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.)
Llamas can guard sheep. Check!
Llamas can solve problems caused by a lack of llamas. Check!
I have never heard a llama ask for help. Check!
Llamas …um, continue guarding sheep. Check!
Llamas create wool, which makes awesome knitted garments. Check!
Fuck it, I’m gonna marry a llama.
“The one-l lama,
He’s a priest.
The two-l llama,
He’s a beast.
And I will bet
A silk pajama
There isn’t any
Three-l lllama.”
I’d rewrite one of his fantasy points as “a stubborn idiot asks for help last if ever”, but I guess I must just not be post-modernist enough.
“Just think it through” should be the next “And that’s real.”
Source.
So… if one fails one of the Man qualifications, what do you then become? I’m just wondering. It must be quite difficult if you feel your gender can be taken away if you don’t fulfill a straitjacket of behavior.
“Be a hero”
Nope, that’s not a lot of pressure to put on people or anything. No way setting that as the bar that people have to reach could possibly go wrong.
@Gametime:
I owe myself ten bucks.
I had a bet going that Dvarghundpossen would stroll in and notice something totally wrong with my 101 philosophy stuff there.
Poo.
😛
Because if I’m the Hero, I’m important, not just a meaningless cog. If I’m the Villain, I’m important, not just a meaningless cog.
It all grandifies me, makes me huge! I emcompass armies. I am Legion!
… it’s ego. It’s all ego.
Ah. Being one of those normal people isn’t good enough, I guess? X|
RE: CassandraSays
No joke. Though speaking of toxic masculinity and the stupid shit it can get you into, you should’ve seen me and my husband when we first started dating. He was so used to a hetero dynamic where the woman was supposed to do the communicating, and I was just fail at everything. It was funny in a, “Wow, it’s a wonder we managed to get together at all” way.
@cloudiah:
So “just think it through” guy is positing that A) alphas and betas are a thing B) if an alpha falls in love, he LOSES, C) because women, amiright?
…
This is beautiful logic. These guys are totally consistent and not garbage monsters at all.
@ LBT
Actually I just had a lightbulb moment when you said that. I wonder if part of the misogynist dudebro fear and confusion about gay relationships is based on that idea that it’s a woman’s job to do the emotional work. In that paradigm, no woman = no warm fuzzy bonding stuff, since men are assumed to be crap at it.
… Fight club is a romance novel. The movie is a romantic comedy about the dangers of obsession.
It’s not a great call to arms about the sad state of today world, it’s a mockery of the notions of archetypical, super masculine behavior (“My perfect world… the clothes on you back is what you’ll live in and die in… no ATMS, no credit ratings, just you and your spear… Dead by thirty”. From memory, near the end, discussing the future).
I love Fight Club. I think it’s a great movie. The book is so-so, as is most of Chuck Palahniuks work in my opinion (… Seriously. Being descriptive isn’t being a writer, man!), but I don’t love it because it inspires me to go start my own cult, bomb Starbucks and declare myself the last progeny of a lost father and the windblown wreck of time tossed haphazardly from place to place. Tangent.
Also? I quite like Ikea furniture. I find it very functional.
People who use it as a call to arms frighten me. I don’t feel frightened by a lot of things, since an emotional dead state and the inability to feel is part of being a robot, but someone who misses the point of an entire book so much is frightening. Latching on to what is being mocked is strange.
I’ve heard stories about Palahniuk doing interviews, and people walking up to him and asking “So hey, man, where’s the local fight club?”, thinking it must be a real thing, thinking it must be the answer, thinking somehow that it’d make them more… something. Imagine that.
The murderous, cult-like, obsessive behaviour all generated to get the attention of a girl you couldn’t otherwise get the guts to talk to and someone reads that and latches on to it, and wants to find out where he can go to generate this secondary personality that will allow him to be great?
I guess writing it out like that it isn’t too surprising.
“Also? I quite like Ikea furniture. I find it very functional.”
Idk wtf the topic is at this point, so I’ll just chime in to second that.
And say that I like alpacas more than llamas, because my gloves and hand warmers are both alpaca (shit LBT, you didn’t get to see my frankengloves!)
“@cassadrasayss, I use the term “Hero” to shame myself and only myself. If I am doing something criminal then i’m not being a Man according to my own standards. One mo’ this is an internal dialog.”
Budmin, why do you see the need to treat Being A Decent Ordinary Human Being 101 as Being a Hero? Why do you have to make it such a big deal? Do you really need to shame yourself into not doing something criminal? Is criminal behaviour something so appealing, or is something wrong with you that it’s harder not to do something that’s criminal (which may or may not mean directly harmful to other people)?
And if your “this can apply to women” disclaimer is genuine, wtf are you so fixated on the Man = Hero nonsense?
It’s all very well to say this is an internal dialogue, but seriously, you’re not the protagonist in anyone else’s life, and this chest-thumping stuff pretty much imposes a male-female dichotomy and I’m guessing would have toxic effects on those around you. For that matter it would have them on you: wtf sense is there in doing the “never ask for help” thing? That’s where you get blokes who never ask the way when they’re lost, on a minor level, and on a serious one, blokes who die a lot earlier than they need to because they’re such Manly Men they think it’s weak or girly to go to the doctor when they’re sick.
Well, whoever thinks that’s a general thing is stoooooopid.
Even if alpha and beta was a thing that list is still stupid. If I were going to use the terms, I’d call Louis an alpha less ‘cos he was once one of the most powerful kings in Europe than ‘cos he’s himself, and holy shit, finding out he loves me too was the BEST. Loses interest? Breaks his heart? Fucking morons, seriously.
Also watching a cricket match when there are only six players and they don’t know a whole lot about it is the funniest thing ever. (Family picnic last night.)
@LBT: “So… if one fails one of the Man qualifications, what do you then become? I’m just wondering.”
You become a llama, of course.
Which is quite cool, because as well as the things listed above, they’re really good at spitting in the eye of anyone they don’t like.
Fight Club? Is that the movie where Helena Bonham-Carter is all gothy?
Did you ever see The Matrix? I hear it’s a good movie.
@Bannester I didn’t accuse you of being an Objectivist, I just wanted to know if you’ve checked out her work.
The other part is about how many young men are identifing with characters. charismatic anarchists like Durden/Joker/Bane etlc. Not to say that those ate my only options. Other then that you are right. I am seeing the world in a self discribed morally hypermasculine way and I’m perfectly cool with that. Moral relativism scares the shit out of me.
Spell checking and typoes may very…
Budmin, where on earth do you get the idea that you have to be either hypermasculine or relativist? I’m absolutely with you that relativism is not a very good idea. But why, of all things to anchor your beliefs to, did you pick your penis?
So, the only alternative to moral relativism is hypermasculinity? Sounds like someone is listening too closely to the voices in his penis.
Also, where are all these Durden/Joker/Bane wannabes? I mean, other than the handful who shoot up movie theaters now and then?
Ouch! Good thing his beliefs are so lightweight.
“Sounds like someone is listening too closely to the voices in his penis.”
Dammit Bob, I was enjoying that cup of coffee!
His beliefs aren’t that interesting–just a bunch of talking heads.
“His beliefs aren’t that interesting–just a bunch of talking heads.”
::side-eyes katz::
Did you mean to put that image in my head?