In a case of spectacularly bad timing, Fox News happened to choose the day before the Zimmerman verdict was handed down to publish an op-ed proclaiming “the White American Male” to be the most oppressed creature on Planet Earth. In a piece entitled “Men — The New Second Class Citizens,” professional antifeminist Suzanne Venker declared that
From boyhood through adulthood, the White American Male must fight his way through a litany of taunts, assumptions and grievances about his very existence. His oppression is unlike anything American women have faced.
What is revealing about this quote, besides its complete disconnection from reality, is that Venker makes no other references to race in the rest of her piece, which runs through a number of tiresome and oh-so-familiar MRA talking points about the alleged oppression of men.
Venker complains about schools being biased towards girls, from grade schools that force students to sit still to colleges with their infernal Title IX. She whines about “sit coms and commercials that portray dad as an idiot.”
Quoting antifeminist psychologist Helen Smith, a friend of and sometime contributor to A Voice for Men, she suggests that women can get their boyfriends or husbands locked up on a whim just by claiming abuse.
I’m surprised she didn’t talk about the evils of “friend zoning.”
But when Venker refers to “men” in all of these complaints, she is evidently thinking only of white men — why else would she switch so seamlessly from talking about the alleged oppression of “men” to proclaiming “the White American Male” the ultimate victim?
There’s really no other word for this than, well, racist.
The day after Fox published Venker’s nonsense, we were of course reminded (as if any of us really needed to be reminded) of the very real oppression faced by “the Black American Male.”
Trayvon Martin didn’t die because he happened to see a show featuring a bumbling sitcom dad. He died because George Zimmerman saw a young black man in a hoodie walking home from the store and assumed, apparently because Martin was young and black and wearing a hoodie, that he was up to something sinister.
Trayvon Martin didn’t die because he was male; he died because he was a black male. His killer walked free not because his victim was male, but because his victim was a black male.
Suzanne Venker did us all a favor by revealing the unconscious racism underlying so many Men’s Rights complaints. The Men’s Rights movement is not only a movement that is overwhelmingly made up of white men; it’s a movement that’s almost exclusively about white men, and their largely imaginary oppressions, as well. We might as well call it the White Men’s Rights Movement.
“There’s no denying that” is the latest version of “And that’s real.”
Insomnia sucks. I got 3 hours of sleep last night, and now it looks like the same deal tonight. Worried about friend with cancer, who has taken a turn for the worse. Cancer, of course, sucks even worse than insomnia.
(Hugs cloudiah)
Would camomile tea help? Turkey? I’m thinking that you may have to trick your body into being sleepy.
But men are more likely to be seen as dangerous, or criminal, or guilty. There’s no denying that.
That’s a function of the fact that men are afforded more agency than women are in general, not a bias against men. Women can’t possibly be dangerous because lady brains are soft and squishy and sugar and spice, so women are incapable of being actors in the world in the same way men are.
It’s the same logic that lets female pedo teachers off the hook — all those idiots who say “I wish I’d had a teacher like that in school!” Especially when it comes to sexuality, women are not given enough agency even to rape a child. They’re still only allowed to be seen as sexual objects, the lady from the Hot for Teacher video, even when they’re actually predators.
“It’s not all or nothing, this sort of things happens to women too. But men are more likely to be seen as dangerous, or criminal, or guilty. There’s no denying that.”
“I’m not arguing that black men face more racism. Racism hurts both men and women equally, it isn’t some razor sharp device that gets only certain people and not others.”
You have said that racist stereotypes affect men and women equally and have also said that men are more likely to be seen as dangerous, criminal or guilty. Can you please explain to us what you perceived to be the equally ill effects of racism against women?
(wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femme_fatale#Early_Western_culture_to_the_19th_century)
“In any oppressed group, the males bear the brunt of the hatred.”
“I’m not arguing that black men face more racism. Racism hurts both men and women equally”
Pick one.
@CassandraSays
@NightShadeQueen
You stole my argument. *Throws up hands*
@Saintnick – That’s not what being an MRA is about for me. I see it as an exercise in empathy. That’s because the problems of men are largely invisible. Men have been taught not to talk about these things all their lives. It leads to a lot of pain and anger. For me, it’s an amazing stretch of the empathetic mind to know that, beneath the big tough guy, there’s pain! The problems men face are no worse than the problems that women face. But they’re hidden on a much deeper level, and I think it takes a special kind of love to be an MRA and try and tease those problems out into the light.
Now, you mention stereotypes about the black community. Those stereotypes definitely exist, but so do stereotypes about men – and they’re so invisible, they’re right in front of our noses. Howard Zinn wrote in A People’s History something about how “when studying history it is easy to forget half the population entirely.” That’s just the problem. Men are seen as the default for a lot of things – both good and bad. Feminists have questioned the notion that a firefigher should be a man. They haven’t done anything to question the notion that a gunperson should be a man.
“That’s not what being an MRA is about for me. I see it as an exercise in empathy.”
lol
Did you really just say that?
“Feminists have questioned the notion that a firefigher should be a man. They haven’t done anything to question the notion that a gunperson should be a man.”
Yes, they have.
HOWARD ZINN, A People’s History of the United States
http://www.notable-quotes.com/z/zinn_howard.html
@CassandraSays: Once my brain enters this state, I don’t find that anything except a sleeping pill or total exhaustion helps, and of course I don’t have any sleeping pills around since I haven’t needed them for a while. I am trying some tea, but I don’t have high hopes.
Thanks for the hug! I hope to see friend tomorrow and let her know that no matter what, I am right there beside her. (And do a bunch of errands for her mom, who is her primary caregiver.)
FUCK CANCER.
And now we know whose sock this is.
On the principle of it being important to criticize your own in-group (it’s much easier to criticize outsiders), here is an example of someone who’s part of my in-group (white, European) displaying his batshit racist ideas, again. It’s really not surprising that Brevik thought this guy would want to be his buddy, but he actually underestimated the dude’s xenophobia. Smart move, French government, arresting his dumb racist ass before he does anything with the guns his equally batshit wife bought.
Well, when there are misandrist stereotypes of a group, the women drop off the map. They can’t possibly exist, or else the marginalized group might actually be human. And I suppose that invisibility is a difficult thing to deal with. Also, as you’ve pointed out, women in such groups are probably a good deal more likely to be sexually abused. So, it sucks for both genders.
@Jason
“Men have been taught not to talk about these things all their lives. It leads to a lot of pain and anger. For me, it’s an amazing stretch of the empathetic mind to know that, beneath the big tough guy, there’s pain! The problems men face are no worse than the problems that women face. But they’re hidden on a much deeper level, and I think it takes a special kind of love to be an MRA and try and tease those problems out into the light.”
I find that claim ludicrous in light of the MRA response to the Neo Male project, a project which is attempting to change the public stereotypical perception of men. http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showthread.php?tid=3995&pid=31732
These MRAs have stated that the do not want this project to get money because it supposedly attempts to subvert masculinity.
@NightShadeQueen – The problem is, Howard Zinn is a Marxist. Marxism is all about conflict. Who’s the oppressor, and who’s the proletariat? Those are the questions Marxism asks of every dynamic It’s a very limiting worldview, and it does apply to some aspects of society, but not to gender. Applying Marxism to gender is a capital mistake. The rules of gender are very, very different.
I’m not arguing with Howard Zinn’s view on a lot of levels. I’m not arguing with him that Andrew Carnegie had it many, many times better than a poor laborer. I am arguing with the notion that Andrew Carnegie’s wife didn’t have it every bit as good as Andrew Carnegie. I’m not arguing that the strikebreaker beating up a striker was probably a male. I’m only pointing out that the striker was probably a male, too.
@Jason please go read my earlier comments on page 1. About how men are NOT invisible. How they are overrepresented EVERYWHERE.
*slams head against wall*
Feminists are pretty much the only people who question the assumption that a shooter has to be a man. MRAs spend their time arguing whether or not women are even qualified to be shooters.
Look, I actually agree that the intersection of black/male is extremely dangerous for the person possessing both of those characteristics. But white men are very much less likely to be shot by the cops.
Blaming that on feminism means that you will never solve that fucking problem, you asshat, and that is why you make me angry.
(Cassandra, which sock is he?)
Jason: For you to quote Howard Zinn with such stunning lack of understanding and context is almost beyond my belief. Did you just randomly look up quotes on the web & think they meant what you want them to mean? Your lack of context for his writings is pure neglect at best, shameful and disingenuous at worst. You don’t know anything about him or his work or what he stood for. Just, wow. You should be deeply embarassed.
Oh my, Jason, allow me (as one of your fellows, a white male in his mid-forties, who spent his youth in that bastion of feminist laws, california, under Gov. Gerry Brown [back in his “moonbeam” days), to respond to this gem:
Bullshit.
There, I trust that got your attention. Feminsism doesn’t paint all men as rapists, nor as slavering beasts (that honor rests with the Conservatives, and the MRM).
You, of course, will fulminate, and froth that this is not so. You will be wrong. You have been misled, and are subject to a delusion. If not, then you are a liar.
Incidentally, reading material: Shuffling Feet
Hint: Jason, you’re supposed to read this one 😀
Jason: No, Cassandra, I’m warning you that if we don’t address certain social issues now, more bad things like this will continue to happen.
Ah… the “nice place you got here, shame if anything was ta’ happen to it” routine. Just give the nice men what they want and they won’t beat you up, rape you, or kill you.
Nice “movement” you got there.
. And when men of color are done being insulted by you feminists comparing your “oppression” to theirs, they can take a little of the time left over to be insulted by me.
Whut? Why do you need to insult them? Oh… it’s an antecedent pronoun problem, you meant to say that when the MoC were done insulting the women is was your turn to insult the women.
Since you’ve been so polite as to wait your turn.
Oh, it’s the “taking quotes out of context” portion of today’s stupid feminist show.
No son, this is the reading exactly what is said; and laughing because you don’t know how to properly use pronouns.
This, you see, is the out of context portion of the evening’s entertainment, where you chose to misrepresent the events in this sentence.
1: I defy you to find that sentiment.
2: Good luck finding feminists who say the treatment of blacks in the US is just like the treatment of women (bonus points from erasing women from your litany)
3: Rebecca Watson didn’t say his taking no for an answer was the problem, it was that he ignored what she had said about not wanting to be propositioned at all.
But thanks for playing, there will be some lovely parting gifts on the way out (Scented Candles, matching towels and hard wooden chair)
@Melody – The outsides of men are visible. Everyone sees men as heroes. But can you tell me what a hero feels? Nothing. In the stories, at least, a hero feels nothing. He does what needs to be done to defeat the enemy, and any fears he has are soon quashed by duty. In real life, of course, the people we call on to be our “heroes” feel something. Men who go off to battle are haunted by it forever. If they survive, of course. In Joseph Campbell’s journey, the hero comes back from Hell with a divine gift. In real life, the male hero comes back from Hell scarred for life.
THAT is the myth of male power.
Really? I’ve always used views about childbirth as the marker for whether people marginalise another group. It can’t be coincidence that women of a despised race/religion or of an inferior class/caste always seem to qualify for the “just drop a baby in the field and keep right on digging potatoes/ hanging out laundry/ carrying water”. Not at all like the well-spoken, refined, ladylike women of my own class/race who suffer real pain during childbirth and real grief if the baby dies.
Not at all. Most of the real problems of men are caused by the social and economic systems that men themselves prefer for other reasons. They’re invisible to men mainly because men prefer not to think that the things they see as beneficial have significant drawbacks for men themselves.
And I’m not just talking about PHMT. This is about economic, employment and political structures and policies making men’s lives more difficult than they need to be. But some men, who might have joined political parties or unions or protest movements to take on governments or employers or aristocrats decades or centuries ago, have allowed themselves to be sucked into lashing out at others who are in the same, or worse, position than they are.