Feminism doesn’t help men and buzzwords won’t help men’s issues

iainmf · 2022-03-30T07:49:16+00:00

If suicides are caused by 'toxic masculinity' then we should have seen decrease in the male-to-female suicide ratio over time as more men feel comfortable with being emotional.

What has happened is the opposite. Since the 70's the male-to-female ratio has increased dramatically. See figure 2 here: https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/39/6/1464/736597?login=false

The other thing to note is the change in the ages of men killing themselves over time. Historically male suicide was concentrated in older men. But since the 70s increasing numbers of young men have been killing themselves. (Figure 3)

Again, if suicide was caused by 'toxic masculinity' then I would expect a decrease in suicide for young men as each generation becomes less 'toxic'.

Since 2nd wave feminism the ratio of male-to-female suicides has increased and more young men are killing themselves. Now correlation does not equal causation, but if feminism helps men then the suicide data does not show it.

Sydnaktik · 2022-03-30T01:10:49+00:00

You're going to run into problems because feminism works on a multi-tiered rhetorical system.

Each level relies on the level underneath for justification.

So you'll have people on twitter say "kill all men" and they'll justify their statement from bloggers talking about male privilege and gender oppression.

The people talking about male privilege and gender oppression justify themselves with more academically inclined bloggers/pundits/authors talking about patriarchy.

The more academically inclined pundits justify what they say from what comes out of the "scientific" research.

But the "scientific" research is extremely misandrist, gets very slowly debunked and as soon as it is debunked it gets replaced by more misandrist "science" that supports misandrist ideology. Often times trying to keep using the same words but with new definitions. Thereby enabling those at upper levels to keep spewing their misandrist nonsense that even the people at the bottom would agree, when cornered, that it is nonsense. But they will do everything they can to avoid saying outright.

Taking feminism head on as you're trying to do is incredibly difficult even under the best of circumstances. But in a feminist academic institution it is suicide.

I recommend an alternative approach. Instead of attacking feminism. Attack misandrists. You'll need to define the term "people who hate men and want to strip them of their rights and dignity" (or something like that, whatever will help you make your point but is also easily defensible).

Then you approach the subject of misandry within feminism. This is much more easily defended as a subject than outright attack against feminism itself as feminists are used to such types of disagreements within feminism (e.g. white vs black feminism, TERFs etc...).

I personally recommend that you don't go overboard in your first paper. Baby steps is enough.

But don't concede any ground either. One very common ground to concede is to claim that feminism in the past didn't really have much misandry in it. Which is false. Another frequently conceded territory is to claim that while male as a class oppressing women as a class isn't a real thing in today's western societies it is real in other parts of the world or has been real in western societies in the past. This is also almost certainly not true. In every society where women appear to be oppressed, a similar or greater percentage of men suffer even more under slavery-like conditions (or are simply dead).

By targeting specifically misandrists and misandrist feminists you save yourself the nearly impossible task of attacking feminism head on and leave it to the reader to eventually recognize that nearly all feminists are misandrist feminists. You don't have to stick your neck out to make the point, people will connect that last dot for themselves.

Edit: Ironically enough, it's the same tactic used by misandrists when they talks about "toxic masculinity". They claim that it's not meant to mean that masculinity is toxic, but it's an umbrella term they can use to point to any behavior or attitude associated with masculinity and present it in a way where it is harmful to people. People eventually conclude that masculinity is toxic.

I propose we do the same with "misandrist feminist". The idea that feminists are man haters has been around a long time. But man-haters (aka misandrists) don't want to lose the protection of the holy word "feminism". So they developed a lot of sophisticated language and ideology to hide their misandry. To the point that most people don't really recognize it anymore. In fact it's hidden so well that many feminist will genuinely believe that the care about men while simultaneously spreading bigotry against them.

If you attack "misandrist feminists", those feminists who don't believe themselves to be misandrists might actually listen to you long enough to understand the variety of ways that feminism is hurting men.

But again, I recommend a very slow and empathetic approach. You could pick the topic of "toxic masculinity" and try not to say much or anything about what it stands for and just explain how this choice of word alone is harmful to men, find evidence of blatant misandry making use of the word. Use anecdotal evidence of how this terminology is affecting men and makes them feel guilty for being male. If you look through this subreddit, there's been a few suggestions for less harmful alternatives for the expression.

Doormau5 · 2022-03-30T03:09:52+00:00

You have to give it to femminists. It was a stroke of genius to frame a movement clearly designed to elevate one sex as a good move for equality. It gave them a bullet proof shield to criticism. Feminism was never about helping men, it's in the damn name

Oncefa2 · 2022-03-30T01:42:41+00:00

There are a few academic sources that cover this thesis.

See:

https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/ny08m6/a_friendly_reminder/

And:

It has been argued that these negative stereotypes of men are perpetuated by all-encompassing buzzwords frequently seen in the media such as ‘patriarchy’, 'male privilege’, ‘rape culture’ and ‘toxic masculinity’ which can shape wider attitudes and policies (Nuzzo, 2019; Barry et al., 2019). Such negative stereotypes may also have been fuelled by recent social movements including #MeToo and moral panics about male sexuality on campus and beyond (Liddon & Barry, 2021; Kipnis, 2017). In sum, the actions of a very small minority of men are often extrapolated to the whole population of men by various sectors of society, leading to the aforementioned negative stereotypes and associated policies which can discriminate against men. As will be argued throughout this book, such negative stereotypes can colour and shape the treatment of males by others, including treatment by: (i) health services (ii) law enforcement; (iii) the legal system; (iv) employers; (v) teachers/professors; and (vi) the general public.

From Men’s Issues and Men’s Mental Health: An Introductory Primer

https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-86320-3

This is available through Springerlink if your university offers that to you.

A lot of the content from chapter 1 of this book addresses the early "criticisms" in your paper. I do agree that the section for de2 can be reworded but that's a rather minor point compared to the logic of the paper (I wouldn't remove what you're trying to say in that section, just how you're saying it).

It's interesting that these people are seeking to silence you when part of the point of toxic masculinity is that men should be speaking up more. So here is a man (presumably) talking about feminism and you're being told to sit down and shut up. Which makes this editor / professor part of the patriarchy that is creating toxic masculinity, per their own logic.

That point isn't just trite anymore, either. This issue, a double-bind as it's formally called, has also been recognized and published in academic sources. Here is something I typed out from that same book for a post in this sub that makes it.

If you need the sources referenced here I can dig those out for you.

[S]ome scholars have argued that men as a group can be demonized in particular contexts, for example, on college campuses (see Chap. 7), where sexual paranoia and related campaigns can send a subtle message that all young men are potential rapists and a threat to communal safety (MacDonald, 2018; Kipnis, 2017).

Moreover, there have been many well-documented cases where men and women have attempted to organize discussions about issues affecting men’s mental health on campus, but these are met with hostility and vandalism. For example, a group of male and female students at Ryerson University (Canada) created a men’s issues group, where men's mental health was a core theme. This group was regularly refused official status by the Ryerson University Student Union (Csanady, 2016). A similar phenomenon occurred at Durham University (the United Kingdom) where a men’s issue group has been denied official recognition for many years (Daubney, 2015). Likewise, the University of Toronto Men's Issues Society invited renowned scholar Dr. Warren Farrell to talk about men’s mental health, but his lecture was met with protests and vandalism by demonstrators (Smeenk, 2012).

This creates a paradoxical situation, which has been labeled the men’s mental health double-bind (Whitley, 2019). It is often said that silence is detrimental to men’s mental health, and there are frequent calls on social media and elsewhere for men to “talk more” and “open-up” about their mental health (see Chap. 1). But attempts to discuss men’s issues can face obstruction and hostility, and men are often facing local situations where they are being implicitly told to shut-up, “check their privilege,” and talk less.

An example of the men’s mental health double-bind comes (somewhat paradoxically) from the world of academic psychology. In the United Kingdom, several leading psychologists recently formed a male psychology group offering public lectures, a website, a newsletter, and a social space to discuss men’s mental health. As the group grew, the leadership applied for the group to be recognized as an official section of the British Psychological Society (BPS), which would require a vote from the whole BPS membership. Bizarrely, this application was opposed by an organized group with its own dedicated website entitled “no to male psychology,” which campaigned for a no vote. In the resultant ballot, over 4000 BPS members voted, with two-thirds voting in favour of the new section (Male Psychology Network, 2019). This was welcome news for all who care about men’s mental health, but it cannot go unnoticed that around one in three BPS members (who voted) did not want a male psychology section. The negative messages underlying this double-bind are reliant on the biases and stereotypes discussed in Chapt. 1 and throughout this book and must be addressed as part of any paradigm shift in men’s mental health.

I unfortunately don't have time right now to go through everything else in your paper but I'll definitely come back and share more when I get a chance.

What subject is this for if you don't mind me asking?

Edit:

Referencing either this or the other source from the first link I gave you (which is also on springerlink) would add more credibility in the eyes of the people judging this paper. They might be less inclined to see you as someone with an isolated opinion that they can blow over if they were to know that other university professors, and even a couple modern psychology textbooks, are talking about the same stuff you are now (especially if you could word something like "a new psychology textbook makes the point..." in there somewhere).

LaserowaPani · 2022-03-30T08:26:50+00:00

OP. It is feminism not meninism. It is basically explain in the name itself. It is not designed to help men.

rochesterslim · 2022-03-30T15:27:47+00:00

can someone find me a link for the 1st annotation about feminism saying men should just cry more to get rid of their problems? (DE2)

Title	Feminism doesn’t help men and buzzwords won’t help men’s issues
Author	rochesterslim
Upvotes	168
Comments	25
Date	March 30, 2022 12:31 AM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/tru0a3/feminism_doesnt_help_men_and_buzzwords_wont_help/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/feminism-doesnt-help-men-and-buzzwords-wont-help.1109498 https://theredarchive.com/post/1109498

Comments