves, and they still work. The women, though, they’re all ‘crazy.’ I have a suspicion — and hear me out, because this is a rough one — that the definition of ‘crazy’ in show business is a woman who keeps talking even after no one wants to fuck her anymore.
“
| — | Tina Fey (via hardlyart) |
