Raising the volume on what men think about feminism

The Age ^ | Sushi Das

[nickcarraway]

SUSHI DAS discovers what men think about feminism.

'FEMINISM has turned women into selfish, spoiled, spiteful, powerless victims," shrieked the email. "Men are talking, can't you hear it? Marriage rates are down, birthrates are down, men are using women for their pleasure and then leaving them."

If it was only one of a handful of emails I received, I might not have given it much thought. But there were many more. "I do not think it's men or boys that need reforming. I think women are the main instigators of hate against one half of the population," wrote another man.

Then there was this: "I have healthy relationships with women and always have protected sex to avoid entrapment … why should I risk losing everything I own and having my children taken away from me?"

And this: "The modern guy is not looking for the 'services' past generations did, they often just want a nice person to share their life with, rather than someone who is going to be climbing corporate ladders, getting pregnant when she chooses and then assuming complete control of a child's life. That is not to say they are not supportive of women's careers and goals."

The emails were a response to a challenge I posed to men on this page a couple of weeks ago. Specifically, I asked them to engage in debates relating to "feminist issues" and show they understood that equality, women's rights, the work/life imbalance, the declining birthrate, sexual politics and relationships generally are important to everybody, not just women.

I received, a tsunami of emails. Many were considered arguments. A significant number were the bitter outpourings of men hurt by women. Some elucidated the frustrations of men who couldn't find Ms Right. Sadly, many were simply vitriolic or abusive.

In the hundreds of emails, anger appeared to be the underlying emotion because the writers believed the pendulum had swung too far in favour of women. There were some common threads: men were angry that women's needs took priority over theirs; they felt men constituted the majority of the unemployed, the homeless, the victims of industrial accidents and suicides, that men's health received less funding than women's, and that boys' education was poor. In relationships, they felt some women were "not very nice to men" and were often too selfish to consider their needs. These concerns are real,

but how many can really be blamed on feminism?

Essentially, men raised three broad concerns over why they did not engage in the debate on feminist issues. First, they were scared of being howled down by aggressive feminists who dismissed their views. Second, they felt they were victims too, but women didn't listen to them. Third, they were confused about what women really wanted and what constituted appropriate behaviour.

On the first issue, I agree, some women are dismissive of men's views simply because they are men. Men who speak out, wrote one man, are "smashed upon the rocks of indignation" and this made it "a very, very scary debate to engage with". Another said: "Opting out of an argument in which we cannot hope to be allowed an equal voice let alone a fair outcome is a perfectly rational response."

My response? Get over it. If you're a man and you have an opinion, speak out. Put your case. It will stand or fall on its merit. Stop being scared. There are plenty of women willing to listen. And if you get howled down, get up and say it again. That's how women got their voices heard in the 1970s.

On the issue of men as victims, some argued women too are violent, that men have few rights on abortion, that female teachers get off more lightly when they sexually abuse male students, that men are vilified as pedophiles, that affirmative action is discriminatory, that women frequently win the custody battle. Clearly these concerns require attention. Perhaps it is governments that are not listening to men, rather than women.

Finally, some men were unsure of their role in society. This is complex, and women must recognise this. But men should also let common decency be their guide to appropriate behaviour. Being a decent human being shouldn't be that hard.

Equality is a prerequisite for development. When the shouting from our respective corners is over, perhaps resentment from both sides will melt.

Many emails I received were a cry from the heart from men. But it's not just about women listening to their words, it's about men taking action to improve their own lives. This means speaking out, whatever the consequences — engaging in the debate on equality or feminism or whatever it is called these days.

With that in mind, I'll leave the last words to a man: "Damned if we do, damned if we don't. We need to speak though. We do not want our daughters growing up stunted by arguments or situations that could have been campaigned away. Equally, our sons require education. But how do we do this with integrity? That's the challenge for all involved."

[RedRightReturn]

shows a woman with a gigantic chip on her shoulder.


But she's wearing a choker, Yeah Baby!

R3

[luckystarmom]

I'm glad my husband didn't have the attitude that I see by lots of the men on this thread. I was almost 30 when we got married.

[RinaseaofDs]

I'd agree with you completely, its just that I wouldn't characterize any of those people you mentioned being feminists. Not really.

Let's throw another name in there too - Dr. Laura. Her book on husbands is so on the mark that it brings tears to the eye upon reading it. What's worse, what she's talking about isn't rocket science either.

I really am only angry at feminists - in that feminists believe in the primacy of the female. Most feminists, in that spirit see abortion as a right - its a central tenent. I don't think any of the women you've mentioned, and most of the women in this forum, have such hubris.

I sincerely believe men and women need each other desperately. I also believe that feminists currently control the political, social, and business agenda. It's why the family court system is rigged, why your home and fortune is at risk, why even free speech is abriged.

Even this Sushi Das person makes the point, "Why aren't men engaged in this debate."

It's because the debate is over. Men are STILL looking for good women. Conservative men all the more.

[music is math]

Feminism is kinda cute, economically. Ford tried something like this in the 1980's: "We're crap, but we're American - so buy us."

Funny you should mention that - that's precisely the analogy I was thinking of.

Australia's pretty great too. Women there are lovely and happy to be happy - just happy sharing life with somebody. Amazing people, them.

I live in Australia. Australian women are just as feminist as American women. Maybe it's a matter of degree, and that American women are even worse. Or maybe it's an age thing.

[John O]

Men in their twenties need to step up the plate and start having real meaningful relationships with women in the 20s. Then they can get married and have babies.

This is exactly true. And what I tell all the younger folk I know. Life is short. if you are planning on ever having children, do it now. My wife and I waited until I was 40 to have our first child (lots of health issues delayed us. We tried to start when I was 30 but it didn't work out). While I was much more financially secure I was also 10 years older.

You can always get more money but you can't get more years.

If everything goes exactly correct I'll be 68 or so when my youngest graduates from high school (My wife died in September and I want more children and haven't met the right woman yet so obviously this is a real wild number).

It's far better to have your kids while you're young.

The second point is we need to revamp family law so that marriage doesn't have as many risks for the man as it does now. It's scary how easy it is to lose your whole life just because the woman went strange on you. If I didn't want more kids I wouldn't remarry at all, I'd just play around. Same as the 20 somethings are doing.

[texan75010]

I said that it was looks that initially attracted me. That is not why I married them. But I would never have known they had a great personality if the first time I met them they had a mustache thicker than mine.

As a man, good looks opened the door and a great personality sealed the deal. By the same token, the fact that I had a job and money and paid for our first date made them feel secure enough to go on a second one. I dont fault them for that....I applaud their good judgement.

But do you think if I told them I wanted to have them over to my mom's house to play on my x-box that they would give a rats rear end about my personality?

[NathanR]

Maybe, the reason this resonates with me, is that I married at 42, and I will never have any grandchildren.

[RinaseaofDs]

Last I was there was 1992. That would explain it.

Sorry to hear things have changed a bit.

[music is math]

Thanks. I don't think things are going to get much better here either.

[SauronOfMordor]

These are agitators, professional "feminists" who populate the HR departments, the Women's Studies schools, the popular literary culture.

I've noticed that the HR dept of the company I currently work at has a dozen employees. Not one male works in the HR dept. I don't think it's just my company

[HairOfTheDog]

I don't think they're 'feminists' either. Not in the political sense.

You're right that feminism has really become synonymous with liberalism, and even moreso, abortion. That's what I meant when I said that the feminist movement, having won the war, decided not to go home but invent new controversies. And it muddied the water for women such as myself who vote republican because we want smaller government (and they keep promising this) and yet I support women's involvement in both business and politics and even military, where we are suited for it.

The language of conservatism needs to change to adapt to this because bitching about feminism is too vague. Because when you say you hate liberalism and abortion, I'm on board. If you say women have no business being in business or politics (as some on this forum do) you lose me.

As for Dr Laura's book, I've heard good things about it, but I haven't read it. I've found her to be too shrill and mean for my tastes on her radio show (I have the same complaint about Ann Coulter). I think the roles of men and women in relationships, and our devotion to family does get a bit complex now, more than it was, but I think our role at home is ultimately not for political parties to decide, but for the families themselves, each according to what they want out of their life. Freedom's not easy.

[Freebird Forever]

she's gotta be the child of mushroom eating 60s psychadelic parents - like Frank Zappa's kids Dweezel and the Moon Unit.

And strangely enough, Frank Zappa was on a par with Ted Nugent and Gene Simmons for being anti - recreational drug use. So much so that he'd fire band members for indulging.

[Galveston Grl]

Let's anaylize the various mentalies men have expressed in this thread:

We have the "I hate my mommie" boys who proclaim that women have a shelf life because they can not cope with mommie aged women. If a woman is older than 30, forget it, she's too smart for these little boys to deal with. Get 'em while they are young and stupid. (But I bet they have some problems in attracting the young ones cause they are way too wounded to be successful men.)

We have the "The Whiney Oprah Boys" who have thrown in the towel having been rejected by women one too many times. Now they leaving the country to buy wives who don't know them. Maybe going to a third world sh!t hole for a hard up babe who will marry anything calling itself American to get the heck out of female head chopping land and into America is the only option they see for themselves at this point. They try to make themselves feel better about their submission to failure by telling themselves "American women don't deserve me anyway. Girls suck." Talking to these wounded puppies is like "I know you are but what am I." They probably live in California, bless their hearts.

We have some quite sensible men, the "I am a real man bunch" who can actually assign the problem of structural inequality delivered to men, where it belongs - to Marxist feminism. They also recognize that the Marxist gender social engineering is detrimental to men and women which means they probably have the ability to step outside of it and lovingly direct themselves in relationships with women. They also may possess the ability to actually effect change that will help both men and women in the aftermath of Marxism feminism. One of them observed that husbands and wives put their needs aside and seek to serve one another. I appreciated that wisdom and must remember to seek to do that with my man.

Finally, we have the "scary boy group" who refer to women as bitches and pigs and who "don't talk to them." These angry little boys in men's bodies are probably dangerous to themselves and others. It is best not to talk to them either. : )

[SauronOfMordor]

If this is not women bashing, objectifying and hatred, then what is it?

It's an accurate depiction of real life

Men do not need to marry to get female companionship. Men marry when they've decided they're ready to become fathers. At which point, they marry women who will have some interest in being mothers, and are still in their best child-bearing years

[Leatherneck_MT]

"Increasingly American men marry women from a traditional society such as Japan, Korea or Saudi Arabia. Perhaps there is a message there."

IF (and that's huge if) I ever get married again, my new bride will come from a traditional society.

[SauronOfMordor]

Having had great success with the opposite sex, I can say categorically that I haven't the slightest idea what women look for.

Women are more likely than men to delude themselves. They can have a firm picture of what kind of person they want (and it never occurs to them to ask why this perfect man would have any interest in them) and will not settle for anything less. Then these women wind up at 35, never married, bitter, and still not having a clue.

[HairOfTheDog]

"Increasingly American men marry women from a traditional society such as Japan, Korea or Saudi Arabia. Perhaps there is a message there.

" IF (and that's huge if) I ever get married again, my new bride will come from a traditional society.

Emphasis mine, in reference to the countrys you quoted above... By traditional do you mean a society where women live in constant fear of their husbands? Is it the traditional burhkas and beheadings, or the silence in public and foot binding that you wish we had more of in this country?

[Mr. Mojo]

In relationships, they felt some women were "not very nice to men" and were often too selfish to consider their needs.

Aw, poor little fellers. If they had any self-respect whatsoever they'd dump the broads in question, quit complaining, and move on. Metrowimp victimologists.

[HairOfTheDog]

While it's true we often fit into types, and those types are certainly present on this forum, I'm really trying to not just make it an 'us' against them. I don't like it when men do it. I don't like it when women do it.

[Leatherneck_MT]

I never reference a specific country.

I said I would marry a woman from a Traditional Society.

The quoted message above that was from the original post.

and if you don't like my view then there's a real simple solution to the problem.

Don't read it.