tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28989955.post3466363529856797035..comments2023-10-30T14:34:16.722-07:00Comments on Men Need Feminism: bell hooks MondaysJeff Pollethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13789663140920958914noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28989955.post-17901032786074648002007-05-15T08:42:00.001-07:002007-05-15T08:42:00.001-07:00Oh, and on of us should probably start a blog call...Oh, and on of us should probably start a blog called Penis-Weilding Patriarchal Automatons. Y'know, before somebody else does.Jeff Pollethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13789663140920958914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28989955.post-62147030716759413712007-05-15T08:42:00.000-07:002007-05-15T08:42:00.000-07:00Looks like enjoying hooks' writing is something el...Looks like enjoying hooks' writing is something else you and I can agree on, Hugh. (I'm making a list. Heh.) Who do you have in mind when you note that some feminists insist that men are motivated by a desire to dominate women sexually? The devil will be in the details there for me, because I think that, to the degree that men are shaped to want to have lots and lots of control over their world (which is central, I think, to traditional masculinity all the way back to John Locke and before), and to the degree that dominating one's world includes dominating others sexually, I'd agree that men, some men, perhaps most men, are motivated by a desire to dominate women sexually. Whether they want to play out that desire or not, whether they do play out that desire or not, I think it is a motivating factor. <BR/><BR/>Empirical research on men's sexuality is great, but again, you and I might disagree when the details come out--if we're talking about 'sexuality' as somehow separate from the rest of one's life, then I would tend to agree with you--at least it's been my experience. But if the research is limited to conscious sexuality, then I'd have some trouble with it, because I think most of the sexual dominance stuff comes in very unconsciously, and not only while people are fucking (but in day-to-day life, controlling access to birth control and such). <BR/><BR/>Anyway, I don't think hooks' is <I>quite</I> essentializing men or women here, but she's coming closer than I've seen her do, and I wish she'd been more explicit about that, because I don't think she is an essentialist about gender, in general. <BR/><BR/>I also agree with you that she handles the subject of men and masculinity in feminism with quite a bit of dexterity, which is one of the reasons I like her writing; it's also one of the reasons she gets in trouble with 'mainstream' feminism sometimes, from what I hear.Jeff Pollethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13789663140920958914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28989955.post-86315221197672580352007-05-14T23:08:00.000-07:002007-05-14T23:08:00.000-07:00I see what you are saying, but something I do like...I see what you are saying, but something I do like about hooks' approach is that she doesn't assume that she knows all about men and their motivations, like some feminists (both male and female) do. For instance, some feminists (usually radical feminists) insist that men are motivated by a desire to dominate women sexually. Yet actual empirical research on men's sexuality does not find that men in general desire to dominate women sexually (at least, not any more than they desire submission). Although I have disagreements with hooks, she is a feminist who has done one of the best jobs of articulating a view of men as human beings, rather than as penis-weilding patriarchal automatons.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com