Can I talk about men ?

Into each generation is born a....

Yes, and very apt it is, you are indeed the definite article

Well I suspect that's why Reasonable is your middle name Buffy! By responsible I don't necessarily mean guilty, although I suppose we are all responsible when all is said and done.

Also guilt is fair enough when a specific objectionable action lies with an individual.

It is remarkably tough to unsee once you have seen which I suppose means makes some people more responsible than others, although perversely perhaps some of the most guilty are least responsible iyswim?

Thanks again everyone. And sorry for any derail. I kind of instinctively know what is meant by class analysis but was trying to get a more definitive explanation as it seems easier to apply in some circumstances and with some groups than with others IYSWIM.

As you were everyone….

It's a tough one though Buffy, because I don't think I would have the aspiration to see things change without taking some sense of responsibility for the way things are.

Then again privilege is something I view a little differently from most people. It's a given that some people will have advantages that others don't, and it should be the responsibility of those that have it to ensure more people share in it.

Paraphrasing John Adams we must study feminism so our daughters and sons don't need to.

Good stuff museummum

even if it's not really addressing the question in the op :)

can i just say, this has been a really interesting and useful discussion. thanks.

I'm trying to understand class in a bit more depth here. We have society, and yes that society is patriarchal ie the further up the pyramid you go the more likely you are to be male (Caucasian and several other markers as well). Society as an expression of all of us we can all (in theory) change.

Obviously the patriarchs have a greater control over such changes (or as is more often the case resistance to change). However how responsible is the average male for the status quo? Am I more or less responsible than the average woman? I am undeniably privileged (and in more ways than simply being male), but I am not necessarily powerful (certainly not in the patriarchal sense).

In fact I am extremely unlikely to make it to the top of the pile in terms of the patriarchy as I would undoubtedly not be "their sort of chap". The male pyramid itself can be further sub-divided into classes. Which is why I find the MRAs quite frankly absurd as whatever ways they feel their lives have been compromised by being male the policies that have led us to that state of affairs are indisputedly set by more men than women.

"It's not really a class analysis if you are perpetuating the abuse against a minority or oppressed group."

I think this is a factor.

I think your reaction to those comments grimbletart are perfectly reasonable. You are, in effect, part of the oppressed class as ageist remarks are disproportionally directed against older people. It's not really a class analysis if you are perpetuating the abuse against a minority or oppressed group.

Hope that makes sense.

grimbletart wrote - "is there a definitive proportion of men or of women who have to exhibit these characteristics to before they can be defined as a class?"

I don't know of any definitive figure for the social sciences.

I do know that one of the the more obscure mathematical/philosophical definitions of a class (or group or set) is along the lines of "a collection of things that doesn't contain all its things".

grimble i have the same re "young" women / "young" feminists - NAYWALT etc. though actually you have far more reason to object to ageist comments than i do to those about younger women.

Thanks for trying to answer my question everyone.

Petula: I've been a feminist since kindergarten - when I first noticed boys were treated differently at school than girls (always, it seems to girls' detriment). So, long before I read my first feminist tomes (Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Frieden) etc. By practical feminist I meant always challenging sexism, the status quo, misogyny and so on (as well as supporting women's charities) rather than studying the subject academically.

Nojacket - I think your point about e.g. 90% of violence by men is a good explanation of class. We would have the statistics to verify the % of violence carried out by men. I am not sure we have the statistics to verify the % of women who care about appearance though…..

Beachcomber: I understand it is society that defines classes and not feminists. Agree on your point about nuance - I was being too broad brush.

I think some things are more amenable to class analysis - things were statistics are available e.g. violence crime, numbers of men/women in various jobs etc. but I am a bit sceptical about it as a tool for more amorphous situations such as caring about appearance.

It is clearly a useful tool but I can understand how hard it is for individuals to put aside the "not me" response e.g. NAMALT.

I have a personal NAPALT response when I find, usually on AIBU, that pensioners are attacked for being selfish, not caring about the problems faced by today"s young etc. when I now how much DH and I have impoverished ourselves helping out the younger generation and how life was just as difficult in a different way when we were growing up in the 40s and 50s. Very hard to detached when you are swept up in a class analysis that confers on your class a behaviour or attitude you are not part of and actively strive against. But that's a personal response and I just have to get over it.

Generally speaking I don't feel scared of men - I'm very lucky in that, I know. I do feel professionally disadvantaged by sexism a lot though, and in that I am unlucky.

I don't hate men. It doesn't take much analysis of my friendship groups or my social and professional interactions to see that I have many more male friends and acquaintances than female, that I prefer the company of some of my male friends and acquaintances to most of my female ones (not all) and that my most enduring friendships are slightly weighted towards my male friends rather than my female ones (and when you insider that I went to an all girls school and an all girls oxbridge college, that might be mrs significant than for someone who was educated in a co-ed environment). However, working as I do in a hugely male dominated area, I have met far more men who infuriate me and who I believe act...poorly...than I have women. And the patriarchy drives me up the wall.

But I really like my friends and most of them are (lovely) men.

Perhaps that means I'm not a feminist. I certainly don't think their rights are being threatened by me demanding my own rights. They have plenty of rights. They don't think their rights are bing threatened either. I suspect that's the key to it - I know nice men as well as less nice ones.

i thought that buffy - presumably for example politicians (or their staff) do that sort of analysis when they are looking at impact of policies on different social groups? (well given my jaded view of them perhaps they don't, but i'll be charitable for now). iirc it was noted recently that the one class they hadn't tested budget cut effects on was that of women

I would need to see 'men as a class are violent' in the context it was used museumum. In my experience feminists tend more to use terms like 'male violence' or 'violence against women'.

grimbletart - it is society which defines the groups/classes.

The group 'men' and the group 'women' exist because society is set up the way it is - not because feminists decided that men or women were distinct political groups.

It isn't feminists who decide what is statistically significant and what makes a group or class.

I don't think I've really come across feminists saying 'men as a class are violent' - they are more likely to say 'men as a class benefit from male violence'. Which is something rather different and much more nuanced and analytic. It is much more useful. The point of talking about male violence or men as a class is not to be nasty about men - it is to try to understand and further the position of women and to examine the societal wide power dynamic that exists between men and women. In other words, we suspect that women don't get the top spots in running the world/economy/jobs/in government/etc, not because we are a bit crap but because we are discriminated against and sometimes actively prevented (via male dominance and male violence and a system of male status and privilege that is buttressed by the threat of violence) from accessing opportunities.