Can I talk about men ?

[Blistory]

In light of the recent threads and the perception that some feminists hate men, can anyone confirm that what they really feel about men as a class ? And whether they believe that feminism harms men ?

I see more disrespect for men on the general boards, the 'men just don't see dust', 'I'm as well doing it myself as he makes a mess of it' 'bless them, they just don't get it' 'women are naturally the better parent' types of threads. To be fair, those posts usually attract rightful condemnation but I can't understand why just because feminism demands more of men and expects more of men, feminism is seen as disrespectful or dismissive of men. Surely it's the opposite ?

In the interests of honesty, there are individual men I like, admire, love or respect. There are individual men whom I trust but it has to be said, not unreservedly.

Men, as a class, on the other hand, I fear. I fear the stranger in the dark alley, I fear the man driving the taxi, I fear the men attending conferences with me who decide to retire to their rooms at the same time. Not because I think they are definitely going to harm me but because I equally fear that if someone does harm me, I will be judged for not recognising the danger and protecting myself. This, I blame, not on men but on a patriarchial society that tells me men are predatory and women are victims. I blame it not on men but on a rape culture which reinforces the attitude that women are there for the taking. The only individual men I blame are the ones who rape, kill and assault but I start with the premise that those individual men are not identifiable to me therefore I should be cautious of all. Man hating ? I don't know.

In terms of feminism, I've always been quite comfortable with the idea that whilst not an aim, the accepted by product of feminism will be that men's lives are also enhanced. The prevailing notions that men have to be strong, assertive, to be the bread winner, emotionally detached, not to cry, to be able to physically protect themselves are all damaging to men, particularly those who don't conform to the stereotype. I firmly believe that while feminism seeks to break down barriers, the result of it will be that men also benefit significantly. And I welcome that. If feminism was simply about achieving a position for women that significantly put men in jeopardy, I wouldn't be supportive of it and I don't know many feminists who would.

Given that men who suffer under patriarchy will benefit from feminism, I see no need to actively campaign for men's rights so I'm entirely comfortable with focusing on women. For men who won't benefit, I'm sorry but I just can't shed any tears for someone who has had all the advantages and is now being asked simply to share them.

I've asked, not to be controversial, but because I didn't want to derail any existing threads that are, quite rightly, about putting women first. And I've been genuinely perturbed by the current threads that insist there is a genuine and strong sense of men being hated by some feminists on here. Is it just misunderstanding of language, a lack of understanding of feminism or am I so blinkered by my beliefs that I can't see it ?

[Dervel]

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.

[museumum]

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

[museumum]

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

[YonicScrewdriver]

Good stuff museummum

[Dervel]

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.

[grimbletart]

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….

[Dervel]

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?

[OutsSelf]

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

[Dervel]

Into each generation is born a....