Heads Up, PunkAssers!
Published by Lisa Kansas November 16th, 2008 in Punkass!, Feminism, Men's Rights ActivismAs many of you are no doubt aware, I have been writing the occasional article for Glenn Sacks. For reasons known only to himself, Glenn appears to be at least somewhat pleased by my poor efforts as a visiting “Feminist Dissident” on his site. (Whether or not his men’s rights activist audience is pleased by them, I cannot say. I’m not even going to speculate.)
To date, we haven’t had too much trouble. I have confined myself to a general introduction, lacking specifics that would have overly excited his crowd; two articles on child custody, which as I do not favor preferential treatement of the primary caregiver in custody battles, did not incite the residents to riot; and one article on legal paternity, which since I do favor allowing men legal rights in the case of unwilling biological parenthood protecting them from also being forced to engage in legal parenthood, similarly failed to provide a convenient lightning rod. (Caveat: I was dogpiled by the pro-life contingent.)
However, my days of, er, uneasy truce with Glenn’s readers may be over when Glenn posts my next article (which I am in the process of working on now). I am allowing myself to be drawn in by the possibility that the majority of these folks aren’t flat-out misogynists…well, that’s not entirely accurate–it would be more accurate to state that, while it’s tempting to believe that they are based upon their behavior and comments, I am uncomfortable simply making that assumption outright. To date, we have only focused on things that negatively impact some men at the hands of some women; it wouldn’t be fair to base an assessment on their feelings about women in general on how those discussions panned out. Therefore, I am proposing to write an article for Glenn about women in general and feminism specifically and why, perhaps, feminism is really not that uncommon among women, and see where that takes us.
Now, this will require me to actually write as if my target audience might be brought to care in a positive way about what I’m saying, or it won’t be a good article. This will have the unfortunate side effect of requiring me to open up a trifle, not something I enjoy doing with an audience that is much more likely to be jeering and unpleasant than thoughtful and constructive.
So, to make the whole situation more palatable to my subconscious, I have gotten Glenn to agree to let me cross-post the article in its entirety, not just the usual link to his site, where I know the audience will discuss what I’m going to say, whether or not they agree with it, in a thoughtful and constructive fashion that is relatively unlikely to involve personal attacks of any description.
I’m betting I’m gonna need that. So please, stay tuned! 
Good luck, Lisa!
I’m really impressed with the work you’ve done there, and I’m not sure I’d have the patience or the chutzpah to do it.
I do think that reaching out to MRAs can have some value, just as I think it’s worthwhile, if occasionally scary, to try to see what they see. Not because it’s wise to know one’s enemies, but because I don’t think they’re all enemies—I think they’re victims of the incredibly stoopid rigidly enforced gender roles we all have to negotiate, almost as much as (and in some cases more than) women are.
I also think it’s worthwhile to engage in respectful discussion with people whose views are ideologically different from one’s own because it forces one to examine one’s own views and arguments critically, and to engage with one’s own views in a way that can be more demanding than one’s likely to get from criticism from an ally, in a forum where one cannot simply dismiss the person holding the opposing viewpoint.
Looking forward to reading your post!
“but because I don’t think they’re all enemies—I think they’re victims of the incredibly stoopid rigidly enforced gender roles we all have to negotiate’
One of the problems you run into there is that a lot of those guys are blaming feminists for agonies in their own lives that come out of the court system. They may blame bias in the court system on feminists, but a lot of their stories look like paternalistic judges favoring women uncritically. Of course there are feminsts who have exactly the same POV, but I really doubt that these judges formed their legal philosphies baesed on anything these particular may or may not have said.
One good effect of your efforts, Lisa, may be to separate the MRAs from the misogynists. (Not that a person can’t be both.) Glenn moderates out the overtly vicious comments, and there are some commnenters who call other commenters, but you do have to hold your nose sometimes there. It may help to remember that some of the guys posting misogynist crap have been thrown out of their homes without due process, had their kids taken out of their lives or else been denied any kind of legal protection from abusive spouses, and they blame it all on all women, or all feminists, when their real targets ought to be paternalistic judges and a macho law enforcement community. They are just wounded animals.
Okay, the article has been shipped off to Glenn! Unfortunately, I think it may be way too long for his site. (sigh) Oh well–if it is, I’ll just throw it up over here only–it’d be a crying shame to waste all that effort.
Zing and Jim, your words are appreciated. Let’s keep our fingers crossed!
“One of the problems you run into there is that a lot of those guys are blaming feminists for agonies in their own lives that come out of the court system. They may blame bias in the court system on feminists, but a lot of their stories look like paternalistic judges favoring women uncritically. Of course there are feminsts who have exactly the same POV, but I really doubt that these judges formed their legal philosphies baesed on anything these particular may or may not have said.”
To deny that feminism has not, and does not have a major influence on decisions that are made by the government would be a huge(!) error.
Also, it is true that a lot of the people on MRA websites are simply misogynistic. This is a natural phenomenon among frustrated groups of people who feel they are being mistreated. This same phenomenon happens among those that claim they are women’s rights activists. My personal feeling is that misandry is, to some extent, supported, while misogyny is heavily frowned upon in our (at least, in my own) society.
I am first time visitor, and a passionate believer in Men’s Rights but I find, as some have pointed out, that many communities with similar views as mine are too fueled with rage and outright misogyny for my taste.
“Also, it is true that a lot of the people on MRA websites are simply misogynistic. This is a natural phenomenon among frustrated groups of people who feel they are being mistreated. ”
I agree with all of this, but my point was that these guys often blame their problems with courts on feminsst.oftehn that’s because with some feminsts, there isn’t a lot of daylight between thier positions and stodgy, paternalistic, patriarchal old judges who think women are dainty little victims who need to be protected whatever the facts of the situation might happen to be. And it’s an understandable mistake - just look at a lot of the discourse around domestic violence and who espouoses which opinions. But it is an unfair charcaterization of all feminists and it’s counter-productive.
“To deny that feminism has not, and does not have a major influence on decisions that are made by the government would be a huge(!) error.”
That depends on the feminsism, since there are varieties of feminism that contradict each other in these areas.
You may mean women’s groups such as NOW, rather than feminism as an ideology or a movement. There’s no question that pressure groups of all kinds affect political decisions, and as much as we might like to think the judiciary is above all that partisan nastiness, when judges are lected oficials, you open the door for that kind of thing.
Hi Lisa,
I will be interested to see if you fare any better with your next article than I fared with mine. As you know I am an anti-feminist. As such I thought it would be a cold day in hell before I ever read much less commented on a feminist blog. I have long been a supporter of Men’s Issues in particular Father’s Issues because of the problems my husband experienced at the hands of his first wife and the Family Court System. I still believe that system needs a major overhauling but I no longer believe it should be entirely abolished. Apparently some people need much more guidance than I ever before realized.
You might wonder what caused my recent change of heart…or epiphany as I think of it. Well, it was the guys on Glenn’s blog that did the trick. I’ve long been a vocal supporter of men and fathers locally and on various places in the internet. But the response I got from the guys on Glenn’s blog was something out of a sci-fi novel.
I actually was told by a man on that blog that men not only could but *did* know exactly how menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth, and menopause were experienced by women. Not one other man posting there commented otherwise. I see that as tacit approval from the rest of them that they had no issues with what the first guy claimed. Then Glenn posted my column which was about how women experience aging. I invited questions about how women view this process in life. I never got a single question from these men. Not one.
What I got was a lot of men telling ME what women experience in aging or what women *should* experience in aging or that aging was no big deal for women because men always have it much worse. There is no point in talking to people who are so emotionally biased, probably most with justification which in no way means I’m going to serve as their whipping post just because I’m female.
Just the same to me it seems that raw emotions now reign supreme with the regulars over there. Nobody can have a logical and reasoned discussion where emotional knee-jerking is the most common response made to anything any woman attempts to say—even a woman who has long been on their side. As a reasonable person I have to now rethink who and what it is I was supporting for so many years. To do that I figured I had to give the other side of the issue a fair look.
So I came to check out your blog, Lisa. I’ve only read two of your articles so far but I have to admit I’m surprised. I was expecting something very different than what I’m seeing thus far and thus far. I like your writing style very much. From what I’ve seen thus far, you seem to be a voice of reason. Good luck with your next article on Glenn’s blog. I sense you’re going to need at least a little luck but I think you handle the responses over there much better than I did and you will probably do just fine.
Perspicaceous,
As I said, some or most of those guys are wounded animals. I remember this when I look in on some feminist blogs a la Womanist Musings. Both are havens for wounded souls. Glenns blog has become a man’s space, and you don’t get much more real discussion there than in a woman’s space-type of blog. I don’t bother to comment much any more at Glenn’s Blog or even read the comments much because they don’t carry that much information.
However that is all the more reason to keep up the fight to improve the situation. There will always be wounded souls, but we wouldn’t have so many if we didn’t manufacture them in the Family Court system.
You might look in at Feminist Critics now and then. They don’t post often, and they don’t have a huge crop of regular commenters, but they are extrememly rigorous about civility and personal attacks, and no one who is just venting misogyny gets any kind of hearing, and gets banned pretty quickly. And the bigotry you have experienced at Glenn’s is straight-up misogyny. Misandry is another matter at FC, because they think it is the price they have to pay to get any feminists to try the place. The standard of debate is high.
I’m morbidly curious as to how Womanist Musings got a reputation as that scary omg super-psycho radical feminist blog, and Renee, a reputation as an angry, wounded dove, hyper-radical feminist, viciously lashing out against men. Or, y’know, something.
If anything, it’s always seemed to me that Renee is quite critical of mainstream feminism, and often critiques the ways racial oppression and gender roles harm men. Her partner is male, I believe, and she has two sons.
This is the second comment in as many weeks talking about her and her site like they call daily for the extermination—or, at a minimum, castration—of all men. Was there a link from some dark corner of the MRAsphere?
Persp,
(sigh) Yeah…I was surprised by the attitude towards you over there from some of the guys; I mean, you’re not a feminist, as Yours Truly over here is, so one would think that the chip on the collective shoulder would drop off a bit. Clearly not, though.
I’ve found the best way to hold forth over there is to clearly state that you are discussing topic A and doing so from perspective B, and that’s what you’re there for, and attempts to discuss anything else will be politely acknowledged but no more. (Not that I adhere to this perfectly! But I’ve found that it’s very helpful.)
I don’t suspect they’re too interested in what anything is like for women, and they have the distressing tendency–hardly unique among them, it’s definitely a human one–to be utterly unable to see, feel or understand anything that is outside their experience. I can understand and sympathize with that argument, and work hard to reframe my points in ways that perhaps can resonate and be understood by someone who has no personal experience with them. What I have no time nor patience for is those who take it a step farther and decide that since they personally have not experienced it, it must be (a) a lie or (b) trivial. At that point, either ignore ‘em or go for snark, whatever suits your mood; there is no longer any real and genuine attempt at idea exchange to mess up by doing so.
Also, thank you for the kind words about my writing style and posts!
Vi,
I don’t think I’ve ever been over there (Womanist Musings). I think I must check it out!
Violet,
Her reaction to Glenn’s campaign against the blatantly bigoted DART posters in the Dallas buses did a lot to get her that reputation. [ Gratuitous personal attack removed ~v ]
“If anything, it’s always seemed to me that Renee is quite critical of mainstream feminism, ”
If by “mainstream feminism” you mean old-fashioned 70’s equity feminism, that would explain a lot of her misandry.
“Her partner is male, I believe, and she has two sons.”
Is that intended to show that she loves men, as in “some of my best friends are black”? It’s about as convincing, and for the same reason.
So, in short: Yes, she was linked from some dark corner of the MRA blogosphere.
I think your understanding of the development of feminist movements might be a bit foggy.
No, it’s meant to show that she’s not a lesbian separatist. This is only relevant because I would expect the MRA boogeyfeminist to be some hairy-legged lesbian separatist who explicitly and viciously hates men. Or a woman who at least identifies with liberal feminist organizations (like the MRAs favorite, NOW). None of this necessarily has any bearing on how she actually feels about men.
Violet,
She was linked by Glen Sacks
“This is only relevant because I would expect the MRA boogeyfeminist to be some hairy-legged lesbian separatist who explicitly and viciously hates men.”
I think your understanding of the MRA boogetfeminst might be a bit foggy.
Fair enough. I didn’t exactly do a study.
Hi Jim2,
Thanks for your comments, Jim.
I am aware that some of these men are wounded. I come from that same perspective having gone through hell with my current husband at the hands of his ex-wife in family court. Foolishly I thought that counted for something…that I had walked in a some of their shoes. It didn’t. All women are the enemy over there. I got the message loud and clear.
Yes, I was reluctant to see it but the guys over on Glenn’s blog are for the most part women-hating misogynists. Redundant I know but there it is anyway. Glenn puts up articles about woman and from women like Lisa and me in what I think is an attempt to make these guys reconsider their knee-jerking emotional attitudes but it isn’t happening for the most part. Those men are completely out of control and don’t have two rational thoughts in their heads to rub together.
I think only Lisa has met with any success there and I give her credit for doing it. It is a dirty job but apparently someone needs to do it. I look forward to seeing Lisa’s next article there.
Hi Lisa,
Thanks for the advice but it was too late for me. I should have nipped them in the bud as you so wisely did. I’d say maybe next time but there isn’t going to be a next time. I was helping with that DART campaign…writing letters and emails mostly. No more. I wouldn’t spit on these guys if they were dying of thirst now. They may not have initially been to blame for the bad rap they’ve gotten but many of them are certainly earning their stripes now. I fail to see how this attitude helps them other than to make them feel good but it’s their choice.
I read some more articles here and so far I haven’t seen one I didn’t like at least in one or more respects. I might not agree with it all but it gives me pause to think and at least reconsider some of my old convictions. In many ways this is like a breath of fresh air.
Thanks for your advice and again, I’m looking forward to your next article at that other blog.
Pers,
Glenn’s articles are interesting, an a very few of his commenters are worth reading, but that’s about it.
Lisa’s secret is that she has a very good sense of boundaries. She’s a soldier - obviously a warrior too, but the soldier is what is relevant here. The Army is a huge organization of organizations, and those organizations are multi-layered webs of relationship - the weapons are just attached on the surface - and the key to functioning relationships is boundaries. That’s probably where she learned her chops, or refined them.
But from my angle I can’t see any reason for you to put any more effort into it. Too bad about your work on DART, it is good and it is necessary, but those guys need to be neutralized because they get in the way. They and not people like you are hurting other men.
This argument (Via jim2)
“That depends on the feminsism, since there are varieties of feminism that contradict each other in these areas.”
has always irked me a bit. It’s politically distancing yourself from an ally on a certain issue (absconding yourself in the process), while benefiting from it’s work (which may secretly align with your own).
Put another way, that’s like saying the Cavalry doesn’t agree with the Infantry on certain issues.
It’s a dumb argument.
______________
Perspicacious,
I didn’t comment on, nor even follow the thread on, your article. I apologize. i did read the article, and it was good, but it just wasn’t something I cared about. I do not, and will not, apologize for the fact that I find 25 year olds far more attractive (on average) than 55 year olds. Women don’t apologize, why should I?
As for the men making assumptions (I admit, I didn’t read the thread but after years in this thing I likely don’t have to), they are no worse (nor no more valid) than the assumptions thrown at men every day. If this is your reason to “pitch” the Men’s Rights Movement, then I’d say you were a fair weather friend at best. For what it’s worth, I have a lot of sympathy for women that find themselves getting older and single (maybe never married) that can’t find a man.
My perspective on it though, is that this is where the term “spinster” came from, it’s not a new phenomenon. It’s not men that these women should be angry with…
For what it’s worth, I’ve never viewed you as an MRA. I always put you in the “Jeana” camp myself, so your longtime support of men is a bit of a surprise. I agree with you on lots of things, but there’s always those blinders…..
——————
Lisa:
Once again, great article which definitely has potential to open good dialogue. I see the post count is around 385 already, with some good points made. Congratulations on the nuptuals, get your ass away from the computer, it’s your honeymoon!
Factory,
You wrote: I didn’t comment on, nor even follow the thread on, your article. I apologize. i did read the article, and it was good, but it just wasn’t something I cared about. I do not, and will not, apologize for the fact that I find 25 year olds far more attractive (on average) than 55 year olds. Women don’t apologize, why should I?
_____________________________
You did the only thing I expected from anyone. To read what I wrote and to either respond to *what* I actually wrote, or as you did…decide it didn’t interest you and move on. Thank you for reading it and for judging the subject, rather than me personally.
I don’t expect everyone to ever get all excited or even a little interested in any one single topic. That would be a ridiculous expectation. I’m not interested in every topic either. All I expected was a discussion on the topic (rather than on me) from those who claimed to be interested in the topic. I don’t see that as my being unfair or unrealistic.
Some women do apologize. I’ve done it often on usenet and blogs when I’m wrong and especially when I’ve been proven wrong by cites or studies. To maintain I’m right in the face of cold hard facts only makes me look more foolish. I have known several MRA’s who will not admit they are wrong in the face of facts to the contrary just because some woman put up the proof. This door swings both ways of course…women do that, too. I don’t want to be party to that so I admit when I’m wrong as a rule and if I’ve done damage I apologize.
Why should you apologize when you’re not wrong? You shouldn’t. But when you *are* wrong it works in your favor when you admit to it. It builds credibility (or it should). That is a benefit to you.
So Lisa…how’s it going over there? I’ve been following “orders” and spending some time away. Not because they told me too, though. LOL
Speaking as someone who has freely made use of his own personal life in his posts, I can understand it when someone attacks you, or your character, rather than your point. Speaking as an MRA, I can tell you this is the default stance of all arguments against me, which must be defeated before argument on the point is allowed at all.
I can understand your frustration, but I disagree with your reaction.
When you put your own personal experiences out there as example of concept, you must be prepared for negative responses about you. It’s the nature of the beast.
Sure, some of those guys are repugnant. So am I most of the time. So are many who frequent boards such as this, academic catchphrases and code-speak notwithstanding.
Maybe I’m just a big ol’ misogynist after all, but I really don’t see a whole lot of unreasonable things being said (ok, there’s a couple guys that are both prolific, and extreme). What I see most of the time are objections to phrasing, or attitude, when “hostility” is pointed out. That’s an attempt to control discourse, and I can’t support that.
Fac, I don’t really care about the personal attacks; clearly I’m not a dumbass, I knew they’d be coming.
What was said to me, over and over, was, “No, we don’t care. We care about our issues, and we blame women for them, so go away.” That doesn’t hurt my feelings, but it makes me posting a waste of time!
Hi Persp,
Oh, I’m about done.
I’m dialogging with Glenn (or I was yesterday, anyway) about whether or not I should hang around…so we’ll see…
Factory, the article I wrote was based on research on what men and women seek in mates and how women age mentally and physically. I looked up a lot of different cites on the internet. Some of this includes my experiences but none of it was based strictly on my experience. In fact I included things I never experienced or even knew about prior to writing the article.
In plain English the article was not about ME.
Glenn set a maximum of 750 words for the article. I didn’t have much room for quoting articles or even citing them. It was the first time I wrote any thing like this so I was new to the process. Knowing what I do now, I would have asked Glenn for more space and if not possible I would have declined. The subject matter couldn’t be done well within such a small amount of space. Like I said I learned a lot from the process.
Factory: If this is your reason to “pitch” the Men’s Rights Movement, then I’d say you were a fair weather friend at best.
_____________________
From where I stand it looks to me as though I was never considered to be a friend in the first place. Technically speaking I can not abandon that which I never was part of in the first place.
Perspective may not be everything but it counts for a lot.
I haven’t pitched anything. My values trump some peoples bad behavior. It took me awhile but I’m only as human as the rest of you are.
What I am now is a lot more neutral on issues. I wait longer before I jump to the conclusion men are right than I did before. I give feminists a little wider consideration rather than knee-jerking my disapproval.
I think its a better approach than I’ve taken in the past. Unless both sides come to an understanding nothing will ever change. JMO.
Lisa, you held up very well all things considered. I’m sorry if I derailed your thread in anyway. Even though I’ve moved on, it seems not everyone else is able to do so. Still the last thing I wanted to do is derail your article and I apologize for my part in doing it.
Persp,
You didn’t derail it more than anybody else did! Part of the problem was that I was too busy…gettin’ married, you know…to really keep on top of it like I usually do/did. But good lord, it wasn’t you!