That’s right, motherfuckers, I’m admitting it. Tell all your MRA buddies that they’ve been vindicated, call Rush Limbaugh, make sure to let all the other feminists know I’m blowing their cover for them. Men are obnoxious, arrogant, entitled, violent, stinky, crass, loudmouthed, stupid, craven, bragadocious, thoughtless, unreflective, abusive, selfish, lowbrow, willfully ignorant assholes. Well, most of them.
You see, I don’t hate all men, just almost all of them; some of my best friends are men (snarf snarf). There are three or four that I love and consider to be fundamentally decent human beings, there are about seven that are big enough “faggots” that I like hanging out with them, and there are maybe ten that, though I’m sure they have no idea what “male privilege” means, I would equivocate before sending to a re-education camp if given the chance (if the camp conditions were harsh; if it was like summer camp I’d snap up the opportunity to send them for a week or two of re-humanization training and craft lessons).
But back to that shit about me hating men. I’m tired, tired, tired of people expecting me to defend myself against the accusation that I just hate men. It’s bullshit deluxe, and it’s the most transparent derailing tactic there is. I know that I’m raising spooky specters when I hint (I’m really subtle, right?) that there might be something wrong with male supremacy, with gender roles, with men violently abusing women, with men treating women like subhuman sex objects, with men being stupid violent alpha-male dicks towards each other, but it isn’t my job to reassure men that I still love all of them and give a shit what they think just because they’re uncomfortable confronting the possibility of the loss of a bit of their privilege.
And besides all of that, why shouldn’t I hate men? Men, being the default humans, get to decide how they want to act and how to define humanity and masculinity with fewer constrictions than women face. What they’ve opted to go with is pretty abysmal, and I don’t have to pretend to like it. I can already hear the whiny voice of some MRA saying, “Then why can’t I hate women? They choose to act as they do!” Women have to deal with enforced femininity, and while a lot of the behaviors femininity entails do indeed suck, they aren’t chosen as freely as men’s behaviors are. And now I hear the whiny voice of some dude who doesn’t adhere to the NFL Masculinity Guidelines claiming that he has to suffer the opprobrium and violence of those who do. Well, duh. But again, it’s men who are the problem, and it’s men who are responsible for men’s behavior. Oh, shit, here comes that MRA again, claiming that women are gold digging sluts who won’t date men who aren’t rich. Who created the ideological world system in which a man’s worth is judged by his material possessions and in which wealth supersedes decency as the chief indicator of a man’s value? Pretty sure that was men (unless you want to try to tell me that women have been running the world and doing all of the important philosophizing and ideological treatise writing for the last few millennia).
I win. Men are assholes. It’s time we admitted it. And hence I bring you my new series on why I hate men.
What brought about the sudden urge to admit to the public that I hate men? A few hours spent waiting at the Delta terminal of La Guardia in the middle of the afternoon on a weekday. In case you aren’t aware, that particular terminal tends to be awash in suits at that time of day, and what is more representative of American middle-class maledom than your average suit hanging around waiting for a flight home from New York to Charlotte? I was already in a heinous mood when I arrived, having thought I was late and would miss my flight, then arriving and hearing it’d been delayed for like 4 hours, so I was in no state to suffer listening to the kinds of conversations these dudes have and to witness their bizarre masculinity rituals.
I sat down to wait for my flight and to attempt to read some terrifyingly boring book for one of my classes and was immediately enraged by the conversation going on to my left. A woman, who was sitting primly with her knees crossed and looking bored as her male companion sprawled out over three seats with his legs blocking the walkway between himself and the seats across from him (which he’d commandeered as his own personal luggage storage space) and talked incredibly loudly on his iPhone. He was a big, arrogant-looking dude with a giant head, that shiny look that men who shave constantly seem to have, and a permanent smirk. I immediately wished he would have a premature stroke as I listened to him talk about the meeting he’d just left. He machine-gunned whoever was on the other end with the finer points of his performance at the meeting — at which he’d apparently totally showed everyone who was really the boss — before calling one of the other meeting attendees a “pussy.” His female companion finally got tired of being ignored and got up, saying, “I’m going to get some magazines.” And he replied, without looking at her, “Get me Sports Illustrated or Sports. Anything, I don’t care, as long as it’s about sports,” and then returned to his conversation. No offer to pay for these magazines, no hint that he had grasped the fact that he was behaving like an unfathomable prick, nothing. Unbelievable.
This same asshole was in line behind me when I got on my flight. He sat down two rows behind my seat and continued his phone conversation, which at this point had turned to the topic of some recent NFL draft. He constantly referred to whatever team he was talking about as “us” and “we” and was apparently thrilled that “we” had scored this particular player. He affected his most derisive voice and said, “Pshhh. Yeah. I’d like to see Dallas try to fuck with us now. They’re going to get dominated.” Mind you, this was after he’d carried on the same loud conversation all the way down the aisle, bumping into everyone in sight as he obliviously made his way to his seat. And it went on for so long that the flight attendant had to tell him three times to turn his phone off so we could get the fuck on the road (in the sky, whatever).
Now, I know this is a fairly egregious example I’m giving you here, but it’s not as if it’s not representative of the way the average male American behaves, and I could give you several milder examples of similar behavior that I witnessed on the same day. The airport terminal was a cacophony of affectedly gruff male voices talking about sports and business, and the “masculinity” of the whole thing was sickening. And there were very, very few women present to dilute the cesspool of aftershave and arrogance. So, my foul mood and my unwilling captivity in the same room and plane with a bunch of suits caused me to come to the realization that the accusations my many MRA readers have leveled at me have some merit. I really do hate most men, because I hate what masculinity and maleness mean and the kinds of behaviors they produce.
I’ll be getting into the details of what that all means in future posts.
To be continued…
304 Comments
July 6, 2009 at 3:56 am
Oh. Oh yes, I am so keen for this.
After hearing a bunch of fifteen year old boys on the train the other day, talking about their girlfriends sexuality/orgasms as if they were some cheap party trick and you know, not actually a sharing of intimacy or bonding or signs of human pleasure (unlike their ejaculate) anything like that I’m quite happy to admit that the huMAN race is fucking doomed.
July 6, 2009 at 5:27 am
I think it would be awesome if women would just run the world. With no help from men of course. I’m beyond sick of hearing about it. I know you think you would do a better job. I’m not convinced, but I really don’t care, I’m 40 and have no kids so the effect on me will be minimal.
Good luck.
Shaun
July 6, 2009 at 5:43 am
Uh, OK.
July 6, 2009 at 5:45 am
haha, what the actual fuck?
July 6, 2009 at 5:53 am
Hey, great work. I just got a blog today and your blog was the first thign that came up when I looked up radical feminism. Your post was beautiful and being a fellow man hater, I agree with everything you say. However, you using the word motherfucker troubled me a little. Why is here a need to degrade women and call them names? By calling men motherfuckers, you are not cussing the men, but their mothers. Shouldn’t father fucker be more appropriate?
July 6, 2009 at 6:06 am
I use that word not in a literal sense but colloquially. I feel like it’s lost the connection with its literal meaning, though I do see what you’re saying.
July 6, 2009 at 10:07 am
I believe it was Twisty who once typed, “93.7% of 21st century feminist time is wasted reassuring people that feminists don’t hate men.”
Aiport Man an egregious example? Please. That guy was a minor annoyance. He was a common, everyday, run-of–the-mill example–which is exactly what makes living in a man’s world so maddening: the everydayness of it all.
And, Ladies, you will notice that we have gained Shaun’s permission to take over the world. I know that’s all I was waiting for before I charge into battle yelling “ALL the money and all of the pussy!”
July 6, 2009 at 10:38 am
Thanks, 9-2 for calling it like it is. And to the dudes who complain that they are crushed under the patriarchal boot-heel I say, they’re YOUR kind – take it up with THEM.
As for ‘motherfucker’: only a dude would feel privileged/power deranged enough to fuck his mother. That’s the way I see it and that’s the way I use it. A lot.
July 6, 2009 at 12:44 pm
You know, I don’t care for men a whole helluva lot myself. I mean, there are certain ones (like grandpa) for whom I have a lot of respect, but that’s about it.
July 6, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Yes! Let the man-hating begin!
Men on flights–biggest pains in the ass. They try to nudge in front of you in line, they try to dominate the arm rest, and they are generally assholes. On one of my flights, I got to my seat and noticed that my rowmates were all women. Yes! That leg of my flight was the best one.
July 6, 2009 at 6:12 pm
WELCOME TO MY WORLD!!
In light of the undeniable historical persistence and severity with which men have oppressed and abused women (see, for example, statistics on rape and single motherhood; see also the laws and rules of evidence on “spousal rape”), the exceptionalism of a few males is hardly sufficient justification for remaining loyal to the entire gender. In fact, it would be IRRATIONAL for me, as a woman, to love men in general. It would be IRRATIONAL of me not to fear their unpredictable violence.
It would be irrational of me not to separate myself from men’s continuous assault of unapologetic attempts to dominate everything feminine.
92, TELL IT!!!!
July 6, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Have you ever been paintballing? It’s much worse; but highly amusing.
I’ll be honest with you, the way you feel about men is the way I’m tempted to feel about white people, especially white men. I don’t want to say it because it sounds reverse racist, and I know all white people aren’t like this, but since you described the behaviour of privileged and arrogant men, I thought I might as well join in with something similar.
There is also another kind of privilege that intersects with white and male privilege, but that people rarely talk about: extravertist privilege. It sounds trivial since it’s not on the agenda (possibly because the agenda is set by extraverts), but the amount of bullying, ignoring, rudeness, stares and condascension I’ve faced due to my ’shyness’ and aspie-like tendencies is far worse than all the racism and sexism I’ve faced put together. And your story illustrates this bigotry even further.
July 6, 2009 at 9:05 pm
The you-just-hate-men attack is so amateur hour. Frankly, it just proves so many of your points.
I’d argue that it’s a combination of penis worship, fundamental misogyny and its kissing cousin, homophobia: the whole idea is that you’ll recoil in horror at being described that way, because that’s not a womanly way to feel, because EVERYBODY LOVES DICK, no matter what comes along with it. Only lesbians hate men, and you’re not a lesbian are you?? You’re a real woman, right? So of course you don’t want anyone to think you don’t worship at the altar of the Church of XY, right?!
You’re supposed to run away screaming, “Ack, implied lesbianism– get it off me!!!” (Or perhaps, “Let me prove to you just how much I love men, you irresistible and intellectually superior stud”?)
Meanwhile, it’s like, what if you do hate men?
How does that invalidate your points (which is to say, how does that change reality)?
Does the revelation of your supposed man-hate mean that women are suddenly earning the same as men? Or that porn is not a mostly male-driven pursuit that is harmful to all involved? That women and men aren’t cutting up their bodies etc. to please the insane demands of men? That women are assumed to be fair game for gropings and so on, simply by dint of being outdoors?
Give me a fucking break.
Bullshit Deluxe™ pour homme… the most indulgent bullshit available. By Davidoff.
July 6, 2009 at 10:18 pm
This comment rules.
July 6, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Oh, and lest I seem obtuse:
Obviously, the other reason you’re supposed to run screaming at the you-just-hate-men accusation is because you’re being lumped in with all the other indiscriminate, irrational haterists (racists et al). This is a distortion of hate that really pisses me off. Basically, it implies that there’s no good reason for any woman who’s not actively being gang raped to hate men.
Hating a group just because of who they are, without regard to (indeed, despite) how they act, is ism and is foul. However, I submit that hating a group specifically because of how they act is perfectly fucking sensible. Hmm, to which category does institutionalized patriarchal misogyny (IPM) belong? And to which category does Deuce’s “misandry” belong? Hmm.
Not to even mention, Deuce’s man-hate is somewhat exaggerated for effect, I’m sure. (Mine is, in that when pressed, I acknowledge that I just hate/resent most men. Probably 85%.) To be honest, I don’t even want to hate them. Men, as a group and as individuals, have done and continue to do some Very Bad Shit to women, and yet I doubt there are many women who truly do. So, yeah. We exaggerate. For effect.
Whereas, despite constantly being played down by apparatchiks of the patriarchy, IPM is dead fucking serious. If you consume any popular media at all, you’re reminded of it daily: degrading portrayals; batterings, murders, sadistic sexual assaults. Epically awful imagery– one can’t even call them jokes– like the donkey punch, dirty sanchez, angry pirate, etc., which seem to exist only to remind us of how hated we are, and how we’re all just one lippy remark away from the inevitable rape/murder we so richly deserve. Okay, we get it! Message fucking received; 5×5. I’m hated, Deuce is hated, all of our mothers, and their mothers, and their mothers’ mothers since time out of freakin’ mind, have been hated. Eve is hated. (Yeah, I know what you’re going to say. Look, all she did was what the talking penis told her to do. Talk about damned if you do/don’t.)
And yet, fools cannot imagine why anyone would ever hate men. They’re all clutching the pearls and like, “land sakes, why do you hate us so much?” I’m sorry, but that is my line.
July 6, 2009 at 11:05 pm
Nine Deuce. Seriously, you are the shit. I wish more feminists would admit to this instead of wasting their fucking time by placating teh menz.
July 6, 2009 at 11:09 pm
Thanks.
Something about this post just made me SNAP.
I came back with another comment. It’s pending. Please feel free to fix my tags– sometimes I mess them up when I’m in a blind rage. Either that, or the WordPress tryckfelsnissen (typo elves) are after me.
July 7, 2009 at 1:11 am
I sometimes feel that way about white folk too.
July 7, 2009 at 2:36 am
Kinda how I feel about people in general, actually…
as for the MRA’s who say “why can’t we hate women”…it’s like dude, you DO, why do you think you are an MRA???
Alas, I still like football.
July 7, 2009 at 5:22 am
I did a post like this awhile back, explaining why men can really suck.
Yes, I do kind of hate men. I hate that they have power and I don’t, for reasons that are bullshit at best. And I’m not going to apologize and/or explain myself anymore. Thank you, 9-2, for being the awesome blogger that you are. Vindication is awesome!
July 7, 2009 at 8:14 am
I guess the question I’ll pose is: Can there ever exist an egalitarian society?
As humans we tend to want to keep what we’ve achieved. So do men subjugate women because they’re men or because they’re human? And would it be the same if roles were reversed?
July 7, 2009 at 2:55 pm
“I feel like it’s lost the connection with its literal meaning,”
Oh…can o’ worms there. More or less the same argument is used when calling something “gay” as an insult. Or, for that matter calling someone a “pussy” or saying he (only really applies to men) has one.
Mind you, having sex with your own mother, in its literal meaning, is something abhorrent and wrong, while society has to pretend not to feel that way about homosexuals or vaginas.
July 7, 2009 at 3:06 pm
“I’ll be honest with you, the way you feel about men is the way I’m tempted to feel about white people, especially white men. I don’t want to say it because it sounds reverse racist, and I know all white people aren’t like this, but since you described the behaviour of privileged and arrogant men, I thought I might as well join in with something similar.”
I thought this might come up. I agree with you. White people have a massive amount of privilege, and they run the world…in a different way that the patriarchies do, but still. I think it’s fair for people to hate white people as much as men.
Likewise, anyone whom is a member of an organised religion of any size. They also run the world, overlapping strongly with the patriarchies. I think it’s fair to hate them.
I’d also add Americans to that list, except that everyone hates them already ;)
July 7, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Nice try, but that isn’t what I’m pushing for.
July 7, 2009 at 7:05 pm
…Enter the tired-ass “isn’t-that-just-the-way-it-is” argument. So what else are you going to say is impossible just because the cavemenz didn’t do it?
*yawn*
July 7, 2009 at 7:12 pm
If masculinity is bad, why are most women attracted to it. I was a very efeminent male growing up, artist and all that, and no girl would give me the time of day, and it wasn’t something else about my personality or looks either, as I was actually always pretty popular. I’m an Apha male jerk now (with a bit of a wink and nudge so people don’t take it so seriously), but I had to learn to be one so that I could attract a good women, who I did and am now married to. Women seem to be confused internally about what they want to say the least….
July 7, 2009 at 9:05 pm
Glad to be of service.
July 7, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Stop making sense.
July 7, 2009 at 9:09 pm
Well…I wouldn’t say that equality between men and women is impossible, just that if it ever happened, people would, IMHO, find someone else to oppress.
As to whether women would do things differently if the role was reversed, I’d say no…at most, there’d just be a different form of oppression centering on different things. If men and women would do things differently, than that’s an actual division between the sexes, not just a societal one, and you’d get actual reasons for one or the other being socially dominant.
July 7, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Oh…I see a biter argument forming here. You’d have societal influences, of course.
Also…being masculine doesn’t (or at least shouldn’t) mean “being a wanker” any more than feminine does/should not mean “being a nice person”.
July 7, 2009 at 10:01 pm
“Women seem to be confused internally about what they want to say the least….”
Wow.
A man telling women what we really want. How bloody original.
July 7, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Dude. Don’t tell us what we want. THIS IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. You are NOT LISTENING and you plainly don’t give a shit about our voices, or anything we might have to say. I suspect this was probably the case long before you ‘became an alpha male jerk’.
Minus the alpha male part, of course–to my view, you’re just a garden-variety jerk.
And dude? Not all of us are attracted to men, jerky or otherwise.
July 8, 2009 at 1:39 am
Jay-what a total fail. You didn’t need to turn into a total dick, you just needed to start wearing Axe. We can’t resist assholes or dudes that wear Axe.
July 8, 2009 at 2:42 am
What fucking bullshit. Look, Mr. Sensitivity, any man who would even consider metamorphosing into an “alpha male jerk” — and, yes, I believe you are being serious — to attract women has zero moral fiber to begin with. A genuinely decent guy would rather be alone for the rest of his life than sell himself out like that, IF he was stupid enough to believe his “artistic side” (LOLZ) was repelling women.
So let’s establish point A) You were a wanker to begin with. Women possessing an iota of self-esteem smelled your assholishness a mile away and kept their distance. Point B) You’ve successfully undergone a (*giggles*) “transition”, which essentially means you decided to drop your Nice Guy(tm) facade, since it wasn’t getting you any pussy, and let your already-deeply-entrenched assholery shine through.
Congratufuckinglations, you’ve learned that “bad boys” attract women…a certain kind of woman. A woman who has very little to no self-esteem. Yeah, that’s really something to be proud of.
July 8, 2009 at 2:54 am
I, for one, am eagerly awaiting Pfizer’s release of their lesbian conversion drug, Sapphocet. They’ve already reeled me in with their new ad campaign: “Say ‘goodbye’ to pole and ‘hello’ to hole!” I’ll probably have to sell my soul to afford a year’s supply, but it will be soooo worth it.
July 8, 2009 at 3:02 am
OMGLOL….Leis, you just made me spray Coca-Cola all over my monitor!
July 8, 2009 at 3:06 am
This comment is 50 kinds of awesome :-D I wanted to stand up and cheer when I got to the end: “I’m sorry, but that is my line.” HELLS YEAH!
July 8, 2009 at 5:01 am
Patriarchy is a hierachal social paradigm. Egalitarianism is, by definition, diametrically opposed to hierarchal systems. There is simply no room for oppression of anyone when everyone is on equal footing.
I would love to see the scientific evidence that validates this supposition: “As humans we tend to want to keep what we’ve achieved.” It’s more like patriarchy breeds entitlement, and entitled people are society’s equivalent of the spoiled rotten brat. SRB’s tend to throw temper tantrums when people threaten to take away their unearned toys.
July 8, 2009 at 6:30 am
You could say unclefucker instead. A la South Park.
July 8, 2009 at 7:55 am
Your point about extravertism is an interesting one. I’ve never thought about it before. As someone who’s very open and talkative with people, I should try to be more careful and pick up on whether or not they’re really interested in talking to me.
Thanks for this.
July 8, 2009 at 10:39 am
Holy crap! This same jerk off seems to be at every airport terminal I’ve ever entered.
What with obnoxious dudes and airports? Is there some sort of ratio between how much a man travels and how much of an asshole he is? Hmm.
July 8, 2009 at 4:27 pm
I promise being too nice was my problem. In college (art school) I lifted weights. Then I focused on dressing better. It wasn’t until I could fearlously could approach women and deal with the rejection that happened most of the time, basically becoming dead inside to female opinion, that I began to date. This is essentially what an Alpha-male is. Someone who doesn’t “care” emotionally about other peoples judgements of them. It was very hard, I am and was a very sensitive artist (I do have depression, so maybe that was the main thing that turned women away), to make that transition, but I have a high IQ, studied the problem, read books, and adapted. By the way, my wife is very insecure. She was a late bloomer, but now at 30 looks 18. I am always trying to show her how great she is, but she was pretty beat down early in life, and hasn’t quiet shaken her insecurities (of course she has anxiety problems so maybe its too inherent to change). I realize many of you have been hurt by males, I have too, but the ones who hurt me always seemed to have the easist time with women. I believe the too sides need to continue our conversation, but now with the MRA movement, it is no longer a one sided debate. A middle ground will be reached. It is the way of the universe. Balance falls away and reasserts itself often.
July 8, 2009 at 4:56 pm
This post, and the accompanying comment thread, make me smile. I can say with a great deal of assurance that everything bad that has happened, at least in the historic era and that isn’t the result of natural disaster, is the fault of men. This includes when bad things happen to men and when women act like assholes: all because of systems of interaction imposed by men. Like you said, certain individual dudes can be okay, but they have to resist a lot of shit to be that way; exception, not the rule.
July 8, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Balance asserts itself by falling away? What?
And…how do MRAs stop it from being a one-sided debate? Is this a “what about the men?” argument? Do you mean advocates of men’s rights, or Men’s Rights Advocates, exclaimation mark and triumphal music?
Yes, feminists may seem to hold almost a monopoly of complaints about gender inequalities (that being more or less the only perk to being of the undesirable side of an inequality), but bringing the level of complaints about Men’s Rights up to the same volume probably isn’t the best way to balance that out. I think possibly redressing the balance somewhere else (I’ve got a place in mind) might be the blatantly obviously correct thing to do.
That said, I’m all for people actually advocating men’s rights, just not MRAs, in the same way I’m for the ethical treatment of animals and against PETA.
July 8, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Hey?
I might have missed something somewheree, but it sounds like you are saying that when men do something bad it’s their own fault, but when women do something wrong it’s the fault of society.
Or are you saying that as society has been male dominated more or less forever, all credit and blame for everything must be given to men, and women are irrelevant?
?
July 8, 2009 at 7:08 pm
No, but I am saying that men face less constrictions on their behavior (due to their role as an oppressor, rather than oppressed, class) than women and thus have more responsibility for their oppressive behavior.
July 8, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Almost as many men as women are oppressed by the ruling elites.
I submit that many miss this truth because the men are considered losers, therefore invisible.
Oh well. I wish you the very best in your endeavors.
Thanks
Shaun
July 8, 2009 at 8:03 pm
Are you saying they don’t ever turn around and take that out on women?
July 8, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Only if you think avoiding women can be considered taking it out on women.
July 8, 2009 at 9:01 pm
Ah, but not everyone is oppressed to the same amount.
And, as ND says, it’s handy to have someone further down the ladder to kick. A particularly repellant example is the whole “gangsta” ideal, of being oppressed by The Man and how much it sucks, and oppressing women (using less than flattering terms) and how much fun it is. In between glorifying senseless violence and drug dealer and so on.
July 8, 2009 at 9:27 pm
You know, I hate men too. Everyone who’s ever assaulted me, or tried to rape me, has been male. In very round numbers, everyone whose abuse of political power has really chilled me to the bone has been male. I don’t know that this isn’t because women simply haven’t had a chance. I’m inclined to think that a lot of this just throws down to: who has the power. When I’ve had interactions with women who had a lot of power, in whatever little context the patriarchy allowed them to, they were usually assholes, too. But if you showed me the magic multivariate regression table from God, and it turns out men are inherently more likely to be jerks, I wouldn’t be altogether surprised.
And there are other people I hate. I hate me some Republicans. I hate liberals, in a different way. I hate raisins, and everyone involved in the production of raisins. I hate American Idol. I hate people who say “in my humble opinion” and “I don’t have all the answers.”
But I try not to get off on hating people, at least not in public. I understand the appeal. It soothes the ego. It makes the struggle less painful. It creates camaraderie; an inside joke; a shared straw man for entertainment. Fine. And hatred can be varnished up with a nice coat of irony, very modern, so it doesn’t need to be justified in any way. But as a public act, as a pronouncement, hatred is always going to be regressive. It is never actually going to be a useful part of any struggle I’m interested in.
July 8, 2009 at 10:23 pm
PLEASE NOTE: This is a response to Jay Black from a man because I firmly believe that men need to hold each other accountable for our crap. For the women on this blog: feel free to read or skip as you like- I wouldn’t take up the bandwidth on this blog with this if I had another place to say this to him. That being said…
@Jay Black
First off, you’re right that sexism and its effects have significant negative impacts on men. And at the same time, the evidence is pretty clear that it’s not nearly as universal or as damaging as the effects that it has on women. A broken leg isn’t as bad as a broken spine- they both suck. But the EMTs will deal with the broken spine first because it’s a bigger injury. And if you’re the person with the broken spine, you really don’t want to hear the person with the broken leg complaining.
I totally get what you’re saying about being “too nice” from personal experience. A lot of boys and men are taught that the only alternative to the alpha male is to be a “sensitive guy”. I don’t know if this was your experience, but when I was in that place, I didn’t set boundaries, speak up for myself, get angry, etc. and that definitely got in the way of my relationships.
But unlike you, I changed that by stepping outside of the alpha male/wimp model. It’s entirely possible to claim your strength and your power without going so far that you shift into force/control. Some people phrase that as “power with/power over” but I prefer to think of it as power and force/control because when you’re powerful, you don’t need to force or control people. It’s a different way of moving through the world and I think it deserves a separate word. A powerful man wouldn’t need to “dominate the pussies” like the guy that 9-2 blogged about.
If you’re truly dead inside to female opinion of you, then I’m sorry that you felt the need to cut part of yourself off. That is one of the costs of sexism for men and it grieves me to hear that. But what if you learned how to be a powerful man who cared what the women (and men) in his life thought of him without letting that rule him? What if you could be both strong and willing to be open to others? What if you stopped thinking of it as a dichotomy of alpha/sensitive and discovered what it means to be powerful without having to control?
It’s true that the men who operate out of the alpha model often seem to attract women. There are a lot of theories about why that is. But I can tell you that there’s no shortage of women in the world who would love to connect with a man who can be confident, strong, and powerful while remaining open, sensitive and caring. You’ll almost certainly find that there’s much more joy in your life when you get off the alpha/wimp see-saw.
For example, you say that you are “always trying to show [your wife] how great she is”. Right there, you’re saying that you’re trying to control her experience and it doesn’t surprise me to hear that it’s not working. What if you simply said to her “I think that you’re really great AND I understand that you don’t feel that way. How is that for you?” See what happens if you stop trying to control how she feels and spend a little time empathizing with and supporting her. When you try to convince her that her perception of herself is wrong, that is probably only reinforcing her beliefs about who she is. I get that your intentions are really good. I do- I’ve fallen into exactly the same trap more times than I can count and it’s usually because I want to help. But it’s not the way to do it because it’s coming from the place of “I know better than you,” which is an example of control.
The idea that it’s an either/or usually reinforces the problems of sexism in the first place. Sure- there are times when life does offer an either/or. But when it comes to how we connect to other people, there’s often room for BOTH sides to have their space. You can be strong AND open to others. You can be sensitive AND maintain your position. It takes practice. AND it’s not nearly as hard as it sounds.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled feminist blog. Thanks for your time.
July 9, 2009 at 1:36 am
I stand by my original opinion, Jay–you’re no Alpha Male.
Oh, sorry–you’re right! All I want is an asshole who doesn’t care about my ‘female opinions’ at all! thank you so much for clearing that up!
I’ll say it one more time: you are the problem.
July 9, 2009 at 2:10 am
How about using degrading, violent porn? Studies show that men in lower social classes tend to go for more degrading porn.
July 9, 2009 at 3:17 am
And domestic violence rates are higher in the lower socioeconomic brackets, too.
Shaun, you’re talking apples and oranges here, as there can exist multiple forms of oppression, affecting different groups, within one society.
July 9, 2009 at 4:46 am
You’re confusing “nice” with “no backbone”. Niceness and confidence/assertiveness are not mutually exclusive character traits. I believe what you meant to say is that you were too shy to approach women. This is one reason some men mistakenly assume that masculinity archetypes like the Bad Boy make good dating role models. What Bad Boys and Alpha Males have in common is that they exude confidence. What you’ve failed to realize is that people of all stripes and personality types, as long as they’ve got buckets of confidence, are going to get dates. Sensitive artistic types who have faith in their inherent worth as human beings and aren’t afraid to approach women are going to be romantically successful, too. Now that doesn’t mean that every woman approached by a confident man is going to be captivated by said man — the world simply doesn’t operate that way. Dating is supposed to operate on the principle that compatible personalities will find each other so long as they’re willing to tolerate the inevitable rejection that comes with a journey through Datingland.
You didn’t have to “deaden” yourself to others’ judgments, you only had to believe in your intrinsic value enough to understand that not every man was made for every woman, and vice versa. Once you realize that we’re all, men and women alike, bumbling awkwardly through the dating thing, we’ve all suffered rejection, we’ve all been rejectors at some point, you see that it’s just the price you pay for playing the game and nothing to take personally, really. There’s nothing wrong with acknowledging how emotionally vulnerable this process makes you feel. The vulnerability makes you human. I’m sorry that you didn’t have someone to tell you this earlier in life when you needed to hear it. I’m sorry that you didn’t have someone to empathize with you and assure you that a very human experience was not a liability.
Yes, your depression probably did repel women, and not because it made you a flawed, unwanted, undateable person. Depression manifests as negative personality characteristics, it makes you appear unapproachable; of course it was going to serve as a tremendous impediment to attracting women. Wouldn’t it have made more sense to treat the depression? It would probably make a lot of sense to seek treatment for it now.
As for the MRA stuff…*sigh*. I don’t think you understand that this was never a “one-sided debate”. Feminists have always encountered opposition. History stands as testimony to the fact that being a member of an oppressed group means having to fight tooth-and-nail for full human status. It has never not been a struggle.
July 9, 2009 at 4:57 am
I’ve never been involved nor do I have any firsthand knowledge of the ‘gangsta’ ideal. All I know about it, I’ve learned from popular culture and then only as background noise because I’ve always found it repellent.
So I can’t really speak to that with any semblance of intelligence.
Shaun
July 9, 2009 at 5:05 am
I find it interesting that you bring class into the discussion. How is it relevant if you hate all men?
In fact, the asshole in your essay certainly wasn’t part of the lower class or even the working class.
Anyway, I don’t think my life has been easy. I’ve been an outcast my entire life. I couldn’t even begin to describe for you the emotional pain that has been inflicted upon me by girls and young women since grade school. And I don’t expect you to care.
Didn’t mean to crash your party.
Best of luck taking over the world, I mean that.
Shaun
July 9, 2009 at 7:42 am
I swear, the next guy I hear whining pathetically about how “nice guys” can’t get women because women only want “bad boys” might just push me right over the edge. Do you even comprehend how arrogant (stupid, obnoxious, self-serving) it is to surmise that since there is nothing wrong with your looks, intellect, or personality, clearly your lack of romantic success must be due to some defect of women as a group?
Seriously, dude. Weightlifting? Dressing better? Could it be that women didn’t like you because you were shallow and vapid? And if your spelling and grammar are any indication, you’re barely literate. High IQ? Give me a freakin’ break. I mean, seriously, you write like a god damned lolcat.
You want us to believe that you used to be a nice guy? You weren’t, and here’s how I know: Every sentence that you write is literally dripping with the sense of entitlement that you have. You have as much as claimed that you are justified in being an asshole to women because you are entitled to have a woman and so whatever you may do toward that end is totally legit. This is not the jerk persona, either – this was the line of reasoning that led you to adopt the jerk persona in the first place. If you had had actual respect for other human beings you might have comprehended that perhaps men who are able to date successfully are not all alpha-male jerks and women are not all credulous idiots who can easily be fooled out of their pants by a jerk persona.
If you had wanted to form a meaningful relationship with another human being, you would have wanted to relate to her not based on a false identity that you took on to get her in the sack, but on whatever characteristics you might possess that make you a good partner. If, on the other hand, what you wanted was to have women as fucktoys, emotional band-aids, and trophies to validate your sad existence, well then you would have had no problem with the “be someone you’re not while treating women like shit” approach.
But you expect us to believe that even though you treated women, from day one, as objects to be acquired through any means necessary, you’re really a very nice guy. You know, internally.
Yeah, fucking right. And I got a bridge to sell you.
July 9, 2009 at 12:54 pm
“Only if you think avoiding women can be considered taking it out on women.”
I’d be thrilled if more men avoided women. Instead they tend to “take it out” on us by harassing us, raping us, beating us, taking away our rights, and beating off to humiliating, degrading porn.
July 9, 2009 at 12:58 pm
“Studies show that men in lower social classes tend to go for more degrading porn.”
I’m personally not buying that. It could be true. But what I suspect is going on is that men in those brackets are more likely than higher income men to get busted using degrading porn and are more likely to admit to using degrading porn. Plus, I wonder if the studies might be intentionally slanted by folks who are biased against poor folks. My experience says that men use degrading porn regardless of their status.
July 9, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Thank you for the well reasoned last two counter arguements. I would like to clarify that my sensitive/Alpha sides are balanced, I’m all about trying to achieve balance, as the Alpha side is more of an act anyway, the sensitive side always remainning the core, I’d say I’m still far on the sensitve side of the spectrum. Also, when I stated that I was trying to show my wife how great she is, I meant in all the ways you suggested. I empathized with her, because we were so similiar, both late bloomers. I didn’t try to control her self image, just point out the positive. As for dead to female opinion, I don’t think you realize how much rejection some men go through. I had a strong self image, teachers, the popular kids even, and most adults found me “interesting” (I’m opinioinated), and I had several social circles ((potheads, jocks, trouble makers, rich kids; they sort of all made a super group for partying), my DnD group, artsy group, and outcasts) but it was female peers who tore down that image. To not let that amount of rejection affect you would mean your already dead inside and probably a sociopath. If I allowed female opinion to mean something significant to me I would of killed myself (instead of just dwelling on it.) And I was never, ever shy. I approached girls quite often (I’d approach anyone who interested me), refusing to ever completely quit (I was never a complete failure in getting dates, just follow up dates, that was the ego killer, because then they rejected me based on something), I have the inate quality of perseverence. (I even tried my hand in most sports despite my unathelticism) Body language alone often let me know girls were not interested in someone like me. I wasn’t a creep who couldn’t pick up on signals. Of course I read a book on body language in 7th grade that was a god send (Geeks aren’t good at that stuff). I refuse to accept your premise that most girls will be attracted to sensitve intellectuals, and the ones who might of been were too shy, or didn’t exist in my social circles, for me to have bumped into them. Hell, I went to art school, assuming girls who would dig me would show up there, but same story) Maybe I was just unlucky, but nerds didn’t date often, and scientists aren’t known for being “eligible bachelors”, even the ones at the top of their fields. I know my description of myself may seem somewhat unbelievably painted in a good light, and I didn’t mean to make this an autobiography, (although I do admit that I like talking about myself as I learn stuff about me from others in that way), and I have no way to prove it of course other than to allow you to contact people I grew up with, which I am actually willing to do (because thats how I role), but I am, was, and will always be an empathizer inspite of possibly having a mild case of aspergers (which is a personality type, not a psychological condition, I love my geeks), and I cannot help but note, that in my world, women controlled my education, my father, socially acceptable behaivor in general, and the social dynamics of peer groups, far more than the few alpha males who controlled their individual cliques. But enough of me: explain why men make up the majority of homeless, prison inmates, school dropouts, special ed. students, suicides, work related deaths, losers in child custody disputes, victims of violence, and earn far fewer college degrees than women. Where is the patriarchal power for them? How does physical strength oppress 51% of the population in a democracy run by the rule of law? How are womens evolutionary advantages (many) curtailed by our “patriarchal system”? I appreciate this dialouge and find it fascinating and important.
July 9, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Very insightful. Thank you for your statement.
July 9, 2009 at 2:02 pm
BTW: My depression has been successfully treated since I was about 21/22. Thanks for your concern. Weed helped before that. Depression sucks, what a cruel trick of nature to make someone generally unhappy. However, it has the possiblity of allowing for empathetic insights otherwise unattainable. My favorite example if Lincoln.
July 9, 2009 at 3:40 pm
I see how you got that impression… When men do something bad, it’s because of societal systems put in place by men. When women do something bad, it’s for the same reason. As I told Mr. Crankosaur the other day, men are not inherently more gross than women, society just makes them more gross.
July 9, 2009 at 9:35 pm
“I firmly believe that men need to hold each other accountable for our crap.”
Hear hear, bradah!
I can’t seem to get this fool (the responder to my post) to understand that. Feel free to whoop up on him.
July 9, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Orlando – You make a good point, homie, but I long ago surmised that 9-2 likes to vent. This is her blog – her safe place. We may or may not choose to handle things in the same way she does, but the fact that she does so is her prerogative. Now, I don’t doubt for a second that entering her ideas in a public forum comes with, at least in part, the intention of connecting with other people somehow (I ain’t 9-2, so I couldn’t begin to tell you). At the same time, I feel like everyone has a reason for expressing themselves the way they do – even if we wouldn’t go about things the same way. As long as 9-2 ain’t expressing herself with a rifles and bombs, I figure how she handles her business is none of ours. I’ll agree with you though. Hate is as degrading to the hater as it is to the one being hated.
One thing’s for sure. I’ve never got anywhere trying to influence and persuade my friends and coworkers to be fairer to women using 9-2’s style, so I’ve surmised that that style isn’t for me to use.
I can see how 9-2’s writing can put people off, but if you know how shit works and can see around your privilege, it won’t bother you. Also, if you can see that 9-2 don’t owe any of us anything, you won’t have a problem.
The only people coming up in here to start a flame war with folks are people who are like my friends and coworkers I was talking about – they only know what they want to about feminism, rather than what it’s really about. They need to read something and STFU. They need to stop buying all the misinformation that can be found in rags like Maxim.
I’m off my soapbox, Deuce. Thanks. I know you don’t need me speaking for you.
July 9, 2009 at 10:00 pm
You sure that the women aren’t rejecting you because you’re stuck on stupid? You’re being corrected left-and-right, man, think about what you’re typing.
July 10, 2009 at 4:48 am
This is a fairly long comment, so let me summarize:
“Hi. I’m a NICE GUY but women don’t seem to get it. Oh, and by the way, I hereby demand that you explain this ‘feminism’ nonsense to me on my terms.”
Allow me to respond:
I have noticed that most men can only seem to understand arguments of the form “my dick is larger than yours.” So every time a woman complains about rape, a man has to validate himself by pointing out all those men in prison who are getting raped – which is clearly a much worse problem, because it’s happening not to women but to actual human beings. But this pathological inability to listen to others and this perverse drive towards one-upmanship is clearly not a personality defect, but instead a product of a sensitive individual who has been damaged by the fickle and capricious domination of women. I mean, men aren’t really egotistical scumbags – that’s just a front some men put up to get women to suck their dicks.
Has it ever occurred to you that the mere fact that bad things happen to men doesn’t invalidate feminism or negate the oppression of women? In other words, that despite the evidence of centuries of patriarchal hegemony, the world does not, in fact, revolve around you?
July 10, 2009 at 8:39 am
Sign me up for some fuckin’ man-haterade. Do you know how intensely happy it makes me to see straight feminists that don’t wax poetics over their love of cock and maleness? There’s a disgusting unexamined amount of heterosexual priviledge in the ability of the straight cock-sucking fun-feminist to brush off accusations of man-hating. See, the thing is, I really can’t field those discussions of not hating men. Even if I liked men, which I don’t, nobody would believe me. Queer women are automatically shuffled off the good feminist board as soon as they express that they kiss girls, like it, and can do so–would rather do so–without the attention, permission, or enjoyment of the Cock In The Room.
My life would improve immensely and immediately if every single man on the planet suddenly dropped dead. Even the men that, defying their horrendous upbringing in masculine woman-hatin’, I love. That’s a horrible thing to say, and I admit it. It’s really just earth-shattering to say that a little under half the population of your species is so twisted and poisoned by their own stupidity, greed, and love of violence that the other half of the species would lead better lives if they were not there. Honestly, does anyone really want to say that about humanity? It’s not like I take sick pleasure in the fact that the elimination of billions of people would make the existence of other billions of people bearable and finally free from fear, oppression, and hate.
As I learn more about the people on this lump of dirt floating in a vacuum, I find that fully half of humanity has done shit in their lives that really truly deserves a banishment to some hell or a locked cell. And this is just taken as normal. Part of “growing up”, if you’re a dude, is treating women like shit. It’s stalking them, harassing them, raping them, assaulting them, insulting them, terrorizing them, and then clapping your buddies on the back when they do the same. I can’t think of a single man, off the top of my head–aside from a few I know who are painfully shy, disabled and thus excluded from woman hatin’, or flamming gay–who hasn’t done something really horrible to women. Several women. Often, repeatedly, and without shame.
Really, the world would be a better place without (heterosexual) men. I hate men, as a group, and find it really fucking funny that my dislike of cock and previous painful nonconsensual encounters with men makes my hatred of them less rational. Shit, when you’re beaten and tired and you don’t even have things like federal rights and the ability to walk to street at night by yourself, not hating men is irrational. Hate men? Of course I hate fucking men. What other option do I have unless I’m down with some fucking spectacular victim-blaming?
July 10, 2009 at 11:29 am
S702, I keep seeing this word “safe space” on blogs, and I’m not at all sure what it means. I’ve read 9/2’s editorial policy, which welcomes civil criticism. In contrast, many of the articles on the blog, including this one, seem designed as provocations, and 9/2 is liberal about allowing commenters to post further provocations.
So I am a little taken aback when I say “maybe X is not a great tactic” and your response is to tell me “I should’t have problem” or “be bothered” and that this is a safe space.
It sounds a great deal like what you’re saying is that I shouldn’t post here in a way that’s critical of 9/2’s thesis. Even if, as you suggest, I’m saying something that you agree with. Is that what a safe space means, these days? A place where no one asks questions?
And…on a different note…exactly what sort of privilege do I have vis-a-vis 9/2 in this forum?
July 10, 2009 at 1:54 pm
“And if your spelling and grammar are any indication, you’re barely literate. High IQ? Give me a freakin’ break. I mean, seriously, you write like a god damned lolcat.”
I’m not having a terrible amount of sympathy for Jay, but that was way the fuck out of line. How about sticking to the matter at hand instead of attacking the other person’s grammar and spelling?
July 10, 2009 at 2:05 pm
Let us assume, for sake of argument, that women tend to be attracted to “jerks”, and not to “nice guys”. Or even, lets say that all women are solely interested in bad men.
Does it then follow that men should behave that way, because otherwise they won’t be attractive to women?
Surely there is a correct way to act, regardless if it allows you to pick up or not.
July 10, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Oops. “Breatheinspirit” would be me, Faith…
July 10, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Usually I’d agree with you, but he opened the door when he touted his own high IQ and flawless personality. He made his intellect a part of the matter at hand when he made the explicit claim that he’s intelligent and the implicit claim that the only intelligent thing to do if you want to get dates is to treat women like crap. Obviously neither of those claims are true.
July 10, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Let me get this straight. It’s not enough that men leave you alone, they must also not masturbate to porn?
What do you care, as long as they don’t talk to, or look at you?
July 10, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Read my porn series. Maybe start here.
July 10, 2009 at 8:09 pm
I don’t know if I buy it either, but the idea that lower class men have it worse than women is a bit too much to take.
July 10, 2009 at 8:28 pm
“Do you even comprehend how arrogant (stupid, obnoxious, self-serving) it is to surmise that since there is nothing wrong with your looks, intellect, or personality, clearly your lack of romantic success must be due to some defect of women as a group?”
Just for the record, back when it mattered I was in good shape, had a nice face, was reasonably intelligent and curious about the world around me.
But I was shy, so I guess I was defective in the personality department.
I guess then we’d have to go further back to determine why I was shy, could it be that the female of the species strikes the first, and most deeply felt, blow in the struggle in which we are so clearly engaged?
This is my opinion borne of experience and no matter how eloquent and compelling your argument is, you simply cannot go back in time and change it.
I’m willing to step back and watch women manage the world in a more overt manner and would love more than anything for my brothers to join me. I’m unwilling to take more than half the blame as a gender for what is wrong with the world.
Clearly the idea of co-mingling between the genders has run its course.
I’m with you, it needs to stop.
Nothing good can come of it.
July 10, 2009 at 8:32 pm
“What do you care, as long as they don’t talk to, or look at you?”
Oh, maybe because there are real women being really abused, humiliated, and degraded in porn. Maybe because I came really fucking close to becoming one of those women myself.
Just for starters.
July 10, 2009 at 8:33 pm
“but the idea that lower class men have it worse than women is a bit too much to take.”
Agreed.
July 10, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Sorry about my grammer (I’m not proof reading). I’m a visual spatial thinker primarily, probably with a bit of Asperger’s. They tried to send me away to a special school for the gifted in elementary school (refused for various reasons), and I have had my intellect openly admired by most of my teachers and proffesors. (I won’t list academic achievments as much of that boils down to hard work, not intellect.) That doesn’t mean smart people don’t have bad ideas. I’m here to learn while sharing my own beliefs, because that is one of the best ways to learn about your own beliefs, and evolve them, that’s all. I truly believe that through thoughtful debate (arguing) both sides will learn something. Also, I was never a jerk to women per se, just indefferent if there is one word to describe the cool guy attitude. And I see that you are bothered about my ego or self-centerdness. I never denied that, and have hinted at it; “like to talk about myself”, “never ever been shy”. I admit what we all should admit. Anyone who doesn’t think they are self-centered is dillusional, and I would rather be self-centered, which is honestly the biological norm, than detached from reality. That does not invalidate my ability for empathy. That does not stop the emotional pain I experience when witnessing emotional of physical suffering in others. Anyways, please read “The Evolution of Desire” and “The War Against Boys”, because obviously most of you are not willing to take me seriously, so maybe a book by someone else will do a better job at explaining some of my views. As an end, because I think I am done here, (unless succussfully provoked back into the debate, darn that ego), many of you have been very dismissive and hostile, really pretty mean to me, which only entrenches me in my belief that women are not the sweet and inoncent gender they claim to be. P.S. Reading further down from my posts comments, I see some referring to this as a “Safe Place” to vent. I did not approach it as such, and did not now that. I believe we all need outlets for emotions and did not mean to intrude if the policy and practice of this blog is for venting, and I take back my statements about the hostility then as I realize its purpose. Bad things can be used for good ends, just like mens propensity for violence.
July 10, 2009 at 8:58 pm
Oh, we’ve got us an MRA. Lucky us.
July 10, 2009 at 9:41 pm
That was a thought provoking essay with which I can find little, if any fault.
Maybe technology will enable men to find a release without harming or bothering women.
Shaun
July 10, 2009 at 9:47 pm
Okay. I don’t think it will be a good thing for society if a bunch of men are walking around, shamed into not looking at women, let alone dealing with them, while being unable to masturbate without any visual stimulation.
Clearly I’m confused. What would you have men do, if not themselves?
Shaun
July 10, 2009 at 10:48 pm
Nice false dilemma. How about men walk around and interact with women as if women were also human (i.e., not using them as masturbatory tools, not harassing them)?
July 10, 2009 at 11:33 pm
And here I thought we were negotiating a separation.
Pretend for a minute that it isn’t a false dilemma. You can either like men the way they are, or you can be content with them leaving you alone.
Pretend that changing men is as off the table for you as changing women is off the table for men.
Maybe I read more into your essay than was really there. I was under the impression that you hate men. I extrapolated that to mean that you want nothing to do with them.
Shaun.
July 10, 2009 at 11:55 pm
I hate masculinity. If you’d read what I wrote, you’d know that. I’m not advocating separatism, but rather a change in social paradigms that would make separatism unnecessary. As men are, I don’t like them. That’s why the ones I associate with tend not to fit this pattern of behavior. I choose to leave the rest be because I don’t want to deal with their bullshit. However, what would you recommend I do when one harasses me on the street? How do I leave him alone? If I could figure that out, I’d be stoked. What does the rape victim to to leave her rapist alone? And how is changing women off the table for men? For fuck’s sake, women’s entire lives are shaped by what men want out of them (beauty standards, porn, the expectation that women will defer to men’s opinions, etc.).
July 11, 2009 at 1:17 am
Who non-ironically believes that pointing us in the direction of books based on pseudoscience and misogynistic propaganda lends credibility to his argument.
July 11, 2009 at 1:19 am
A really smart artist who is also really good looking.
July 11, 2009 at 1:35 am
…Many of you have been very dismissive and hostile, really pretty mean to me, which only entrenches me in my belief that women are not the sweet and inoncent gender they claim to be.
“Sweet and innocent” is not a compliment. It’s what men call wide-eyed passive fembots who eat a metric ton of shit a day and beg for more.
Just in case I wasn’t clear, it’s an insult.
July 11, 2009 at 1:44 am
I love your writing. I really do.
Ever since I got involved with feminism, I’ve been worried about my younger brother (age 20) and what impact this society will have on him. I wonder if he really understands that having sex with a drunk woman is rape. I wonder if he has enough respect for women to not watch stuff like Max Hardcore pornography. I wonder if, should he get a woman pregnant, he will own up to the responsibility that comes with being a father.
I occasionally point things out to him that might make him more aware, such as a book I was reading where the main character spoke condescendingly to an abuse victim and then blamed her after her jealous husband came to beat him up. I give him “mini-lectures” on feminism because I know that just handing him a book by Andrea Dworkin will just make him think I’m crazy.
I don’t want him to be the kind of man that’s hated by feminists. I want him to respect women and treat them as equals. This blog and others inspire me not to give up. As his sister (age 23), there’s not a whole lot I can do, because his friends and society will have a much greater impact.
But I’m going to keep trying.
July 11, 2009 at 2:03 am
“…Could it be that the female of the species strikes the first, and most deeply felt, blow in the struggle in which we are so clearly engaged?
Ah, and at last all becomes clear: MRAs have mommy issues. Personally, I recommend therapy over bigotry.
July 11, 2009 at 4:19 am
“I had a strong self image…but it was female peers who tore down that image. To not let that amount of rejection affect you would mean your already dead inside and probably a sociopath.”
You admitted previously that guys bullied you, too, so this is not a single-sex phenomenon. If you were the target of an inordinate amount of criticism and general negative attention from your peers, there had to a be a reason why that was. I’m not insinuating that you deserved the bullying, but I am stating, positively, that there was something about your personality that chronically rubbed people the wrong way.
You mentioned that you have Asperger’s and, you know what? That explains a whole hell of a lot. People with autism spectrum disorders have a far more challenging time relating to their peers, and you must know that male Aspies almost always present as cold, callous, supercilious…not the most endearing traits, and certainly not the sort of traits that are going to win over the lady folk.
I cannot help but note, that in my world, women controlled my education, my father, socially acceptable behaivor in general, and the social dynamics of peer groups, far more than the few alpha males who controlled their individual cliques.
But who sits on the school board? Which sex is most likely to be the school administrator? Nope, sorry, but the men are still overwhelmingly in charge of education in the U.S.
“Socially acceptable behavior” in the U.S. has as its foundation in Judeo-Christian morality, and the Judeo-Christian religions were founded and controlled by governing bodies comprised of MEN. You want to blame someone for constrictive social codes, blame your own fucking sex.
If your mother also worked outside of the home, I suppose your father did exactly 1/2 of the housework and childrearing, did he? Your mother was never expected to “sexually service” him when she wasn’t in the mood? Your mother had equal career and personal autonomy?
I won’t presume to know what the power dynamics were like within your own little social circle growing up, but I do know that the jocks are, and have always been, the ruling elite in American public schools. And you know I’m not referring to the Title IX group.
explain why men make up the majority of homeless
Research has consistently shown that the homeless are largely mental illness sufferers and addicts who have fallen through the gaps in the social safety net. Thanks to the social construct of masculinity under patriarchy, men are encouraged to repress emotion and discouraged to seek assistance in dealing with emotional distress. You can give your sex a giant FUCKING THANKS, BROS! for making it more difficult for men to seek mental health treatment.
prison inmates
You’re making this too easy. The patriarchal construct of masculinity encourages male aggression, discourages male expression of emotion, and this toxic recipe creates a human ticking time bomb. Throw in the masculinity ritual of excessive alcohol consumption (how manly!) and drug use, the resultant lowered inhibitions, not to mention possible frontal lobe damage, and it’s only a matter of time before an emotionally disturbed young man goes off in somebody’s face.
I’ve spent a fair amount of time working with at-risk youth, and I can tell you that every single one of those poor boys is a caricature of hypermasculinity.
Psychopathy does occur far more frequently in the male population, and there are probably milder variants (would that ever explain things). Psychopathy has been studied to death and there is very little, if anything, that professionals can do to treat it. Psychopaths and narcissists are notoriously resistant to treatment by virtue of the very traits that define them.
school dropouts
Same thing, essentially. Rebellion is a stereotypically male-coded behavior in our society, so it’s more acceptable for boys to act out and act up. Greater expections for obedience are placed on girls.
special ed. students
I’m not so sure that there’s a statistically significant divide there; I’d need to see the evidence. I suppose perhaps you’re referring to the higher rates of autism in the male population, which, if so, how is that even relevant to your argument?
suicides
Annnnnd we’re back to the subject of socially constructed masculinity and repression of emotion, which means fewer men seek treatment for mental health issues than women. Hell yeah, we’d love to change this dynamic. It would be great if masculinity would stop impeding men from becoming fully realized human beings. So help us overthrow patriarchy already! Why do you want to continue holding your sex back?
work related deaths
Women have been historically excluded from industrial labor positions or harrassed mercilessly if they dare get a job “on the line”. It’s not a female-friendly line of work.
losers in child custody disputes
Primary care-givers are always given top priority in custody disputes. Women have been traditionally stay-at-home-moms because that is their female-coded role under patriarchy. Women have been barred from participating equally in the work force, historically speaking, so they’re more likely to be the primary care-giver.
victims of violence
Now you’re just fucking with us, unless you’re including statistics for prison violence and military-related deaths, both being male-dominated institutions, I don’t have to tell you.
earn far fewer college degrees than women
If you look at the history of higher education you’ll see that your sex has benefitted from it far more and for far longer. I think there was a temporary spike in the percentage of female college graduates (ah, I found it, 57%….WOO! really big difference there, Jay). Wow, you’re panicking over a fucking margin of 7%? When men have traditionally comprised the majority of the collegiate student body? What do you want us to do, Jay, to ensure that the balance will always be a perfect 50:50 ratio, or else favor the MEN, LIKE IT HAS FOR CENTURIES? Do you not realize that there are more women than men in the world and that statistics for college enrollment may very well accurately reflect the gender ratio? Let’s not get started on how the male population is siphoned off into the military, or, rather, let’s. Because feminists are pretty much anti-war, which means more boys at home dreaming big dreams and pursuing careers instead of getting their heads blown off by order of YOUR sex.
And you’re throwing a fucking tantrum when it’s the men who still are overwhelmingly in positions of power in academic institutions, when it’s men who dominate middle and upper management positions in corporations all over the world, when it’s men who still run the fucking government.
Here’s a statistic for you: MRAs are the world’s most pathetic and entitled cry-babies.
And I’m not even going to deign to address your junk science arguments.
July 11, 2009 at 4:29 am
There’s an MRA who hangs around Forest Chase (in my city) with a big sign on him saying “Stop Discrimination Against Men!”. What he doesn’t realise is that all his arguments are just sexist stereotypes (he actually said women don’t enjoy sex!).
As with that guy on the plane, I think the world would be better off without certain people.
I hate masculinity. If you’d read what I wrote, you’d know that. I’m not advocating separatism, but rather a change in social paradigms that would make separatism unnecessary. As men are, I don’t like them.
This made a lot of sense. I agree so much!
July 11, 2009 at 4:47 am
What she said. (Thanks, Nanella, because that needed retort and I might not have had the strength).
July 11, 2009 at 4:50 am
Haha. Cut and paste fail. Those are my notes on sushi recipes I was checking out. Sorry for that 9-2.
July 11, 2009 at 4:54 am
WTF do you think men did before the advent of the printing press? Do you seriously think single men were running around with hard-ons 24/7 because they couldn’t masturbate?
July 11, 2009 at 4:57 am
Fixed. I was wondering if that was some code I just didn’t get.
July 11, 2009 at 5:32 pm
“What would you have men do, if not themselves?”
Men do not need porn to masturbate. People have been masturbating without the aid of porn since people have been masturbating. It is quite possible to have a fulfilling masturbatory experience without any outside aid. I do it all the time.
July 11, 2009 at 11:26 pm
What does your experience have to do with the male experience?
July 11, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Right, you guys are so unimaginative that you can’t masturbate without porn. Do you really want to admit that? I think, oh, every man that ever lived before the advent of the internet might beg to differ.
July 12, 2009 at 12:46 am
“Right, you guys are so unimaginative that you can’t masturbate without porn. Do you really want to admit that? I think, oh, every man that ever lived before the advent of the internet might beg to differ.”
If you were right and I was wrong, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
July 12, 2009 at 12:48 am
ND, Nanella-
Are you planning to cite these studies of yours? Or is blatant classism just so axiomatic that it isn’t even worth bringing in evidence?
July 12, 2009 at 12:53 am
I already said I’m not sure about that claim.
July 12, 2009 at 1:39 am
Sounds ‘almost racist’ – snort.
July 12, 2009 at 6:31 am
“And if your spelling and grammar are any indication, you’re barely literate. High IQ? Give me a freakin’ break. I mean, seriously, you write like a god damned lolcat.”
That’s fucking hilarious!!!
July 12, 2009 at 6:39 am
I agree, panoptical, that was a good one. Will – you are, however, an asshole and I won’t publish any of your comments but this one since they’re all misogynistic bullshit.
July 12, 2009 at 2:01 pm
“If you were right and I was wrong, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.”
That’s some utter brilliance right there.
“What does your experience have to do with the male experience?”
Men masturbate without porn all the time as well, Shaun. Men can not leave women alone -and- masturbate to porn too. As I have already stated, there are real women involved in porn. You can’t have it both ways.
July 12, 2009 at 2:29 pm
“What does your experience have to do with the male experience?”
That’s a fair question, actually. As much as I don’t personally believe that one gender cannot speak about the experiences of the other (at least to some extent), it does seem to be a position held by most people here.
July 12, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Dude, just by leaving such long comments on someone elses blog you are acting entitled and you can’t even see it.
Look, I think, as has been said before, you were pretending to be something you were not and women saw through it. When you dropped the act and were your asshole self then you atracted someone.
July 12, 2009 at 5:14 pm
ND’s excellent rant reminded me of an essay, written back in 2003 by a man named Kim du Toit, entitled “The Pussification Of The Western Male.” I am not sure how many people here have read this nonsense, but if you haven’t, I strongly recommend it. It is wonderful unintentional comedy, and provides an interesting window into sexist masculine culture.
http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/essays/41/
This essay caused quite a stir back when it was released. Du Toit was naive enough to publish it under his real name, which completely derailed his career.
Some gem quotes:
“There was a time when men put their signatures to a document, knowing full well that this single act would result in their execution if captured, and in the forfeiture of their property to the State. Their wives and children would be turned out by the soldiers, and their farms and businesses most probably given to someone who didn’t sign the document.”
Love the nostalgia for a time period that no reasonable person wants to return to.
“But in the twentieth century, women became more and more involved in the body politic, and in industry, and in the media—and mostly, this has not been a good thing.”
At least he’s honest.
“But most of all, I do this website because I love being a man. Amongst other things, I talk about guns, self-defense, politics, beautiful women, sports, warfare, hunting, and power tools—all the things that being a man entails. All this stuff gives me pleasure.”
You know what, Mr. du Toit? I am a man. And I will say this: Fuck you. Stop telling me what being a man entails. You are part of the problem. Pull your head out of your ass.
“Well, I’m not going to quit. Fuck that. One of the characteristics of the non-pussified man (and this should strike fear into the hearts of women and girly-men everywhere) is that he never quits just because the odds seem overwhelming. Omaha Beach, guys.”
I am positively quaking in my Birkenstocks.
“Women, even liberal women, swooned over George Bush in a naval aviator’s uniform. Donald Trump still gets access to some of the most beautiful pussy available, despite looking like a medieval gargoyle. Donald Rumsfeld, if he wanted to, could fuck 90% of all women over 50 if he wanted to, and a goodly portion of younger ones too.”
There are no words for how indescribably wrong this passage is.
July 12, 2009 at 5:29 pm
“That’s a fair question, actually.”
So what are you saying exactly? That men do need porn to masturbate? Are all the dudes who lack access to porn refraining from masturbation? How about all the men who masturbate all the time in the shower? Do they all have tv sets or laptops hanging in their bathtubs?
The idea that anyone -needs- porn is completely and utterly absurd. There isn’t a soul on the face of the planet that -needs- porn of any variety.
July 12, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Has everything with regard to male/female interaction NOT changed in the last hundred years?
Seriously, single men? What’s that a couple hundred years ago? Some 18 year old boy?
July 12, 2009 at 5:50 pm
That guy’s hilarious. I bet he’s an amateur MMA fighter.
July 12, 2009 at 9:16 pm
No, I merely meant about the idea that one gender can’t understand the other. If that is so, then feminism is something of a lost cause, surely.
July 12, 2009 at 9:55 pm
No one is obligated to provide linkage to placate your obnoxious demands, and I’m not about to whip out scientific data to support every single assertion I make. For one, I don’t retain every single piece of information I read in personal records. Secondly, I don’t have the time nor the inclination to scour the internet for said information. If you disbelieve anything I say here, trust me, it’s not going to hurt my feelings.
That said, I can and will provide evidence if someone asks me to and if it’s readily available: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/intimate/victims.htm#income
July 12, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Oh please. And since maternal mortality rates were significantly higher at the beginning of last century, that meant a far greater number of young male widowers. Who weren’t able to satisfy their sexual urges themselves because they didn’t have a Playboy lying around the house, apparently.
Let’s not forget that sexual morality was such at the time that premarital sex was prohibited. I suppose men who weren’t actively courting a woman, and even those who were courting a woman, had no choice but to endure agonizing hours looking at their stiffies and wishing there was something they could do about it.
July 12, 2009 at 10:28 pm
Do you have any idea how insulting that statement is to female recovering porn addicts? You’ve got a lot of nerve presuming that visual sexual stimuli is not equally influential on the female sex drive.
Sexual objectification of women is a culturally indoctrinated behavior; it’s just one aspect of male privilege.
July 12, 2009 at 11:49 pm
Nanella-
Thanks for the BJS link. The jump below $7500 a year is eye-opening, but I am inclined to doubt the drop at the high end. Lest we forget, it was second-wave feminism that pointed out the major problems in reporting bias for DV and sex abuse within the upper class.
And I am not sure what is obnoxious about asking that your claims be based on fact. If you are going to assert the positivist privilege of having “opinions based on science,” then you should have some science available.
While I am hardly trying to side with Shaun H, it is kind of striking that ND will pull out a study to slap him with, then immediately acknowledge it to be bullshit, and not even apologize. I appreciate your providing a link, but I don’t think I’m out of line to ask for one.
July 12, 2009 at 11:53 pm
I didn’t acknowledge it to be bullshit, I said I wasn’t convinced that the numbers are lower for higher classes. I’m pretty sure violent porn use exists across the board, though I don’t doubt that it might increase with economic oppression. There has to be someone down the line to kick, and it’s usually women.
July 13, 2009 at 12:14 am
“Do you have any idea how insulting that statement is to female recovering porn addicts? You’ve got a lot of nerve presuming that visual sexual stimuli is not equally influential on the female sex drive.”
Again, if it was EQUALLY influential, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
“Sexual objectification of women is a culturally indoctrinated behavior; it’s just one aspect of male privilege.”
I’m wondering how you reconcile this statement with the one that you made before it.
What if the images were artificial, would you still have a problem even though there would be no ‘victim’?
July 13, 2009 at 12:16 am
I don’t know about her, but I would. The reason being that it has been repeatedly proven that viewing degrading porn lowers men’s sense of empathy toward women, makes them more likely to disrespect physical and emotional boundaries, and makes it more likely that they’ll disbelieve rape victims and fall for rape myths (e.g., a short skirt equals asking for it). So, whether the porn is made with real women or not, it affects real women’s lives.
For fuck’s sake, man. How far do you have to go to defend your porn use?
July 13, 2009 at 12:34 am
The jump below $7500 a year is eye-opening, but I am inclined to doubt the drop at the high end. Lest we forget, it was second-wave feminism that pointed out the major problems in reporting bias for DV and sex abuse within the upper class.
The problem with that argument is that DV is underreported regardless of socioeconomic status. I think the figures should be much higher for every bracket.
And I am not sure what is obnoxious about asking that your claims be based on fact. If you are going to assert the positivist privilege of having “opinions based on science,” then you should have some science available.
You called me a classist. I don’t take kindly to unwarranted claims concerning my race/class/gender sensibilities.
I doubt it would kill you to politely request corroborative evidence, and if you’re refused, oh well. It’s not like we’re testifying in court here.
July 13, 2009 at 1:18 am
Again, if it was EQUALLY influential, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
We’re having this discussion because of the deeply ingrained cultural mythos that surrounds male and female stereotypes.
I’m wondering how you reconcile this statement with the one that you made before it.
The capacity for visual stimulation is similar-to-indistinguishable in men and women, but the fact that pornography exists primarily to satiate the male sexual appetite has to do with patriarchal attitudes and values.
In other words, the ability to become aroused by visual stimuli is innate, sexually exploiting others for the purpose of indulging that mechanism is a choice. I sometimes get the urge to slap someone upside the head when they’re acting like a moron, but I choose not to indulge that urge. I am a recovering pornography addict and I choose not to use porn. I’ve relapsed several times in the past two years, but I am getting better at staying on the proverbial wagon.
You want to talk about porn and what it means to you and how unfathomable giving it up is, don’t think for one second that there aren’t women here who can’t empathize.
I’ve got more to say on this on this subject but it’s time for me to call it a day.
July 13, 2009 at 2:28 am
The absolute numbers are irrelevant to the claim you (both) made, which is that a given criminal behavior, and a behavior that you consider sociopathic, is disproportionately found in the lower class. And you didn’t state this as an opinion; ND said and you inferred that it was based on evidence. In the absence of evidence, yes, that’s classist. Absolutely. If I say that I read a study one time saying Jews are more likely to be child molestors, and I don’t want to be accused of anti-Semitism, it is on me to find that study. Yes?
July 13, 2009 at 5:16 am
Hahha, PERTH’d on the internet. I thought they got rid of that guy? And the speakers steps in general? Whatever the case, I’ve come close to bottling that waste of oxygen a couple of times, but I bet some of the gogans there would have done it anyway.
If they haven’t nuked Forrest Chase, it’s well past-due.
And in true typical Perth fashion I see you know someone I know.
July 13, 2009 at 7:56 am
[...] Deuce has also taken up the subject of man-hating on her blog, Rage Against the Man-chine. It wouldn’t hurt if some of her commenters read this peice, either. It’s incredibly [...]
July 13, 2009 at 9:49 pm
Kim Du Toit is a psychotic gun-toting fascist who thinks he’s gawd’s gift to the earth. Total douchebag.
July 13, 2009 at 11:22 pm
Okay, Orlando, you and I obviously have different definitions of “classism”. The studies cited in this discussion were relevant to the subject at hand and not targeted at economically disadvantaged men as a whole. We’re talking about random members of a social group doing bad things, NOT an entire group of people.
Did anyone here insinuate that ALL lower class men are wife beaters and sexual deviants? THAT would be classist. When somebody does advance that argument, you’re welcome to cry foul.
July 14, 2009 at 1:16 am
Hello All-
I am new here. Love your stuff!
The reason I hate men is because they compartmentalize. I am part mortified and part jealous of that ability.
Do I want to be able to commit genocide? NO.
Do I want to be able to turn off my emotions like a light switch? YES.
Is this nature VS nurture? I don’t know. All I know is that when I read the paper, it’s men that do most of the damage. I don’t want to be like that, but it would be nice to just flip a switch in my brain and not remember every gory detail of some horrible crime I’ve read about or experienced.
Men just seem to be able to walk between the raindrops in that regard. Nice. Fuckers!
-V
July 14, 2009 at 1:17 am
No, I agree completely. All you are saying, in equivalency, is that science has proven–offstage–that Jews are unusually likely to be child molesters. You aren’t saying that all Jews are child molesters. Why would anyone get upset?
July 14, 2009 at 1:17 am
What if the images were artificial, would you still have a problem even though there would be no ‘victim’?
It’s been my experience that rendered/graphic porn is even more rife with sexual violence.
Really and truly, porn in general is highly problematic if you look beyond the ethical conundrum of using it. There’s the novelty factor, which means the softcore stuff will eventually cease to provide the same thrill and you’ll become desensitized to the depiction of misogynistic sex as you graduate to looking at more and more hardcore/taboo forms of porn to achieve the same “high”. In pornography, taboo = violent/degrading sex acts.
That craving for novelty carries over into the bedroom. Ordinary sex doesn’t seem quite as fun or fulfilling after you’ve stuffed your head full of exotic sexual imagery. The extraordinary begins to seem mundane.
Porn creates an artificial state of heightened arousal that people become dependent on very quickly. It becomes altogether too easy to use porn as an escape mechanism, or as a drug to attain a sexual “high”, whenever you’re feeling bored or lonely or sad, etc.
Sometimes porn, itself, becomes too mundane and people need to up the ante, so to speak, they need to engage in more and more sexually thrilling activities to get the adrenalin and endorphins flowing, e.g., cybersex or webcamming.
Then there’s the “porn aesthetic”. If you’re masturbating to images of physically ideal women, that ideal is also going to become mundane to you. The average female body isn’t going to have the same appeal. There is a tremendous diversity in female anatomy that is not at all accurately represented in pornography.
I’m aware that some amateur, and a smaller % of professional, porn incorporates a variety of female body types, but the problem is that this is niche porn. The “big naturals” type of porn, or porn featuring women with large labia, e.g., is targeted exclusively at fetishists. You don’t get the opportunity to admire and appreciate the wide range of feminine beauty that exists unless you specifically go looking for it.
From my own experience, once I stopped using porn and was no longer being constantly exposed to images of muscle-bound hunks as masturbation material, the male physical ideal became less appealing to me. I was able to better appreciate the physique of the average Joe. And since I’m an average Jane, the ability to find guys in my own league of attractiveness hot makes dating a far more rewarding experience. Quitting porn has actually been beneficial in a multitude of ways.
The funny thing is, I never had the slightest interest in using it before curiosity got the better of me. I often use the analogy of smoking to explain how addictive porn can be. If you never pick up a cigarette, you never become dependent on nicotine, you never have to struggle with quitting. It’s the same with porn. If you’d never used it, you wouldn’t “need” it now. Once you’re hooked, you have two choices: suffer through withdrawl or deny that it’s a problem. Right now our society is at the same place in regards to porn that it used to be with smoking. Porn use is condoned as a healthy, natural, harmless activity by the general population. We’re a long ways away from universally acknowledging porn’s detrimental effects on individuals and society.
July 14, 2009 at 6:47 am
i know alotta men who hate men. well, not people with penises, but macho masculine men, like the guys at this airport. men who hate masculinity usually make great friends.
“Women have to deal with enforced femininity, and while a lot of the behaviors femininity entails do indeed suck, they aren’t chosen as freely as men’s behaviors are. ”
i’d really like it if you could explain this further in a future post for this series.
July 14, 2009 at 7:04 am
If we were having a discussion about ethnicity and pedophilia…but you know what? That would never happen because ethnicity is comprised of biologically inherited characteristics and things get really dicey whenever you start making assertions about biological predispositions and groups of people. It is generally agreed by scrupulous, non-prejudiced people that biology-as-destiny arguments are all-around crappy and ultimately untenable.
Socioeconomic status is not an immutable, biological characteristic and, therefore, can be examined objectively as a contributing factor in demographic-specific phenomena.
You have done a whopping good job of perverting the definition of “classism”, by the way.
July 14, 2009 at 7:43 am
(other than one exception, the quotes are from jay black)
“doesn’t mean smart people don’t have bad ideas. I’m here to learn while sharing my own beliefs [...]”
i don’t think jay is the bad guy that people here are interpreting him to be. i take his word for it that what he says in the above quote is true.
“It wasn’t until I could fearlously could approach women and deal with the rejection that happened most of the time, basically becoming dead inside to female opinion, that I began to date. This is essentially what an Alpha-male is. Someone who doesn’t “care” emotionally about other peoples judgements of them.”
see, this just isn’t my definition of alpha male. i think alpha males are scummy people. and incorporating alpha-male-ness into your personality, even a little bit, means incorporating scummy-ness into your personality. which is why a strategy like this fucking sucks:
“I would like to clarify that my sensitive/Alpha sides are balanced, I’m all about trying to achieve balance, as the Alpha side is more of an act anyway, the sensitive side always remainning the core, I’d say I’m still far on the sensitve side of the spectrum.”
why would you want to have any alphaness in you at all? bleh!! it also shows you didn’t understand the essence of what charlie said to you:
“But unlike you, I changed that by stepping outside of the alpha male/wimp model. [...] What if you stopped thinking of it as a dichotomy of alpha/sensitive and discovered what it means to be powerful without having to control?”
but anyways, i think the main problem here is in how you’re defining an alpha male. you seem to think it’s a man who (in the heterosexual context) is unphased by romantic rejection from women. and so when you stopped being phased by such rejection, you seemed to think this made you alpha. but it doesn’t. some alpha males have this characteristic. others do not (and in fact get very hurt by such rejection… and then they cope with it by being abusive to a woman, or to a less alpha man, or by jacking off to misogynistic porn, or whatever).
“Anyways, please read “The Evolution of Desire” and “The War Against Boys”, because obviously most of you are not willing to take me seriously, so maybe a book by someone else will do a better job at explaining some of my views. ”
i haven’t read these particular books, but i’ve read other MRA stuff… and the analysis is always far inferior to stuff written about masculinity and the male plight from a feminist perspective.
i recommend:
“the will to change: men, masculinity, and love” by bell hooks
“we real cool: black men and masculinity” by bell hooks (focuses on black men, but insights into masculinity in general)
“the gender knot: unravelling our patriarchal legacy” allan g. johnson
“boys will be men: raising our sons for courage, caring, and community” by paul kivel
good luck :)
July 14, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Look, throughout the literature on DV, it is routinely pointed out that police and medical personnel systemically ignore evidence of DV in the middle and upper class, especially among whites, because of structural classism and racism. This is not exactly fringe stuff; it was, for instance, the subject of a JAMA special report (“Doctors Falter,” 1992). It is discussed in pretty much every article on DV I’ve ever read, usually in the context of the inherent reporting biases that muddy the waters here. And it is a very dangerous bias, since it directly endangers one set of women while reinforcing stereotypes about another set.
It is discouraging—especially on a feminist site—to see those nuances and established patterns of bias get swept aside in order to claim that the poor folks beat their women more often, full stop. But what I find especially discouraging, and kind of confusing, is your response afterwards. You make a claim which groups as conservative as the AMA have been describing as classist for two decades, and seem shocked that I’m taking umbrage at it.
July 14, 2009 at 10:13 pm
“Surely there is a correct way to act, regardless if it allows you to pick up or not.”
Absolutely. Be who you are. If you’re a man-hating feminist, be that. If you’re a feminist who adores men, be that. If you’re a chauvinistic pig, fine, be that. If you’re a woman who happens to like living under the thumb of a man, be that. Or whatever you want to be.
i’m just sick of seeing people pretend to be what they aren’t. If the guy’s a jerk, i’d rather he act like a jerk in the first place then find out later, yanno?
The fact of the matter is there are enough people in the world that you can choose who you want to interact with. Sure, fight for equality everywhere it can be had – but lets expect people to be people. That is, diverse, strange and not all the same.
July 14, 2009 at 11:57 pm
Look, throughout the literature on DV, it is routinely pointed out that police and medical personnel systemically ignore evidence of DV in the middle and upper class
I have not personally encountered this phenomenon “throughout the literature on DV” and you’ve provided exactly one study focusing exclusively on negligence within the medical community to support your argument. I’m sorry, I’m just not convinced that there is a statistically significant lapse in reporting for DV in the upper classes. I’m not arguing that the statistics 100% accurately reflect incidences of DV in U.S. households. I did acknowledge that DV is underreported, but that phenomenon is not exclusive to the upper socioeconomic classes. To reiterate, I firmly believe that the numbers should be higher in every bracket.
If you want to, you can read all about the DOJ’s methodology for collecting DV data; there’s a pdf file in there somewhere. The data is based on reported and non-reported incidents — it is derived from crime statistics and survey figures. If you want to persuade yourself that it’s unjustly biased against a specific group, you’re going to have to ferret out that information for yourself. The statistics reflect my personal experience within the socioeconomic strata of society; I’m satisfied that the numbers are indicative of real-life trends. I’m sorry but I can’t see what is classist about acknowledging that poverty and financial difficulties produce chronic psychological stress which, in turn, exacerbates existing mental illness and lowers stress threshold. Stress makes people wacky, it makes them act out, that’s a given.
It’s vitally important that the relationship between disadvantaged socioeconomic status and DV is clearly documented so that funding for prevention and treatment programs can be secured. Not having that funding in place would be plenty dangerous for those members of society who have been historically underserved and marginalized because they lack class privilege.
This sidebar is starting to smack of “who will look out for the rich white women?”. I don’t think I care very much for the turn this discussion is taking.
July 15, 2009 at 12:30 am
I’m a man and I’ve nothing in common with hardly anyone, I guess cause I am fucked/stranded in the middle of nowhere and actively avoid all the ignorant assholes (of both sexes) around me I find this post and responses alarming. But I’m not surprised just further bummed out, I wish a plague would kill off most of the population or the earth flood and flip on its axis and drown everyone. – Chuck, a very masculine loner
July 16, 2009 at 6:08 pm
I’m late to the party, but since Shaun rejected the anecdote of a woman masturbating without porn, I’ll provide my own.
There are three men in this house who do not (and have not) watched porn. We still (miraculously!) find ways to whack it.
Of course, we generally aren’t thinking about women when we’re doing it, so I suppose Shaun’s next comment will be that teh gayz are somehow biologically different from het dudes and therefore don’t require the same direct visual stimuli.
Or maybe I just have this thing called a memory, and no problem calling one forth to “see”/relive an *actual sexual encounter* that I was *actually there for*.
Crazy, right?!
July 17, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Butters, I know what you mean about extrovert privilege. I’ve always been extremely shy. Most extroverts act as if we introverts don’t exist; they don’t even see us. Or they act like there’s something deeply wrong with us.
Most extroverts are completely oblivious to introverts, let alone the fact we deserve to be treated like equals.
July 18, 2009 at 2:07 am
I’m not going to try to defend men at all to anyone.
You make a lot of good points on just about everything you’ve said.
But it is very sad to see, with all the bullshit, hatred and murderous fucktards in the world, another living soul with hatred towards anyone in their heart.
But I must admit as a man, that 90% of the men on this planet are dipshits, probably myself included…
PEACE
July 18, 2009 at 7:22 am
Julian, thanks for the input, please don’t put words into my mouth.
Nanella, I think your responses hit the nail on the head, thanks for sharing.
Shaun
July 18, 2009 at 7:26 am
That’s kinda my point. But it’s lost on the haters.
The men that also hate men happen to be invisible to the haters.
What’s truly fucked up is that the Alpha-males could not give two shits about the issue.
Then we are told that it’s our responsibility as a gender to reign in the most macho among us. If that were possible, it would have been done before those kids got out of middle school.
Shaun
July 18, 2009 at 11:21 pm
Good stuff women. Keep up the good male hating commentary! Just what I needed for a boost on a fine summer day.
I loved the jerk in the airport story.
July 19, 2009 at 9:39 pm
You might enjoy my all time favorite quote, which is by TheBewilderness:
This is a cheap transparent trick to change the subject from the behavior of men, to the feelings of women. Every time you hear the term hate used in this fashion it is always a cheapass way to change the subject. Serious people do not like to be manipulated in the style of political operatives.
Men rape women.
Why do you hate men.
Porn hurts women.
Why do you hate sex.
Do you see the shift from the behavior of the perp to the feelings of the victim? You can see it any time you like on the cable news networks, where that crap passes for discussion.
It does not pass here.
END quote. Isn’t that fabulous? She thinks it sounds too rude. Of course I love it. lol
Analyzing men as a class becomes hating men. Wanting to end the oppression of females becomes hating men. Being angry at men because they oppress women becomes hating men for no reason. Saying men as a class oppress those they claim to love becomes hating some random reader’s husband and gosh she is personally offended.
July 19, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Progressive recess, I agree with you completely. I’m white but realize that no one in this world is more priveleged than the white american male…this country can be racist but it’s wayyy more sexist.
July 21, 2009 at 5:20 am
Shaun, you are not, sorry to say, exempt from the pool of men being hated on here. You’ve taken one anecdote about a man who outwardly embodies everything wrong with masculinity and sanctimoniously separated yourself into an imaginary opposing group of good guys (or “beta males”) who are miraculously free of patriarchal influence. You were raised in a patriarchal society, you haven’t escaped the conditioning (barging onto a feminist blog to bleat about how you’ve been mistreated TOO is pretty damn “alpha male” in its self-important disregard for the subject at hand). (And then there’s your championing of critically unexamined and heinously sexist male/female stereotypes. Alpha males, and alpha male wannabes, are alllll about the stereotypes, Shaun. They eat them for breakfast with their testosterone-and-egg yolk power shakes.)
Here’s a news flash: There is no alpha male/beta male social dichotomy (except in the minds of narcissistic asshole-dripping-with-money-and-hawt-babes wannabes). There are varying degrees of macho jerkness, with a very small portion of the male population being enlightened enough to recognize and reject their own patriarchal conditioning. You’re not quite there yet — not even close — but if you continue educating yourself and make an honest effort to rip the patriarchy out by the roots, you’ll get there eventually. You can start by checking your privilege: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/the-male-privilege-checklist/
Good luck (I seriously mean that).
July 21, 2009 at 5:28 am
Admitting your dipshitedness is the first step. Kudos.
July 22, 2009 at 8:29 am
Obviously “Karinova” has never been the target of domestic abuse, rape, being paid .75 while a male coworker doing less work gets paid 1.00, or sexually harassed.
“Everybody loves dick” does not make a woman love men, it simply means she likes to go to the store and buy a dildo to please herself.
We really don’t need men, just sperm bank ‘em and toss.
July 23, 2009 at 12:07 am
Uhhmm.
Marianne, either you are misreading the sarcasm in Karinova’s post, or your own sarcasm is layers too deep for me to understand.
Gee, sarcasm. Helping folks communicate….
July 23, 2009 at 6:46 pm
If more men were this cool, the world would be a better place. I’m sure he’s going to get shit for writing this:
Losing my religion for equality
Jimmy Carter
July 15, 2009
Women and girls have been discriminated against for too long in a twisted interpretation of the word of God.
I HAVE been a practising Christian all my life and a deacon and Bible teacher for many years. My faith is a source of strength and comfort to me, as religious beliefs are to hundreds of millions of people around the world. So my decision to sever my ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, after six decades, was painful and difficult. It was, however, an unavoidable decision when the convention’s leaders, quoting a few carefully selected Bible verses and claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be “subservient” to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service.
This view that women are somehow inferior to men is not restricted to one religion or belief. Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths. Nor, tragically, does its influence stop at the walls of the church, mosque, synagogue or temple. This discrimination, unjustifiably attributed to a Higher Authority, has provided a reason or excuse for the deprivation of women’s equal rights across the world for centuries.
At its most repugnant, the belief that women must be subjugated to the wishes of men excuses slavery, violence, forced prostitution, genital mutilation and national laws that omit rape as a crime. But it also costs many millions of girls and women control over their own bodies and lives, and continues to deny them fair access to education, health, employment and influence within their own communities.
The impact of these religious beliefs touches every aspect of our lives. They help explain why in many countries boys are educated before girls; why girls are told when and whom they must marry; and why many face enormous and unacceptable risks in pregnancy and childbirth because their basic health needs are not met.
In some Islamic nations, women are restricted in their movements, punished for permitting the exposure of an arm or ankle, deprived of education, prohibited from driving a car or competing with men for a job. If a woman is raped, she is often most severely punished as the guilty party in the crime.
The same discriminatory thinking lies behind the continuing gender gap in pay and why there are still so few women in office in the West. The root of this prejudice lies deep in our histories, but its impact is felt every day. It is not women and girls alone who suffer. It damages all of us. The evidence shows that investing in women and girls delivers major benefits for society. An educated woman has healthier children. She is more likely to send them to school. She earns more and invests what she earns in her family.
It is simply self-defeating for any community to discriminate against half its population. We need to challenge these self-serving and outdated attitudes and practices – as we are seeing in Iran where women are at the forefront of the battle for democracy and freedom.
I understand, however, why many political leaders can be reluctant about stepping into this minefield. Religion, and tradition, are powerful and sensitive areas to challenge. But my fellow Elders and I, who come from many faiths and backgrounds, no longer need to worry about winning votes or avoiding controversy – and we are deeply committed to challenging injustice wherever we see it.
The Elders are an independent group of eminent global leaders, brought together by former South African president Nelson Mandela, who offer their influence and experience to support peace building, help address major causes of human suffering and promote the shared interests of humanity. We have decided to draw particular attention to the responsibility of religious and traditional leaders in ensuring equality and human rights and have recently published a statement that declares: “The justification of discrimination against women and girls on grounds of religion or tradition, as if it were prescribed by a Higher Authority, is unacceptable.”
We are calling on all leaders to challenge and change the harmful teachings and practices, no matter how ingrained, which justify discrimination against women. We ask, in particular, that leaders of all religions have the courage to acknowledge and emphasise the positive messages of dignity and equality that all the world’s major faiths share.
The carefully selected verses found in the Holy Scriptures to justify the superiority of men owe more to time and place – and the determination of male leaders to hold onto their influence – than eternal truths. Similar biblical excerpts could be found to support the approval of slavery and the timid acquiescence to oppressive rulers.
I am also familiar with vivid descriptions in the same Scriptures in which women are revered as pre-eminent leaders. During the years of the early Christian church women served as deacons, priests, bishops, apostles, teachers and prophets. It wasn’t until the fourth century that dominant Christian leaders, all men, twisted and distorted Holy Scriptures to perpetuate their ascendant positions within the religious hierarchy.
The truth is that male religious leaders have had – and still have – an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter. Their continuing choice provides the foundation or justification for much of the pervasive persecution and abuse of women throughout the world. This is in clear violation not just of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but also the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul, Moses and the prophets, Muhammad, and founders of other great religions – all of whom have called for proper and equitable treatment of all the children of God. It is time we had the courage to challenge these views.
OBSERVER
Jimmy Carter was president of the United States from 1977 to 1981.
July 24, 2009 at 3:11 am
Jay:
I went on a “I hate Males” rant tonight, ergo this website.
You are brave for posting. For women there, I am a feminist. And forlorn and angry in many relationships. But, please, don’t rag on a man because of his honest thoughts and contributions. Listen.
July 24, 2009 at 4:33 pm
keep trying, rachael! my (male) friend/lover of 2 and 1/2 years grew up under the influence of a feminist older sister and he has often told me he wouldn’t be who he is if it hadn’t been for her. i’m so grateful to her! he might be a pretty shitty guy otherwise (in which case i simply wouldn’t be with him).
July 24, 2009 at 4:48 pm
quoting shaun: “Almost as many men as women are oppressed by the ruling elites.”
ok, true. and… so what?
it’s pretty clear the point you’re really trying to make is “and therefore sexism isn’t really a problem, just classism.”
this is just stupid. i’m not saying you’re an overall stupid person, you may be quite smart in other ways, but this particular opinion is so fucking stupid it’s unbearable.
both classism and sexism are problems. and don’t forget that many women and girls are oppressed on grounds of both sex and class (among other things!). do you think impoverished females have it easier than, or equally hard as, impoverished males?
do you think impoverished males can’t and don’t beat, harass, rape, etc. impoverished females? they can also do these things to females of any class (i’m from a middle class background and was abused by my lower class ex-boyfriend — we lived together in a $200/month concrete basement with a flea infested mattress on the ground, so i mean for real lower class — who was also an ex-pimp and abused various lower class women by pimping them and beating them).
and yeah, females can use their class privilege to oppress or degrade lower class males, but this doesn’t at all cancel out the fact that sexism, patriarchy, and misogyny are huge fucking problems.
also, take a guess who these ruling elites are, virtually 100% of them: MEN!
do you honestly not get all this? it seems like the simplest thing on earth to understand.
July 25, 2009 at 6:27 am
lol @ anonyman’s comment. wow, i like this guy.
July 25, 2009 at 6:33 am
lol! thanks, argive, for sharing this treasure.
July 25, 2009 at 6:48 am
yes, to help reign in those hyper-macho men … and the hypo-macho men, too. it seems like you think this is an unfair expectation. do you? and why? we’re not saying it’s easy.
the reason why those uber-jerks rule in middle school is cuz almost all the other guys look up to them. there’s the few that get picked on, put the majority do not get picked on … the fear of getting picked on, mixed with the twisted admiration for them, keeps them in line… kissing their ass. but these uber-jerks would be nothing without the majority of guys patting them on the back and clamoring to be buddies — and also immitating them, and sometimes being mini-jerks. and the same goes at any other age, pretty much…
July 25, 2009 at 6:55 am
“Women have to deal with enforced femininity, and while a lot of the behaviors femininity entails do indeed suck, they aren’t chosen as freely as men’s behaviors are. ”
i do hope you get more into this in a future blog entry. this is something i don’t currently agree with but i want to see where you’re coming from on it. the way i see it, gender socialization is more rigidly and brutally enforced for males than for females. (i’m talking here about a contemporary “western” societal context.) however, that masculine gender socialization that is enforced on boys soon cycles back to fuck women up real bad.
July 25, 2009 at 6:56 am
omg, click on anonyman’s website too (by clicking on his name). a self-esteem booster that was much needed on my end :)
July 25, 2009 at 7:03 am
i’m actually very much like that (compartmentalized, often very unemotional). but compassion, ethics, and activism are still among the most important things in my life. i care about people and animals (am a vegan). you can still care, be good to others, etc., even if you can easily flip a switch in your brain and forget the gory details of a crime, etc.
actually, people who look into brain differences between males and females (which i’m confident are mostly if not totally caused by nurture, not nature), it is males who are more emotional. surprise!
July 26, 2009 at 8:31 am
Here’s a radical concept: you were after sex but were to insecure to approach anyone so you unleashed your inner misogynist in order to pick up a woman who is incredibly insecure (thanks to the patriarchy) who thinks her only worth lies in sex. The worse you treat her, the more she thinks she’s only worth sex and so the more sex you get. Congratulations on being an A-grade asshole.
July 26, 2009 at 8:31 pm
“It wasn’t until I could fearlessly approach women and deal with the rejection that happened most of the time, basically becoming dead inside to female opinion, that I began to date. This is essentially what an alpha-male is. Someone who doesn’t “care” emotionally about other peoples judgements of them.”
How does how you dress or how often you work out relate to being “too nice”? Don’t you see that dealing with the potential for rejection is what made you more attractive and dateable? It’s called self-confidence. (Or at least, the appearance of it.) Seeming self-confident— without being an asshole— is a near-guaranteed way to attract positive attention. On the other hand, very insecure people can be quite attractive… to other insecure people looking to feel better about themselves.
Which is why I’d argue that “alpha-males” care very much about what other people think. Dickish alpha-male behavior is rooted in insecurity: by definition, they have to surround themselves with less-confident people. (The pinnacle of alpha-male-ism isn’t being good at knocking down challengers, it’s being good at making sure there are no challengers.) However, dickish behavior is normalized, to the point that— ironically enough— it’s generally perceived as a display of confidence. Which is why it can and does attract a (certain type of) woman. Consider: you yourself describe your wife as chronically insecure.
July 31, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Passive-aggressive sarcastic apathetic MRA troll FTW!
(Or, as AileenWuornos so aptly put it, haha wtf?)
July 31, 2009 at 12:05 pm
But wouldn’t “motherfucker” be a statement of how awful the person is, and not their mother? I can’t hear any complicity in that word on the part of the mother — in my mind it’s the same as “mother-raper”.
(This conversation actually got me thinking about this; oh Maude, the language geekery!)
August 1, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Precisely. Literally interpreted, it means “person who rapes mothers”.
It’s telling that being called a mofo is a fraternal bonding term in gangsta culture.
August 2, 2009 at 7:52 am
:( I’m sad now….apparently I’m an ass because I’m male. T.T and here I thought we were all about equality for everyone.
August 3, 2009 at 11:27 am
…Only if you are under the misconception that “fuck” means “rape”, not “have sex with”.
August 3, 2009 at 11:40 am
Well in this instance ND encounters a man, dislikes his behaviour, then extrapolates without providing any evidence for her assertion that “it’s not as if it’s not representative of the way the average male American behaves”.
Now leaving aside the fact that what she might hate is America, rather than men, this still constitutes the standard bigot’s approach to writing: attack a single person effectively, then smear your success out onto everyone who is somehow linked to them. Turn a single loathsome example into an ambassador. I’ve seen it done dozens of time by many, many idiots & I am genuinely disappointed to see it done here. Perhaps this is some kind of parody post?
Regardless, it’s a damn shame. We aren’t going to get anywhere with this sort of prejudice reinforcing tripe.
August 3, 2009 at 11:51 am
& sorry for the excessive swearing, that wasn’t productive. Wasn’t a “put you in your place” thing, it was a knee-jerk anti-bigot response thing.
August 3, 2009 at 11:37 pm
I expect you to read what I said, James. This guy is an example of our culture’s idea of masculinity, and I stated quite plainly that it’s masculinity, not men specifically, that I hate. For someone who hates the gender binary so much, you should have picked that up, seeing as I said it, like, five times.
August 3, 2009 at 11:38 pm
I’m not going to be called a bigot. It’s perfectly acceptable for someone to dislike the generalized behaviors of a group of oppressive people. Bigotry is groundless. There’s a difference.
August 4, 2009 at 12:05 am
…Before saying you hated “Maleness”. Now it’s perfectly possible that I’m getting myself worked up into a lather over semantics here, but isn’t maleness supposed to refer to a penis & masculinity to a cultural construct?
August 4, 2009 at 12:10 am
Like any bigot is going to call their own hate-group a groundless source of opprobrium. You’ve used anecdotal data to stage a generalised extrapolation. That’s a classic bigot technique & it is deeply unimpressive.
I’m not going to start liken you to a National Socialist or a Republican or anything inflammatory like that, but I really think that this approach is inadvisable. If you are going to attack a section of the population this sizable (& yes, I’d like a better world, but the one we’re dealing with has close to 100% of the c. 50% who are born male as some sort of masculine) then you should come packing data. Not mere prejudice.
It’s risky territory, not “I met this complete asshole in the airport” stuff.
August 4, 2009 at 2:19 am
It was an anecdote meant to illustrate several of the main points of the following posts. This is a series, and I’ll thank you not to tell me how to start it off or continue it. Please, seriously, wait until I’ve laid out my case before you tell me I’ve done it improperly.
August 4, 2009 at 2:20 am
No, it refers to masculinity as it is socially defined. Now please, I’m on vacation. I’ll finish this series when I’m back.
August 4, 2009 at 2:34 am
Enjoy yourself.
August 6, 2009 at 6:03 am
Well, hon, when I say, “Fuck you!”, I’m not wishing you a happy hump session with the person of your choosing. “Fuck” takes on more sinister connotations when used as an expletive.
Your response did inspire me to delve into the etymological origins of “motherfucker”, which, according to some sources, may be literally interpreted as “a person who has incestuous relations with their mother”. I still say the most sensible interpretation is “mother raper”, but whatevs.
August 7, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Well given that fuck is a violent word and sex with violence is rape, yes, fuck does mean rape. Unless of course you’re still trying to convince yourself that its acceptable to be violent towards women.
August 9, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Fuck is an inherently violent word? It often is used that way yes, but not exclusively, surely.
August 10, 2009 at 12:15 am
I think so, absolutely. Anytime it is used outside of a sexual context it is used in a violent way. Then, of course, when it moves to sex people try to claim that it isn’t violent anymore (just as they like to claim that BDSM isn’t violent) but its impossible to remove the engrained violence in such a word. It’s not possible to fuck someone you see as an equal, which is why it usually refers to women being fucked.
August 10, 2009 at 1:32 am
Aren’t you forgetting the gays? They fuck each other all the time. Why can’t I fuck a woman if I’m allowed to fuck a man?
August 10, 2009 at 3:36 am
The situation women have to face is that men are socialized (by other men) to despise women in the same way that white supremacists despise black people. Imagine if white supremacist were sexually attracted to black people. What a complete mess that would be. But it is a reality for us. We are supposed to have intimate relationships and raise children with people who see us as the “n” word, totally subhuman, dirty and contemptible.
August 10, 2009 at 6:02 am
having just finished INTERCOURSE i can see how relevant this point is.
sadly/however the word fuck is fairly embedded in my vocabulary. i think james should go read that book too just quietly.
August 10, 2009 at 8:18 am
The issue of sex between gay men is more than I can explain to a misogynist in a short comment. Like berryblade said, read “Intercourse” and then go and read about how masculinity effects men’s views on sex (with men or women). You don’t have any right to treat anyone as inferior or as sex objects which you are doing if you refer to sex as fucking.
If you are the kind of person who thinks it is acceptable to “fuck” women then why on earth are you on a radfem blog? Did you think you could impress us all by pretending to be a ‘feminist’ male? Pity for you that no one here is stupid enough to fall for that crap. As long as you are not willing to check your male privilege and as long as you think “fucking” women is acceptable you are not going to get the praise you are so obviously after.
August 10, 2009 at 9:07 am
I don’t know about that. It seems to me that it only has that negative connotation because sex is inherently dirty, and we should all feel ashamed for our wicked thoughts, especially the women.
There isn’t (at least in english) a polite verb referring to the sexual act because of this.
Though, it could just be that I don’t live where you live, and the word is used slightly differently around here.
August 10, 2009 at 3:10 pm
It is truly a sad reality when in todays world women must endure the splatter of bullshit that spews forth so effortlessly from “The Man” as well as his corporate female/she-male counterpart, “The Wanna-Be Man”. Yes, I am referring to the corporate business woman female counter-part to “The Man”; “The Wanna-Be Man”. I was raised to be a team player and to be loyal to the team captain, or leader of whatever team I am associated, yet, I find more and more that I am quite often the only female “team player” who is playing by the rules and whose values reflect loyalty, integrity and a desire to be successful while at the same time, helping to make my fellow teammates and team leader shine more brightly in the eyes of “The Man” who employs our professional service.
I am of the opinion most women are still working tirelessly at defining their roles in todays world. Sadly, just as in the case of “The Man’s” actions, we must equally endure the “counter female” who in support of her male counter part, chooses to stand in support of their male leader when decisions are made which are strategic in streamlining the “type” of people who will be chosen for success in “The Man’s” world of business and the team for which he is playing alongside. These female counter-parts seem to rear their ugly bestial faces in times when women most need to stand strong beside each other in support of our united struggle to be accepted on our own terms for who we are as human beings capable to performing on the same level as any male. Yet, it is other females who continuously seem to be the greatest perpetuator’s in supporting the actions, spoken or otherwise, of “The Man” in the battle to keep women in a place where we will be of no threat to their male dominated roles, fragile egos, selfishness, and greed of unimaginable heights. As for “The Wanna-Be Man”, who seems to think they’re being “team players” when they support their business leaders, ” this very support of “The Man’s” actions merely serves to perpetuate the condemnation of females to subservient positions in the corporate world, which will, once again, need to be overcome. Well, I say to all of you “Wanna-Be Men” out there who are fucking your own kind; GET A FUCKING CLUE!
*This current generation of corporate business women who are trying so desperately to “fit in” with “The Man”; believe the way it was for them is the way it’s got to be for all females who wish to play a more productive role in the world of business today and in the future. Well, this is just not true. Too many women strive to attain more than what they are allowed to become in this still male dominated world. The majority of women are allowed charity leadership roles from their business leader,”The Man”. I tell you now, it will not be until this whole generation of business men, and women, have lain down and died will the weight of their oppression be off our backs!
Sadly, women are quite often the worst enemy of women. “The Man” is merely the puppet master sending clear messages, which serve to hold women back from too much advancement in the business world as well as in life for some.
Women are continuously redefining their vision of what role they will play in their own futures. Now is the time for women to stand together sharing in a united goal with personal and professional values are in alignment by all, or this struggle will continue to serve as a distraction for human kind, preventing us all from focusing on what matters most; quality and balance of life for all on our living planet earth.
*I twisted a memorable quote from the movie, Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner, which I felt suited the nature of what I most wanted to communicate, though a bit on the dramatic side, if I do say so myself.
Teresa
August 11, 2009 at 3:51 am
I’ve been extremely shy my whole life, and yes, people treat you like total crap. I was not as aware of sexism growing up because I was treated inferior all the time and didn’t connect it to my gender at all.
People treat shyness like it’s something that needs to be cured, that everyone must be an extrovert or there is something wrong with you. Also it is seen as a sign of being weak, and weakness is severely punished in a patriarchal society.
August 14, 2009 at 4:12 am
jackass!
August 14, 2009 at 4:15 am
ok we’re getting away from the real important issue here…. that all men suck butt!! they are horrible beings who deserve to be hated!!
August 15, 2009 at 6:58 am
Hi there,
I found your site by googling “I hate men”…I was just having one of those days where I just said.. argh I can’t stand men….and I am so glad I found you! I am totally straight (unfortunately) but right now I want to date you :)
I completely wholeheartedly agree with what you are saying. I felt like I was reading my own journal when I read your blog.
Like you I don’t hate all men but yea I hate almost all of them…. and I feel like it’s become really the battle of sexes now…
August 16, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Fuck is not used exclusively with violent intent. Example: I absolutely adore a good fuck when I’m feeling overly excited in a sexual manner. I just want hard core sex, with little thought regarding personal emotions between myself and my partner.
See? Isn’t that a nice way of using the word, Fuck? :-)
August 16, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Whatever turns you on, Teresa.
August 16, 2009 at 7:57 pm
Hey! I was only providing an example for when the “F” word is not delivered with violent intentions behind the use of the word.
I thought it was a good example, as opposed to being condescending.
August 16, 2009 at 8:03 pm
I must agree; the word fuck is embedded in the vocabulary of many and has a different meaning for each intent in which i is delivered. It’s a happy verb, or an angry adverb, etc.
Keep your listening ears on!
August 16, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Yes…..you are correct, Misty. Apologies.
Men suck.
August 16, 2009 at 10:57 pm
Actually, no, it’s not a nice way of using the word. All it means is that you have acquired it in order to objectify your partner. You’re just getting in first so that you can objectify someone before they are able to objectify you. That’s not “nice” it’s either self-preservation or ruthlessness displayed through violence.
August 16, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Hah, my mistake, sorry. The internet is so saturated with snark I’ve started to see it everywhere, I suppose. I agree with you.
August 16, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Here’s what I think…
Sexual objectification is the objectification of a person, which occurs when a person is seen as a sexual object when their sexual attributes and physical attractiveness are separated from the rest of their personality and existence as an individual, and reduced to instruments of pleasure for another person. Such as when partners are role playing and wearing Super Hero costumes which lead to intense Super Hero sex totally devoid of emotion, but every bit as enjoyable as when you are enjoying the usual mind body connection associated with “love making”.
The concept of sexual objectification and, in particular, the objectification of women, is an important idea in feminist theory and psychological theories derived from feminism.
I believe there are many feminists who regard sexual objectification as objectionable with regards to the inequality of women. There are also those who have argued that sexual freedom for women has led to an increase of the sexual objectification of men.
Personally, I think this is more of a sexual philosphy discussion and even a sexual ethics which would be a great topic for further discussion and debate. Just not in this particular discussion as it is not “exactly” what the topic of focus regards.
I will continue to wear my Wonder Woman costume and enjoy the complete objectification of my partner who will be wearing his Batman costume.
TO THE BATCAVE!
August 16, 2009 at 11:45 pm
I have to say; my husband and I were discussing the “balance” needed between men and women earlier today. We had a pretty involved discussion which has proved to be multifaceted in perspectives, feelings, great emotion, confusion, and values and ethics.
It is obvious, both men and women are out of balance in today’s world and there is much growing to do on both sides before a new balance is created.
For now, my husband and I choose the path of listening and truly hearing what each side has to offer the other.
August 16, 2009 at 11:50 pm
I think porn is objectification which carries very negative connotation directed completely at dehumanizing women.
I think men are clueless when it comes to why most women are offended by porn, or by the use of porn some men choose as their way of creating sexual desire for their partner. That is just sad all the way around.
August 16, 2009 at 11:58 pm
I don’t think men are clueless as to why women object to porn, I think they pretend to be in order to protect their “right” to use it. I’ve got a 9-part (and counting) series on porn here if you’re interested.
August 16, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Fuck is an iconic English word. In its canonical transitive verb form, it simply refers to the act of sexual intercourse. By extension it may be used to profanely or negatively characterize anything that can be dismissed, disdained, defiled, or destroyed, and it is due to the convergence of these two weighty concepts (sex and destruction) that the term can carry such overloaded emphasis, although it is frequently used as a mere intensifier.
“Fuck” can be used as a noun, verb, adjective, adverb, pronoun, or interjection and can logically be used as virtually any word in a sentence (e.g. “Fuck the fucking fuckers”).
It hence has various metaphorical meanings.
The verb “to be fucked” can mean “to be cheated” (e.g. “I got fucked by a scam artist”).
As a noun “a fuck” or “a fucker” may describe a contemptible person. “A fuck” may mean an act of copulation.
As a verb, the word can be used as an interjection, and its participle is sometimes used as a strong emphatic. The verb to fuck may be used transitively or intransitively, and it appears in compounds, including fuck off, fuck up, and fuck with.
In less explicit usages (but still regarded as vulgar), fuck or fuck with can mean to mess around, or to deal with unfairly or harshly. In a phrase such as “don’t give a fuck”, the word is the equivalent of “damn”, in the sense of something having little value.
In “what the fuck”, it serves merely as an intensive.
August 17, 2009 at 12:29 am
huh?
August 17, 2009 at 12:32 am
I’ve never needed porn to masturbate. As a woman, I use my minds eye and a battery powered tool. Fortunately for me, when my mind fails me, the tool does not. However, I am ashamed to admit, I’ve seen porn and it did have a sexual stimulus affect on my mind. How crappy is that to know!!!
August 17, 2009 at 12:38 am
I’m so interested and secretly agree with your comment regarding men pretending to be clueless. I think some men know exactly what they are doing and could care less as they don’t hold women in high regard in general, as it is. I think there are some younger men who are still forming wrinkles on their brains and “now” is the time to make these young men more aware, before they too have little regard for women and what we think and feel, in general. The “good ole boy” day’s need to end now.
August 17, 2009 at 12:41 am
I totally forgot; I would very much enjoy reading your 9-part (and counting) series on porn.
I’m very opinionated on this subject and enjoy a psychological, socialogical, ethical, as well as philosophical discussion on the subject of porn.
Thanks for the offer, Nine Deuce!
August 17, 2009 at 12:53 am
Here’s part 8, which deals with men’s supposition that they have a right to use porn. If you go over to the right and use the search box, you can type in “porn part 1″ or whichever of the 9 you’d like to see as they are all titled porn part __ plus a subtitle.
August 17, 2009 at 1:48 am
Go Fembots!
Does anyone remember the Fembots?
August 17, 2009 at 1:59 am
If human kind could only learn to cherish the old ways, living close to the natural order of things. We could all live together in harmony with our living Earth.
It would be just like…..Paradise.
August 18, 2009 at 12:53 am
Dude? You didn’t get dates because you were an “alpha male,” you got dates because you acted interested in women. I would rather date a guy who’s interested in me than tear my eyes out over a guy who acted interested for two seconds and then walked out, or a guy who never looks at me at all.
It ain’t rocket science. There’s nothing “manly” about it. If women weren’t socialized to be so damn passive I bet you would have loved to have a woman come up and show interest in you.
Just guessing… could be wrong.
August 18, 2009 at 12:56 am
I think jerks get more female attention because they’re on the prowl to victimize women, so in order to do that, they must “set the bait” by displaying interest in their targets. It doesn’t last forever. Either they drop her like a hot potato when they’re done with her or they hold on to her and it escalates into abuse.
The stereotypical “nice guy” who complains about the “jerks” getting “all the women” is typically a guy who sits off in a corner trying to be invisible. How’s that going to get anyone’s attention?
Admittedly, jerks have more confidence because the culture encourages them. Nice guys don’t have that advantage. Ditto for passive women getting encouragement versus assertive women not getting it.
August 18, 2009 at 1:18 am
You clearly have never read Fast Times At Ridgemont High. Unless Brad thought the toilet was sexually attractive, that is.
OK, OK, given, while the book was based on true accounts, who knows how much was exaggerated and where. But damn. Are you seriously trying to tell me men have to be looking at something to ejaculate?
August 18, 2009 at 9:11 am
“Natural order of things”?
If you’re talking about living in harmony with the environment, well, I’d be interested in how you’re accessing the internet without the use of manufactured goods.
If you’re talking about living in harmony with other people, then that’s not really “the old ways”…humans have fought amongst themselves more or less forever, ever since they banded together to avoid having to contend with the environment so much…one of the disadvantages of having evolved from a predatory species, I guess.
August 19, 2009 at 3:37 pm
It was a quote from Wonder Woman. Don’t take life so seriously. Sometimes, it’s best to take a step back and take in the world around you. I think our world today is moving so fast that we are not aware of what is immediately around us in our own environment and how life changes us and even warps our perspective, creating a slight imbalance in our inner core.
“Cherish the old ways.” Try to remember, sometimes in life, things are not as complicated as we tend to make them. KISS.
“Live in harmony with our living earth.” Learn to feel the world around you. The real living world we live in, that is. Trees, grass, ants, heathly earth alive with life going about its business in the soil beneath us. Have you ever seen the earth move beneath your feet?
Try not to let the fight for equality and the constant battle against the man-chine with all of its egotistical, self serving, arrogant and narrow minded thinking; try not to let our struggles take from us the things in this world which should be most important to every human; life and quality of life on our living earth. KISS.
Humans have been evolving for quite some time. I don’t think it was exactly trying to “avoid contending with the environment”, as much as humans have struggled to live within their environment, but in the least dangerous way possible as part of the need to survive. At one point, humans came close to no longer existing on earth. Fortunately, because early humans were resilient and had the ability to adapt to the environment and the new conditions as presented, we are still here and will hopefully continue to evolve further.
I am surprised that a simple statement such as “live in harmony with our living earth”, was so easily twisted into something far too complicated.
This is exactly the opposite of “Keep it simple stupid.”; KISS. Life is not that complicated, unless you choose to make it so, which will further complicate it for those around you. We all touch each others lives in one form or another.
Let’s try to make sure our values are refleced in our actions, as well as in the choices we make for ourselves each day. Reflecting the best of what we have to offer each other, rather than so much complication and negativity towards our male counter parts will only serve to hold us back in what we endeavor. Each of us, including women, are accountable for the state of things in the world, such as they are today. Like it or not, women have always held great influence over man, though maybe not in the way we would prefer; as equal voices on the floor.
If we continue to wield this influence in the right manner, our goal of true equality will come to fruition. In the mean time, forums and blogs such as this one, will allow us to verbally bitch slap the male of our species until they learn to stop thinking with their man-tool, as opposed to using the giant noodle in their heads as was its intended use either by design or evolution.
Wow. I got off track a bit. Sorry. I am groggy and need coffee now, please.
August 19, 2009 at 3:54 pm
I am in agreement with your post, Charlie. It’s a good deal about inner strength in each of us and our own actions and choices we make for ourselves. This is what attracks me to another person. I like people who are strong in their values and core beliefs, who’ve learned how to live according to their values, no matter the opinions of their peers who may find them to be weak for not going through life using the “pack” mentality, as most men seem to do in our world. (I know; the pack mentality is a separate subject matter for a completely different discussion in a totally different blog.) But, I hope my direction was easily understood. If not, I will certainly restate using better clarity of thought as I write.
August 19, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Oh my gawd! Einstein was not the best writer either, but he “clearly” had a high I.Q.
A truly intelligent person would easily overcome such triviality in a blog post.
You could have nicely reminded the writer to consider using spelling and grammar check before posting comments if they wish to be taking more seriously by the readers.
I’m just sayin…..
Peace dude and dudettes!
August 19, 2009 at 4:21 pm
I hold no aggression towards you or your words, as they are intended to enlighten, as well as invite feedback in an attempt at further discussion on the subject.
I too am curious as to the reason for the aggression, or hostile comments being sent your way.
I don’t think aggression or hostility is the correct way to keep lines of communication open. If we are to better understand each other, and the needs of both men and women in order to live a more balanced life, then we will “ALL” need to learn how to communicate more appropriately.
If women, and some men, would please try to keep this thought in mind; when we “choose” to communicate on any level and in any written or spoken discussion where millions of people have the ability to read our words, these words “YOU” choose to use “WILL” be a reflection on women and the struggles of women. Clearly you can each understand, the manner in which you choose to “represent” will inevitably reflect either positively or negatively on the minds of others, thereby holding the potential to mold the views and opinions of readers; men and women.
I would hope that a slightly less aggressive and less hostile communication approach could be taken for this reason alone.
If my reasoning on this issue is faulty, please enlighten me, as I am also in the position of “representing”. I would like to know I am not doing it poorly, if it can be helped.
August 19, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Nice! I think you made your point well, Nanella.
This is not a court room and we’re not on the witness stand giving testimony. I think there is nothing wrong with asking for supporting data if it serves to educate others. Hell, if supporting documentation, or information linkage serves to educate just one person, then the request for said information is justified.
- Next
Does anyone wish to cross examine? If not, I will allow Nanella to step down.
August 22, 2009 at 2:17 am
“I’m not going to be called a bigot. It’s perfectly acceptable for someone to dislike the generalized behaviors of a group of oppressive people. Bigotry is groundless. There’s a difference.”
I understand what you’re saying (and frankly, I wouldn’t be callous enough to call any member of an oppressed group a bigot for their reaction to the oppression), but this makes me uneasy.
After all, I am a man, a radical feminist, and a homosexual. I’m often tempted to hate heterosexuals (you may or may not be one, but statistically it’s likely I guess), but I try not to. After all, heterosexuals are the ones oppressing me, and the vast majority of heterosexuals, especially men, degrade and offend me on a regular basis. We could go into a surreal Olympics of Oppression here, deciding who has it worse, homosexuals or women (I’d probably concede it’s the latter), but either way, the situations are similar.
I try not to hate heterosexuals because it doesn’t accomplish much. There are plenty of straights who are kind to me and supportive and I love them for that. I certainly make blanket statements that heterosexual culture sucks, that heteronormative assumption sucks, etc. However, I don’t hate heterosexuals FOR BEING heterosexuals.
I guess I’m just saying that it would probably be more productive to focus your anger (which is definitely righteous) towards the actual cause of the oppression, which is not men or masculinity itself, but instead certain (read: the fucking huge majority of) men (unless somehow I’ve misread your stance and you actually believe that masculinity inherently leads to oppression, in which case I guess I just disagree).
Does that make any sense? I love your blog and I’m definitely going to be reading more. Have a nice day!
*Sorry for so many parentheses, I’m a terrible writer.*
August 22, 2009 at 2:31 am
I think that masculinity, as in the cultural idea of what it means to be gendered male, is the problem because it’s defined by aggression and privilege. That doesn’t mean I hate everyone with a penis, but that I hate the idea of what “manhood” is supposed to consist of because it hurts women (and it also hurts men). I don’t walk around hating every dude I see, but I’m wary of them and I assume they’re assholes until I see otherwise, because 99% of the time they are. But I’ll get further into all that in the rest of the series.
Welcome aboard. (And worry not about parentheses – I’m a big fan myself).
August 23, 2009 at 12:43 am
I don’t walk around hating every dude I see, but I’m wary of them and I assume they’re assholes until I see otherwise, because 99% of the time they are.
…Ok firstly that’s fucking crazy. 49% of the people you meet are assholes? Which planet are you located, exactly? Secondly: that’s the definition of prejudice. You make a negative assumption based upon an anecdotally compiled grudge.
August 23, 2009 at 1:00 am
Hey there Jonah!
Idk if this is to do with me being bi rather than gay, but personally I don’t feel oppressed at all. Sorry to feel that you do, though. As for me being “callous enough to call any member of an oppressed group a bigot for their reaction to the oppression”, there’s a quote I’d like to share with you:
“For our declaration of independence, we should have the skin of a white man for parchment, his skull for an inkwell, his blood for ink, and a bayonet for a pen!”
That was Boisrond-Tonnerre, aide to revolutionary Haitian, Dessalines. Both Dessalines & Boisrond-Tonnerre had been horribly oppressed, as all black Haitians had been, but both of them were still murderous bigots. ND is obviously nowhere near their league (either in bigotry or badassery), but I hope that that historical quotation goes to demonstrate how being a victim of oppression & being bigoted are far from mutually exclusive.
(In this instance, however, there was a happy ending: rather than embarking upon full-scale genocide upon reaching power Dessalines decided that white Haitians who had fought for independence had thus rendered themselves black, which is an atypical definition but as sound as any. Whether B-T agreed with it, I honestly don’t know. I certainly doubt that he did at the time of that quote’s origin.)
August 23, 2009 at 2:17 am
I hate everyone, James. It’s probably got more to do with my countercultural elitism.
August 23, 2009 at 3:22 am
You keep saying things like that but all I hear is excuses for your behaviour. You cannot be a bigot against people who have been oppressing you for hundreds of years. You, on the other hand, keep proving how ignorant you are about how power and oppression actually works. Too many people, yourself included, like to align themselves with an oppressed group to try to prove how “progressive” they are to the outside word. All you are actually proving to those who are oppressed is how engrained that power actually is by not only refusing to recognise that their is a power imbalance but also by shifting blame to the oppressed group. Take a look at yourself for the true bigotry.
August 23, 2009 at 8:15 am
“49% of the people you meet are assholes? Which planet are you located, exactly?”
Yeah, where exactly is it where 51% of the population isn’t?
August 23, 2009 at 8:29 am
“You cannot be a bigot against people who have been oppressing you for hundreds of years.”
Well, no, because the human lifespan doesn’t run for hundreds of years.
Seriously, though, when people start talking about other people’s oppression as if it was their own, it becomes a bit of a slippery slope.
The oppression of women by men has been going on for thousands of years, yes, and has, and is, spectactularly horrific at times (as opposed to “normal”, common or garden prejudice), but the men of today (or, for that matter, any other time) are only responsible for their own actions, and to some extent those of their contemporaries.
Personally, I’d say that it would certainly be possible for someone who had been oppressed to be a bigot (hell, look at the Middle East…every atrocity committed against *them* is fully justified by all the atrocities committed against *us*, forever).
That’s not to say I’m calling ND a bigot, or even that I think it’s relevant. Not having ever met her, all she is to me is black text on a white background, and ideas which are right or wrong regardless of who or what she is.
August 23, 2009 at 11:17 am
Becstar, I don’t really deem this to be a response to my comment, as such. You have said “You cannot be a bigot against people who have been oppressing you for hundreds of years”, but that seems to be an assertion rather than an argument, because you have provided seemingly no reasoning. I would say that it is entirely possible, as well as probable & unhelpful. Unless you are in a position where that hatred can drive you through a successful revolution (& radical feminism has yet to find it’s analogue to anti-colonialism’s Haiti) it generally just generates rancour & prevents people getting anywhere. Think Nation of Islam era Malcolm X (post-NoI X was an entirely different story, a true hero were there ever one).
As for your ad hominem regarding my motivation, well I don’t really need to respond to that, but I shall. I don’t want to impress everyone by by astounding progressiveness, & if I did I’d probably be posting elsewhere. I can think of far better locations for an ego rubdown & if you have an ounce of empathy (& have read this post’s title) you’ll probably be able to see why. Politically I’ve been all over the place these few last years, but the lodestone is opposition to bigotry (with the anti-racism, internationalism, egalitarianism, socialism & all else that adherence to such a doctrine implies being constants too).
I think that elimination of the inaccurate cultural trope of there being a gender binary is a matter of highest priority. Unfortunately many feminists seem to be treating it with reverence rather than the contempt it deserves, albeit inadvertantly. The outcome is sexism, pure & simple: an environment where I can claim that a post entitled “Why I Hate Men” is sexist & be accused of bigotry is one where the world has been put upon its head.
I am not blaming you & Nine for any social ills (I don’t really know where you got that impression), I’m just saying that this post is pretty damn bigoted. Its a piece of prejudice, pure & simple.
August 23, 2009 at 11:01 pm
Why thankyou so much for not blaming you. Being a girl and all I really needed male validation. And of course, if a MAN says a woman is bigoted then he must be right! This patriarchy business is obviously all for our own good anyway, right?
August 24, 2009 at 1:13 am
That’s a mixture of a strawman & an ad hominem. I tried to present a case for why I think that this post is a bigoted one (not that Nine is a bigot), & now you’ve responded by saying that I just think I’m right because I’m male.
If that was the case then I wouldn’t have bothered making an argument. Speaking of which, you’ve just typed out some views which I don’t believe in to try & discredit the ones which I do. That isn’t really a rebuttal.
August 24, 2009 at 8:17 am
There’s no point rebutting the argument of someone who is convinced they are right simply because they have been brought up to believe that as a male they are always right when compared to women. It hasn’t even crossed your mind that your position is based on your privilege and that just because you claim to be supporting feminism does not mean you are incapable of being a misogynist. Until you recognise this any argument you produce is worthless.
August 24, 2009 at 8:58 am
To be less snarky & concise:
-I’ve actually been considering this whole “privilege” thing a lot lately. I’m very divided over whether stressing it is a bad or good thing, but I certainly have given it some thought.
-I’ve never stated I’m “supporting feminism”, I certainly do not support radical feminism, on the grounds that I think it generally reinforces the gender binary (see: the post we’re replying to).
-Neither do I assume that there are no misogynist feminists. It just so happens that I find misogyny preposterous. That sort of comes hand in glove with disagreeing with the binary.
-Above all in matters of gender I am opposed to prejudice & presumption. I think that that’s the source of a huge amount of ill (that’s a woman, she’ll get pregnant if I hire her; that’s a man, he won’t understand feelings). That’s what I think should be eliminated from out culture, & right now I’d say you are being part of the problem rather than the solution. You are dismissing me on the basis of which side of the imaginary line I fall down on, rather than dismissing the binary on the basis of it being bullshit.
I don’t know nearly enough about you to estimate whether that’s due to oppression of some kind you’ve suffered or not, but that’s not really my point. You are acting like a right little binarist.
-Speaking of ignorance, you know fuck all about my background. Don’t imagine your lovely structuralist model acts as a substitute for asking me how I was raised, please. I certainly was not raised to believe that men are always correct over women. Otherwise I’d be hanging with my thief of a father in Spain, living merrily off of cash drained offshore from the joint account (& the children’s building societies, & the mortgages run up on our properties until they were much worse than worthless, & the stolen jewels/champagne, & the…), rather than having stuck around being dirt poor here with my mother for five miserable years.
& that’s your literal dirt poor, you understand. At some point bedrooms without a roof, dust every-fucking-where. No hot water for several months so baths involved boiling twenty kettles, etc, etc, etc… All the while I could have been sunning myself laughing at that mad bitch back in Britain with her deranged conspiracy theories & faulty grasp of finances.
But instead I accepted that he was an embezzling bastard, my mother was the entirely blameless victim of theft on a truly vast scale, & so I stuck around with me mother & little sister, both of whom (believe it or not) are both females & feminine & argue with me all the fucking time rather than ceding to my almighty, cock-based authority as they surely should do what with my bountiful, fathomless privilege. Instead they force me on a regular basis to accept that they’re right & I’m just fucking wrong. & they aren’t even feminists! Unbelievable, huh?
It’s almost as if structuralism doesn’t work when you try & apply it to the micro, or something wild like that.
-Almighty fucksticks, you truly are fond of them ad hominems, aren’t you? As it happens attacking me doesn’t dismiss any of my points, as much as you may want it to & as self-righteous as you may feel while laying into my defects.
August 24, 2009 at 9:10 am
“I think that elimination of the inaccurate cultural trope of there being a gender binary is a matter of highest priority. Unfortunately many feminists seem to be treating it with reverence rather than the contempt it deserves, albeit inadvertantly. ”
I agree with you on that…sort of.
However, eliminating the gender binary is harder than simply ignoring it, and what you see as the reverence of it is probably due to people drawing attention to it, often not in the best way, though there is some overlap.
Mind you, I sympathise with those who don’t see it being eliminated, at least not in our lifetimes, and have thus accepted is as a constant, even if I don’t neccesarily agree with them.
August 24, 2009 at 11:58 pm
“Shaun, you are not, sorry to say, exempt from the pool of men being hated on here. You’ve taken one anecdote about a man who outwardly embodies everything wrong with masculinity and sanctimoniously separated yourself into an imaginary opposing group of good guys (or “beta males”) who are miraculously free of patriarchal influence. You were raised in a patriarchal society, you haven’t escaped the conditioning (barging onto a feminist blog to bleat about how you’ve been mistreated TOO is pretty damn “alpha male” in its self-important disregard for the subject at hand). (And then there’s your championing of critically unexamined and heinously sexist male/female stereotypes. Alpha males, and alpha male wannabes, are alllll about the stereotypes, Shaun. They eat them for breakfast with their testosterone-and-egg yolk power shakes.)”
Oh I don’t know about that. I was raised by women. Women that had a very similar world-view as that which is prevalent on this blog.
August 25, 2009 at 3:44 am
What the hell is it today with men claiming they can’t possibly have been conditioned by the patriarchy because they were raised by/around women? One woman, or even several, are not going to be able to cancel out every aspect of society that reinforces the patriarchy (porn, advertising, business, education…the list goes on).
August 25, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Your problem, Becstar, is that you’re taking a structuralist model (the Patriarchy) & then trying to cram us into it. Believe it or not, that’s a kind of treatment that people object to. You don’t know anything about our upbringing, you are simply presuming things. It isn’t appreciated, please try asking how we were raised.
Who knows, perhaps your model could feature a flaw.
August 25, 2009 at 11:15 pm
You can’t honestly be that thick – did you actually read what I wrote? I’m not the one forcing you into the patriarchy, the patriarchy already exists everywhere and simply by being alive people are a part of it. It doesn’t matter how you were raised, as long as you have been out in the world you have been influenced by the patriarchy and gained from the privilege that it gives men. Being raised a feminist woman, no matter how radical, does not change that, and quite frankly every single time you post you are proving your ignorance as to how power structures actually work.
August 26, 2009 at 2:10 am
Right on! I really do hate men, as defined by the patriarchy, and most males act out that role to a greater or lesser degree. Some of that is self-defense because they hate me, and all women. I also hate sex, as the patriarchy has defined it. Any and all time spent protesting that “no, we really love men/cock” could be better spent bringing about the feminist revolution.
I know there is another way to experience sex that is not violent, hateful or fetishizing dominance, but I don’t know exactly what it is yet, nor how to get to it when starting from the entrenched mindset of the patriarchy.
August 26, 2009 at 3:00 am
You can’t honestly be that thick – did you actually read what I wrote?
Yes, although I doubt you read much of what I did.
I’m not the one forcing you into the patriarchy, the patriarchy already exists everywhere and simply by being alive people are a part of it.
The Patriarchy was a “model” designed to help us understand the world by a thinker who should have stuck to selling soap.
It doesn’t matter how you were raised, as long as you have been out in the world you have been influenced by the patriarchy and gained from the privilege that it gives men.
So you know more about my upbringing than I do. Do you ever stop to think that you might be presumptuous instead of well informed?
Being raised a feminist woman, no matter how radical, does not change that, and quite frankly every single time you post you are proving your ignorance as to how power structures actually work.
I’m not going to apologise for my refusal to accept your lovely structuralist model. At some point you’re going to have to realise that they don’t work, have never worked & never will work as a means for understanding the totality of human existence. Which is sort of the problem I have with the gender binary, really: you can set down a normative rule & expect it to work. I’m increasingly coming to realise that you’re doing much the same, just with the parameters set a little differently.
August 26, 2009 at 3:37 am
I think (and correct me if I’m wrong) that Nine Deuce is saying if anything a feminist says is going to be construed as “man-hating”, then why not embrace it and not waste time constantly trying to explain how it’s the system and the men who perpetuate it that are the problem.
I don’t hate all men, but I’m SOOO SICK of the everyday, socially acceptable hatred and nastiness directed at women in general, and feminists in particular when we have the nerve to complain about it. You could say the most innocent thing, like women should get equal pay for equal work, and get accused of just being an angry ‘man-hater’.
Calling ND a ‘bigot’ misses the point entirely. Why not direct that energy toward your fellow men and take them to task for their nastiness toward women and their definition of manhood as being someone who is superior to women and treats women contemptuously?
August 26, 2009 at 3:57 am
I am so sick of poststructualists who think they are so clever and alternative for following Foucault and company. You do realise that poststructuralism itself is inherently a metanarrative of its very own don’t you? It can never work because that is its inherent flaw – you cannot have a theory that espouses that all theory is bad without being an enormous hypocrite.
August 26, 2009 at 2:07 pm
“It isn’t appreciated, please try asking how we were raised.”
Unless you or anyone else was raised in a basement with no interaction with the outside world, it is irrelevant as to who raised you or how. We were all raised in a heavily patriarchal society. There is no getting around that fact. By coming in contact with that patriarchal society, we have all absorbed the messages of this society to one degree or another. Do you watch TV? Do you – or have you ever – attended school? Do you have a job where you interact with other people? Have you ever used porn? Do you perhaps go to church or follow any male-dominated religion? If you’ve done any of these things, you have been exposed to patriarchal society.
In short, unless you were raised in a hole in the ground, you have come in contact with patriarchal programming. Unless you are some super-human (and from reading your comments, I’m guessing you’re not), you have been conditioned by that programming to some degree or another. Each and every one of us has.
The only question for any of us is how much we have been affected and in what ways have we been affected.
August 26, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Unless you or anyone else was raised in a basement with no interaction with the outside world, it is irrelevant as to who raised you or how.
No, it is not. Certain figures are far more influential than others in people’s development. If some over-arching “society as a whole” was as over-bearing as you seem to think it is then cultures would be incapable of change.
We were all raised in a heavily patriarchal society. There is no getting around that fact.
I think that’s a very reductionistic way of approaching the world.
By coming in contact with that patriarchal society, we have all absorbed the messages of this society to one degree or another. Do you watch TV? Do you – or have you ever – attended school? Do you have a job where you interact with other people? Have you ever used porn? Do you perhaps go to church or follow any male-dominated religion? If you’ve done any of these things, you have been exposed to patriarchal society.
Yes, & at many stages staged a systematic rejection of its claims. I’ve been exposed to all sorts of ideas in my time, it’s vital to distinguish between exposure & acceptance.
In short, unless you were raised in a hole in the ground, you have come in contact with patriarchal programming. Unless you are some super-human (and from reading your comments, I’m guessing you’re not), you have been conditioned by that programming to some degree or another. Each and every one of us has.
The only question for any of us is how much we have been affected and in what ways have we been affected.
No, I don’t think I’ve been programmed. That suggests some guiding sentience was giving me instructions, which isn’t how culture works.
I am so sick of poststructualists who think they are so clever and alternative for following Foucault and company.
This isn’t about me, & it most certainly isn’t about Foucault. It’s about your attempt to rely upon models to understand humanity, & how that’s wrong.
You do realise that poststructuralism itself is inherently a metanarrative of its very own don’t you?
I have never called myself a post-structuralist.
It can never work because that is its inherent flaw – you cannot have a theory that espouses that all theory is bad without being an enormous hypocrite.
“No universal laws” is a universal law, etc, etc. Yes, I know. I still don’t like structuralism.
August 26, 2009 at 8:13 pm
“No, it is not. Certain figures are far more influential than others in people’s development.”
James,
Saying that it was irrelevant was a poor choice of phrasing. What I meant by that is simply that the people who raise us are not the only ones who have an effect on us and on our conditioning. I stand quite firmly by everything else that I said.
August 26, 2009 at 8:15 pm
Gawd James, you just keep going from feminist blog to feminist blog making the same crappy arguments no matter how many times we debunk, answer, and generally shoot them down.
Aren’t you bored yet? We are.
August 26, 2009 at 8:54 pm
One of my main arguments is that feminists rely too much on ad hominems. :P
September 24, 2009 at 10:12 pm
men are assholes. they can’t seem to keep their dick in their pants for a long time.
bloody fuckers.
thank you for creating this article.
i am feeling soo relaxed after a long time unloading my hatred for bloody male sex.
September 25, 2009 at 2:12 am
Don’t you think even all our life’s individual subjective experiences never can be fully objectively interpreted until you try out both sides? So, never. My mother was a strong person, had equal function in my family and had equal job as my father, but was payed more.
September 26, 2009 at 3:36 am
Thank fucking walrus! I love this post. Geez, I have tried for a long time to like or at least tolerate men but I can’t. I simply can’t. I have never met a man that had any clue what they were talking about; even the potentially smart ones were diminished by the fact that they still viewed girls talking about men as useless fucks as sexist and evil as men talking about girls the same way. Because they like to think that men face all the oppression and bullshit now a days and that male privilege doesn’t exist. FUUUCK! I hate them. Anyway, it’s more sensible to be anti-men until you met one that’s not shit; you don’t trust a giant knife being hurdled at your head because of the off chance that it might be plastic.
September 29, 2009 at 3:36 am
I grew up with men. My mother had 4 brothers so she wasn’t all that feminine. I never felt comfortable as a woman, and once in my twenties I had to start trying to figure it out. But now coming up on 30, I’ve realized I don’t enjoy male company either. I’ve never been treated with such disrespect than by men when i started dating at around 25. For no reason.
Other than having children, I have absolutely no use for them. Oh and maybe moving heavy objects. It’s sad, but they bring it on themselves. They lie, they cheat and think only about themselves.
September 29, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Thank you for this. I thought I was the only one.
October 8, 2009 at 6:57 am
posting this because i feel my post may have helped contribute to the name calling.
o-o..my comment was made more as a joke, and to let off a little personal steam. kinda felt like my gender was being attacked but it’s cool. ^_^ everyone has opinions to express, and i respect people who tell it like they see it rather than sugar coating it.
so yes, 9-2 isn’t a biggot. she just has negative personal views based on past experiances.
and also sorry that i make crappy jokes.
if my previous comment had no effect then disregard this post.
October 19, 2009 at 8:21 am
OKAY. You know, i just don’t understand why men and women have to be as different as they are. I understand being different but for motherfucking sakes! I have been off and on with the love of my life for 4 years.. as turbulent, difficult, strange and confusing as it has been.. there are things he does that I end up blaming myself for! WHY? I am the type of female that doesn’t put up with ANY male shit what so ever but since I am in love with this guy really, I find myself making excuses for him.. its my fault.. its things I did before, so I’m paying for it now blah blah blah. Where does this end? Where does this go? I have never been so confused in my life, and I have no-one to relate to, all my friends have never had a love like I have with my guy. I want to make it work but, for one, he’s a free spirit and I’m beginning to think theres a part of him that is severely detached from me which drives me absolutely up the wall to no end! But then again, in true love, is there supposed to be a part of them you don’t know??? Ahh fuck, I don’t know, I’m in dire need of some kind of feedback. He treats me like a queen, he really does, yet I get so insanely jealous when we break up or are having an open relationship.. it just consumes me. He like I think alot of men, doesn’t tell me how he feels when he’s upset, he just holds it in or kind of tells me but not to the extent he wants to. WHY??? Why can’t men just say how they feel like we do?? They fucking bottle it up, and it makes US feel like they don’t give a fuuck, we get fucking pissed off, then before you know it we’re fighting about shit we weren’t even mad about in the beginning!!!!! Ahh.. advice?
October 20, 2009 at 1:51 am
Get him drunk.
October 20, 2009 at 3:40 am
What a splendid forum.
…And men can go to hell!
October 20, 2009 at 4:15 pm
I consider myself an egotist – not an egocentric. I actually DESPISE egocentrics because egocentrics really CANNOT see things through any other persons’ perspective, other than their own (in fact, they pretty much deny that other perspectives exist). I have NEVER met an egocentric that gave a damn about anyone elses concerns or had an ounce of empathy for anyone’s suffering – other than their own. I don’t believe that most people are egocentric and most of the time – when egocentrics make that claim, it’s only to justify the intrusion of themselves onto everyone else.
October 24, 2009 at 2:53 pm
PLLEEEEEASE UPDATE THIS SERIES!!! I’m feeling very angsty and man-hatey lately. You’re wonderful 9-2, by the way.
November 1, 2009 at 5:01 am
I’m pretty sure Einstein lived before the time of spell-check. Had he lived in the modern day, I bet would’ve been intelligent enough to take the two seconds required to *use it*, especially if he was spouting off about how smart he was.
November 1, 2009 at 5:19 am
Are you implying that Valerie’s post is an ad hominem? ‘Cause it’s not. Saying “James is boring because his arguments are wrong”, which is what Valerie said, is entirely different from saying “James’ arguments are wrong because he is boring”, which would be an ad hominem. Implication arrows: the order matters!
November 1, 2009 at 5:23 am
Judging from the URL, I expected a puppy’s face followed by some more text: “you are! Yes, you are! Good boy! Who’s a good boy, you are yes you are!” I don’t know whether I’m disappointed or not.
December 1, 2009 at 10:36 am
I’m so glad I found this. Here I am, sitting at my computer because I can’t sleep. I’m sick of how women are treated as second class citizens, and I don’t understand why men aren’t aware of how hurtful they are to women. They make cheap jokes about how women are sex objects, and then there are women who promote that image through the media.
There’s no hope if we sit around and wait for men to understand all of this discrimination, yet there is also no hope if women keep encouraging such behavior. Societal influences suck…
December 1, 2009 at 4:27 pm
@Beth
WHY??? et cetera
Men and women are more or less identical, except we get told different things and people react to us differently. Why do women talk about their feelings and why don’t men? Because women get told to talk about their feelings and get shunned if they don’t, and men get told not to talk about their feelings and get hit with sticks if they do.
December 2, 2009 at 4:12 am
It’s not the individuals I hate: it’s what they’ve collectively bought into. Lip service: we respect women. Reality… um, I really don’t even want to discuss it: it only serves to validate their behaviour.
And yet, and yet… if there *is* a male out there that doesn’t buy into the whole obnoxious, arrogant, entitled, violent, stinky, crass, loud-mouthed, stupid, craven, bragadocious, thoughtless, un-reflective, abusive, selfish, lowbrow, wilfully ignorant asshole way of being, he’s either gay or thought of as gay (not that there’s anything *wrong* with that!) … — and this is the kicker –: by *women*!
Why the fuck *is* that? Are roles so entrenched that we *expect* men to behave this way, even though we deplore the behaviour? Mixed messages.
December 10, 2009 at 10:52 pm
Found your site by googling “I hate men” and have been lurking in the shadows ever since. But I can no longer resist commenting, if only to say how right you are and how pissed off I am that so few people get it. Feminists do take a lot of crap for being man-haters–and we waste precious time and energy defending ourselves against those charges. But so what if we do hate men sometimes? Excuse me if I have trouble exhibiting tolerance in a world where I cannot walk home at night (modestly dressed, not that it should matter) without being stalked by a man who “just wants my number.” In a world where me screaming, “Fuck off, asshole,” elicits nothing more than bemused smiles from passers by.
Because, you know, I should be flattered that some random asshole finds me attractive enough to harass. Because women were put on this earth for the sole purpose of eliciting hard-ons from manly, manly men. And don’t you dare express dissatisfaction with this situation, lest you be accused of being a bitter man-hating dyke. Well, I’m ready to confess. I hate this system and the men who propagate it, whether by design or out of willful ignorance and complacency.
Great blog, 9D. Hope you get a chance to update this series sometime soon.
December 19, 2009 at 3:00 am
I RULE THEM!
December 20, 2009 at 2:27 am
I’ve been on another forum (non-feminist related) and the men seemed cool for the most part. But when someone brought up feminism the reaction was surreal. The hate toward women showed it’s ugly face. And also the ridiculous “men too” argument. “Men are discrimintated against too” so women can’t complain about anything. It was an atheist forum and they pay a lot of lip service to mysogyny in religion, but, like using the plight of women to justify going to war in Afghanistan and then not giving a shit about whether women in those countries have any rights once the country is “liberated”, these assholes use religious-based misogyny just as an excuse to bash religion. Talking about the rights of women in oppressively theocratic foreign countries, whom they’ll never ever meet or try to fuck, is easy.
December 21, 2009 at 2:26 pm
The pseudo-feminist argument in favour of the Afghanistan occupation is fantastic: instead of those women-oppressing Taliban scumbags, we should support…Women-oppressing warlord scumbags.
A huge leap forwards.
December 21, 2009 at 7:28 pm
I am a feminism evangelist. (For a self-described militant radical feminist who is also a PvP gamer, this should come as no surprise.) Last night, I introduced yet another woman – a fellow gamer – to what feminism actually is. Here is a summary:
me: I am a militant radical feminist.
her: But men have -some- uses!
me: All PEOPLE have different talents and abilities and human potential; no trait is exclusive by sex.
her: Everyone in my office, including the managers, are women, and they hire and promote based on looks, too.
me: Women can be sexist without sexism becoming women’s fault, or women becoming responsible for sexism. Women can engage in sexist behaviors without making sexism any less wrong or oppressive to women, or making men benefit from sexism any less.
her: …It’s really hard to see feminism as being wrong, the way YOU describe it.
me: That’s because feminism is about enforcing the human dignity of non-males and eliminating inequality based on sex.
her: Then why is it always described as so bad?
me: Because we were all conditioned by the same patriarchal society. You’ll note your immediate response to my feminism was about men? The patriarchy insists than anything that isn’t ABOUT MEN must be AGAINST MEN. Feminism is not about men. It’s about women. So you are conditioned by society to respond as if it has anything to do with men, because the patriarchal society is only about men, and can’t be about anybody else.
Maybe non-males are easier to pitch feminism to because we have an intrinsic sense of our own oppression and its injustice, of our own human worth and how it is infringed upon in every tiny and monstrous way. Males do not live with constant incursions calling their humanity into question, for one thing. Males are also taught from birth that everything is about themselves. Non-males are also taught that everything is about someone else (males). Non-males are conditioned to consider the thoughts and ideas of others; males are conditioned to presume the value and importance of their own thoughts and ideas. That’s why males barge into feminist blogs and try to set the wayward wimminz, who should be LISTENING, straight. Never having learned to second-guess the correctness of their ideas, just shutting non-females up is in my experience too often impossible.
December 21, 2009 at 8:11 pm
The pseudo-feminist argument in favour of the Afghanistan occupation is fantastic: instead of those women-oppressing Taliban scumbags, we should support…Women-oppressing warlord scumbags.
It’s certainly an interesting one. Even more interesting when you think that women’s rights in Iraq have taken a huge leap backwards since the latest bit of warmongering. Oh and the USof Az didn’t give a shit about the position of women in Aghanistan when the ‘evil empire’ invaded and they armed the Taliban. Oh and remind me why we’re not at war with Saudi Arabia and China again?
December 22, 2009 at 12:58 am
CC – I think there might be some miscommunication because I disabled comment threading. I don’t think Meg was talking to you, but rather that the posts are out of order.
December 23, 2009 at 1:46 am
Your post pretty much sums up what *I* hate the most about men and masculinity. If anything I hate it even more than you do, but for the oddest reason in the world, perhaps: physically, I “belong” to that group. Well, let’s say it’s assumed that I belong. The behaviour is *expected*. And yet, I have always known there is something fundamentally wrong with it, have never subscribed to it, could never play that game and so have always been on the outside looking over at it. The more I look at it, the more my initial take on masculinity is confirmed and the less I want to have to do with it.
Sad to say, all I’ve achieved it putting myself into this odd grey-area socially. Since I don’t/can’t “play the game” heterosexual men and women see me as “weird”. Gay men see me as a wannabe gay… “not a chance, mate”. Gay women feel sorry for me, because they see inside me – all women communicate at such an incredibly wonderful level and pick up on things no man will ever see – and realise what is going on and how bleak my plight is.
I’ve been on oestrogen and anti-androgens for five years now but know one thing to be incontrovertible fact: no born male can ever “become” female. There is just too much missing.
However, this journey has given me an opportunity to understand how to listen properly (with your whole head and eyes and heart), how to see the value of a smile (mine) and to offer it often, what body-boundaries mean and how to respect those of others, and how to count to twenty-five before saying anything back.
I feel as on-the-outside as ever, but it doesn’t much matter anymore. There is always art.
December 31, 2009 at 6:17 am
If i draw from personal experience. Men win when it comes to winning the ‘biggest a**hole’ race. What i dont get is they claim women aren’t human, they should take a look at themselves. I know in my heart men must feel inferior to women…because they have a greater need to disparage us women.
January 16, 2010 at 12:47 am
I hate it when men call a women a slut when she doesn’t give in to him. It also not always sexual with a man either. I was reading a blog on why men hate women and another thing they addressed was how stupid women where. I decided to read the comments posted( mostly by men). Then I came on here and read the comments, and the comments (made by women) on here is far more intelligent than the comments that those men where making. It just goes to show that women don’t have to do a bunch of name calling to get there point across.
January 16, 2010 at 2:11 am
Not an excuse, but testosterone at certain levels appears to have a deleterious effect on the intellect. That’s a liability. Words failing them, “real” men resort to profanity and then fisticuffs.
It’s all rather sad.
January 16, 2010 at 2:18 am
Other studies using placebos indicate a psychsomatic effect may be at play, OLO.
January 16, 2010 at 1:19 pm
“It just goes to show that women don’t have to do a bunch of name calling to get there point across.”
It seems odd, but as was mentioned somewhere on this blog, you don’t seem to hear of female trolls.
January 16, 2010 at 6:13 pm
I know at least one in person: she’s both overtly female & a skilled troll.
January 23, 2010 at 3:57 am
Nicely said. I hate them too.
I wouldn’t kill anyone or anything-I just have no respect for 90% of the behavior of 90% of men. For 53 years I tried to be nice. My mother was in the Civil Rights movement and the Feminist movement of the 60s and 70s and she and the others were constantly ridiculed. She always said and I always said, ‘We don’t hate men, we just want freedom for all human beings.’
But the other day I was telling this guy about how the behavior of some other guy drove me to the exhilarating conclusion that I genuinely was through with dealing with men, especially now that I don’t have the enormous sex drive I once had, and it’s so much easier now to stay out of harm’s way, and he said, “You just hate men.”
“No I don’t,” I said, and then I stopped and admitted it: “Yeah, I just hate men.”
We bumped fists on that one.
I felt no apology, and none was demanded. It felt good to tell the truth and not be nice. I can understand how a lot of black people hate white people. (I mean I hope nobody kills me for being white or anything, but I can understand when a black person feels a certain kind of disgust for a white person considering the history and the privileges and the often twisted, ignorant assumptions.)
Deep, deep riveting hate is no good for any of us, but when I say I hate men, it’s not like its something eating me up inside — it’s just an honest, free response. Of course I would save one if he was drowning or something and I had the strength and the means. I just wouldn’t want to subject myself to his more than likely critical, dominating, selfish, insulting ways once I dragged him back on land.
I was married for many years to the love of my life and have wonderful children but you know now that I’ve been alone for 14 years I am the happiest and most free human being on the planet and have no desire ever to live with a man again in my life. That means I don’t have to take another obnoxious, unconscious, compensating, condescending insult from another man for as long as I live. That in itself is bliss!
Unfortunately, people say I still look kind of “young and attractive” according to ridiculous and prevailing ideas — and I still get cat calls or comments about my ass that aren’t always said in the most loving way. But other than that I am home free baby! Home free!
[It doesn’t bother me if men are friendly and make remarks like “you have a beautiful ass” in a funny or polite way- I'm talking about when they're hostile and disrespectful, and say things like “I’m gonna fuck you up your ass and then you’re gonna suck my dick.” Just wanted to illustrate what I’m talking about lest some dick head male gets on here and thinks I’m just “being too sensitive” when men “express themselves.” I don't go around harassing males (and didn’t even when I was a horn dog (horn bitch) in heat) and I don’t appreciate when they go around harassing females, especially me.]
Hate is not a fun or desirable sensation but it’s honest as shit.
January 23, 2010 at 10:40 am
I fucking hate porn, I hate men, I hate lip stick, I hate fucking high heels, and being in a fucking harness. I hate verbal game playing and banter and dick contests, and little boys that pour gasoline on ducks and light them on fire, and teens that raped my sister, and husbands that stabbed me in the back, and guys who criticize Monique for not shaving on the day or her award, and comments about how young women look like ripe fruit but it only lasts for a season, and snuff, and men who stone women adulterers to death, and families who burn up daughter in laws, and doctors who fuck up women, and lawyers that make condescending remarks, and sneaky deals, and spouses who leave wives when they are sick, and arrogant ass kissing, politicking co-workers, and arrogant little boys who are rude to adult women…I fucking hate them all.
January 26, 2010 at 2:25 am
http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/features/why-men-like-porn?ecd=wnl_wmh_011110
Fucking shoot me.
January 26, 2010 at 3:47 am
Yes, it’s all about men’s desire to create offspring to carry on their genes, silly women! It’s funny how that desire seems to dissipate once that baby is born…wouldn’t the desire to take care of your offspring and see them grow up to be healthy and happy be just as strong, if not more so?
Wouldn’t it make sense for men to be ‘hardwired’ for being responsible fathers too?
January 26, 2010 at 4:51 pm
I agree with that article to the extent that a man’s use of porn is not a reflection of how he feels about his partner. I also think that porn engages men on a subliminal, subconscious level as well.
That, however, does not mean that porn can not have detrimental effects on a relationship, as opposed to his “daily life”, which the article states only occurs at a rate of 5%. It also doesn’t mean that men are powerless against it. I have huge problems with personal vices which, though they require a choice, are conceptualized as “diseases” or “addictions” that people are powerless to stop. This includes drugs, alcohol, smoking, etc. I don’t think porn is different.
January 27, 2010 at 5:59 pm
And that led to sexy outfits and a little experimentation in the bedroom.
“Sexy outfits” for her, no doubt. What a lovely sales pitch for commodified sexuality. Yay, consumerism! Barf
January 31, 2010 at 11:05 pm
Thank you for this!
I’ve read so much female-bashing misogynistic crap on the web that I’m glad to see it get flipped.
And might I add that you’re much more intelligent / correct than the aforementioned misogynists.
I’m sick of trying to tell men that “feminists” don’t hate men. They can go find the fucking dictionary and figure out the definition if they want. It’s about equality. No matter what the (male-dominated) media machine tells them. And yet some of them insist on acting like parrots, echoing back whatever they hear on the all-knowing, all-powerful television.
And I get what you’re saying. You not talking about ALL men. Just the fucking retarded misogynists who think women aren’t human.
I work in a male-dominated industry and I’m so fucking sick of all the sexist jokes. And I’m SICK of them saying, “Aww you don’t have a sense of humor!” When I don’t find the same old sexist joke (that I’ve been hearing since I was born) funny.
Everyone now-a-days wants to be cute, sarcastic and satirical. Too bad they don’t fucking understand humor. Satire doesn’t mean reinforcing the status quo.
I’d also like to add that I’m sick of the lady-douchebags who sit there killing themselves trying to follow all the rules set forth by the powerful man on what women “should be.” Dieting…dressing…having emotions…all based on what would be most pleasing to men. And then those lady-douches insist that they’re not “feminists.” Of course those brainwashed idiots aren’t feminists, they’re too busy being sheep.
Again, thanks for this article. I’m sure you get tons of hate mail from idiot men everywhere. Stay strong!
February 1, 2010 at 3:57 am
You know, I was just thinking about this post and it reminded me of WHY I broke up with a b/f several years ago.
He asked me what my dream was. I said it was to make a magazine that focused on REAL issues that women face, at the time I likened it to the “anti-cosmo”. And he asked me “what about men’s issues?” I replied, “YOU can make that magazine.”
He then went on to liken my dream to the separatism employed by the Nazis (he’s British) against Jews & homosexuals. He went on to say–I will never forget THIS as long as I live–that my magazine & idea would be “the last nail in the coffin of freedom”
Dudes, man.
In hindsight, best reason to break up ever.
February 1, 2010 at 7:12 am
Roxie,
I know, I hear that all the time. Whenever you bring up empowering women, “well, what about men?” That’s considered ‘equality’, if women can complain about something, it’s only fair that men can complain too. Blech.
You have to decode Male Supremacist Speak, ‘freedom’ means being able to have power over women. ‘Equality’ means keeping the status quo. And women who fight against discrimination, oppression, abuse,
torture, and/or murder of their fellow females are ‘Nazis’.
February 1, 2010 at 1:44 pm
Not to mention, how few of the legitimate issues they generally choose to bring up in response.
There are actual concerns over the rights of men (and, for that matter, any group you care to name) that MRAs should be dealing with, that are totally ignored in favour of batshit insanity.
February 1, 2010 at 9:03 pm
But when you weigh those mens-rights issues with the rights-of-women issues, there’s really no comparison. Men have nothing to whinge about. There is strong evidence to suggest that these problems are so ingrained as to actually be quasi-accepted by both genders. Susan Maushart addressed this in “Wifework”.
Men have to truly buy into equality in every sense of the word. Colour me cynical, but there are too many misogynistic bastards bred out there by phallocrats for that to happen overnight.
And then, there’s the whole role thing. Which century *is* this, anyway?
February 2, 2010 at 9:35 am
I like to think the 21st century can become the first in which current forms of misogyny have no place (US-centric here). After all, women being able to vote in the US didn’t happen until 1920 (except Wyoming got there in 1869, or 1890 as a state, says Wikipedia), but we definitely think of the 20th century as one in which women had suffrage. If you see what I’m saying, this late at night.
February 2, 2010 at 10:52 am
“But when you weigh those mens-rights issues with the rights-of-women issues, there’s really no comparison. Men have nothing to whinge about.”
I don’t agree there. No matter how much greater the issues confronting one group are, it doesn’t make the issues confronting another to be irrelevant. Mind you, MRAs don’t seem to like the “less important but still relevant” label, or else have a very distorted scale.
I agree about the ingrained acceptance of the problems though.
February 3, 2010 at 8:50 am
Perhaps it’s because I’m in a profession with predominantly female colleagues (nursing) that I can’t appreciate men’s rights as an issue, but…
I see female patients in post-anaesthesia recovery: these women have been suffering with severe, debilitating lower abdominal pain for… far too long – because that is what women *do*! they put up with the pain because women don’t complain. That’s my experience in recovery: women as a rule complain a third as much as men. These women *finally* go in to seek medical help because they simply can’t *stand it anymore. They undergo a laparoscopy (the surgeon actually looks around in the belly with a keyhole surgery device). So many times the surgeon *sees* nothing abnormal … I’m tending to their needs (breathing, pain relief, etc) as they wake up after the operation and they receive the news that “there is nothing wrong”!!! and these poor women dissolve into tears because … because … why??? Because the bloody surgeon can’t *see* anything, they think telling the patient there is nothing wrong is the *right* thing to do? Do they think that it would be a *relief*???
My main role is to support those women, to reassure them that they are not crazy (I don’t put it that way, obviously, but that’s the gist of their concern) and that there *is* an answer out there. I can’t cure, but I can reassure, and do my best to give hope and strength to them.
If males were afflicted with this condition (not endometriosis… the medicos don’t seem to have a name for it, but I see it a LOT) the research would be fast and furious and the cure would have been found *ages* ago… but because it afflicts women, well, regardless of the fact that surgeons have to scratch their heads telling the patient in their rooms they couldn’t see anything and then what, prescribe pain meds? nothing much seems to be happening. Well, I don’t read much evidence of anything.
Stack that against men’s rights: sorry, the male-biased weight of focus on even something like healthcare tells me that on a very basic level, equality… isn’t. Men’s rights vs what?
February 3, 2010 at 10:16 am
Nine-deuce,
Your voice is sanity, truth, the way it is. Reading your words is grounding me to the earth right now. Lately it has been difficult relating to other humans, especially in regards to the patriarchal construct we are born into. It annoys me all the time and I can’t turn off my awareness. Wouldn’t want to. Just mentioning patriarchy results in a request for definition of said word. Sigh. Grateful that you take the time to express your viewpoint. You are so eloquent and gifted with the written word. Coming here, I feel connected to other people. You give me a sense of hope and so do many of your commenters. Your influence is needed and appreciated. Keep on keeping on.
In Seattle…
February 4, 2010 at 10:37 am
Sure OLO – men’s diseases matter far more than women’s in our society. That’s why the prostate cancer campaign is so much bigger than the breast cancer campaign, right?
February 5, 2010 at 12:52 am
James – you should keep your mouth shut about things you clearly know little about.
The respective levels of impact on humans of prostate cancer and breast cancer are such that they are not comparable in the way you have tried to.
The ‘campaign’ face of breast cancer is overwhelmingly directed by corporations making profit. Unbiased, neutral information in this ‘campaign’ is very hard to find. Even deeming these ‘campagins’ as something of a pointer to the state of diseases “mattering” as you so vaguely put it, is ridiculous.
February 5, 2010 at 1:09 am
Portia – I’d appreciate it if you were a little more courteous.
I was responding to this passage:
“but because it afflicts women, well, regardless of the fact that surgeons have to scratch their heads telling the patient in their rooms they couldn’t see anything and then what, prescribe pain meds”
You may claim that the breast cancer campaign is an astroturf staged by corporations, but the contributions made by individuals (both in term of money & “awareness” efforts/activities) clearly demonstrate that women are hardly deemed worthless, nor are conditions which they specifically encounter inevitable disregarded.
Indeed, I’d say that by comparing the campaigns’ relative successes you’d observe quite the reverse.
Finally: everything is perfectly “comporable” to anything else. Me stubbing my toe in comparison to the Holocaust is insignificant, for example, because it didn’t involve massive amounts of death. That is a comparison. It irks me that so many people mistake the very function of a comparison, & attempt to conflate it with the entirely distinct equation.
February 5, 2010 at 3:36 am
You were comparing the two cancers with the intention to equate and still are. Compare to your heart’s content, the two diseases are not analogous.
Read about the effects of breast cancer on humans and the effects of prostate cancer on humans and then draw conclusions rather than basing your entire arguement on the fact that the less well publicised cancer is found in men only and the better predominantly in women.
If you can’t be bothered to read, then don’t comment.
The fact that breast cancer as a tool for marketting consumer products has made it on the corporate agenda does not offset the rest of women’s healthcare taking a back seat in the assignation of priorities in public health throughout the world. Expand your horizons.
February 5, 2010 at 8:48 am
James, I’d appreciate it if you would fuck off now and never comment on this or any feminist blog again. Or read them.
It would solve both problems – we wouldn’t have to see your clueless drivel and you could stop worrying about our level of courtesy.
February 5, 2010 at 10:47 am
“I was responding to this passage:
You may claim that the breast cancer campaign is an astroturf staged by corporations, but the contributions made by individuals (both in term of money & ‘awareness’ efforts/activities) clearly demonstrate that women are hardly deemed worthless, nor are conditions which they specifically encounter inevitable disregarded.”
How is that a response to what I was talking about? You’re talking about campaigns and comparing one disease against another: I’m talking about a exclusively female medical condition for which there *is* no diagnosis because the male-dominated medical society that came up with the concept of “female hysteria” have basically labelled this too — something they don’t understand — as “all-in-the-mind”.
I’m a male nurse seeing this happening all too often to mostly younger women, and I’m appalled / incensed / AND doing something about it!
This *IS* an example of “doesn’t-afflict-men, can’t-be-physically verified, must-be-all-in-the-mind”.
It’s so easy for doctors to say: “look, we saw nothing wrong in there, you really don’t have anything wrong with you…” and then look for a psychological etiology for the pain, as if all other causes have been ruled out with a laparoscopy.
I never see a male patient subjected to this sort of humiliation. With males, it’s always: “if there’s smoke, there must be a fire”.
Always.
I’ve been doing this for too many years … I’m in the trenches seeing this.
So the whole male rights thing looks pretty bland and inconsequential from where I’m sitting. Men’s rights? They already have the weight of the medical community on their side.
I’m frankly embarrassed to be one.
February 5, 2010 at 2:24 pm
Portia- marry me?
February 5, 2010 at 3:18 pm
Firstly, men can get breast cancer as well (I heard a cousin suggest the more manly sounding “chest cancer”).
Secondly, the comparison of two ailments isn’t really all that useful in exploring the health system as a whole.
However, I would like to appropriate for my own ends. To clarify, when I say I recognise the important of men’s rights advocates (not Men’s Rights Advocates), I mean in the same way that I recognise the important of people that work to cure less widespread and less debilitating illnesses. They should, of course, receive a lesser priority, often much lesser, but they are still worthwhile.
February 5, 2010 at 5:16 pm
The woman’s movement has helped get information about breast cancer out to the public through tireless activism. Also men like boobies, they don’t want us to lose them (see the “Save The Boobies” and “Save The Ta-Ta’s” campaigns.)
It’s a fact that research studies on heart disease for many, many years were only conducted on men. Most people thought heart attacks were a men’s health issue, but according to the American Heart Association, “coronary heart disease, which causes heart attack, is the single leading cause of death for American women. Many women believe that cancer is more of a threat, but they’re wrong. Nearly twice as many women in the United States die of heart disease, stroke and other cardiovascular diseases as from all forms of cancer, including breast cancer.”
Most people are still unaware of the fact that coronary heart disease is the #1 killer of women in the U.S.
Also from the AHA:
“Women and their healthcare providers do not know the biggest healthcare threat to women is heart disease. A 2006 survey conducted by the American Heart Association found that 43 percent of women are unaware that heart disease is the leading cause of death among women.
Although women of color and of low socioeconomic status are disproportionately affected by heart disease — the death rate was 28 percent higher for black women than for white women in 2005 — only 31 percent of black women and 29 percent of Hispanic women knew that heart disease was their greatest health risk, compared to 68 percent among white women.
“Among primary care physicians, only 8 percent knew that more womean than men die each year from CVD.
“Many women do not recognize the warning signs or symptoms of heart disease and stroke, which may be more subtle than those exhibited by men.
“Lack of awareness often results in less aggressive and sophisticated diagnosis and treatment by women’s health care providers, with worse outcomes.”
February 5, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Jess -
Those articles telling us that male’s porn use is perfectly healthy and no threat to their partners – and in fact if we’d just lighten up and pornify ourselves a bit, we’d have a very nice time of it are SO FUCKING TIRESOME, aren’t they?
“Often, one partner has a porn interest, and the other thinks that’s a problem,” says Russell Stambaugh, PhD, … “It rarely is”.
I cannot tell you how sick I am of hearing this shit from “experts”.
I bet that if women started having orgasms through some sort of online activity while their partners were elsewhere, a lot fewer “experts” would be telling us how harmless beating off to/with strangers is.
A recent Slate article about Tiger Woods’ screwing around states: “Excessive sexual appetite was only clearly pathologized when it showed up in women.”
Of course it was.
Yes, shoot me indeed.
February 6, 2010 at 3:28 am
What gives these asshole “experts” the right to tell women what is a problem in their relationships and what isn’t?
“Often, one partner has a porn interest, and the other thinks that’s a problem,” says Russell Stambaugh, PhD, … “It rarely is”.
Well now. It’s a problem if I leave his sorry ass over it, isn’t it? For him at least. At that point, my problem has been solved.