Embracing the Enormity

One reason that I've stopped posting regularly was that the enormity of the various tasks at hand are sometimes overwhelming. Fighting sexism? Ongoing, huge battle. Fighting classicism? Ditto. Fighting racism? Yet another seemingly impossible task. All the while, finding a space to do this as a white, middle-class man? Sigh.

Add to that a growing understanding that communities of protest, communities that seek justice, often aren't very good allies, well, that makes one take a few steps back, reassess and rest.

But of course, 'resting' can be privilege-driven, can't it? I can stop posting, sure, but here I am, living in the US as a white, middle-class man...putting down my pen (so to speak) just means I get a break, to a large degree (though I would claim that men don't get a break from the hardships that patriarchy places on them, either). When BFP stops posting, and takes down her site, because she's understandably fed up, she still has to face a racist, sexist world.

So I'm starting to feel like my hiatus here, while fueled by understandable concerns for my own mental and physical health, is also a way of letting my white/male/able-bodied privilege win out. And, while I think that shutting up can be a lot of what an ally ought to be, I also think that there are ways that I can raise my voice without shouting down those-who-I-would-be-an-ally-of.

So, to start off, howabout a little checklist for myself, to combat the desire to take another break?

1. But it's hard to hear that one isn't being a good ally.
Yep. Sure is. Getting called out feels like shit, especially since people are much more likely to blame than praise in the world o' blogs. You work really hard on trying to bring social justice, and you get called out for what, to you, might seem like small things. But you know what? You don't get to judge what counts as a 'small thing'. These are communities we're talking about, and we're all in it together, so if enough people call you out and say it's important, then it is.

2. There's just too much work to do.
Also true. But keep in mind that you're not doing it alone, and you're not even facing the most daunting challenges--others are. You post about comics and men & feminism, for goodness' sake, not systematic rape in the congo. Maybe you should be posting about other, more important things, but to claim that posting about comics and gender is too daunting, as one of your tasks, is to embrace your privilege. Fight that.

3. But I'm Not Welcome.
Not in every community, not all of the time. That's why this space exists, in part. And there are those who value your voice, and who value what you say. Seek them out. Nurture them. And continue to understand that it's ok that you're not welcome some places. Keep the righteous indignation at a minimum, because it is so often a reflection of your privilege.

There's more, of course, but this is a start.

Absence

I've been away. Not literally. Wait--can you be away literally from a blog? There are various reasons, not completely unlike Roy's reasons at No Cookie for Me and legions of other bloggers everywhere, I suppose. Issues of relevancy, of utility, and of being just plain burnt out. And then, of course, as a male feminist blogger, there are added issues of privilege--the idea that men can more easily take a break from understanding sexism does tend to pop into my head, though I know it's more complex than that.

And now I am going to be out of town for a week or so, back The second full week of February. So I'm going to let my road trip help me percolate up some of the ideas I have for change here at Feminist Allies into ideas worth writing about. Something clearly has to change so that I can feel not only like I'm creating some interesting ideas in people's heads, but also that I'm not setting myself up for another burnout.

My original conception of this blog was for 4 or 5 men (and women) to post middle-length posts about men, masculinity, and feminism. When the groupblog didn't work out, I resolved to do short little posts on a 5-a-day basis, with perhaps a long-ish post thrown in once or twice a week. This appears to be too much for me--I just haven't felt like I've had enough to say that often. So I'm working on some other ideas, which I'll hopefully start up when I get back from my trip.

Count me as down, but not out.

See you in a week or so!

Apologies...

...as is traditional with much blogging, I apologize for the lack of posts for the last four days or so. Probably the thing to do is to chalk it up to being sick or busy, but I think I've become a bit burned out. Posting about the 16 Days of Action Against Gender Violence had something to do with it, the holidays and winter weather have had an effect on my mood, and then, one night, reading that somebody considers me a borderline anti-Semite because of some of my thoughts on atheism and feminism just drove me over the line, I suppose. It's possible I'm not thick-skinned enough to write about religion and feminism at the same time! Also, wanting to take a few days off of posting and realizing that what I had really wanted at one point was a groupblog, reminded me of the failure to accomplish that (so far), which added to my burnout.

It's also possible that I'm just going through a rough patch emotionally, and at another time of the year, I wouldn't have been so affected by things. So I may be posting a bit less in the coming weeks. I tend to like blogs which not only deal with particular issues/ideas, but also give you a glimpse into the lives of the writers. I know this isn't for everybody, but it's what I like, so I thought I'd let y'all know the reason for the lack of posting.

Picking A Fight

Some recent comments have led me to do more thinking about what I want to get out of this blogging-feminism-as-a-guy thing, and what I want other people to get out of my writing. Some of my goals: Find some ways for men who don't identify with feminism per se to see how feminism may help them. Find some ways for men who do identify with feminism to better understand the difficulties involved in being a man while being a feminist, and to find and develop a community of feminists, as well as a community of feminist men. And, while I fail or succeed in these goals to various degrees, I seem to be giving non-feminist men the impression that I really, really want them to be converted in some way, that I want them to come over to our side of things or some such. Jim W says in the comments:

I can assure you, though, that if male feminists insist in adapting wholesale all the rhetoric and assumptions of radical feminism, we will convince very, very few of our fellow men.

Leaving aside the idea that I somehow espouse 'radical' feminist ideals (erm...have you checked out Women's Space/The Margins lately?--if you think I'm radical, then perhaps you haven't), I suppose on some level I am trying to 'convince' my 'fellow men'. I put forth ideas and arguments and paint a picture of my own world-view--implicitly I'm asking people who don't share my world-view to consider it. But changing the minds of men isn't my primary goal, though it is part of the larger picture; mostly, I want to have discussions with men. I want to discuss things with other feminist men (which is one of the sadder parts of this 'groupblog' being not so group-y at the moment). And I want to discuss things with other men who don't identify as feminist. And I want to discuss things with other men who share some of my own feminist ideals (Jim W. is a stay-at-home dad: Some antifeminists would consider this a feminist act) even if they don't share all of them. I'm up for discussion--and with that some minds may change (even mine!), but I don't think changing minds is my central goal here. In a good discussion of ideas, mind-changing may happen, but it may not: everybody may simply achieve a better level of understanding about their own beliefs and the beliefs of others.

'Good discussion' doesn't mean the same thing to everybody of course, and by 'good discussion' I don't mean 'any discussion'. I've enjoyed conversations with people here who disagree vehemently with some feminist ideals, and, yes, some of my ideas have changed as a result (I'm thinking here in particular of discussions around the invisibility of man-on-man violence in discussions of male violence through a feminist lens, for instance). I draw lines though, I pick my fights, and I sometimes chose to not put time into some potential discussions. If there is some common ground, if people are civil, I tend to be more interested in discussion.

Ultimately, I do hope that minds get changed, mostly because I see the ways in which feminism helps men and people of all genders. But this isn't a conversion blog. It's not my aim to create born-again-feminists. I just want to put my ideas out there, and let them be part of the larger realm of ideas. As such, appeals to change the way I'm saying things to make my ideas more palatable to the greater number of men will largely not do much good. There are men out there who will really listen and discuss (and when and if I think this is not so, I'll likely not continue this blog)--and on the whole, I'd rather spend my time discussing things with them--whether we agree on something or not.

What Men Can Do: Responding to Worthwhile Comments

Toy Soldier recently left a comment on a post of mine that dealt with encouraging men to better recognize connections between violence by men in general and violence by men against women--my suggestion being that a strategy one might employ to get more men to better understand the role that traditional masculinity plays in men's violence against women is to better understand the role that traditional masculinity plays regarding men's violence in general. Toy Soldier thinks that the fact that I didn't talk about women's violence against men is not only worth noting, but also implies that I don't think that such violence and its victims are unimportant:

It is unfortunate that in your description of the violence committed against males you fail to mention women as aggressors. Most child abuse is committed by women. Nearly 40% of the people who rape and sexual abuse males are women. Recent studies show that women initiate and commit the same amount of domestic violence as men.

By avoiding mentioning that important aspect of violence committed against male you present an inaccurate view of male violence. Unless you consider female violence against males as inconsequential or condone it, it insulting to male victims of female violence to pretend they do not exist. -- Toy Soldier

Respond, or Point to Feminism 101?
My first impulse was to send TS to Feminism101, specifically the FAQ on FAQ: Why are you concentrating on X when Y is so much more important? But, while I think that Feminism101 serves a great purpose in this regard sometimes, there are times when another sort of response is necessary, and called for, and worth my time.

Some Common Ground
Toy Soldier and I may simply have world views which are incompatible fairly deep down. But I think that some common ground can be found. So I think a more thoughtful response than sending him to F101 must begin with a few comments detailing where I think TS gets things right. First off, I think TS's blogger etiquette (for lack of a better phrase) is right on here--he comes in, makes his point succinctly (and politely, using language like "it is unfortunate that") and then leaves the rest of his discussion to take place in his own space, rather than derailing any possible discussion over here. This type of etiquette is a big deal to me, given the ways that we, as bloggers, sometimes talk to each other in comments, and it is much appreciated. Additionally, it represents a way of talking to each other where some work can actually get done, if both 'sides' want some work to get done.

Secondly, TS is right that the violence that women commit against men is important. It is also important that male victims of the violence women commit against men are often silenced; the ways in which boys and men are silenced, we might note here, may be different in important ways than the ways in which women are silenced. Mostly, in my opinion, boys and men are silenced by the institutional nature of conceptions of traditional masculinity.

My basic agreement with TS is this: These things are important.

Point of Disagreement: What Does Choosing a Focus Imply?
My disagreement with TS stems from (at least) two places. First of all, I have some trouble with his factual claims about levels and frequency of abuse, which I discuss below. I also have a problem with TS not providing links to the studies he refers to--when making a point over here, any self-proclaimed feminist critics ought to know that the burden of proof is on them, a good deal of the time.

More importantly, though, I disagree with TS that not mentioning female violence against men every time I bring up male violence against others is "consider[ing] female violence against males as inconsequential," or that I'm "condoning it" by omission. Instead, in my opinion, I'm focusing on what I see as one aspect of a larger problem: Patriarchy and traditional masculinity help to cause men to do violence against each other and against women. Sure, patriarchy and traditional masculinity also help to cause women to do violence against men, boys, and other women, but that's not the aspect of violence-caused-by-patriarchy that I chose to focus on.

Does choosing that focus mean I don't think other types of violence are important? I don't think so. But I can see where TS might see it that way, and why. After all, if we look back to any movement, including feminist movement, there are places where the thinkers involved were taken to task for not giving enough consideration to various groups. When wealthy white women try to tell poor women of color that they should wait for their issues to be addressed (or ignore their issues completely), they should be called on it. And I can begin to frame TS's points in that light (though I don't know whether he would see it that way, of course): Perhaps by not mentioning women's violence against men every time I talk about men's violence against men and women, I'm somehow leaving out something fundamentally important.

I don't think so, and here's why: I think that these problems are big and complex enough that there is plenty of room for work on all fronts--and I think that pointing out, like TS is doing, that women do violence against men too every time somebody talks about violence men commit against men and women does less to draw attention to the violence women do to men and more to distract from the fact that men do a lot of violence against women, and against other men. So, while I think the former is important and is worthy of discussion, and I think that it should be an important goal of feminist men to deal with the violence done by parents (male and female) against boys (and girls! and people of all genders!), that doesn't mean that I think it should always be the topic of discussion, or always the most important facet of the subject of patriarchy and violence.

And, while TS seems to center his take regarding the abuse that men can suffer on feminists for various reasons (talk about killing the messenger!), he doesn't only do that. His blog, though filled in my mind with lots of rhetoric and misinformation (I'm sure he'd say the same of this blog...), is also full of good resources for men. So, while I don't agree with his general worldview, and I don't agree with the implicit argument that his site seems to make about feminists causing all the hardships men face (rather, I think it's patriarchy and traditional masculinity, often, which contributes the most to the suffering men feel), I do agree that men and boys aren't as likely to report violence done against them (especially if it's done by women), and are likely to suffer greatly because of the ways in which traditional masculinity influences how they deal with their trauma. (Plus: Many of the boys who are abused by their mothers will go on to abuse their wives, sons and daughters, in part because they aren't given good ways to voice their pain.)

And I hope all of this isn't taken as lip service. I know that questions of focus can come down to real differences in conceptual underpinnings, and that can lead to real differences in practical considerations. Again, my example from feminist movement: When feminist movement (more) ignored women of color when doing feminist work, and women of color said something about it, sometimes feminists reacted by noting that those problems would get dealt with later--and TS might well interpret my reactions to his position here as a similar move. I don't think it is. If you read this blog with any frequency, you'll see that I take the way men are harmed by patriarchy seriously, and address it quite often. (That's what the Feminism Helps Men posts are about, for instance.) If you really think that I'm condoning female-on-male violence by not mentioning it every time I mention male violence in general, then we're going to have to agree to disagree.

I'll admit that I wanted to not respond to TS at all, at first, but then I checked out his blog some more, and I see that you're genuinely interested in helping men who are victims of abuse (TS gives links to various groups that support men who are victims of abuse)--though he oftentimes focuses more heavily on women-on-men violence than I do--and that's my central point: There's plenty of room for both talk about men's violence against women (and men), and about women's violence against men--that doesn't mean that they both have to be talked about in every discussion.

Back to the Stats
TS doesn't give us specific links to his facts, but his points are worth at least some looking into--and I think that things are much more complex, at the very least, than TS is willing to admit in his comment:

Just as one 'for instance'--even if 'most child abuse' were 'committed by women', (and again, TS doesn't provide us with links to the studies he mentions) isn't it important that in single-parent homes, which account for almost a third of all families, single mothers account for 5/6ths of all of 'em? And yet, the percentage of men who abuse children is almost as high as the number of women. We should expect, if all else were equal, that women would be abusers at rates around 3 times higher than men (at least)--though it's hard to gauge because not all abuse happens in single-parent homes, of course. Instead, we find that, of people convicted of abusing children (80 percent of whom are parents), 58% were women and 42% were men. So, even though women are much more often (to the tune of 3 times as often) parents than men are parents, women who are convicted of abusing children do so at only a 10% higher rate than men who are convicted of it. This isn't even going into the societal stuff around the likelihood (in my mind) of women being convicted for it more often because male-on-male violence from father to son is more socially acceptable. Sources:
There were an estimated 11.4 million single-parents in 1994.
Women comprised
about five-sixths of all single parents.
Nearly 80 percent (79.4%) of perpetrators were parents of the victim; Approximately 58 percent (57.8%) of perpetrators were women and 42.2 percent were men.

The point is, it's much more complex than TS lets on in his comment. Basically, I have some concerns about what appears to be an oversimplification of the situation, and of the interpretation of the statistics involved.

Friday Men Doing Feminist Work: Favorite Male Feminist Bloggers

I go back and forth sometimes as regards men who identify as feminists, or as feminist allies, and how much blogging can make a difference. I've come to think that, as one part of what we do in the world, as one piece of a very much larger puzzle, it can. Yes, a lot of what we do as bloggers can tend to be more like living in academia if we're not careful--ivory tower feminists may do more harm than good for feminist causes--but a lot of what we do gets people thinking, and at least offers us some kind of community to find some comfort and some passion.

So this week's Men Doing Feminist Work Friday is about some of my favorite male feminist bloggers.

• Chris Clarke at Creek Running North:
  Despite the fact that I disagree somewhat with him about his pretty famous "why I am not a feminist" post, it's still a great read, and made me understand the conceptual troubles around naming men as feminists a lot better. But what I like most about Clarke's feminism is the way in which he integrates it into his other posts, and into his life. He writes poetry about feminism and men, for pete's sake.
  
  
• Hugo Schwyzer: I still say that Hugo's Christianity will one day collapse under the weight of its sexist underpinnings, in the light of Hugo's feminist proclivities, but part of what makes Hugo a good read is the complexity of his life, and of his worldview--and of feminist principles that live along side, say, Christian ones. I also like that Hugo doesn't shy away from long posts--blogging tends to be a short-blurb medium a good deal of the time, and the issues that feminists have to deal with aren't always best served by the short-blurb format. Plus, the guy writes at length about Christianity and BDSM.
  
  
• Roy at No Cookies for Me: Let's be honest, Roy's got the best blog title of any male feminist blogger (please correct me if I'm wrong here). Roy finds a nice mix of deeper theory and pop-culture analysis. It's lovely to find posts about video games right alongside (or concurrent with) posts about conceptual analysis of traditional masculinity. Plus, he's funny.
  

This isn't an exhaustive list, of course (not only am I leaving out lots of people I've met online recently, but also some of the people who've been A-listers for a while), but these are the guys that post often, and almost always have something important to say.

Who are your favorite male feminist bloggers?

The Comments That Help a Lot

Lots of good, encouraging words and ideas coming out of my post about ally work, and I thank everybody for their kind words. I also have to say that comments like this will keep me going for a long, long time:

I've been using this blog to gather strategies. So, two things: In a confrontation with an anti-feminist or a non-ally, I've found that "Not cool, man," works every time I had to use it. Jeff, your description of your mother's reaction to your Lego toys inspired me to start teaching feminism to the two young sons of a couple of friends of mine. "Is that fair to say that Mrs. B-- has to do all that by herself?" and so on. -- Bach-us

Bach-us not only gives me an excellent, simple strategy to employ, but also encourages me by noting that some of my words may influence how some young boys are raised, however much. That, in a nutshell, is why I'm writing this stuff at all.

Thanks again.

Upgrade

Blogger has finally let us upgrade to the new version. There may be some layout problems for a few days...