Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

[Xray the Enforcer]

[mod] One thing I'd like to avoid is this thread turning into yet another iteration of the US Politics thread. As such, let's not focus on PEOTUS or his staff. That stuff should go in the US Politics thread. Here we should focus on larger themes and trends. Thank you! [/mod]

[karaddin]

OK first post here from my phone so won't be as in depth as I might prefer. I think in some ways the issues we are seeing at the moment are difficult to discuss within the traditional feminist lens while focusing on women because fundamentally what we're seeing is about men. There is absolutely feminist theory that I think is useful for examining those issues, but it can't really be done just by looking at women.

Being cognisant of X's point above, I don't want to turn this into being about the US Election, but I don't think it can be separated from the upsurge in bigotry around the western world that Lyanna mentioned already and it's predominantly what I'm focusing on.

First off I want to link this piece

this piece

Which elaborates on how the right in this campaign don't just look similar to everyone's favourite online ethics movement, but was actually using the same playbook.

The underlying issue in both cases that has been exploited is the anger of men who perceive they have failed by the standards of broken masculinity. Pretty much all of the nerd reactionary groups whether the virulent gators and puppies, the PUAs, MRAs, incels or MGTOW are all cut from the same cloth. They did not fit into traditional models of masculinity growing up and sought refuge online, but the anger and resentment this inspires has not been directed towards remodeling masculinity but towards women and finding a way to simply move themselves to the top of the pyramid - or at least the middle if that can be obtained by shoving women, people of colour, lgbtqi people etc all down to the bottom. It's a situational game when viewed this way, if you can bring someone else low then you rise. I view this nerd masculinity as sharing many elements of genocidal masculinity, but I think there are still distinctions worth drawing and I've taken to calling it nihilistic masculinity. The impact of such trends cannot be dismissed, and probably should have been taken more seriously (aside from the harassment - which already was by anyone I'm talking to) prior to the election. Family slaughters by genocidal patriarchs played a significant role in the fall of apartheid in South Africa for example.

Another group with a different failure of masculinity is the group that's getting amplified by being referred to as "the working class" is white men of lower socio economic standing who are in locations or industries where the labor market has collapsed. Unlike the first group, a great many of these may have been successfully meeting the standards of traditional masculinity, however have been brought down by the changing economic conditions and due to the importance of being the "bread winner" this doesn't just leave them in financial difficulty, but attacks their manhood. I don't think there is as much to analyse in this component, but it still leaves a lot of simmering resentment that is only going to grow with automation.

The reason I think the second group is just as important to keep in mind is because both show just how urgent the need to reform masculinity is, they need a healthy model of how to be men that lets them be complete people on their own rights. 

I'd also be curious what similarities there are between this neo-reactionary movement and anti-modernity reactionary movements (fundamentalist religion in general, but especially Christianity, Islam and Judaism) from a political analysis point of view. Ideologically this new one would appear quite different, but they all default to highly misogynistic mindsets and ultimately come down to people feeling out of place in the modern world.

I'll leave it at that for now, I'm focusing on a more dry/distant/abstract component because I'm too worried on a personal level (more for friends than myself for now) to really engage with any of the practical stuff for now.

[Lyanna Stark]

8 hours ago, theguyfromtheVale said:

 

@Lyanna Stark I get the anger about the last election. But I don't think calling him nything but his name is going to make clear how absurd this situation is: The President-Elect of the USA is Donald Trump, a man I've heard described as having substituted money for character even before this election. The campaign only made that more obvious, and his election is a disgrace, but not naming him, not looking in the face of what is actually staring at us won't help, I fear.

@topic: This might as well be put in the LGBT, or police violence, or... thread, as it's intersectional. But I gotta start somewhere. I read the essay "Gegen Hass" (Against Hate) by German Feminist and LGBT activist Carolin Emcke today, which was awarded with this year's Peace Prize of the German Book Trade. If you do understand German, I recommend picking it up. If you don't, I hope it will soon be translated to English, as it absolutely deserves to. The analysis of the current social and political climate seems spot on, and I think the overall message is too important to let it slide.

For me it was two-fold: partially to express rage and partially to keep the political trolls to the politics thread. However, I understand what you mean and yes, as a general rule, I think treating him as just another man and not some superhuman monster is a good idea. He is just a silly, spoilt, little man, brought fame, power and glory for espousing hatred already made popular by far more wily people than him.

@theguyfromtheVale I found an excerpt in English of Emcke's writing "Against Hate". It's really interesting, and she makes some very good points in only this short section. For instance:

"Hatred does not arise spontaneously; rather, it is cultivated. Everyone who understands hatred as sudden or distinct inadvertently aids its continued growth."

In light of the rise of the alt-right, white nationalists etc. this is important to really grasp. This is not some random thing, it doesn't arise from nothing; no, the opposite is true, this is driven forward by forces who want this to happen.

"The past few years have seen a mounting unease about tolerance:
Has it been taken too far? Can’t those who have different beliefs, or look different, or love differently, be satisfied at last? There were discrete, yet clear reproaches voiced. Maybe Jews or homosexuals or women could be content and quiet, for once; after all, they’ve already been given so much. It’s as if equality has reached its limits. As if women or gay people might be allowed equal rights up to a certain point, but beyond that, enough is enough. Completely equal? Well, that would be going too far. After all, then everyone would be … equal."

This sort of strange shift in responsibility we often see, whether it's Richard Dawkins telling western women to be content because the women in Saudi Arabia have it far worse, or how women are overreacting when some scientist tells a "joke" about women not being fit for lab work since all they do is cry and cause drama wrt men. As pointed out in the article, the fact that women are "allowed" to work isn't some sort of panacea. Women should bloody well as a status quo be equal, every thing else is a flaw, it's broken, it is not right. This is btw also another example of acceptance of a toxic mixture of both benevolent and hostile sexism. Women can be equal, but not too equal. We are only here on the sufferance of men, and this is implicitly understood.

"Examining hate before it blindly erupts opens up other courses of action. Public prosecutors and the police are responsible for inciting certain kinds of hatred. But everyone in a society is responsible for forms of marginalization and inclusion, for the small and petty gestures, habits, practices, and beliefs that foster exclusion. As a civil society, we must revoke the space that the hateful have to make their object to measure.
This is not a task we can hand off to someone else. It doesn’t take much to stand by those who are threatened because they look different, think differently, believe something different, or love someone different. Small gestures can change things, can open up social or discursive spaces for precisely those who are supposed to be excluded from them. Perhaps the most important gesture against hatred is not letting oneself become isolated, not letting oneself be forced into silence, into the private sphere, into the shelter of one’s own environment. Perhaps it is most important to move out of oneself, to move toward others, and to open up social and public spaces together with them."

A recipe for action, finally, and I approve. Small actions, perhaps just words of kindness, or seeing someone else or treating them like goddamn human beings can change things. Not everyone can become an activists, but I strongly believe there are things each and everyone of us can do, which can make a difference.

 

@karaddin Great post, I agree in full. The toxic masculinity sprung out of the gamergate/alt-right/MRA/8chan is supertoxic and based totally on just kicking anyone else downwards. I was going to get to that eventually too but it does go 100% hand in hand with the benevolent/hostile sexism situation among women to create a perfect shitstorm of sexism hitting us full in the face. I need to go make N amount of Xmas cakes now (where N approaches infinity) so I am unfortunately unable to write anything more eloquent in response, but suffice to say that YES this discussion MUST be had. It is inevitable and desperately needed.

 

[Lyanna Stark]

9 hours ago, Mya Stone said:

I AM trying to contribute to this world's future by raising sons who would NEVER treat women as commodities. I think it's the least I can do. I truly am fearful of how the world will look in 4 years time.

As a bad feminist, I have never sat down with my sons and talked to them about feminism properly (they ARE only almost 9 and 5), but I guess I have led by example, because hearing my children flat out declare that they recognize that Trump is sexist helps. (My almost 9 year old said that, verbatim.)

That's pretty awesome.

As for "actions that can help", I absolutely think educated kids is one of the best, for the future. Kids tend to be very straight forward and have a pretty direct sense of justice. If you make someone cry and make them unhappy, it is per definition a Bad Thing to do. They don't make excuses and they are not yet up on the "protection racket" of benevolent sexism either.

Another thing with kids is that they won't feel it's the person who is sad and who gets hurt who is at fault. Unlike the alt-right crowd, who is so bent on shifting blame. "If you take offence, you are the problem", but really, does that really work in reality? If I say something awful and terrible to someone to make them cry, then *I* am the problem, not the person getting hurt. This constant shift in responsibility is something strongly correlated with the toxic masculinity karaddin mentioned above too: real men don't cry. They are emotionless automatons, walking through life like Clint Eastwood, "Make my day". Only, of course this is not true. Men are as tangled in the net of sexism as women are, it's just that their designated role in this dance macabre is different.

[karaddin]

Its not just not being allowed to feel emotions other than anger, its that the way to feel them is through a woman. The way to cope with stress, with life, with everything is through a woman. You're systematically taught that you can't feel your emotions, that you can't process your feelings by yourself but you're also taught that you can't connect with any kind of intimacy to anyone other than a woman who is your romantic partner. So you're starved of intimacy, starved of emotion and taught to center everything on something you don't have (and probably for most of them genuinely long for aside from all this), and when you've got so much riding on relationships it is super hard to then have them be healthy.  As Brook's mentioned to me before, even though the stereotype is for women to be the ones pining for a relationship, men frequently fall super hard and fast when they find someone they click with because it fulfills so much of what they've been missing.

Another piece on this topic was https://medium.com/@emmalindsay/men-dump-their-anger-into-women-d5b641fa37bc#.3vu5s13tl and I know I saw yet another one relatively recently as well that was about the way the friendships of women are ridiculed by society, yet they're precisely the healthy relationships outside the romantic one that enable women to do all the emotional labour within the relationship. They're not even particularly common in cinema, so often there are negative aspects to a portrayal of friendship rather than simply allowing it to be there as a good.

[Fromtheblonde]

God it is good to be back.  Being surrounded by such intelligent women is refreshing.  I do have thoughts and will post but wanted to drop in.  Excellent discussion

[Lyanna Stark]

5 hours ago, karaddin said:

OK first post here from my phone so won't be as in depth as I might prefer. I think in some ways the issues we are seeing at the moment are difficult to discuss within the traditional feminist lens while focusing on women because fundamentally what we're seeing is about men. There is absolutely feminist theory that I think is useful for examining those issues, but it can't really be done just by looking at women.

Being cognisant of X's point above, I don't want to turn this into being about the US Election, but I don't think it can be separated from the upsurge in bigotry around the western world that Lyanna mentioned already and it's predominantly what I'm focusing on.

As it happens, I agree. Feminist tools may be useful, but it's also the flipside of discussing feminism if by that we mean "discussing women's issues", since it's getting increasingly clear that this leaves out the huge chunk of what's on the "other side" of feminism, if you will (and to use a pretty sloppy analogy). It seems more and more clear that this is, indeed, about men and the twisted ideals of masculinity which are being sold/pandered to men.

 

5 hours ago, karaddin said:

 They did not fit into traditional models of masculinity growing up and sought refuge online, but the anger and resentment this inspires has not been directed towards remodeling masculinity but towards women and finding a way to simply move themselves to the top of the pyramid - or at least the middle if that can be obtained by shoving women, people of colour, lgbtqi people etc all down to the bottom. It's a situational game when viewed this way, if you can bring someone else low then you rise.

I just want to highlight/bold this section, since I think it is absolute key to understanding a lot of the mechanics involved in toxic masculinity. The whole underdog/outgroup scenario being promoted, and how this is all about sticking it to the man/the powers that be, while in reality it is used as a tool to kick downward I think is what makes it so dangerous. In their own minds, they are completely righteous revolutionaries, and everyone else is in the wrong, or part of the corruption. I don't know if this is gaining ground because of the post-truth climate, or if it helped create the post-truth climate, or whether it's both in a sort of self-perpetuating cycle, but the righteousness scares me more than almost anything else. At least old-skool conservatives were more honest in that they preferred the rich to be rich and the poor to be poor, even if that was perhaps a bit selfish, but this is different. There is a moral dimension to this that almost touches upon religious fervor, and an avoidance of responsibility for the worse elements of the movement that gives off echoes of the 30s.

5 hours ago, karaddin said:

Another group with a different failure of masculinity is the group that's getting amplified by being referred to as "the working class" is white men of lower socio economic standing who are in locations or industries where the labor market has collapsed. Unlike the first group, a great many of these may have been successfully meeting the standards of traditional masculinity, however have been brought down by the changing economic conditions and due to the importance of being the "bread winner" this doesn't just leave them in financial difficulty, but attacks their manhood. I don't think there is as much to analyse in this component, but it still leaves a lot of simmering resentment that is only going to grow with automation.

The reason I think the second group is just as important to keep in mind is because both show just how urgent the need to reform masculinity is, they need a healthy model of how to be men that lets them be complete people on their own rights.

This is also not helped by short-sighted policies by politicians, who have longed ignored this simmering resentment as irrelevant, yet the alt-right and especially perhaps the nationalist parties in Europe are riding high on this wave right now. It is far easier to blame immigrants and feminists for the collapse of the old-fashioned society, instead of looking austerity politics, globalisation, tax breaks for the rich, subsidising of "service jobs" for young people (i.e. the State supports companies like McD who hires young, unemployed people, basically illegally subsidising them, the gutting of cheap public housing, privatised education etc.

These are big, complicated questions, often cloaked in lots of strange terminology and involving complex connections to adjoining areas. (for instance: if you subsidise loads of great new motorways that may be good, but that means you're not keeping up with renovating the train tracks, and trains won't run on time, and suddenly cargo trains will start to disappear, etc. )

While I agree that reform of masculinity is needed and should happen, I strongly believe that this is where it really intersects with class (if by "class" we look at people left in nearly perpetual unemployment, or fear perpetual unemployment, or whatever crap job they have is both unfulfilling and barely pays the bills). Combined with a strong prejudice against the poor and poverty, this is a pretty explosive mixture, and being poor is extremely stigmatising. Nobody wants to see themselves as poor either. Of course, this is also tied strongly to being the breadwinner. You can't really be a "proper man" if you fail as a breadwinner, so these two: the old-skool provider/bread-winner mentality and the new "blame it on the women and the foreigners, cos now they make the world a different place" go hand in hand very strongly and again, they seem to feed on each other, in a vicious cycle.

(Obviously this is no excuse for this type of shite behaviour btw, but it does help with understanding why the shite behaviour happens. )

3 hours ago, karaddin said:

Its not just not being allowed to feel emotions other than anger, its that the way to feel them is through a woman. The way to cope with stress, with life, with everything is through a woman. You're systematically taught that you can't feel your emotions, that you can't process your feelings by yourself but you're also taught that you can't connect with any kind of intimacy to anyone other than a woman who is your romantic partner. So you're starved of intimacy, starved of emotion and taught to center everything on something you don't have (and probably for most of them genuinely long for aside from all this), and when you've got so much riding on relationships it is super hard to then have them be healthy.  As Brook's mentioned to me before, even though the stereotype is for women to be the ones pining for a relationship, men frequently fall super hard and fast when they find someone they click with because it fulfills so much of what they've been missing.

Another piece on this topic was https://medium.com/@emmalindsay/men-dump-their-anger-into-women-d5b641fa37bc#.3vu5s13tl and I know I saw yet another one relatively recently as well that was about the way the friendships of women are ridiculed by society, yet they're precisely the healthy relationships outside the romantic one that enable women to do all the emotional labour within the relationship. They're not even particularly common in cinema, so often there are negative aspects to a portrayal of friendship rather than simply allowing it to be there as a good.

I have so much to say on this subject and this hits extremely close to home. It will have to be later because I will need to sort out my own thoughts on the matter first. There are also some (unfortunately Google translate for you guys) links I have on this very subject.

[deleted01]

Well, I'm back, even if it is just a flying visit. This site doesn't work well on my phone. Thanks Lyanna for dragging me here

I have so many thoughts, on so many subjects, but I'll keep it brief for now. I wanted to touch on what was mentioned earlier, the idea that, if you don't call out every instance of sexism you come across, you're a bad feminist. I've wrestled with that a lot, as my FB friends may recall, after getting shouted at by some men in a van, & I just sat there in frightened silence. How can I preach to others to fight misogyny if I don't practice it? I realised that I can only do my best, when it's safe to. But I also realised that I don't always have the energy. 

I recently had some wonderful discussions on Twitter with some enlightened folk - including an MRA, an anti-feminist account & an "I'm not like other women" woman - about how I didn't change my name when I got married. Apparently, this means that I am a lesser woman, not suitable to "breed", and my marriage is a sham. Which is always good to hear. That fun experience left me drained, but I jumped straight back in the saddle and began arguing with some other fool about abortion. I stood as a movement builder for the Women's Equality Party over here (& lost. I think I'm too much for them tbh), and one of my key goals was to push for social media sites to be held accountable for cyberbullying and harassment. The thing that pushed me to stand as a candidate was, after one argument on FB about the tampon tax, a guy messaged my work's FB page, complaining about me. Because a woman disagreed with him on social media, he found it appropriate to potentially jeopardise her job. Thankfully, his shit wasn't taken seriously, but I shudder to think what might have happened if my company had reacted differently. 

Anyway. My point is that, while I try to call everything out, it's not always possible. My aunt keeps addressing stuff to "Mr & Mrs Partner's Surname", even though she knows I didn't change my name. I've mentioned it once to her, but if she continues, it's really not worth the ball ache. 

Side note: I'm glad to see so many old faces here, & I hope you're all doing well. I'm also glad to see this Feminism thread still going strong

[Theda Baratheon]

I really want to touch on karaddin's point about nerds and misogyny and in some ways I feel like I'm betraying ''my people'' but then again, ''my people'' (nerds) have betrayed me lots of times. 

I found this really great article that I related to SO much.

Male Nerds Think They're Victims Because They Have No Clue What Female Nerds Go Through

Quote

As a child and a teenager, I was shy, and nerdy, and had crippling
anxiety.

I was very clever and desperate for a boyfriend or, failing that, a fuck.

I would have done anything for one of the boys I fancied to see me not
as a sad little boffin freak but as a desirable creature, just for a second.
I hated myself and had suicidal thoughts. I was extremely lonely,
and felt ugly and unloveable. Eventually I developed severe anorexia
and nearly died.

Like Aaronson, I was terrified of making my desires known—to anyone.
I was not aware of any of my (substantial) privilege for one second—
I was in hell, for goodness' sake, and 14 to boot.
Unlike Aaronson, I was also female, so when I tried to pull myself out
of that hell into a life of the mind, I found sexism standing in my way.
I am still punished every day by men who believe that I do not deserve
my work as a writer and scholar. Some escape it's turned out to be.

I was also an ugly, weird, frightened, confused nerd. And it's a bit worrying to me always when men, a lot of the time, lovely, nice dudes, are extremely surprised to find out that whilst they were growing up, frightened and self loathing and feeling worthless and not masculine, there were just as many nerdy girls going through the EXACT. SAME. FEELINGS. Minus the masculinity. Except, when WE grow up...we're growing up into a world of sexism.

This article might be specifically replying to a piece I've never read and focused on STEM which I'm not part of, but I really relate to so much of it. 

Quote

Science is a way that shy, nerdy men pull themselves out of the horror of their teenage years. That is true. That is so. But shy, nerdy women have to try to pull themselves out of that same horror into a world that hates, fears and resents them because they are women, and to a certain otherwise very intelligent sub-set of nerdy men, the category "woman" is defined primarily as "person who might or might not deny me sex, love and affection."

I've been feeling this way a lot recently, that otherwise intelligent, ''logical'' men, are just completely resentful and hateful towards women. 

Quote

(And you ask me, where were those girls when you were growing up? And I answer: we were terrified, just like you, and ashamed, just like you, and waiting for someone to take pity on our lonely abject pubescence, hungry to be touched. But you did not see us there. We were told repeatedly, we ugly, shy nerdy girls, that we were not even worthy of the category "woman." It wasn't just that we were too shy to approach anyone, although we were; it was that we knew if we did we'd be called crazy. And if we actually got the sex we craved? (because some boys who were too proud to be seen with us in public were happy to fuck us in private and brag about it later) ... then we would be sluts, even more pitiable and abject. Aaronson was taught to fear being a creep and an objectifier if he asked; I was taught to fear being a whore or a loser if I answered, never mind asked myself. Sex isn't an achievement for a young girl. It's something we're supposed to embody so other people can consume us, and if we fail at that, what are we even for?)

I've lost count of how many times, and I don't say this to toot my own horn, because it actually PISSES ME OFF, that a guy who has seemed interested in me has told me I'm ''not like other girls'' or that I'm ''unique'' for doing things like playing video games and enjoying movies. Well, shit. THAT is a big red flag right there. Because anyone who thinks those qualities, or most of my interests, are unique obviously does NOT know very many women, not closely anyway. 

This whole idea of girls pretending to be nerds FOR THE BENEFIT of men is ridiculous !!! 

I was bullied in School for years, I was made to feel ugly, hideous, frightened, angry all the way through School ...I played MMOs and Video games online since I was 10/11...surrounded by toxic sexism and hatred and distrust of women! These men DON'T. KNOW. WOMEN. 

Lots of men just DON'T have female friends!!!! This is NOT a good thing!!!

Quote

And unfortunately for men, they have largely been socialised—yes, even the feminist-identified ones—to see women as less than fully human. Men, particularly nerdy men, are socialised to blame women—usually their peers and/or the women they find sexually desirable for the trauma and shame they experienced growing up. If only women had given them a chance, if only women had taken pity, if only done the one thing they had spent their own formative years been shamed and harassed and tormented into not doing. If only they had said yes, or made an approach.

She also covers a lot of other things and it's not a very long article and would recommend people read it. 

It's just really totally summed up how I've been feeling lately about nerds and nerdy men. Men I should be friends with, men who I have lots in common with, who are often letting me down. 

[Derfel Cadarn]

Weirdly, my wife informed me today that she doesnt consider herself a feminist.  Given she has equal say in our marriage, is the primary earner (a theatre nurse doibg brains surgery), and fully suppprtive of women havibg equal rights to men, this came as a surprise.

 

she seems to equate feminists with sone sort of extremist man-haters, and seemed unmoved by me pointing out that she is actually a feminist (sibce she wants equalrights for women), and confusing the term with extrmist stereotypes.

To little avail :/

 

 

[Xray the Enforcer]

All you can do is point out that feminists are not even remotely like that -- point to discussions like these. Good luck.

One thing I'll point out, though, before this conversation derails -- Rule #2 in the OP covers exactly this topic. Or, to say, discussing whether or not feminists are man-hating harpies will be considered a derail and will be deleted. As such, consider it a [mod] warning that I will bring down the banhammer on anyone arguing about this. On this board, feminism is taken to mean the movement looking for equality of the sexes, including helping men find a better, more inclusive definition of masculinity. This definition is not up for debate. Thank you. [/mod] (not saying you're trying to do this Derfel, just want to make it clear to everyone reading and considering responding.  )

[Knute]

24 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Weirdly, my wife informed me today that she doesnt consider herself a feminist.  Given she has equal say in our marriage, is the primary earner (a theatre nurse doibg brains surgery), and fully suppprtive of women havibg equal rights to men, this came as a surprise.

 

she seems to equate feminists with sone sort of extremist man-haters, and seemed unmoved by me pointing out that she is actually a feminist (sibce she wants equalrights for women), and confusing the term with extrmist stereotypes.

To little avail :/

 

 

That's mainly due to misinformation though and generally the feminists at the extreme end of the spectrum. That happens in any ideology/belief and is natural, the problem is people only tend to look at the most extreme.

Take veganism for example, nearly every vegan I have ever met hasn't shoved it in my face or looked disgusted at me for eating meat and yet that's all we seem to hear about. More examples include most religions being categorized by the small few who like to terrorize. Obviously, then, you'd think that the most extreme feminists who actually do seem to hate men are being counter productive to the movements original intent.

[TrackerNeil]

12 hours ago, karaddin said:

Its not just not being allowed to feel emotions other than anger, its that the way to feel them is through a woman. The way to cope with stress, with life, with everything is through a woman. You're systematically taught that you can't feel your emotions, that you can't process your feelings by yourself but you're also taught that you can't connect with any kind of intimacy to anyone other than a woman who is your romantic partner. So you're starved of intimacy, starved of emotion and taught to center everything on something you don't have (and probably for most of them genuinely long for aside from all this), and when you've got so much riding on relationships it is super hard to then have them be healthy.  As Brook's mentioned to me before, even though the stereotype is for women to be the ones pining for a relationship, men frequently fall super hard and fast when they find someone they click with because it fulfills so much of what they've been missing.

A straight guy I know (who shall remain nameless) once told me, flat-out, "I know I'm not supposed to be jealous of gay guys because you have it worse than me, but I really wish I could be close with other men and not have my motives questioned." That really took me aback, and I thought of that when I read the above. That kind of model puts a ton of pressure on straight guys, and on the women with whom they interact. But how does that change? I wish I knew.

[Larry of the Lawn]

9 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

A straight guy I know (who shall remain nameless) once told me, flat-out, "I know I'm not supposed to be jealous of gay guys because you have it worse than me, but I really wish I could be close with other men and not have my motives questioned." That really took me aback, and I thought of that when I read the above. That kind of model puts a ton of pressure on straight guys, and on the women with whom they interact. But how does that change? I wish I knew.

Not sure exactly how it changes.  My ex gf and I (we still live together) have been talking about this a bit.  A lot of our problems, we both agree, were the result of expected gender/heterosexual expectations.  We're lucky enough to be a couple of dirty hippies, so in our social world it's normal for straight men to hug and have physical contact.  But outside that world, I've been ridiculed for the same stuff.  Hugging my brother in front of a bunch of his friends.  And a world of more subtle 'transgressions'.  

 

Reading the feminism threads and commentary from everyone here over the past few years has been both a wake up call to the fucked up state of things but also a tremendous relief that I'm not a crazy person for avoiding sharing my feelings with other men.  Would love to see more non MRA men's groups.

[karaddin]

2 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

A straight guy I know (who shall remain nameless) once told me, flat-out, "I know I'm not supposed to be jealous of gay guys because you have it worse than me, but I really wish I could be close with other men and not have my motives questioned." That really took me aback, and I thought of that when I read the above. That kind of model puts a ton of pressure on straight guys, and on the women with whom they interact. But how does that change? I wish I knew.

I find it ironic that the group which actually has to filter between sexual interest and just friendship is the group which can just be friendly without having their motives questioned. I think there's a more effective critique of toxic masculinity there than I could ever articulate.

In a similar vein I'd note that in my interactions as a queer women I've never had my feelings of friendship questioned as genuine even where I'm openly attracted to the woman (and even when she's straight), yet that was extremely common when I was perceived as a guy. As a general rule women can't trust that a guy is genuinely interested in her as a person and that's fucked up.

[maarsen]

It can be ...challenging for a straight guy to have female friends and keep that friendship as just that. Not that it is impossible,  you just have to keep reminding yourself that friendship trumps sex. A good friend is so much more satisfying than a quick sex act. Female friends give me a perspective on the world that I would otherwise never see.

[karaddin]

But I guarantee I'm just as into girls as the average straight guy, I'd say probably a hell of a lot more than the average. At no point do those feelings interrupt my feelings of friendship. OK yes I'm talking attracted, not drive to have sex with - but that's far more a function of libido than anything else and there are plenty of men that actually want that a lot less than they make out (because always being up for it is another feature of toxic masculinity). Its whether the feelings of friendship and appreciation of the woman as a person exist legitimately on their own or are only a component of wanting to get into her pants. I trust you that they are indeed separate for you, but unfortunately for far too many guys they are not and most women get burned by this. I didn't, for obvious reasons, but I've seen the attitude from the other side and its really awful if you step back from it.

[Lyanna Stark]

12 hours ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

she seems to equate feminists with sone sort of extremist man-haters, and seemed unmoved by me pointing out that she is actually a feminist (sibce she wants equalrights for women), and confusing the term with extrmist stereotypes.

To little avail :/

This is, unfortunately, not very uncommon. There is a reason why a lot of people I know in RL (work, relatives) don't know I call myself a feminist. Sure, they know my political stance fairly well, but even my own *dad* was shocked when I told him straight out I was a feminist and then argued him into a corner about male vs female "intelligence". (Which made my mum snigger btw, since my dad was, for a long time, my biggest intellectual influence and always encouraged me to read and improve my intellect. My mother was like "You created this monster, you know.")

In this, the media can be blamed for a lot, especially things like the Daily Fail, which loves to perpetuate the stereotype that feminists are man-hating, bitter, bra-burning old spinsters. You also have falsifications like the "All sex is rape" line, which was made up and then attributed both to Dworkin and McKinnon, respectively, because they were both outspoken and for their time, very controversial figures with strong opinions. Hence, demonised, tarred, feathered and brought low.

In any case, it is clear that even now, even today, when Beyonce calls herself a feminist, it is *still* controversial for women to call themselves feminists. People are taken aback, and find it threatening or uncomfortable.

(Even so, if we assume feminism should mean being a misandrist, ok...it probably won't affect anyone but me anyway. Should I suddenly decide I hate all men it would very likely affect me and only me, and very likely negatively as well, so this outrage about "man hating" is fairly strange really. It is hardly socially acceptable to run around and spout misandrist views in the workplace, for instance. So this is clearly set up as some sort of strawman that really isn't even dangerous to anyone, and which really won't gain any traction.)

11 hours ago, Knute said:

That's mainly due to misinformation though and generally the feminists at the extreme end of the spectrum. That happens in any ideology/belief and is natural, the problem is people only tend to look at the most extreme.

 

This always sort of confuses me. I mean sure, there are some strange so called feminists on Reddit (which is generally where I hear complaints coming from), but apart from that, feminist extremist, who are they? Where are their influential blogs, the articles in newspapers, or their books? (In fact, most of the people who complain very loudly about say, Dworkin or McKinnon haven't actually read anything by them.)

OK, I'll give you Germaine Greer, perhaps, but even she is more bonkers*** than she is an extremist. Apart from that and maybe the Reddit stuff, I've got....nothing. Granted, I don't even read a fraction of feminist material published, but I do think if there was a serious extremist faction causing serious disturbance, I would have heard about it. All of these are 70s/80s feminists tho, so it seems to me, society/media are still treading the well trodden ground of "bra-burners" while current feminism is just a different and many-headed beast nowadays that is perhaps not so easily defined. The stereotypes still live on tho, unfortunately.

 

***her TERF-shit is seriously embarrassing, also some of her writings nearly put me off being a feminist, cos I seriously think that woman isn't all there all the time. I can respect her anger, but good grief she is frustrating and isn't likeable AT ALL.

[Lyanna Stark]

6 hours ago, karaddin said:

But I guarantee I'm just as into girls as the average straight guy, I'd say probably a hell of a lot more than the average. At no point do those feelings interrupt my feelings of friendship. OK yes I'm talking attracted, not drive to have sex with - but that's far more a function of libido than anything else and there are plenty of men that actually want that a lot less than they make out (because always being up for it is another feature of toxic masculinity). Its whether the feelings of friendship and appreciation of the woman as a person exist legitimately on their own or are only a component of wanting to get into her pants. I trust you that they are indeed separate for you, but unfortunately for far too many guys they are not and most women get burned by this. I didn't, for obvious reasons, but I've seen the attitude from the other side and its really awful if you step back from it.

It seems to me this is again tangled up with the ideals of toxic masculinity and how that plays out, especially when this is mixed in with the need (mainly from straight guys) to use women as a sort of emotional crutch as well, or the only road to intimacy. Then you have an unhealthy mixture of pressure to always have sex, combined with deep-seated and unfulfilled need for intimacy, a difficulty to fully express emotions or emotional state.

To quote from the brilliant article @Theda Baratheon posted before, I found this piece matches this precisely and illustrates the back-and-forth of how this toxicity affects both men and women.

Quote

This, incidentally, is why we're not living in a sexual utopia of freedom and enthusiastic consent yet despite having had the technological capacity to create such a utopia for at least 60 years. Men are shamed for not having sex; women are shamed for having it. Men are punished and made to feel bad for their desires, made to resent and fear women for having denied them the sex they crave and the intimacy they're not allowed to get elsewhere. Meanwhile, women are punished and made to feel bad for their perfectly normal desires and taught to resist all advances, even.

Is perhaps the solution then more that men need more and better homosocial relationships, i.e. men need better and more constructive friendships with other men? It seems this is not as stigmatising for gay men (which is in itself somewhat contradictory as gay men must then navigate the difficulties of discerning between friendship and sexual partnership, which straight men do not with each other).

How can this be achieved? Perhaps this is where the real challenge lies.

[butterbumps!]

On 12/3/2016 at 4:39 PM, Lyanna Stark said:

A huge and marvelous thanks to Butterbumps! who not only provided an amazing amount of subject matter, ideas, material and articles for this thread, but who has also agreed to write/co-host with me and who basically kicked my sorry arse into action. I hope you do not think I stole your thunder, because that thunder belongs to you.

You are being far too kind-- I feel like a novice at this!  you did an amazing job of putting this all together.  Apologies for my early absence, as I ended up being a lot busier than weekend than anticipated.

Quote

But at least we can enjoy Ivanka Trump's "empowerment" and maybe even buy some of her stuff to feel more empowered, at the same time as being a woman on the internet is more dangerous than ever, where we should feel Sorry for the emasculation of the white working class man, where Science fiction has become Too Progressive and when Gamergaters and Steubenville apologists refuse to go away.*** (This last paragraph contained some irony btw.)

This issue of "empowerment," which is arguably an extension of consumer "feminism," is a rabbit-hole I've found myself falling into as of late.   I'm in the middle of the book We were Feminists Once: From Riot Grrl to Covergirl, the Buying and Selling of a Movement that goes in depth on how feminism became trendy enough for brands to co-opt.   I can only speak for the first half I've read, but so far, I'd highly recommend it if anyone's looking for a history and analysis of the ways in which women have been sold to over time, with focused attention on using feminism as a branding concept in recent years.

My takeaway so far-- from the book, but also from various pop culture phenomena (from the Kardashians, to "empowerment" being basically a term for anything a woman does, to the entirely economically-driven "feminism" of constructs like Ivanka)-- is that "empowerment" is really just a hollow catch-phrase, and far too often the invocation of "empowerment" contributes to reinforcing the benevolent sexism you mention.   This piece from the NYTimes this spring offers a pretty good short summary of some of these consumerist "feminism/ "empowerment" issues, and this Vox opinion from this past fall outlines in brief that while being a feminist is cool now, actually being an advocate is still incredibly hard.  

On 12/4/2016 at 2:57 AM, karaddin said:

Being cognisant of X's point above, I don't want to turn this into being about the US Election, but I don't think it can be separated from the upsurge in bigotry around the western world that Lyanna mentioned already and it's predominantly what I'm focusing on.

...........

Another group with a different failure of masculinity is the group that's getting amplified by being referred to as "the working class" is white men of lower socio economic standing who are in locations or industries where the labor market has collapsed. Unlike the first group, a great many of these may have been successfully meeting the standards of traditional masculinity, however have been brought down by the changing economic conditions and due to the importance of being the "bread winner" this doesn't just leave them in financial difficulty, but attacks their manhood. I don't think there is as much to analyse in this component, but it still leaves a lot of simmering resentment that is only going to grow with automation.

The reason I think the second group is just as important to keep in mind is because both show just how urgent the need to reform masculinity is, they need a healthy model of how to be men that lets them be complete people on their own rights. 

I agree with this.    I posted this article from the Harvard Business Review in the US Politics thread a while back, but it is also highly relevant here, as it pertains to how the American white working class sees available jobs, specifically "pink collar jobs," which refers to work that's been traditionally held by women.

Quote

 

Manly dignity is a big deal for working-class men, and they’re not feeling that they have it. Trump promises a world free of political correctness and a return to an earlier era, when men were men and women knew their place. It’s comfort food for high-school-educated guys who could have been my father-in-law if they’d been born 30 years earlier. Today they feel like losers — or did until they met Trump.

Manly dignity is a big deal for most men. So is breadwinner status: Many still measure masculinity by the size of a paycheck. White working-class men’s wages hit the skids in the 1970s and took another body blow during the Great Recession. Look, I wish manliness worked differently. But most men, like most women, seek to fulfill the ideals they’ve grown up with. For many blue-collar men, all they’re asking for is basic human dignity (male varietal). Trump promises to deliver it

 

  As well as this NYTimes Article referenced in the HBR one that points out that there are jobs available for the taking in industries traditionally held by women.  It's that men do not wish to take these jobs due to the fact that it is deemed insulting to them and compromises their ideals of masculinity:

 

Quote

 

But in the long term, Isabel V. Sawhill and Richard V. Reeves, senior fellows at the Brookings Institution, argue that men must resign themselves to working in “pink collar jobs” — those known by the acronym HEAL, for health, education, administration and literacy.

Economically, “women have adjusted better than men,” Ms. Sawhill said. “They’re the ones who are winning.” Women dominate the (often lower-paying) service jobs that are the backbone of the new economy. Men make up just 20 percent of elementary and middle-school teachers, 9 percent of nurses, 16 percent of personal aides and 6 percent of personal assistants, Ms. Sawhill and Mr. Reeves noted.

Succeeding in the new economy and culture may well require rethinking conventional ideas about masculinity. Mr. Cherlin bemoans men’s “continued reluctance to take jobs they think are beneath the dignity of real men.”

 

 

So in some very significant ways, the anxiety about loss/ lack of jobs in the US amongst the working classes is perhaps not so much rooted in a true absence of jobs (as many job opportunities do exist in traditionally women-dominated industries), but rather the desire to bring back very specific jobs that meet both men and women's standards of masculinity.