Words are not fists: some thoughts on how men work to defuse feminist anger

This is, I think, an important post.

I've been thinking about men in women's studies classes, and jokes about "male-bashing."

This semester's women's studies class is like most: overwhelmingly female.  I've got 32 women and 6 men in the class.  I met individually last Thursday with the women for "all-female day"; I met with my guys on Tuesday for "all-male day."  This morning, we all got back together in the classroom for the first time as a full group in nine days.

Most of the guys hadn't spoken in class all semester; today, all did.  A number of the women in class were eager to ask questions and create dialogue; up until this week, mine has been the only consistent male voice in the classroom.  The guys did a great job of sharing about many topics (we spent a lot of time on the "myth of male weakness")  But two of the guys did something that I see over and over again from men in women's studies classes.  They prefaced their remarks by joking "I know I'm going to get killed for saying this, but..."  One of them, even pretended to rise from his desk to position himself by the door, saying that "Once I say this, I know I'm going to have to make a run for it."   Most of the women laughed indulgently, and I even found myself grinning along.

When men find themselves in feminist settings (like a women's studies class) they are almost always in the minority.  When I was taking women's studies classes at Berkeley in the 1980s, I was usually one of only two or three men in the room.  In my women's history classes over the past decade, men average 10-20% of the students, never more.  Even when they make up as much as a fifth of the class, they generally do less than a tenth of the talking. That isn't surprising, given the subject matter -- I was often fairly quiet in my own undergraduate days.

But one thing I remember from my own college days that I see played out over and over again is this male habit of making nervous jokes about being attacked by feminists.  In my undergrad days, I often prefaced a comment by saying "I know I'll catch hell for this".  I've seen male students do as they did today and pretend to run; I've seen them deliberately sit near the door, and I once had one young man make an elaborate show (I kid you not) of putting on a football helmet before speaking up!

All of this behavior reflects two things: men's genuine fear of being challenged and confronted, and the persistence of the stereotype of feminists as being aggressive "man-bashers."  The painful thing about all this, of course, is that no man is in any real physical danger in the classroom -- or even outside of it -- from feminists.  Name one incident where an irate women's studies major physically assaulted a male classmate for something he said?  Women are regularly beaten and raped -- even on college campuses -- but I know of no instance where a man found himself a victim of violence for making a sexist remark in a college feminist setting!  "Male-bashing" doesn't literally happen, in other words, at least not on campus.   But that doesn't stop men from using (usually half in jest) their own exaggerated fear of physical violence to make a subtle point about feminists.

There's a conscious purpose to this sort of behavior.  Joking about getting beaten up (or putting on the football helmet) sends a message to young women in the classroom: "Tone it down.  Take care of the men and their feelings.  Don't scare them off, because too much impassioned feminism is scary for guys."  And you know, as silly as it is, the joking about man-bashing almost always works! Time and again, I've seen it work to silence women in the classroom, or at least cause them to worry about how to phrase things "just right" so as to protect the guys and their feelings.  It's a key anti-feminist strategy, even if that isn't the actual intent of the young man doing it -- it forces women students to become conscious caretakers of their male peers by subduing their own frustration and anger.   It reminds young women that they should strive to avoid being one of those "angry feminists" who (literally) scares men off and drives them away.

Here's where I need to issue a big ol' mea culpa.  Until today, I don't think I fully realized how common this strategy of joking about male-bashing really is.  I didn't realize how I, as a teacher, permit and thus encourage it.  Too often, I've been so eager to make sure that my small minority of men feels "safe" in the classroom that I've allowed their insecurities to function to silence the female majority -- in what is supposed to be a feminist setting!  Though I haven't made such remarks myself, I've laughed indulgently at them without stopping to consider their function.

Part of being a pro-feminist man, I've come to realize in recent years, is being willing to face the real anger of real women.  Far too many men spend a great deal of time trying to talk women out of their anger, or by creating social pressures that remind women of the consequences of expressing that anger.  Many men, frankly, are profoundly frightened by women who will directly challenge them.  In a classroom, they don't really fear being struck or hit.  But by comparing a verbal attack on their own sexist attitudes towards physical violence, they hope to defuse the verbal expression of very real female pain and frustration.   I know that it's hard to be a young man in a feminist setting for the first time, and I know, (oh, how I know) how difficult it is to sit and listen to someone challenge you on your most basic beliefs about your identity, your sexuality, your behavior, and your beliefs about gender.  It's difficult to take the risk to speak up and push back a bit, and it's scary to realize just how infuriating your views really are to other people, especially women.

The first task of the pro-feminist male in this situation is to accept the reality and the legitimacy of the frustration and disappointment and anger that so many women have with men, and to accept it without making light of it or trying to defuse it or trying to soothe it.  Pro-feminist men must work to confront their own fears about being the target of those feelings.  Above all, we cannot ever compare -- even in jest -- verbal expressions of strong emotion to actual physical violence or man-bashing.

After all, one of the pernicious aspects of the "myth of male weakness" is that men can't handle being confronted with women's anger.  We either run away literally or figuratively, disconnecting with the television, the bottle, the computer screen.  But we're not little boys who will physically lash out in rage when challenged, nor can we be so fearful that we dodge and defuse and check out.  That's not what an adult does in the face of the very real emotion of another human being.

I've allowed this kind of joking and defusing to go on too long in my classes. It's going to stop now.

UPDATE:

Please don't get into thread drift here.  This is not a forum to question the basic tenets of feminism, or issues of domestic violence and abuse, or why I've banned anyone in the past.  I'm going to be much more careful about monitoring what is posted here.  This is not a free speech zone, nor need it be.  It's my blog, and y'all have other forums for discussing gender issues.

Comments

[johann]

Your own words, Hugo:
This is not a free speech zone, nor need it be. It's my blog...
-----
You are very worried about listening to the opinion of men, who do not agree with your statements.
Your statement shows, that you are into censorship...not a good way for a discussion.
-----
About your subject: ....In my women's history classes over the past decade, men average 10-20% of the students, never more....
-----
I also had the questionable pleasure in Europe to attend such a class. It was not a funny time for me.
-----
You said:
All of this behavior reflects two things: men's genuine fear of being challenged and confronted, and the persistence of the stereotype of feminists as being aggressive "man-bashers." The painful thing about all this, of course, is that no man is in any real physical danger in the classroom -- or even outside of it -- from feminists.
-----
Not true in my case, as women are hitting and kicking men, and all what you can do as a man is to remain silent about it.
There are also other form of violence by women, like defamation, false accusations, abusive language, theft and similar actions against men, sharing the same class-room.

Open your eyes, Hugo...and learn not to look away...but I understand, that in your position, you have to choose the comfortable way, otherwise you might be out of job in the school, where you are teaching.

[badgerbag]

Hey Hugo. Great post. I think the exaggerated fear of women's violence also functions as a reminder to the women that it's women who are in danger of physical violence for speaking up.

[badgerbag]

Oh and to bmmg39: "I'm still blinking my eyes over how a meek "I hope I don't get killed for this" is being construed as a misogynist, "keep the women quiet" sort of phrase. Isn't it brutally obvious that saying "I hope I don't get killed for this" is a sign that the SPEAKER is used to not having a say, of being in the minority, of having a tendency of being shouted down?"

It's not meek - it's falsely jocular and hostile. It's not that the male speaker isn't used to not having a say -- it's that they're NOT used to their frame of reference being challenged.

[The Gonzman]

-- it's that they're NOT used to their frame of reference being challenged.

Yeah, that's right. We sit around in the Patriarchal He-Man Woman-Hater's Club agreeing with everything each and every one of us says. First to speak sets the agenda. Nobody gets challenged.

Great Googly-moogly.

[Creeping Jenny]

I don't think the attempts to deflect criticism are unique to women's studies -- I get them from my students as well, and the stuff I teach is often not considered politically charged. It seems to be a method for protecting one's insecurities and for avoiding difficult intellectual work. (That might explain why men do it more often than women in your classes: men are likely to feel more insecure in that setting. In my classes, women seem to do it about as often as men.) It's a mechanism that I can of empathize with, but at the same time it's not really an acceptable substitute for thought and self-examination.

Generally, what I do about it is to find some oblique way of telling the student that nobody is out to attack them personally -- and then going on to encourage criticism of their ideas (note: not the person, the idea). Mythago's suggestion sounds like it would work great toward both ends.

[perplexed]

Yeah, that's right. We sit around in the Patriarchal He-Man Woman-Hater's Club agreeing with everything each and every one of us says. First to speak sets the agenda. Nobody gets challenged.

Gonz, don't give the game away. Just because I got first shout last time. (I realise this post sounds to ultra-hyper-sensitive feminist ears to be 'frat boy jocularity' and therefore pseudo-violent to female ears, but I can't help my nature, sigh!).

[bmmg39]

"Hey Hugo. Great post. I think the exaggerated fear of women's violence also functions as a reminder to the women that it's women who are in danger of physical violence for speaking up."

Yes.

And men, too.

"It's not meek - it's falsely jocular and hostile. It's not that the male speaker isn't used to not having a say -- it's that they're NOT used to their frame of reference being challenged."

I'm not sure what to make of this combo, Badger: your attempt at mindreading, your singling out of men as the only people who ever use this "tactic" (if it can even be called a "tactic"), and your gross underestimation of how much men's frames of reference get challenged.

Jenny: "I don't think the attempts to deflect criticism are unique to women's studies -- I get them from my students as well, and the stuff I teach is often not considered politically charged."

THANK you!

[sb_repr]

I think Good to society happens by seeing both sides. In every sort of discussion many phrases are used, including "I may get killed for saying this". I welcome these phrase and try to discuss with the person, gradually that person may or may not changes this phrases, if he or she prefers to use this phrase I think he is right and he has liberty to use this. Putting a rule of not using this phrase is very harmful. Persons who see both sides of the story to help mankind and everyone deal with these and other kind of phrases.
Since feminist are so acoustomed to wrong one sided laws that harm everyone, they do not want to discuss ther other side of story. So only feminists can agree to banning this phrase for any political , sports , literature , history , TV discussions.
If you are not like feminists you are not likely to think about making a law or a rule to control things like this. You then are among people who want good for everyone, and both sides views.
Are feminists in womens study incompetent of tackling the sentence " I may get killed for this" , so they want to hide by making a rule to ban this.

[s Lovatt]

Too late boys. Man land is going up in flames.
Thats me up on the rooftop doing the dance of victory.
You'se screwed the wrong woman boys, you screwed the wrong woman!
Ha ha, here comes the big wave.
What a great time to be alive.
I wish my grandmother was here to see the Father fall.
It's too late, men's shot at rulership and Divinity has proved itself worthless.

[s Lovatt]

Too late boys. Man land is going up in flames.
Thats me up on the rooftop doing the dance of victory.
You'se screwed the wrong woman boys, you screwed the wrong woman!
Ha ha, here comes the big wave.
What a great time to be alive.
I wish my grandmother was here to see the Father fall.
It's too late, men's shot at rulership and Divinity has proved itself worthless.

[s Lovatt]

Too late boys. Man land is going up in flames.
Thats me up on the rooftop doing the dance of victory.
You'se screwed the wrong woman boys, you screwed the wrong woman!
Ha ha, here comes the big wave.
What a great time to be alive.
I wish my grandmother was here to see the Father fall.
It's too late, men's shot at rulership and Divinity has proved itself worthless.

[s Lovatt]

Too late boys. Man land is going up in flames.
Thats me up on the rooftop doing the dance of victory.
You'se screwed the wrong woman boys, you screwed the wrong woman!
Ha ha, here comes the big wave.
What a great time to be alive.
I wish my grandmother was here to see the Father fall.
It's too late, men's shot at rulership and Divinity has proved itself worthless.

[s Lovatt]

Too late boys. Man land is going up in flames.
Thats me up on the rooftop doing the dance of victory.
You'se screwed the wrong woman boys, you screwed the wrong woman!
Ha ha, here comes the big wave.
What a great time to be alive.
I wish my grandmother was here to see the Father fall.
It's too late, men's shot at rulership and Divinity has proved itself worthless.

[s Lovatt]

Too late boys. Man land is going up in flames.
Thats me up on the rooftop doing the dance of victory.
You'se screwed the wrong woman boys, you screwed the wrong woman!
Ha ha, here comes the big wave.
What a great time to be alive.
I wish my grandmother was here to see the Father fall.
It's too late, men's shot at rulership and Divinity has proved itself worthless.

[Questioner]

I'm curious as to what Hugo was going to say -- that he knew would inflame a room of feminists. That's the question.

[jennie]

Okay, so I've never taken a Women's Studies course. I did my degree in Classics. I never felt the need to preface anything I said with "Well, I know all the dead Greeks and Romans in the room are going to kill me for this...."

A lot of people have commented on the peceived need to disclaim one's statements when one knows one may be espousing an unpopular view. A number have mentioned that, as people who aren't part of an oppressed group (i.e., white folks in a Native studies class or in a Race and Ethnicity course, men in women's studies classes, straight people in queer studies courses), they need to acknowledge to their peers that they are speaking from a position of privilege. People seem to think "I know you're all going to want to kill me for this ... " (and variations thereupon) represent a way to acknowledge that one is espousing an unpopular view from a position of privilege.

What I think Hugo's commenting on, though, is that this particular diction is not "Okay, I'm aware that, as a person from a privileged background I have no direct experience of [topic], but ...." or even "I may be misunderstanding something here ..." both of which, I think, allow the speaker to acknowledge his or her own position without equating disagreement with violence.

[Longhairedweirdo]

This is an interesting point. I had a very uncomfortable revelation one day. I'd participated in a lot of rape discussions where a lot of women were really angry, and I felt that they were overgeneralizing and being unfair in many of their criticisms.

In some cases, I was correct, *from my own point of view*.

(e.g., if you want sex, you have to demonstrate that desire, usually through actions. No, it's not a terrible thing to do so (at least, not automatically).)

But I also realized that, while my concern was being told I was wrong, while I was frustrated and sometimes getting hurt feelings, what do those concerns mean next to concerns about getting raped?

That was the first step. I'm saying "Stop talking like that! You're hurting my feelings!" and they were saying "stop talking like that, you're saying things that rapists use to excuse their actions!" Uh, yeah, if it takes a few hurt feelings to help me realize I'm doing that, it's worth it.

And yeah, that's a painful revelation. I wasn't *trying* to be part of the problem, but to some extent, I was. That's why a lot of exercises in changing ideas have to be radical, going to the deep-down roots of the problem.

It wasn't until later that I had another, uglier revelation.

There is probably nothing that a decent guy does or says that is not abused by a predator.

"I thought maybe she was interested, so I made a move on her, and I stopped when she asked me to!" can be said by a decent guy, slowly moving in for a kiss, or attempting to caress, while watching her eyes for signs of happiness or horror. It can also be said by an ass-grabber.

"But why would an ass-grabber say such a thing, since he knows that she wasn't acting in a way that invited an ass-grab?"

Duh. Because he's not talking to her. He's talking to everyone else. And if he's really good, sometimes he even gets her to question whether or not she's right to be so nasty in thinking that he was acting like a predator. Predators lie.

I don't think most guys imagine a predator making excuses when they hear something like that. But it's not like the knowledge that there are predators out there is any big secret, that they're so rare that they're the big exceptions to all general rules.

So, even when I was right from *my* point of view, I wasn't thinking about those predators, even though, if I was drawn out with the right Socratic line of questioning, I'd have realized that they exist and were common enough to be concerned about.

This ties in to the main subject: the idea/fear that women/feminists have irrational reactions to things. Even when we (currently, referring to "we guys") *should* realize that there's often good reason to have strong emotional reactions to something, and even if we're trying to understand, there are aspects of society that can blind us.

Sexual imposition (ranging from gropes on the subways, leers and catcalls, to long term harassment to rape, etc.) is known to be a common problem, and we accept it as a common problem, but when folks see anger about it, it very often is turned into a feeling that there's an unwarranted over-reaction.

"Oh, those crazy women are just so *angry* over this! It's just not rational!"

I remember hearing a story of one college dean trying to paper over a case of date rape, and asking him and her to shake hands once it was done with, and realize how deep a conspiracy it must sometimes seem. The college dean was undoubtedly trying his best to handle what seemed to be a dispute between two students, and undoubtedly felt like he'd accomplished a fine bit of diplomacy. And if he was castigated by that woman, years later, he might well feel he'd been treated unfairly.

Heck, I'll bet some folks who read this are asking themselves "how do we know she really was raped? Maybe it *was* a misunderstanding!" As if that matters... she felt she'd been raped, and was asked to shake hands with the man she felt raped her.

Not merely asked to "not press charges" or told "we can't be sure of what happened, so we can't do anything"... she was asked to forgive and forget, her pain didn't mean anything.

Even if you posit that maybe it was a misunderstanding, think about how that dismisses what's happened to her, and makes her feelings out to be meaningless.

Umm. I'm talking too much, aren't I?

Anyway: yes. A lot of anger is blown off, ignored, dismissed, or considered unjust. It's crazy-making. I'm *really* glad to hear you talk about this.

[sb_repr]

I think poor men are angry about the false things being said by redical feminists contineously. They know that if they tell the truth they will not get marks, they will be banned from the group.
Only option left with them to try to get even a small amount of justise is by using the phrases like " I may get killed for saying this and acting like defending oneself ".
That is probably the only way to get the truth out, to say the truth.

Innocents men are getting trapped, their lifes destroyed due to press control of Govt. funded feminists and totally illogical worng new LAW made by feminists.

[sb_repr]

jennie said """
Okay, so I've never taken a Women's Studies course. I did my degree in Classics. I never felt the need to preface anything I said with "Well, I know all the dead Greeks and Romans in the room are going to kill me for this...."

My comments :

Jennie, there is probably no evil in todays world like feminists, so you can not compare them withanything else, it is as simple.

So using " I may be misunderstanding something here .." do not work as you know you are correct so why should you say I may be misunderstanding something here. you very well know that they are contineously lieing, giving distorted one sided picture, and you are definately giong to be socially outcasted by class, given less marks by teacher, for saying the truths , so saying things like " I may be killed for saying this is very much required " being outcasted and given less marks for saying truth are not small things.
http://indiatalking.com/blog/genderjustise/4946/

[DFDF]

xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES xxx-MOVIES

[Sherine Harivandi]

I'm two years late, but great post. And thank you for writing it! Hopefully others will stumble upon it by way of Google as I did today.

[dissertation writing help]

Excellent Blog every one can get lots of information for any topics from this blog nice work keep it up.

[Generic Viagra]

Thanks for the info... very nice post!!!

[Vijay - Meditation Techniques Guide]

Great post! A lack of understanding in relationships really brings up anger in all simple acts in life. Diffusing anger serves as a great way to prevent it from getting out of control and causing havoc in life. Meditation and introspection are also very helpful to manage our emotions such as anger in a better way.

[Helen]

Dr E the point is that men are commonly raped in prisons; women are commonly raped *everywhere*. Women are taught to duck and weave and avoid angering men because provoking male anger is dangerous, wheras the worst expression of female anger is likely to be verbal aggression. The sort of ducking you are talking about from a male perspective is more a) patronising and b) common courtesy to fellow human beings.

Also have you read about the Sudan Junta? Or any Amnesty International reports? Women, as well as being valuable members of the armed forces - though forbidden from attending frontline attacks for some reason - are often victims of forced displacement, rape as a weapon of war, kidnap, forcible impregnation, murder (despite being non combatants) and other human rights violations.

Women need slightly more consideration because society is skewed in favour of the male gender. Think of it in these terms; white men still have more privilege than black men. They also have more privilege than white women, in terms of easier employment, higher wages, normative discourse. That tiny fear response a male feels in a women's studies class is a microcosm of how a woman feels every single day. The fear of not being taken seriously, of not being important enough, of being in an environment that is not hospitable for you and not designed for your habitation.