fucking humanism

topic posted Fri, April 29, 2005 - 5:06 PM by  donnie
i'm in the middle of a discussion on another tribe (gender reconciliation) with a couple of men about patriarchy and it's driving me nuts. a friend of mine posted about how to deal with men who get defensive when the issue of patriarchy is brought up. well, these two guys answered, and their responses were about man bashing and "gender feminism" (whatever the fuck that is) and basically blaming women for male defensiveness. so, i posted something about their reaction and got the same kind of response. they actually called me sexist and "anti-male".

how do we, as anti-oppression activists, deal with this shit in this forum? in the workshops that i've facilitated, there's a face to face and immediate convo going on and it's easier to deal with. i'm just really frustrated right now because it's always the same bullshit - "progressives" who call themselves "equalist" or humanist who act in oppressive ways and get riled up when you call them on it. i would rather deal with someone who is blatantly sexist than someone who claims to be on my side but is just a huge asshole.

i need some help here.
posted by:
donnie
Canada
  • Re: fucking humanism

    Fri, April 29, 2005 - 7:09 PM
    one of the things that has really helped me when i think about, talk about, and deal with issues of patriarchy, is seperating maleness and partiarchy (in my mind and out loud).

    The thing is (for me at least, and the way that I understand things), that there is nothing inherent in having a penis that leads to or supports patriarchy. In the same way that I believe there is nothing inherent in being white that leads to or supports racism.

    Yet, men are the key players in patriarchy, as whites are key players in racism. But by understanding that maleness and patriarchy do not exist hand in hand, it gives more space for conversation with male identified people.

    This is supported by the fact that I understand gender as a social construct. In the sense that across history and culture there is no consistent "one way" of being male or female or any other gender (for cultures and times that embraced more than male/female). And since it is a construct, it is not the male himself that is the problem, but the construction of what the male "should" be, and they way that males are socialized to exist in our society.

    I don't know if bringing this up will be helpful to you. But it might.

    The other things is to be very clear about differentiating systems of oppression from individual behavior.

    Something else I might do is to challenge whoever it is who is being defensive to define what they mean by "progressive", "equalist", etc. And then talk to them about how their actions and words support or don't support what they are saying in their definition of what they believe in.

    One thing that is also key for me in expereinces I have had around issues of anti-oppression, is the liberal/progressive who is in the place of priviledge saying something like, "we are all equal" or "we are all the same" or "i don't notice peoples (race, gender, ability, etc), or "I treat everyone the same". And while on some level it is important to acknowledge that all people share a common humanity, and deserve to be treated as equals (or however you understand it), there is nothing constructive about denying the truth of someones expereince. To say, "I don't notice peoples (insert idenity)" is something that comes with having priviledge. I know that as a woman I can't just go around not noticing peoples genders because there is a threat in that to me. And I know that if I don't notice people's race as a white person I am denying the fact that the lives of people of color are very different from mine and they struggle in ways that I don't have to.

    I'm not sure if any of that was helpful. Maybe I'll check out the discussion on that other tribe and see what's up.

    oh and lastly, my favorite tactic (being a the loving spiritual person that I am), is to continue to treat the other person kindly even if inside I am frustrated and angry, because I think it is important to model that kind of behavior. If I am open to being called on my shit and willing to engage and do not get defensive myself, I find that people get over their shit easier. But I know that this approach does not work for everyone. Good luck!
    • Re: fucking humanism

      Sat, April 30, 2005 - 12:17 PM
      ditto and ditto to everything ktmichael said :) If I were to react to each and every white, puritanic, patriarchal value-laden man & woman I encountered I would never have time to enjoy any part of my life.

      living in the mid-west is a double whammy when it comes to these types of people. However, I try to remember either choose not to see the truth or have not woken up to the truth about patriarchy yet.

      Have a wonderful weekend!

      Peace,

      Cc
      • Le
        Le
        online 55

        Re: fucking humanism

        Thu, May 5, 2005 - 9:13 PM
        I was born in China where patriarchy runs supreme. I'm so glad that I don't know anyone (male or female) in my generation of Asian-Americans who would continue that way of life. Gender roles are such bullshit cuz my dad always convinced me that if I didn't know anything about tools or cars or mechanics, that I wasn't a real man. During college, I gave up on making him happy and decided that just cuz I like art, poetry, and foreign film, that doesn't mean I'm gay or not enough of a man.

        Nowadays, I just assume that all male ego is rooted in insecurity. For example, challenge any straight man to addressing their homophobia or even just talking about their feelings. How do you think they'd react? With defensiveness? Denial? If he's the macho type, probably yes. And immature behavior like that is usually a sign of insecurity or some other repressive emotional issue. Problem is, it's impossible to hold a productive conversation with such people. At least that's been my experience.

Recent topics in "anti-oppression"