Gender stereotypes hurt men too

**frostyboy** · 8th-July-2008

Written by Dave Hill for The Guardian's Comment is Free: Gender stereotypes hurt men too

I hear "the feminists" are out to get me. They want to frame me for harassment; they want the right to breastfeed in my car; they want to toast my goolies before raging Sapphic fires. Never mind that some of my fellow men would pay good money to have that last thing done to them, there is plainly a monstrous regiment prosecuting a ruthless sex war at we gentlemen's expense, and it is winning. We have been forced on the defensive. The ladies will not be appeased.

I present these random extracts from the The Seething Classes' Book Of Male Resentments to indicate both the strength of resistance to women's uneven but inexorable advance beyond the domestic realm and the sheer silliness of much of it. Yes, I know sins are committed in female liberation's name and all sorts of daft attitudes struck. Women do sometimes abuse power at men's expense and cite powerlessness as justification. I get narked when women assume that I hate shopping and don't know where the oven gloves are kept because I'd gladly squander an afternoon on retail therapy if I had an afternoon to squander, because the sight of my souffles rising would make them go weak at the knees, and because sex war cliches are, in fact, our common enemy

But that's humankind for you. And the point is that the best and wisest feminist ideals – the sort that don't interest the media - have things to offer men too. Women moving onto the ground of politics and the professions, gaining autonomy and attaining enhanced cultural presence as a result has presented challenges for men and masculinity, but also certain opportunities.

Feminism has become a dirty word in the mouths of some its enemies, so let's recall one of its basic ambitions – the release of women from the constraints of gender custom and practice. It insists – or should insist – that the blurring of boundaries between men's domain and women's, between traits we call masculine and those we call feminine, is not a dangerous assault on some sacred natural order but an advance for social justice. It's about fair play, freedom of choice and enhancing human happiness.

Men should embrace these principles too, not only for women's sake but also for their own. All else being equal, to be born male is to inherit legacies of entitlement that continue to outweigh those bestowed on those born female. Yet the state of maleness carries its own burden of expectations and constraints. Contemporary studies of boyhood shed light on what we've always known – what I still remember vividly from my own boyhood – about the disabling and limiting influence of male behaviour conventions, homophobia and general "gender policing" on men in the making and the huge anxieties that inform them.

This is the baggage men drag with them through their lives; the pressure imposed both from without and from within to appear hard and never soft, to make a performance of rejecting anything that smacks of domesticity or femininity, notwithstanding the metrosexual and "new man". Even men who seem to embody and thrive on this stereotype can feel like slaves to it, and are often undone by it.

Sensible, grown up, non-sectarian feminism recognises all of this and seeks ways for men to combat it. This is not a matter of asking men to forgo every traditional bond and pursuit in favour of their "feminine side" but of inviting them to see that such distinctions are limiting and very largely artificial. It's not a matter either of unmanning the alleged essential male, but about men flourishing and developing in all areas of their lives, including as parents and in the home. It's about making modern, dual-earner, heterosexual relationships work better; more democratically. It's about a chap discovering that he too can be a nurse in the nursery, a cook in the kitchen and a lover in the bedroom and also, should he be so inclined, wrestle grizzly bears and grout the bathroom tiles as well – and be happy for women to enjoy such freedoms, too.

**Factory** · 10th-July-2008

Quote from frostyboy

Written by Dave Hill for The Guardian's Comment is Free: Gender stereotypes hurt men too

Another attempt to co-opt the men's movement into something more palatable to feminists. Note it lays no blame at the feet of anyone other than men themselves, and furthermore barely even acknowledges the REAL issues men face.

PHMT argument...mangina....yup, Hugo would love this guy.

**noone** · 11th-July-2008

Quote from Factory

Hugo would love this guy.

Oooh, I dunno... The author of this article doesn't have a vagina...

**yesterday's Hero** · 11th-July-2008

Feminism has become a dirty word in the mouths of some its enemies, so let's recall one of its basic ambitions – the release of women from the constraints of gender custom and practice. It insists – or should insist – that the blurring of boundaries between men's domain and women's, between traits we call masculine and those we call feminine, is not a dangerous assault on some sacred natural order but an advance for social justice. It's about fair play, freedom of choice and enhancing human happiness.

Mark Rudov used a illustration to point out the hypocracy of such statements

It says more than 1000 tomes of verse

**Timocrat** · 11th-July-2008

It insists – or should insist – that the blurring of boundaries between men's domain and women's, between traits we call masculine and those we call feminine, is not a dangerous assault on some sacred natural order but an advance for social justice. It's about fair play, freedom of choice and enhancing human happiness.

Total BS from my stand point. I welcome any woman who wishes to come in a male area and beat men in a fair measuring. Yet what happens almost always is the ranks are lowered and women's scores raised by wishy-washy PC affirmative action weasel games.

In the areas women are said to do well we also need to remove distortions. Are not most of the best designers not gay men? Are not most of the best cooks not men? Are not those who give of the best advise in bringing up children not men? Are not single mothers screwing things up with men having no part in bringing up the kids? Even the confused 60s types had Spock.

Then after cleaning up who can do almost everything better we have the IQ tests which shows men at both extremes and women in the middle. Here they do not measure bravery, and why thinking less about everything may allow males to charge a bunker, jump into a flaming house and more.

In conflict (like war) the very simple things become extremely hard. Maybe nature has such non-academic men for they are what is needed when thinking too much means no one fights the lastest barbarians at the gate. The Chinese system was the best academic system for most of history (and will be so again soon no doubt),and still the Chinese couldn't get enough academics to fight an annual invasion they all new would come like clockwork (which happened about 100 times over 500 years) and kept on getting taken over by the lower scoring on test types.

Hmm.. where is the chapter on how not to be a weasel in any school system. Too many high scorers want to be the one pulling the strings, and not on the front lines. What we need is a new IQ test (nothing like the BS Emotional IQ test, which was made to make women look better) , but one that measures a score of intelligence when a real dangerous threat is hanging over your head. My guess is the Woody Allen types' IQ would fall, and the lower ranking IQ types will rise. This is why corruption always rises in effete states, as indirectness is said to be smart. It is only a simple animal-like pragmatic self-serving effete root that is rising to again to lead again. Yet when everyone learns these effete weasel ways (even on tests, like those of lawyers) the state goes to rat shit faster than even under the male opressor ones.

Oh by the way, I am not a low scorer on the IQ test either (no bitter grapes here), as I scored higher than average.

It is the need for those who make tests to ignore what someone will score under the duress of possible death that separates the girls & metrosexuals from the men.

I think the best stated position on this issue was said by late great Robert Nozick here:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/cpr-20n1-1.html

**Percy** · 11th-July-2008

It is quite a thing when bullets are flying around. It concentrates the mind very effectively.

A chap can have three peas in his head and suddenly it is concentrated pea soup up there.

Mind you, asking him questions like "do you like tall women' usually gets a thick ear and green coloured language.

**gaynorbarry** · 11th-July-2008

i NOTED ONE OR TWO OF THE COMMENTATORS (I assume feminists) GIVING TESTESTORONE A BAD RAP, based on what appears to be ideas from the "50s". AND even getting confused between testestorone and adrenalin the "fight or flight" hormone which both males and females produce in much the same quantity.
I assume feminist dont like to admit they have the same chemicals in them which make them fight or flight as men and less testestorone which has many good qualities leadership confidence etc which feminists cannot create in such large quantities so they give it bad press ie aggression in boys etc whereby studies have shown this concept needs evaluating because it may have little to do with testosterone and more to do with poor parenting,.