It’s Question Time again. I’ve been reading through Susan Faludi’s Backlash and her more recent book on men, Stiffed, as well as some of the discussion surrounding Hanna Rosin’s The End of Men and Kay Hymowitz’ Manning Up. Faludi, writing in 1991, obviously saw the 80s as a time of antifeminist backlash.
My question is how you would characterize the years since she wrote her book. A continuation of that backlash? A time of feminist resurgence, from the Riot Grrls up to Rosin’s predicted End of Men? A mixed period of progress and regression?
I’m wondering both what your general assessment of the situation is, and also what specific evidence you have — either hard data or personal experience — that underlies your overall view. This could be anything from data on employment segregation or the prevalence of rape to your sense of how media representations of women and men have or haven’t changed, or even how people you know have changed the ways they talk about gender. What do you think are the significant data points to look at?
The question isn’t just what has changed for women but what has changed for men as well — with my underlying question being: what if anything in the real world has changed that might be making the angry men we talk about here so angry? I think we can agree that most of their own explanations are bullshit, but could there be a grain of truth to any of them? Or something that they don’t see that’s far more compelling?
In the interest of spurring discussion and providing some data to work with, here are a bunch of articles responding to (or at least vaguely related to the issues raised in) Rosin’s End of Men, including a link to her original Atlantic article. In addition, here are some posts by sociologist Philip Cohen challenging many of Rosin’s claims, as well as more general posts of his on gender inequality. (Feel free to completely ignore any or all of these; I just found them useful resources.)
RE: Kittehserf
Yeah, it sucks ASS. I’ve been considering getting one tattooed on, because that way, I could NEVER lose it, and no one could take it away from me.
I’m superstitious about getting a permanent tattoo for that, though. I mean, I love my husband dearly, want to get old and grumpy with him, but getting a tattoo like that seems like it’d be ASKING for divorce, isn’t it?
“^*This* is part of why feminism is increasingly unpopular…”
Citation on this?
I have a citation on why many critics think one of the big reasons the GOP lost the last election is because they alienated women — especially when they say stupid things about contraception and rape.
Here’s just one: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/08/republicans-learn-the-cost-of-alienating-women-voters.html
Here’s another from MotherJones:
“The memo, from Stephanie Schriock of EMILY’s List and Neera Tanden of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, notes that even the Republican National Committee’s own post-election report found that, “[Women] represent more than half the voting population in the country, and our inability to win their votes is losing us elections.” But while Republicans have made some effort to soften the party’s positioning on issues like immigration and LGBT rights, the party has not moderated its stance on reproductive rights or other issues of interest to many women voters.
The memo points to the unprecedented attack on access to abortion underway in states like North Dakota and Arkansas, the 160 Republicans that voted against the Violence Against Women Act at the federal level, and the ongoing fights over both contraception coverage and cuts to the federal family planning budget.
NARAL Pro-Choice America’s polling right after the election found that Romney’s view on abortion was the top reason for voting against him that swing-voting women cited in their survey. Planned Parenthood also used this issue to attack anti-choice politicians. Planned Parenthood also used this issue to attack anti-choice politicians. Another post-election poll from Democracy Corps found that 33 percent of unmarried women listed the attacks on Planned Parenthood and women’s preventative health services as a top reason for voting against Romney.
While I’d guess that Republican politicians aren’t looking for advice from CAP and EMILY’s List, the memo ends with some. “If the GOP wants to move forward, help its image and win elections, it should halt its embrace of extreme and out-of-touch policies that attack women and their families,” Schriock and Tanden write. “Ending attacks on abortion rights in the states would be a start.”
Increasingly unpopular? Don’t think so. Feminists issues sway entire elections.
This is what I was trying to get at earlier. A lot of people have a negative reaction to the word “feminism”, which they seem to think means “angry lesbian with hairy legs who wants to castrate men”, but feminist issue? Pretty popular right across the social and political spectrum. In some cases the general public is not yet on board with taking those issues as far as feminists would like to, but they’re still on board with the basic concepts.
Rogan, I get what you mean! I’m superstitious (I can’t call it anything else for myself) about that sort of thing. I do have his signature tattooed, but it’s from before we were in contact.
I went through a time of being a little worried when we went from “lovers” to “married”. I didn’t know him so well then and had a niggling fear that it might bring out some of his earth-time attitudes toward marriage. Not that they were exceptionally bad, but even the kindest and most loving seventeenth-century man’s take on marriage isn’t one I’d want to live with.
Absolutely. My ‘path’ in feminism was mainly through union activism – truly a 1% interest. Not hardly. I remember an interesting remark about workplace safety in previously male-dominated areas. Some speaker or other was talking about how occupational safety and health issues had been raised in many places by women workers – and how a lot of men, and some old school trade union officials, interpreted this as women being too ‘soft’ for men’s work. If you look at it sensibly, what really happened was new eyes on an old problem. There were many women taking on some jobs that only men had done previously, well, at least since wartime conscription into industry was forgotten by the new generation of baby boomers. When they were shown the work methods and the machinery, they were free to ask Why? Why do you do it that way? Why don’t we do [whatever it would take to make it easier and safer] instead? And there were no good answers.
As for mining and other dirty and dangerous work, people are overlooking the obvious. Money. Workers and their unions since Victorian, or much later, times had gradually improved safety, other working conditions and pay rates for these formerly low wage, high danger (or nastiness) jobs. And they did whatever they could to exclude “others” from taking advantage of the new and better advantages of such work. The high pay mainly. When women said they were willing to face the danger, the dirt or the stink, men claimed that those conditions were unsuitable for weak women or their refined sensibilities.
What they were really doing was keeping the best paid work to themselves. Blue collar, white collar, not a lot of difference when it’s better wages on the line.
@mildlymagnificent, Fist bumps for another union activist. Woot!
An animal to compare Joe to.
(Arguably NSFW.)
“Moreover, what lifts us up, and makes it possible to face the vomitous pussbuckets emptied in our midst, we share our hope.”
Pseudointellectual BINGO!
Vomitous pussbuckets!!! Aahahahahhaha you pretentious, pompous arse!
Also, extra minus points for using the term “dickless” and for stereotyping what “I” supposedly want from women with more bullshit pulled from your arse.
@Kirby –
“… So what?
A) The glass ceiling is not simply about CEOs, the lack of female CEOs is just a symptom. It is a general problem of women being unable to advance up the job ladder.
B) The glass ceiling itself is not even the problem per se, it too is a symptom of how society treats women, which affects all socio-economic areas.
Why aren’t more women in a position to become CEOs? Why does the wage gap exist? These are questions that highlight the greater problem that feminists are fighting against.
(note to all, I’m perfectly willing to be corrected on any of this…)”
and yet, when I’ve worked for other companies / orgs, in different times, places and countries… there were women managers everywhere!
I suspect bullshit!
Also, if wage gap were real – if it was really possible to get just as good work at an x% discount by hiring women… then all companies would only hire women, wherever they were available. It’s economics. Companies exist to make money, they are not a special club for men to spend time at. Duh.
@Joe
educate yourself
People who are sexist make stupid decisions. is that really a shock?
/though I haven’t studied economics, and I’m 99 percent sure that neither have you, so we’ll just see if anyone has has anything to say about “all companies would hire only women” bs.
So, Joe, why don’t all companies hire undocumented immigrants to be their CEOs? They work pretty cheap.
Anyway, Joe has already admitted that he does not support any large- or medium-scale efforts to prevent male suicide or lessen violence against men, so he has zero credibility for anything. Like the rest of our trolls.
If a human being is pulling bullshit from their ass I’d suggest they talk to a doctor and figure out how it got there.
(Creative insults are not Joe’s strong point.)
In order for such a scenario to make sense, you would have to assume that gender is the only criterion for being hired.
“You guys actually do get it all in terms of gender relations”
Bwahahahahaa!! Total bullshit! Hi-larious!
What is it that men “get”?
Under family law?
A right fucking over by a hostile system.
So much so, that the only way to “win” as in not have a bunch of other people (police, lawyers, judges, jaliers) in power over you is not to play the game at all.
Under provision of services for problems?
Huge under-representation, and denial that of men’s suffering
Yeah, we so lucky that way. Not.
And that you can’t see that Radfems hating on transwomen is because Radfems are blatantly misandrist and simply insist on regarding transwomen as being = more men for Radfems to hate. It’s so OBVIOUS.
I guess it’s obscured by the endless theorizing you all like to indulge in, but it’s blantant to anyone with common sense, whose read any of the Radfems ranting.
And I already named one transphobe upthread: Germain Greer. Greer tried to torpedo a woman’s career at a Cambridge women’s college, because she was trans. Look that shit up.
Also, @ Fade – ah yes “vitriol” I forgot that one in Pseuds bingo! Full house! XD
Ohhh, yes, lots and lots of “you’re gonna die all lonely” guff.
And what was that about how men have to become worthy of feminist’s glorious love or some shit??
Here’s the thing, and this is a radical notion, so hold on to your hats.
Maybe a whole bunch of men got tired of being defined by the extent or not that they could get female approval. (so not PUAs then. lol!)
Maybe we decided to define ourselves and lead our own lives, without *gasp* needing women to tell us we were being men correctly.
Shocking I know. It’s like… ooooh, when feminists decided they wanted to do stuff that was not what their husbands and fathers wanted! Liberation and all that, but now men are doing it OMG STOP THEM THEY SO HATING etc.
Hypocrites.
David, I’m really not sure why you’re defending this Onion piece. It is truly awful, unfunny, and yes, misandrist. This is coming from someone who thinks at least 90% of the uses of the word “misandrist” badly miss the mark. Also MRA’s, as a whole, are scum. Which makes this Onion article that much worse–it feeds into their arguments which are usually bullshit.
@cloudiah
“Anyway, Joe has already admitted that he does not support any large- or medium-scale efforts to prevent male suicide or lessen violence against men, so he has zero credibility for anything. Like the rest of our trolls.”
Sorry, wrong thread. Apparently WordPress doesn’t let you delete your own comments.
Bullshit and lies from cloudiah as per usual!
Um, yes, you can’t delete your own comments or trolls would constantly be erasing the stupid things they say and then deny.
It’s so hostile to only get custody 50 percent of the time when you ask for it.
I wonder what it’s like in opposite land
So go your own way and stop posting misogynistic trash?
Cannot understand what you are referencing here…
And did anyone on this thread deny men’s suffering, or is Joe just pulling stuff out of his ass again?
@Aaliyah – what? no.
The criterion is “making money”.
Either women are as good at all the jobs as men, in which case companies would be falling over themselves to only employ women at x% saving in their overhead = increase in their profit margin…. or, gender paygap is bullshit.
Because companies don’t employ a more expensive worker who is no better at the job than the cheaper worker. Even if some companies did that, they would lose out in competition to the companies that employed the just-as-good cheap workers.
Maths and economics, you can’t hand-wave it away.
Your logic is lacking. It makes me want to facepalm.
Like… you try to handwave away social forces and the patriarchy? because those influence your economics, not that you’d get that.
“And that you can’t see that Radfems hating on transwomen is because Radfems are blatantly misandrist and simply insist on regarding transwomen as being = more men for Radfems to hate. It’s so OBVIOUS.”
Says the man who once claimed that trans* people where needlessly marginizaling themselves by merely using the word trans*. You know what Joe? This appropriating other people’s problems to suit your ends has got to fucking stop. For one, TERFs issue with trans* women is so much more than just hating men; for two, trans* women — or I’m going to call you a cisman from now on; three, cisman explaining trans* issues to trans* people is neither welcome nor appreciated, so again I say — fuck off.
itsabeast — you can’t delete or edit comments because then people like Joe would delete the evidence of their idiocy.
@Fade – of course you can’t understand what issues I’m referencing. They’ve only been covered over and over and over and over again, by me and others – on this very site. You just ignore them every time, because you are indifferent to men’s suffering.
Wait, wait. Let me just savour this.
You just posted a link to a fucking Tumblr gif!!! Thinking that proved a point???
Lol!!