Unboxing Masculinity

That isn't true. I spoke in this post about feminist movements of the past--how some have fought only for white women, some only for straight women, but how mine and pretty much the current form, Intersectional Feminism, takes the layers of oppression into account. Sex, Race, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Age... all of it.

And too, you have spoken of double standards. And too, I spoke IN THIS POST about how feminism wants to correct that bias--not just for women, but also for men too.

 

This right here answers @Ockydub's question about Toxic Femininity. Whenever someone straight and female/feminine or male/masculine decides to pick on, taught, bully, etc a gay person who's male/feminine or female/masculine, it's really people perpetuating patriarchal norms = Toxic Masculinity/Toxic Femininity whatever you want to call it. It's really just patriarchy not accepting gay people who don't fit the "true" definition of a man or woman.

 

Whatever is being perpetuated, you cannot just let the women perpetuating it off the hook because they are 'perpetuating patriarchal norms'-and that is what it sounds like. I am not blaming Joe down the street if Susan calls me a faggot, I am blaming Susan-people need to be responsible for who they are and what they do. If Kenny calls you a dirty n*gger are you going to let him off the hook and blame 'perpetuation of systemic and institutional racism entrenched within the historically white dominant societal system..etc...etc...' or are you going to immediately hold Kenny responsible for saying that?

It goes back to victimhood, where Susan is a victim of the system but Kenny is not(and rightly so)-even though you don't know anything about either of them but what you can see, and what you can surmise about them from what (very little) they may present to you in any given situation. Intersectionality in feminism cannot be used as an excuse to wrap oneself in more layers of victimhood and lack of personal responsibility and accountability-which sometimes seems to be the case.

I also question whether this newest wave of feminism really wants to 'correct' bias for all people. Is it really all people or just the people who agree with them and/or fit their narrative and agenda?
Tell me the intersectional feminists who disrupted those college libraries and who basically told other people(who they did not know) that who they were and what they thought or felt did not matter(because of what?-because of how they were perceived only)were interested in correcting bias for 'all people'.

Being a feminist does not give one a 'get out of not acting right in public or treating other people badly or actually discriminatory as well' card-and I think more than a few think they do get that card. You can't demand equal treatment and rights and then expect 'special' treatment as well-too many do not seem to get this.

I am also coining a new term(if not used already): Hyperfeminist. Two new terms. add Toxicfeminist to that.

So along with intersectional feminism you have hyperfeminism and toxicfeminism. Want to guess those definitions?

 

If we could just get rid of the 'excesses' of most* groups, we would be so much better off and could actually have a dialog in this country instead of everyone just shouting at one another, not hearing one another because we are so busy formulating our own tactical opposing response(or getting in our feelings), and getting pitted against one another so the rather small group who really has the $$$$ and the power can sit back and look, point, and laugh at us as we flail around accomplishing little as we battle one another instead of coming together to do anything about them.

Being in favor of decent naturally masculine men/black gay men/any gay men having a place for themselves and a right to express themselves in that space does not mean anyone is automatically anti anything else. Not anti femme, not anti woman, not anti anything really(except when I get tired of the whole human race period), more anti treating people like crap if anything.

Even a site like BGC(I use that site since I have not seen anything like it where people of a very marginalized and oppressed group unfortunately attack one another so readily) has merit and potential and there are good discussions, support offered, etc. on there if you look past the attacks and all. I admit I lurk out of curiosity occasionally and have seen some good things there, even though I have not admitted it.

I don't think Ocky or Nick are anti femme just because they want a site that better expresses themselves(despite the occasional jabs, memes, 'gay voice' stuff, etcetera. I think that if the chips were down and they were in a situation where a femme gay man needed help(as in if that gay man were getting demeaned or even threatened in their presence) they would step up and speak out(or even square up)for that man if he needed it and had not brought it all on himself.
I also don't really think that Ocky is anti-white just because he is very pro-black-I think most of the guys on here are decent people.

I just don't get the backlash this site seems to get. I am sure there are people who do not care for my presence here for whatever reason, but nobody is in my face about it-they leave me alone or simply have never acknowledged my presence or no longer acknowledge me and ignore me as decent people would do. I do wonder what the reasons are and would find it interesting to know them, but ultimately that is not my business and is up to whether said persons want me to know or even care one way or another about it enough to bother.
If I am called out, it is for what I have expressed(and I have been off the mark before and I am sure I will be again) not who I am.

*for some things we do need extremism I will admit-when anything less would mean self-destruction really. In those cases there is no other choice imo.

Anyway(sorry @SB3 with my long ass winded posts lol) but as this relates to the thread I think the original post shows a video that is over-the-top and 'excessive' to the point where it does not really help anything, inform anyone, or encourage any real dialog. It is just propaganda at that point, and it did not provide enough of a combination of humor and other things to overcome that. Just like with the video Hannibal posted- just so over the top, excessive and not representational of the real mass of closeted gay men to the point that it serves no positive purpose.

 

perpetrating patriarchal norms = code word for straight people bullying, taunting, and/or discriminating against gay people. And no, the answer isn't to just take it!

If a female manager is discriminating against you 1) because you're gay and 2) because you're black, the answer isn't to blame feminism. The answer is to file complaint after complaint to who you can and possibly go the legal route if need be. There are federal laws in place to protect you, that feminists and black people fought for. It sounds like a hostile work environment because of her prejudice against sexual orientation and race. You have a good case to hand her some disciplinary action, and at the very least give her a massive headache!

You brought feminism into this thinking it helps her and hurts you, when it actually helps you and corrects her prejudice.

 

This thread right here is what gives me life I real wish I could express my self as clearly as I want too till i can do that here is my two cents in this everybody for the most part on here is right.
The way we talk about these problems seem to mainly focus on the words being used such as masculinity, femininity or what every word people use but the actual thing is we are not focusing on how to actually talk about this with everyone in a more effective manner rather were just saying seem to be blaming each other for things we can't fix.
I've had bad experience with almost everyone withing each of these categories in my life but that has not stopped me from trying to understand them or from looking at those people as individual or just a small group within a bigger group.

 

In the world in which I once worked - politics - I frequently got lectured how women were naturally more compassionate and if they were making policy then we would have less poverty, better education, overall a more humane world. While I believe that government is better the more diverse those who work and make policy, I don't quite buy the argument that women are automatically going to vote to provide healthcare or education or end war. There are now more than enough Republican female Members of Congress to disprove that.
I am with @Ockydub

 

I was not talking about that particular individual, I was speaking in a general sense. And no, there were and are no Federal laws to protect me as I have been discriminated against by both black and white women and (and white men too) for being a white gay male...who they were fine with when they initially thought I was a white straight male. There are no federal laws protecting us gays from being fired, evicted, or denied service in a restaurant for being gay. They may still do it to blacks, but if you suspect it, can find a pattern of it, can get others to verify it, or if the racist is also stupid(those two things often go together) and they admit they are doing what they are doing because you are black, you can get that on that smartphone that I KNOW your 21 year old self has on you, with you, or by you 24/7( lol I could not resist this little poke!) and sue and get the government involved to go after their asses for violating federal civil rights laws.
Now for us being gay, they can say right to our face that we are being fired, evicted, or denied service because we are gay, and there is no federal law for us to turn to.

What federal law that feminists and black people fought for is available to me to use as a white gay man when I am discriminated against for being gay by any race, creed, color, etc? Also I don't think most intersectional feminists give a shit about me as a gay white guy who does not like fashion and who has no fashion sense, who hates shopping and despises shoes, who likes college football(OSU rocked today 58-0), and who does not want to be some straight woman's gay 'pet' friend.

But the answer is also not to automatically blame men or masculinity(under some all encompassing stereotype like the video that started this thread) either when it is the extremes of patriarchy as you mentioned that is to blame-or simply people being bigoted for whatever reason(and no, I am not going to say that all women are bigoted because of patriarchy, since that would be ridiculous as some women as some men are just assholes and love to hate on people). I don't want women or feminism demonized-I have identified as a feminist(in what I see as the true sense of the word, in getting equal protection under the law as in the ERA, equal pay for equal work, equal status and treatment, etc) since well before your birth. But I don't want to see men or masculinity demonized either, or men portrayed as the enemies of women, children, progress and justice, etc.

There were no protections for me in 1984 when that white woman boss of mine(who thought of herself no doubt as a model citizen and Christian) warned me about the stealing n*ggers and the fa@@ots in the bathroom, or in 1998 when my black female boss made my life hell and would go on anti-gay tirades in the therapy room at the rehab center I worked in(cause she thought I was not in the room..funny how everyone would have a pained look on their face and I would just sit there and wait until she suddenly stopped-the point when she realized I was there). What protections do I have now that I did not have then?

This is why I wonder what the hell happened to the ERA, why aren't feminists fighting for the basic legal building blocks first and foremost(like blacks did), and why I hope 'The Power Elite gays' for as much as I rant about them, are now working towards getting gays(and trans, and bi's and the rest of the rainbow) included under federal civil rights protection-it is the next logical step after success with gays in the military and success with gay marriage imo.

Look at the title of the thread- it is not 'unboxing patriarchy'...it is 'unboxing masculinity...and they need to state the difference or exactly what they mean by 'masculinity' if they do not want to get called out, imo.

 

You make a very good point. As you know, there have been proposals to expand federal protections and they've been defeated in great part because of the unprecedented opposition to Obama. However, I want you to understand that feminists were vying for those protections too because it is very much needed for people vulnerable like you. It takes a great deal of explaining on my part to change your idea of feminism and perhaps I can't. That's fine. However, at the very least I want you to understand that the movement's goals are akin to the Civil Rights, Black Lives Matter, LGBT movements in that it addresses inequality. And our own issues as gay men have come to mainstream acceptance in great part because of the feminist movement... And while he wasn't able to get Congress to approve a bill, President Obama did sign an executive order securing LGBT protections for people in federal occupations.

 

I don't need my opinions about feminism changed: I am a feminist- am just not the kind of feminist you want me to be. Overall, when it comes to the much larger picture, we are probably much closer in agreement than you think.

But I will continue to speak out against the demonization of masculinity and of men, and the narratives that men are the enemies of women, children, and society in general that are sometimes portrayed by extreme modern feminism. There is not just 'one feminism' that embraces everything, there are all kinds of thoughts and beliefs today regarding feminism. I think at times that you (and many feminists) come across as speaking for feminism as if you are 'the feminist', not a feminist.

 

Well thanks for your criticism. At times and especially on subjects like these, I find it hard to have a level conversation with people of different opinions. That is, I find it difficult to not act like a know it all, and frankly I needed the criticism. LOL so even though I disagree that masculinity is being demonized, I respect what you've conveyed to me.

 

I will say that what I said was a great generalization, there are trends among certain groups that are demonizing masculinity and I would not apply that to every feminist or every 'intersectional feminist', and that does not mean that masculinity does not need some scrutinizing, or that 'toxic masculinity' gets a pass-it does not

. Very few things in life are really(excuse the pun) 'black and white'. Most everything is a shade of gray I have found-and that makes it very hard for me to fall for an 'agenda' or 'narrative' for almost any group. We need more people who think for themselves and don't just follow(and fall hook, line, and sinker) for the 'party line', the 'official story', etc.

I also appreciate the overall respectful informed dialog. You seem to be very mature for someone who is only 21 and I hope you go on to achieve great things in your life.

 

I get that! I can understand the skepticism in completely going with the agenda of one movement. It's quite healthy, I think. And thank you for your kind words!

 

I'm surprised how homophobia isn't the focus of this thread. Notice even the guy mentioned it repeatedly.