Men, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

Even pursuing a career in early years childcare and education (mentioned upthread) which I have done I've seen men advantaged - a young lad I worked with (but not directly) went from working in pre-school to getting a job lecturing in early years and childcare at our local college. I'm sure I have better qualifications and experience than he does.
And at my DC's school the headteacher is the only male teacher on the staff (and similar situation in many primaries in my experience)

Good point about varying cultures DreamingBohemian.
But I don't think it dilutes the simple point though. it can be done by degree within each area

Sorry to go back to this but I also really dislike 'culture hates women'

There is no such thing as 'culture'. There are infinite varieties of cultures and subcultures, all of which are contested by members of that culture, and which usually evolve over time.

There are multiple cultures operating within the UK. Some of those hate women, I would say. Probably all of them discriminate against women, to varying degrees.

I think it's important because it dilutes the argument. You can draw a straight line between 'culture hates women' and the bland advice at the end to 'stand up to misogyny when you see it'. It assumes that all men witness the same kinds of misogyny, that they all have the same ability to confront it, that there is some unilateral solution they can all share.

For example, there seem to be a lot of crazy judges in the UK making asinine comments and rulings. What's up with that? What is wrong in legal culture? How can men stand up to that when that kind of misogyny has the force of legal opinion? How can they promote the rights of women within that system? Now compare that with other cultures -- in politics, the media, different regions and cities, different socioeconomic groups, different religious groups, etc.

That, to me, is a more helpful way of looking at things than a simple, Men: you're with us or against us.

Sigmund, didn't you get the memo?

When a man is privileged, it's male privilege.
When a woman is privileged, it's benevolent sexism.

But never vice versa.

Bunny - Someone on here linked to it originally, but I can't remember who .

Amanda I'd not heard of that before but thanks for the link - excellent analogy that explains male privilege quite clearly.

Cisco would you argue that as not every single white person in 1960s Mississippi USA was the same as each other and therefore as not every single white person had the same opportunities and privileges - due to class, education, appearance etc - then the notion of white privilege is moot?

I agree that there are certain areas of life where it is easier to be female - pursuing a career in early years childcare being a fairly uncontentious example. More emotive ones being things like custody disputes (though I would say 'easier' in the wrong word for either party in that situation). Ironically, these tend to be areas where patriarchal societal structures and assumptions disadvantage men, rather than examples of a 'female privilege'.

So no, at a structural, cultural level, no I do not believe 'female privilege' exists in the same way as 'male privilege'.

What do you think Sigmund? Is there?

Is there no innate female privilege?

I always find the 'computer game' analogy quite good for thinking about male privilege. It's too simplistic to say that, because all men don't have have the same opportunities there is no innate male privilege. whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/15/straight-white-male-the-lowest-difficulty-setting-there-is/

Ok, agreed. Let's skip the hate bit.

Do all men benefit from a sexist society? No, if indeed we have one. (We have sexist individuals, and some sexist institutions. But how do you define society in this case? Is the law sexist?) Some will, some won't. If the male half of society was egalitarian, if all men were the same, if all men had the same opportunities and privileges, then she might have a point. But it isn't, we all know that, so to lump all men in as a homogenous mass misses the truth.

Why change the word though? She says hate, she means hate. As a journalist, I accept her ability to write what she means, to understand what she is writing. After all, it's a powerful word.

In paragraph 7, she uses it again - 'men as a group certainly do (hate women)'. There is no confusion as to what she is trying to convey. This belief is fundamental to her article. I disagree with her.

On the point of calling out sexist language or behaviour - I could not agree more. Her reasoning about why it happens though - that is where I think she is wrong.

Lastly, your point about paras 2 and 3 - I am not asking anyone to modify their language, to pander to my feelings or to spare my injured male ego. I get why feminists pursue this line, but it doesn't anger me. If anything it makes me feel a bit sad.

great article

I think she has a point. When we don't call men for sexist behaviour we are complicit in that.

Sorry Curlew, I thought I was. In paragraph 4, second sentence, the author states that 'culture hates women'. I disagree with that, and I think that that particular viewpoint is fundamental to the article.

Don't be disingenous Ciskokid. Just means it takes a long time to get somewhere not very interesting.

You took the time to respond, and yet you didn't answer the questions, Sal. Is this a place for open, polite discussion of feminist topics or not? I am interested to know what you think. Of course, you don't have to answer.

Curlew, I mean that it conforms to the the stereotypes and tropes of most of the feminist articles that I read. Saying that, it doesn't mean that I throw a hissy fit and stop reading. Just because I don't agree with all she writes, it doesn't make it a bad article. It throws up some interesting points for discussion. I assume that is why the OP posted it here - for discussion?

Great article, worth recommending to the "lip service" feminist men i come across.

I know a few men who agree with the principle on Feminism but would not actively call out instances they see in RL for fear of sneering from other men, which is exactly the problem Penny is speaking about.

Well, there we have it indeed.