Did Tom Matlack of the Good Men Project – not to be confused with Ben Matlock, fictional defense lawyer beloved by the elderly – swallow one of those mysterious “red pills” I keep hearing about on Men’s Rights blogs? Whatever he swallowed, it’s apparently causing him to hallucinate.
How else to explain his recent post on the GMP site titled “Being a Dude Is a Good Thing.” Now, as a dude who spends a good deal of time every day being a dude, I’ve got nothing against anyone being a dude, provided that’s what they want to be. It’s just that the piece itself is full of some rather strange generalizations that don’t actually seem to be, you know, true, at least not in what’s commonly known as “the real world.”
Rather than try to rebut his argument, because he doesn’t seem to have much of one, let’s just look at some of his loopier pronouncements:
Why do men get blamed for everything?
Uh, because they don’t? Sure, men get blamed for things, but guess what? Women get blamed for things all the time, too, from witchcraft, to divorce, to getting themselves raped, battered or killed. They’ve been blamed for earthquakes, for “inciting” male lust, for killing chivalry and “killing off real men,” for “taking roles intended by God only for men.” Heck, some inventive sorts have even figured out how to blame women for men who are assholes. And this guy has decided that “Black Women are to blame for the disrespect Black Men show towards Black Women.” For endless additional examples, scroll back through the posts and comments here, visit any of the blogs on my “boob roll,” or simply continue living on planet earth.
Back to Matlack, whose generalizations get more surreal by the sentence:
In the locker room, in the bathroom, on the walk out of the board room, in my conversations with men of all kinds, that’s what I hear more than anything. The resignation that to be a man is to be unacceptable at some level to the woman in your life.
Really? Who on earth are you hanging out with? And what women are they hanging out with? Are men other than Tom Matlack and his possibly apocryphal conversational partners actually having conversations like this on a regular basis? If the “woman in your life” basically hates men, what is she doing with you, and what are you doing with her?
One close friend jokes, “When speaking to my wife I always make sure to look at the ground in deference. And I make sure not to make any sudden movements.”
Um, what?
I’ve watched him. He loves his wife.
He’s a very competent human being. But with her he’s decided the only way to survive is to submit. The female view is the right view. The male view just gets you into trouble.
You see what I meant before about the hallucinations, right?
But Matlack suggests there is hope for the poor demure, never-before-heard-from men of the world. Apparently they are starting to open their mouths at last.
It seems that the blame game in the mainstream, whether through the minimization of male life in pop culture or on television or through the continued obsession with men behaving badly, has finally struck a chord with the average guy.
Let’s just pause a moment to reflect on this whole “minimization of male life in pop culture or on television.” Mr. Matlack, do you actually watch movies or television, or visit libraries or anything like that? Most movies revolve around men as the main characters, with women in many cases serving as little more than a love interest or simply as scenery. Have you ever heard of the Bechdel test? Read up on it, run the test on some of your favorite films, and then get back to us on the “minimization of male life in pop culture.”
Now back to Matlack’s manifesto:
We are no longer willing to be blamed for being men. We are no longer willing to avert our gazes and stay silent about our feelings. We are raising our voices and telling our stories in our own male vocabulary.
Yeah, because men have been so utterly silent about their feelings, their opinons, and pretty much everything, up until now.
To women, I assume the response is, “well, it’s about time.” But just remember when we talk it’s not going to sound like a women in a man’s body. It’s gonna be all dude. And you are just going to have to deal with that.
Ladies, prepare yourselves for a lot more Dudesplaining in the near future. Dudes will be ignored no longer! Dudes!!! DUUUUUDESSS!!!!!!
EDITED TO ADD: Matlack’s gotten some responses on Twitter to his dudely roar; he’s posted a bunch of them here. Guest appearances by Amanda Marcotte and (seriously) Roseanne Barr.
This makes MRAL’s dislike of him EVEN WEIRDER. The way he went on you’d think Hugo was actually a decent person advocating for rights for women, instead of a guy who took advantage of his students and never apologized for it. o.O
The reason I don’t think that the leopard has changed its spots is that I don’t think it was ever about the sex in the first place for him. Power, control, influence over others, feeling admired or even worshipped, taking pleasure in those things – he still has and indulges in all of those, and I think that’s what led to him sleeping with his students in the first place, the desire to fulfill those other needs.
Maybe it’s the hypocrisy that bugs MRAL? I dunno if he’s savvy enough to have picked up on that or not.
I do think it’s funny that it was MRAL letting up on the “MANGINA ALPHA FUCK!” that got us questioning Schwyzer for the first time here.
Good point, Cassandrasays – he can now lecture a crowd of young students, shiny-eyed with adoration, about Virtue (like Jesus!), while admiring his own admirable self-restraint.
His main criticism of Hugo is that he’s a “mangina”… because he’s a feminist man? Because Hugo talks about restraining yourself around women? I thought that was it.
And this proves how counterproductive trolling is if you actually have an issue that you want people to engage with.
@Molly: same feeling here. I liked Hugo better when all I knew of him was what MRAL was yelling us.
Also, MRAL, remember the conversation about what is and is not creepy, and why? Hugo is arguably not a bad looking guy – too nerdy and straight-laced for me, but he’s not ugly, and he’s tall. But that thing where he checks Rate My Professor for comments where students say they find him hot, and posts about it on his blog? That’s pretty damn creepy.
(Also sad. I think he’s close to my age, and dude, really? You’re still looking for sexual validation from teenagers? That’s kind of pathetic.)
Speaking of creepy, anyone see Horrible Bosses?
Dammit, Kladle, don’t talk about the Pussy Warehouse!
I love* how Hugo’s basically saying “I was drunk” as an excuse, I mean “clarification” for his sleeping with students. Yeah, I don’t think the leopard’s spots are ever really going away.
*not at all
I have a soft spot for Schwyzer because one of his posts on not feeling hot was one of the sparks for Figleaf’s Two Rules of Desire, which is one of my favorite bits of gender theory ever. Nevertheless, he is a little bit creepy.
I had two professors whom I think are cute… does that count as having a crush them? Of course, I never talk to professors because I’m afraid I’d be imposing, so…
Joanna: It got covered on NSWATM a while back… ugh, sexual harassment and assault is NOT funny just because it happens to dudes.
@Ozy: Ah. I’ve just seen it recently. Yeah the prize for creepier boss was a tie between Kevin Spacey and Jennifer Anniston. It was funny until he shot someone. It was funny until she took erotic pictures of her gassed co worker. A line was definitely crossed somewhere.
@ithiliana
I’m glad to meet someone else who likes Elgin’s work. I discovered the trilogy in high school it’s remained one of my favorite feminist sci-fi texts ever since. I’m not sure I entirely agree that there’s one language that could encompass global Women’s Culture, since there are micro cultures even within a single city, but the idea that in some way language has been shaped by the patriarchy to exclude the vocabulary that oppressed people need is not totally off-the-wall.
I wish I could find a copy of the Ozark books, but a lot of her fiction just isn’t in print any more. 🙁
She has a livejournal (ozarque), but she hasn’t updated since April, so I don’t know about her recent health.
As for Hugo Schwyzer… Who? I feel like I’m totally missing something because I’ve never heard of him before.
@Linds: The Ozark trilogy is incredibly brilliant–and yes, hard to find. I did follow her on LJ, but I think her health has kept her from updating recently–what I said is what I’ve heard in rumors around LJ.
I don’t think the idea of a “woman’s language” is at all feasible for the reasons you point out–but the speculation and “what if” related to the Sapir Worf theory makes it a fascinating thought experiment. I thought the next two novels had some major flaws that were, in part, related to just that issue–but I still find the first one of the most compelling ones ever.
Hugo Schwyzer is a well known male feminist who is a community college teacher (women’s studies) in California–he’s fairly well known in the “feminist blogosphere” (which is mostly made up of fairly young femists–meaning, to my mind, 20-30s–I’m in my mid-fifties), and, as you can see from the comments here has appealed to some of the men’s rights advocates. If you google his name, you’ll easily find his blog. I read it a while — but stopped reading steadily and have now given up entirely. From my perspective, you’re not missing much!
It feels fairly natural to me that the discussion about Hugo didn’t happen earlier–as I said to MRAL, I contemplated posting about my criticisms several times, but always chose to not type or to not post what I typed because the earlier attacks were so violent. Once we get away from the insults and ire, there are real issues around male allies and male feminists (some feminists I know claim no man can be a feminist, at best only an ally).
My personal take on his past affairs with student is that he presents the fact that they were in his age cohort as some sort of defense — when in fact non-traditional age women students returning to school after years or decades out can be vulnerable in ways that I’ve seen faculty take advantage of before (academic brat, professional students for a while, now academic), and the self-congratulatory tone about their age always irked me. (NOTE: the majority of students at most community college are not necessarily the 18 year old group–more and more adults are returning to finish interrupted education or to start the education they could not get at an earlier age).
If one is really fast, acetone will reduce (but not eliminate) the effect of nail polish on cloth. it has to not have set, at all, and the acetone may also strip the dies/cause the fabric to dissolve.
It has to be pure acetone.
Oops, sorry for revealing secrets, please don’t stuff my vagina in a box in retribution!
I was reading through Hugo’s stuff last night because I hadn’t looked at much of his writing before. I think what honestly bothers me the most about him is his narrative of recovery from mental illness/addiction. He basically chalks his becoming sober/ recovering from several mental disorders up to a combination of mysterious miraculous grace-of-God plus willpower. Which on first glance doesn’t seem that bad, people get help from religious concepts all the time and do have the ability to change their lives to some extent.
The problem with the narrative though is that it doesn’t help anyone at all– people dealing with mental illness can’t just sit around and wait for a conversion experience. And health care providers and people who care about the mentally ill can’t afford to say “why some make it and some don’t is anyone’s guess”; they have to be able to find reliable interventions to help people who are suffering at any level. Not everyone wants to wait until they’re totally “broken” to get help or change their lives. And you can’t insist of everyone that they have to will themselves into change, not everyone has the mental resources to do that, and a person should be able to get at least minimal help without having to summon extraordinary willpower. It also implies that the people who are sick or who aren’t succeeding in treatment are so because they just aren’t trying hard enough, or aren’t broken enough yet to submit themselves or something, which is a really gross thing to say.
Hugo also seems to be a member of the “absolving myself = talking about myself all the time” club, which I’ve also found to be kind of disingenuous. He’s made up for his horrible past a little bit by promoting feminism, but when his supposed anti-sexist stuff involves talking about himself so much, well, are you trying to help people here or is this about helping you, Hugo?
I think that’s maybe why his whole recovery narrative bothers me so much– talking about it as if it’s a big mystery as to why he got better doesn’t allow anyone else to actually learn from his experience. The only point of telling the story in that way instead of talking in detail about all the nitty-gritty slogging through 12-steps and therapy he did or about exactly how he finally was able to commit to helping himself, is to make him sound profound and falsely humble about everything.
Here’s a quote that’s an example of this that bothered me a lot. The bolding is mine, I found that the grossest part of it; it’s a weird sort of quasi-victim-blaming that you hear sometimes in 12-step programs. Hugo also mentions his privilege– his family paid for him to go to intensive psychoanalysis up to four times a week for two years (and psychoanalysis is extremely expensive compared to other forms of psychotherapy):
Like I said before, humblebrag, with a side order of smug and a vague sense that maybe godless heathens ought to consider whether or not their lack of faith is contibuting to their problems in life.
@Holly: However, there are lots of professors that I’ve been friendly with, joked around with, and been sociable with outside of class. Either because I just liked them as people or because I wanted to make sure they remembered my name when they were grading papers.
It’s impossible to say what any one person says, but as resident professorial type, my experience is that after a while in the field, even someone as socially inept as myself, can tell the ‘crush’ from the more sociable students.
And it is totally the teacher’s responsibility to keep from responding to that crush in any way, or to let things go anywhere.
I used to have intense crushes on some teachers, and really it was mostly about the subject they taught, their passion, their voice (I have a real thing for some voices), and the whole intense passion in a good classroom–more than half these teachers were women–only one (male) ever tried to make anything of it, and i was truly horrified. There is such a thing I think as the erotics of the teacher/student relationship–but (my opinion!), anybody who takes that as a sign that there should be something beyond the classroom is seriously abusing their position.
“Hugo also seems to be a member of the “absolving myself = talking about myself all the time” club, which I’ve also found to be kind of disingenuous. He’s made up for his horrible past a little bit by promoting feminism, but when his supposed anti-sexist stuff involves talking about himself so much, well, are you trying to help people here or is this about helping you, Hugo”
So much yes to this.
Re: Kladle’s Schwyzer quote–I keep wanting it to end with “ain’t I a stinker?” and a wink at the camera.
hahahahaha,
there is something similar to hugo’s boasts and a pua’s lay report….
glad I’ll never be a Male Feminist…..
The Dude abides
Spearhafoc: an obvious author stand-in (for Marv Wolfman)
Knowing Marv, I don’t really see it. None of the panels on that tumblr strike me as any sort of Mary Stu for him.