Categories
bullying evil women homophobia masculinity shaming tactics

>”Fag bashing,” woman-hating, and Men’s Rights myopia

>

One of the many failings of the Men’s Rights Movement — and “failing” really isn’t a strong enough word for it — is the way in which it ignores or denies real problems faced by boys and men that don’t fit into its grand conspiracy theory in which all the ills faced by men are caused by evil women or by men corrupted and seduced, personally and/or politically, by said evil women.

One of these problems, and it’s a big one, is the “fag bashing” that’s rampant among boys of high school and college age. The atmosphere of abuse has a tragic effect on gay teenagers, as the recent rash of suicides illustrates all too poignantly. And it also has an enormous effect on boys who aren’t gay but who have their masculinity challenged constantly by other boys.

While the MRM is obsessed with the notion of the smug, castrating (Western) woman, the entitled “princess” who looks down on decent, ordinary “beta” males and Nice Guys in favor of jerky, aggressive alpha males, it pays virtually no attention to the daily nightmares inflicted on boys by other boys (and men by other men) by “fag bashing.”

Again, take the recent gay teen suicides. While they have inspired magazine cover stories and ongoing discussion on feminist blogs, the only MRA blog of any prominence that even mentioned any of the suicides, to the best of my knowledge, was the False Rape Society, which essentially used the suicide of Tyler Clementi as an excuse to bash feminism, as I pointed out in a recent post, and (as cat pointed out in a comment here) to turn the story of “brutality against a gay kid” into one “about how hard it is to be hetero.”

While MRAs hate it if anyone calls them “fags” or otherwise criticizes their masculinity, they routinely deride any men they don’t like as a “manginas,” and various other terms to suggest they are not “real men.” A few MRAs, like the folks at the blog No Ma’am, bash gays and lesbians quite openly; they’ve also, you may recall, labeled me a “poof” (among other things)

One of the smartest takes I’ve seen on the phenomenon of anti-gay bullying comes from male feminist blogger Hugo Schwyzer. In a recent post on “homosociality and homophobia,” he puts the recent suicides in a broader context. Drawing on the research of sociologist  C.J. Pascoe, Schwyzer describes the ways in which “fag discourse” permeates American high school:

The discourse manifests itself in the almost incorrigible way in which young men label each other “fags” while seeking to avoid having that label applied to them. According to this discourse, fear of being called out publicly as a “fag” is the primary driving force behind what Pascoe cleverly calls the display of “compulsive heterosexuality.” … Pascoe notes that among young men desperate to establish their masculine bona fides with their peers, what we see in American high schools amounts to compulsive, almost frantic efforts by young men to prove their manhood.

Anyone who has worked with adolescent boys knows how much anxiety many of them feel about their own masculinity. It’s not news to say that our sons, like their fathers before them, often have to endure or participate in physical or at least verbal violence that we tragically and falsely believe is necessary to transition into manhood. … The real stigma in being labeled a “fag” doesn’t lie in the association with homosexuality, but with being seen as feminine.

There’s no easy solution for a problem that is so pervasive, but Schwyzer argues that “perhaps the best way to “inoculate against cruelty”is … to encourage strong non-sexual relationships between boys and girls at every age.” Going back to a review he wrote of Michael Kimmel’s book Guyland, a study of teen boys and young men, Schwyzer notes that

boys who have close female friends are much less likely to exhibit the worst and most destructive tendencies of the Guy Code. After all, the “guy code” is wrapped up in the notion that approval from other men … is the most precious commodity a young man can pursue. Even heterosexual conquest is, ultimately, a means of gaining approval from the guys. Young men who have friends of both sexes are less likely to be held hostage to solely masculine approval; they can receive non-sexual validation from their female friends — and that validation is less likely to be connected to the brutal “sturdy oak” ethos of the Guy Code.

And they are less likely to participate in the relentless onslaught of cruelty towards their gay and lesbian peers.

These are lessons that the Men’s Rights Movement — or whatever rises up to supplant it — will have to learn if it wants to be a movement that really benefits boys and men, straight and gay alike, instead of indulging regressive, self-defeating and often dangerous fantasies of manhood that demonize “fags” and women alike.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

68 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David Futrelle
10 years ago

>Nick, so you think that women choosing whom they date is a form of female dominance? Really? If the shoe was on the other foot, and some random woman you didn't like wanted to date you, wouldn't you have the right to say no?

Nick
10 years ago

>David, I never said women don't have the right to choose whom they date. However, the problem lays within the fact that women have the princess entitlement attitude by thinking they are this winning prize. With this mentality, men are supposedly below them and this gives them the entitlement mentality to think they can make the rules or make men jump hoops to have the opportunity to date them. While they think themselves that they don't have to put in the same level of effort. If a man dares to expect this much work out of women, he would be deemed as a chauvinistThat's undeniable domineering behaviour

David Futrelle
10 years ago

>The "princess" women you talk about exist, but they're a tiny minority of women. If you're running into them all the time, maybe you should think twice about the women you hang out with and/or pursue. If you pursue shallow women, don't be shocked then they're shallow. But the bigger problem is that you're making a gross generalization about women that's really pretty insulting. If you're having problems with women — and I have no idea if you are or not, but your comments suggest you are — maybe the problem is that you approach them with a giant chip on your shoulder.

Nick
10 years ago

>Not every woman is like this in western culture but I think more than a tiny minority are. It seems to be a trend.About the "chip on your shoulder" comment, would you suggest that women have a chip on their shoulder when they deem most men as potential users/rapist/assholes until proven otherwise?Or the women who complain about how it’s hard to find a decent single man?It never ceases to amaze me how women are given the pussy pass for such attitudes. In other words, it’s not politically incorrect for a woman to feel negative and bitter towards the opposite sex. But it's politically incorrect for a man to feel negative or bitter towards the opposite sex.Many women jump up and down about wanting equality when it suits them but when it comes to the topic of equality in these areas, they don’t want to know about it.

Burton
10 years ago

>It's still all the fault of women. Why? Because women chase after manly man men, and disdain sensitive guys. Supposing high school women or girls or whatever were to reject the guys calling other men names, and line up to have sex with the men being called homosexual epithets? Given the power that sex exerts over homosapiens, I'd think the name calling would cease in a hurry, and that being sensitive would be "in."So there.

Anonymous
10 years ago

>And what about the effect of poverty, classism, racism, etc., should we ignore these factors? Well, what about the effects of liberalism, political correctness, and feminism in creating crime? What of the fact that they will excuse any amount of criminal behavior as long as they come from some self-declared "victim" group?

David Futrelle
10 years ago

>FWIW, Nick, I think women who complain all the time that there are no decent men out there are as shallow, and have the same-sized chip on their shoulder, as guys who complain all the time about "princess" women. As for the "potential rapist" thing, the issue there is personal safety and freedom from harassment. When a woman is walking home alone late at night and sees a guy (probably much larger then her) seemingly following her, she has every right to be concerned. Women are also often the target of street harassment, and, you know, if you're regularly harassed by dudes it sort of makes sense to be wary when a guy you don't know approaches you out of the blue. Hell, I'm wary when people I don't know approach me on the street, both men and women, because usually people who do that want something from you.

Lisa H.
10 years ago

>LOL!! Read the book for which I provided a link, or read the large amount that is available to read in the book preview, as it is loaded with logical explanations from a variety of disciplines. I'm not about to regurgitate it all here.Amazing how so many of us follow various religious tenets, yet there is no logical explanation nor scientific proof that God or Allah (or whatever name one wants to give to a higher power) exists.As for women having the upper hand in dating, men jumping through hoops, etc., that's basic reproductive strategies in action. Again, this is logically explained in the book for which I provided a link.Perhaps the women who chase after (and why would they need to chase, since, according to Nick, women just sit back and judge?) the manly man men and disdain the sensitive guys are ones that the sensitive guys desire as well as the manly man men. There just may be women lined up to have sex with the sensitive guys, but these women are all but invisible to the sensitive guys because they have their hopes set on the women who chase the manly man men. Neither sex is completely at fault and the other blameless.Crime existed long before liberalism, political correctness, and feminism, and so did povery, classism and racism."What of the fact that they will excuse any amount of criminal behavior as long as they come from some self-declared "victim" group?"Self-declared "victim" group such as who, MRAs?

cat
cat
10 years ago

>"that's basic reproductive strategies in action" Funny how basic reproductive strategies vary from culture to culture then, huh? The problem with this type of evopsych is that it takes a cultural phenomena and assumes it is universal biology while utterly ignoring all anthropological and historical evidence to the contrary. The very fact that you list 'manly' and 'sensitive' as opposites is a cultural clue. Being an artist was considered an intensely masculine virtue until recently in the west. What, women evolved to be better at poetry within a matter of a century or so whereas before it overheated their ladybrains? Not likely.On the other issue of the thread, that of "Nice Guys", there remains the fact that many of these boys who are low ranking in the male heirarchy hold the same nasty attitudes about girls and queer kids as those who are higher up. Just because they are squarely in the dork social category does not necessarily mean that they treat others well. Queer kids and girls have no more reason for supporting unpopular haters than they do for supporting popular ones.

namae nanka
10 years ago

>"Being an artist was considered an intensely masculine virtue until recently in the west. What, women evolved to be better at poetry within a matter of a century or so whereas before it overheated their ladybrains? Not likely."Men open up a new field, the first men who go down that path are put down in history books, the next generations of men slowly make it more easily to the club.Once the bars are lowered or the process laid out for them, women follow in those fields and bring femininity along. Then generally men move along to other fields. The lag is apparent in most human endeavors.

Nick
10 years ago

>"As for the "potential rapist" thing, the issue there is personal safety and freedom from harassment. When a woman is walking home alone late at night and sees a guy (probably much larger then her) seemingly following her, she has every right to be concerned."There is a difference between “safety” or logically keeping a guard up than there is with paranoid sexism.It's deemed as racism to think black people are potential criminals until proven otherwise. But magically, it's not hatred (sexism) to think men are evil until proven otherwise.The only time when it's not politically incorrect is when men as a gender are seen as someone who is potentially evil. If a man has the same level of negativity towards women, he will be a social outcast.I wonder who are the second class citizens, David?"Women are also often the target of street harassment, and, you know, if you're regularly harassed by dudes it sort of makes sense to be wary when a guy you don't know approaches you out of the blue. Hell, I'm wary when people I don't know approach me on the street, both men and women, because usually people who do that want something from you."This rarely happens. I am out in public a lot, David. I hardly see this. But people such as your self will exaggerate issues like this due to the euphoria of female victim status

Anonymous
10 years ago

>"It's deemed as racism to think black people are potential criminals until proven otherwise. But magically, it's not hatred (sexism) to think men are evil until proven otherwise."Makes one wonder what happens when such people are confronted with a black man. prejudging men= okprejudging blacks= not okprejudging black men = …?

Anonymous
10 years ago

>LOL as if MRAs give a crap about black men. You're too cute.

Burton
10 years ago

> LOL as if MRAs give a crap about black men. You're too cute.A sizable number of MRAs are in fact black. I've worked with a MRA group which spent a lot of time dealing with how black men are screwed over by the system. As for the "potential rapist" thing, the issue there is personal safety and freedom from harassment. Just as a man has every right to be concerned about being the victim of a false charge of rape or domestic abuse. When a woman is walking home alone late at night and sees a guy (probably much larger then her) seemingly following her, she has every right to be concerned.Wait a minute.I thought "gender is just a construct." Are you saying that there are differences between men and women other than some bodily orifices? How un-PC!

Burke101
10 years ago

>Crime existed long before liberalism, political correctness, and feminism, and so did povery, classism and racism.Crime has taken a great leap forward with liberalism, as liberals provide the ideological rationale for criminal activity, especially when it comes from a liberal favored group. Thus, violent crime by the urban underclass becomes the failure of society to deal with "poverty" or "racism" or whatever buzz words may be invented. One might note that criminal justice statistics do not bear out liberal assumptions. The 1960s, which saw an explosion of liberal civil rights legislation and war on poverty programs, also saw an explosion in crime and violence–such as rioting (and this from the inner cities to ivy league campuses).The 1980s, with all of the reactionary politics of Reagan, saw a downturn in crime. Like it or not, "three strikes" and "wars" on gangs beat down the crime stats, admittedly at the cost of civil liberties. Feminism has had its role in increasing crime by:(1) Hysteria over rape which has resulted in innocent men being railroaded into jail (e.g., the Duke U Three). False charges of rape are a crime, in case one has not noticed. (2) Advocating the release of female criminals.(3) Wasting criminal justice resource in witch hunts which discredit the criminal justice system chasing feminist fantasies (e.g., Super Bowl Sunday being the most "dangerous" day for women).(4) And destroying the family in general, thereby creating large numbers of ill-disciplined children. Elsewhere, note that since apartheid (a "racist" system) was dismantled in South Africa, there has been a massive upsurge in violent crime, including such pleasantries as the torture of victims. Much of the crime verges on terrorism, especially attacks on farmers (a sort of ethnic cleansing). Yet the new South Africa has affirmative action and a propaganda campaign against the evils of racism. It's also one of the rape capitals of the world.(It may be that apartheid had to go, but it is one more demonstration that replacing a conservative regime with a liberal regime also ups the ante when it comes to crime.)As for "classism," sounds like another Marxist critique, an excuse to overthrow capitalism and replace it with a communist state which, presumably, would be a paragon of civic order. Like the USSR.This gets to the real agenda. It's about liberal-left power. Liberal-leftists claim that if you put them in office, or give them permanent jobs in the bureaucracy or ivory tower, they will solve the problem of crime. Of course, liberal-left policies have proven to be failures when it comes to crime. This is why liberals have to repeat the same old formulas about "racism" and "classicism" (ill-defined terms at best). As is to be expected, when the reality disproves the ideology, they will turn up the noise machine.

Anonymous
10 years ago

>@Burton – were there any actual black men involved in this group? Or was it just a bunch of white guys appropriating oppression of actual minorities for themselves, as per usual?

Rob
Rob
10 years ago

>Crime has taken a great leap forward with liberalism, as liberals provide the ideological rationale for criminal activity, especially when it comes from a liberal favored group.One such crime is Libel!Eh, David?

Anonymous
10 years ago

>booby wrote, Random Brother, well, if the MRM isn't going to deal with the issues of gay men, it should probably rename itself the Straight Man's Rights Movement. Yes, that would make sense since homos don't have to deal with females in a normal way as normal men do or do they suffer the adverse effects that normal men do from interactions with females.How many homos have been accused of sex harassment, rape or are having money extorted from them in child support?