There’s something queer happening among men in America. As society moves toward a more integrated, gender-blind direction, a small yet potent group of men are looking to rise up and reclaim the nation’s reigns. And their mission involves a prescriptive masculinity that, frankly, seems like a step back. There’s something queer happening among men in America. As society moves toward a more integrated, gender-blind direction, a small yet potent group of men are looking to rise up and reclaim the nation’s reigns. And their mission involves a prescriptive masculinity that, frankly, seems like a step back.
The period after World War II helped solidify the macho man’s role in America. Men were meant to rule their roost, help damsels in distress and answer to no one, not even their wives. As time went on, hippies, homos and women helped erode this image of the “ideal” male and helped men touch their sensitive side. No longer were men afraid to cry. Nor were they afraid of vanity, as seen in the “metrosexual” movement and arsenal of body sprays. Shit, men are even being used to peddle low-fat yogurt! Now the only images of “macho men” are on a screen, fictional etches of masculinity gone by. But certain groups want to change that.
Rutgers University Professor Lionel Tiger and some of his penis-wielding peers have been rallying to establish a “men’s studies” program at Rutgers University. Men have reached a point where “they’re experienced a considerable amount of dismay and uncertainty,” says Tiger to CNN. Men today feel “somewhat scorned, in principle by women.” Tiger’s work has been born from a fear that men are being feminized. Thus, men must explore what it means to be masculine; both on a social and biological level, and reclaim their territory.
Professor Tiger’s not alone in his masculinity mission. Just ask Harry Reid. The senator enraged “men’s rights” activists last month when he claimed unemployed men are to blame for increased domestic violence. Said Reid, “Men, when they’re out of work, tend to become abusive.” Men’s News Daily Editor Paul Elam described Reid’s remarks as “bizarre and unfounded” that “reveals an unimaginable disconnect from the millions of unemployed Americans who are not abusive.” The National Organization for Men, Men and Fathers for Justice, Men’s Equality Conference, the Fatherhood Coalition and at least a dozen other “men’s rights” groups joined the fray and called for Reid to apologize. He did not.
These organizations not only protest the feminization and demonization of men. They also rally against what they describe as widespread inequality against men. Marty Nemko, president of the National Organization for Men, insists that men are consistently put on the back burner for women and “minorities,” “When boys start to look into college, the very first thing they see are the colleges’ brochures and websites, with far more pictures of women and minorities; the subliminal message: we don’t care about white males.” Thus, they feel like a “disposable sex.” He goes on, “In our attempt to lift up girls and women, we have destroyed boys and men. Just as we are assiduous to avoid unfair treatment of women and minorities, we must do the same for boys and men.” Other members of this men’s movement are making a career out of revitalizing America’s men.
A man named Brett McCay has become something of a leader for the “retrosexuals,” and wrote a book with his wife called The Art of Manliness, which is chock full of outdated advice on how to keep one’s sack from becoming a purse. Like what? Well, men don’t cry. We have to be “the rock” in a (presumably straight) relationship: “When something tragic happens that affects your family, be a pillar of strength during the crisis. Take care of the business that needs taking care of.” It’s only later, when he’s alone, that a man can cry. I can only assume that these images of “manliness” don’t involve any of the gay or even sensitive men roaming around. And that’s why I’m worried.
Complaints about the “inequality” facing men and the loss of masculinity implicitly endorse an archaic image of the masculinity, one in which only the strong – and straight – survive. Countless boys, whether they be uncoordinated, weak or a bit fey, have been told they need to “man up.” What does that even mean? Who writes the rules of what it means to be a man? It seems to me that such choices should be left to the individual, rather than a group of irate activists who claim men need to embrace “maschismo,” which would basically produce cookie cutter clones. And who in the world wants a man who’s just like the next?
April 14, 2010 at 4:02 pm, Jill Jones said:
Who on EARTH would want to be a heterosexual male?
The rest of us pity you. As most of you are pitiful.
Heterosexual ‘men’ boost their fragile egos at the expense of fellow human beings and care not who they hurt in order to do so.
Indeed, the heterosexual male is responsible for nearly every crime against humanity ever committed.
We tolerate you. Because we need your seeds to procreate.
But we really don’t care for you or your little boy blue fragile egos and fake macho B.S. all that much. It tends to destroy everything in its path.
But thanks for the sperm. I love my baby!
April 14, 2010 at 5:27 pm, Ed Stephens, MD said:
The symposium of scholars, Male Studies:A New Academic Discipline, can be viewed at http://www.malestudies.org.
April 14, 2010 at 7:28 pm, John Dias said:
Manhood has been in decline for a long time, hastened by the ascendancy of feminism. Under feminism, masculine virtues are considered unnecessary at best, and dangerous at worst. It’s no wonder that in popular culture we only see depictions of manhood that are either (1) emasculated-but-amusing or (2) menacing-but-competent. Men are unfairly depicted on a continuum between these two extremes. I would like to see more realistic depictions of men, as both positively portrayed and competent. For example, the movie Apollo 13. The men in that movie were not he-men caricatures, but rather regular people with vulnerabilities who used sheer determination and mental discipline to overcome seemingly insurmountable obstacles — and they were all men in that movie, without an obligatory and pandering reference to female empowerment that we commonly see in entertainment today.
If you want to know what men’s rights activists have to say, there are 5 key Web sites:
1. The Spearhead
http://www.the-spearhead.com
2. Misandry Review
http://www.misandryreview.com
3. Men’s News Daily
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com
4. Stand Your Ground
http://www.standyourground.com/forums/?board=3.0
5. Anti-Misandry
http://www.antimisandry.com
April 14, 2010 at 7:40 pm, Christopher said:
I am a man, a straight man; and this article makes me laugh. It is funny to me to think of some old guys sitting around and romanticizing the way it used to be back in the ‘good ol’ days.
They let themselves be defined by others around them and are not ‘man’ enough to simply turn the other cheek. When someone lashes out like this, it is usually an indication of their own insecurities.
Now that the playing field is beginning to level, they wonder if their son or grandson will be able to EARN a spot at that college since it won’t be handed out.
A real man does what he can to be a good person. To help the people he loves and to understand himself so that he may grow and improve. It does not matter how he is judged, it only matters how he acts. If these men are so worried about the eroding sensibilities of a time long past, they obviously lack the ability adapt.
I am a man but that doesn’t really matter. All that truly matters is that I am a person and I continue to learn. A real man becomes so, by learning to be a good person and staying true to himself.
April 14, 2010 at 9:11 pm, Scott said:
In some respects, men are being taken advantage of. This is true in the family law courts when men are forced to pay alimony for life. It is archaic at best with capable woman living off of ex-husbands. There needs to be reform. To learn what you can do, go to: http://www.thinkdivorceb4marriage.com/?p=1166
April 14, 2010 at 9:44 pm, Ultimo167 said:
Men are confused, right? No wonder. They have all these loons telling them that they must be hypermasculine but then the same loons also tell them that they are the supreme victims of feminism. Here in Australia, the men’s movement wants to go back to the 1950s, when women were at home, barefoot and pregnant, and super straight men ruled the public and private worlds. That movement aggressively attacks anyone who challenges their scary agenda, and they dedicate an extraordinary amount of their time trying to disprove male violence against women. As a gay man, I shudder to think what going back to the 1950s would mean for guys like me.
April 15, 2010 at 10:30 am, fools2234 said:
So I guess men shouldnt complain about laws like VAWA, and title ix that discriminate against us, no we should just take it. A mens movement is the only way to correct issues like these as well as countless others.
April 15, 2010 at 11:28 am, Andrew Belonsky said:
First, I love that you guys are commenting on this story. Thank you! Second, Christopher, I think you’re right on the money: being a man is a personal, subjective decision, one guided (I hope) by more universal/moral forces. Masculinity is not, and should not be, something that’s pre-packaged and prescribed. As for the men here who sincerely believe their lot’s being reduced: rather than trying to grasp a bygone era, why not adapt to the changing circumstances. White straight men were top dog for thousands of years. Why not take a break and let others enjoy the good life?
April 15, 2010 at 11:38 am, Marc A. said:
This article is pure ignorance about the men’s rights movement. Men’s rights is about equal rights. Period. Men are systematically discriminated against in child custody, parenting rights, domestic and sexual violence policies that ignore male victims and their kids, public health policies, criminal sentencing, reproductive rights, forced labor, and more.
In “The Myth of Male Power,” Warren Farrell, Ph.D. provides a more complete picture of how both sexes were limited, empowered and disempowered by gender roles in different ways, rather than just spewing the usual one-sided man-bad woman-good story. He looks at how gender roles spelled disposability for men – working in mines, getting black lung, dying on the job, sacrificing themselves and their health, having no option to stay home, working excessive hours, committing suicide, being apart from their kids, internalizing pain, being denied custody of their kids, having their limbs torn off in wars that women supported at about the same rate men did but only men were forced to fight, etc. Men make 80-99% of homeless adults, job deaths, suicide deaths, incarcerated persons, dropouts, and have higher mortality rates for 13 of the 15 leading causes of death.
You can by cynical all you want in your ignorance. But the men’s rights movement is growing all over the world. African, Asia, Latin America, Europe, and the U.S. Just search “men’s rights march in Mexico city” and watch the video of both men and women marching for men’s rights. Yes, some people actually get it. And that will continue to grow despite the reactionaries.
April 15, 2010 at 11:53 am, fools2234 said:
Andrew how exactly are men supposed to be able to “adapt” to being discriminated against. What are we just supposed to take it, sorry but no thanks lets just hope that some of the issues that MRAs fight against dont happen to you or someone you care about of course if they did you might change your view of us.
April 15, 2010 at 8:04 pm, Andrew Belonsky said:
Fools2234, I suppose you’re right: the word “adapt” may have been inaccurate. I am not sure, however, that these “inequalities” truly exist. White, striaght, men remain the cultural majority: they are the dominant image of masculinity out there. Simply because a college includes women or — gasp! — minorities in their materials does not mean that white men are being discriminated against. I find it astonishing some people would say that opening doors to traditionally oppressed groups — women, “minorities” — counts as discrimination to someone else. Upward mobility is not a zero sum game. Women can get ahead and so can men. As long as your qualified. This men’s rights movement comes across, to me, as a bunch of whining from people who don’t want to work hard enough. But that’s just me…
April 19, 2010 at 11:05 am, Clinton Jasperson said:
I think the model of masculinity portrayed in the article is narrow and weak. Weak because the narrative I hear above is that of a victim “things are being done to me”; maybe when we were little boys, but we are men now, so we should take responsibility. Its narrow in that being a man is limited to stoic emotion and entitlement. Come on really? The 1950s were great, but we are half a century removed from that era and the box of masculinity that came with it.
I personally don’t think or feel that I have been discriminated against as a white heterosexual male. In fact, I look around and see a lot of privileges like disparity in pay because of race/gender in favor of white men, or the ability to marry someone I love. What I do get pissed about is that the only male role models portrayed in our media is that of apathetic sleazeballs who are babied by their wives or superheroes who have zero fault/vulnerability. So the one piece I relate to in this article is that there is a serious need for revised “male script” for men to aspire to. This is also a great opportunity to write a script that is complex and deep enough to include being in touch with the strength that comes stepping into my feelings and being committed to self-understanding so that I can better share my gifts with the world.
I’m a man who is committed to walking my path and sharing that journey with other men along the way. The go it alone, tough boys don’t cry model is dead. We men deserve more than that, and the only people who can give it to us is ourselves.
April 19, 2010 at 6:41 pm, moebius22 said:
“Rutgers University Professor Lionel Tiger and some of his penis-wielding peers have been rallying to establish a “men’s studies” program at Rutgers University…Complaints about the “inequality” facing men and the loss of masculinity implicitly endorse an archaic image of the masculinity, one in which only the strong – and straight – survive. Countless boys, whether they be uncoordinated, weak or a bit fey, have been told they need to “man up.”
+++++++++++++++++
How do you expect people to take your views seriously when you use misandrist statements and straw mans in your writing?
April 19, 2010 at 7:26 pm, Denis Pakkala said:
Sexism is a terrible thing. Traditional values and societal expections have often influenced men’s and women’s roles in society. Women were considered to be baby-makers and housekeepers, men were considered to be wage-slaves and cannon fodder. Feminism has given women the freedom to choose their future and not be limited by sexist societal expections. Men are still expected to be wage-slaves and cannon fodder and their family and societal contributions are not properly recognized and respected.
Feminism has popularized misandry and harmful double standards in family law and domestic violence.
Men built civilization but now we take a back seat to women’s issues.
April 20, 2010 at 12:58 pm, Jim said:
Jill, take your man-hatred and jam it straight up your nasty crack. You’re sexist pig. You’re disgusting.
God help your baby if he’s male, because a child abuser like you is not fit to raise him.
April 20, 2010 at 2:15 pm, h0tr0d said:
Look, this article is to be expected. I smell the fear. Male studies is not about going back, that is willful ignorance. Male studies is about men defining masculinity…instead of feminists. Just see comments by Jill which shows why this is necessary. As Gandhi said
“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win”
Guess what phase we’re in ?
April 20, 2010 at 7:12 pm, Fred said:
Hey Jill, is your baby a male by chance? I truly hope not for his sake. If it’s a “he”, when do you plan to tell him what a loser he and all heterosexual males are? I suggest you wait at least until kindergarten so his undoubtedly female teacher can help you destroy the “badness” in him early on.
Actually, the infatuation of women with themselves is getting pretty old. If men have fragile egos it may be becuase they are not as dead certain of their superiority as women apparently are. I think Frued referred to women as “super egos”. Jill, do you have to spread your legs in the morning to let the sun come out?
April 22, 2010 at 3:15 pm, AlphaOmega said:
This is war. Nothing nothing less. The ungrateful women and sub-humans who dare challenge male power have been given free reign long enough. It’s time to remind you lot why we men have ruled since the dawn of time.
April 27, 2010 at 8:21 am, Alex said:
The comment war makes me laugh. Look at all these closet misogynists using their personal experience to prove the Evil of Women and the Victimization of Men.
On topic, am I the only one who thinks the “men’s rights” movement is anything but masculine? And what the hell does men’s rights have to do with being white? Non-white people are made of both men and women, last I checked.
April 28, 2010 at 4:13 am, Jo said:
Men DO belong on top! Our society is becoming a fascist hellhole because of feminism.
Oh — and the only reason this happened is because men betrayed one another; without the help of their mangina allies men would have always remained on top.
May 10, 2010 at 9:30 am, Chris said:
Andrew Belonsky,
The insinuations you’ve made about the men’s movement would be laughable if they weren’t so damaging. Accusing men’s rights activists of labelling the inclusion of women and minorities at colleges and universities as a form of oppression is a complete misrepresentation of their stance. I’ve never come across an MRA who said anything of the sort. Please cite a men’s rights activist who has said men are oppressed because women and minorities are allowed to study at college and university. I’ve heard many MRA’s speak about the introduction of gynocentric policies that discriminate in favour of women and at men’s expense. This is not even close to resembling the straw-man you’re created.
There is a lot of merit behind the commentary from men’s righs activists on men’s position at colleges and universities: male students are often required to fund the women’s only departments that they’re forbidden from entering, yet there are no similar measures assured for men; women’s studies programs often promote unsubstantiated ideology and hate-mongering myths as “facts”; men who are falsely accused of rape are considered guilty until proven innocent and, receive no recourse when they’re found to be innocent (remember the DUKE innocent?), and; the “men’s studies” course is based solely on the feminist theory about masculinity and, does not allow men to critique feminism — it’s why the newly formed “male studies” course was introduced by MEN.
A key issue you’re failed to mention is the men’s pathway to college and university. The teaching standards and the curriculum in schools is detrimental to boys and preferential to girls — as has been pointed out by many experts, many of whom are women — thus leading to women outnumbering men on most campuses because boys do neglected and judged by women’s standards. The system places more emphasis on girls’ innate abilities and ignores boys’ innate abilities. It’s patently obvious to anyone who has a brain that the teaching standards rate girls’ superior ability to cooperately in class and, write and communicate at an advanced level over boys’ superior spatial awareness and problem solving skills. Haven’t you ever wondered why the majority of the “high performing” girls are hopeless at maths and science and only study art, law and other ideological-based programs at college and university? If you think it’s due to “discrimination against girls” then you’re nuttier and dumber than any conspiracy theorist I’ve never known. Contrary to what the feminazis would have you believe, there are no old men in white robes using subliminal messages to prevent female geniuses from reaching their potential in maths and science. The reason women are less successful in science and maths is because extremely high intelligence is mostly found among men. Every test and study that has been performed on the issue, whether it has been in the form of IQ tests or comparison of men and women in maths and science, has shown that most geniuses, scientists, inventors and mathematicians are men and that men are more likely to dominate the extreme ranges of the IQ scale.
Considering you’re wrongly portraying all MRA’s as lazy whiners who aren’t as qualified as the female counterparts, I thought it was quite ironic to see you make the following error:
“As long as your qualified”
You meant to say “As long as you’re qualified”, right? Any journalist who doesn’t know the difference between “your” and “you’re” isn’t qualified to work as one!
May 10, 2010 at 9:37 am, Chris said:
“Women can get ahead and so can men. As long as your qualified” Andrew Belonsky
Andrew Belonsky,
1. A qualified journalist knows the difference between “your” and “you’re”.
2. Affirmative action leads to women and minorities gaining jobs over equally qualified Caucasian men.
May 10, 2010 at 9:52 am, Chris said:
“Now that the playing field is beginning to level, they wonder if their son or grandson will be able to EARN a spot at that college since it won’t be handed out.” Christopher
It never was handed out. Only the most talented candidates were accepted into the college and university system. Academically-challeged athletes might have been included, but only because they were the best athletes available. Whether you like it not, sport has been part of the college and university curriculum for over a century. Allowing men of moderate intelligence to enter university because they excel at American football holds more merit than giving a seat to a feminazi who excels in womyn’s studies.
“I personally don’t think or feel that I have been discriminated against as a white heterosexual male. In fact, I look around and see a lot of privileges like disparity in pay because of race/gender in favor of white men, or the ability to marry someone I love” Clinton Jasperson
You don’t have a clue. The so-called “disparity in pay” is derived not from discrimination, but lifestyle choices. Women tend to choose part-time work over full-time work and, are less likely than men to work overtime and remain committed to the same job over many years. Women will opt out of the workforce so they can have children, then re-enter in a reduced capacity so they can blend work with motherhood. While men tend to work in the high-paying fields that are avoided by most people (IE. dangerous industry and physical labour), women choose the easier, safer, more comfortable jobs thay pay less. The fields dominated by men pay more because of the demand for workers in these professions. Most women are not going to contemplate the idea of working in dangerous industry and physical labour because it’s messy, dangerous and tiring work that requires a great deal of effort and strength. It’s hardly fair to say that a woman who sits at a desk and answers phone in an airconditioned building deserves the same wage as the man who is risking his life in the blazing sun by working with dangerously heavy and sharp objects that can kill him.
May 10, 2010 at 11:19 am, Andrew Belonsky said:
Ha! Thank you for the note on “your” versus “you’re.” Stupid, yet honest, mistake.
May 10, 2010 at 11:41 am, Bob Knows said:
Real MEN do not care if manginas like Andrew Belonsky and a million cows still want to dominate and control men. Real MEN are angry at the century of men bashing hate spewed forth by their kind, angry at the endemic discrimination in law and injustice. You manginas will either get out of the way or get run over. Deal with it.
May 10, 2010 at 2:10 pm, outdoors said:
i cannot believe MEN died in battle to give freedom for ppl like Andrew Belonsky to spew this anti-male rights crap.
i think Bob Knows has summed things up nicely
May 11, 2010 at 1:14 pm, KK said:
I can’t help but notice Belonsky’s drivel featured a MAN’S LIFE magazine cover with a man defending a woman, and to the right of the page, DT magazine’s pictured cover (“Christopher Mintz-Plasse Kicks Ass!”) featuring a scrawny white guy in a tie getting punched in the face.
The irony almost takes on a life of its own.
July 02, 2010 at 10:02 am, Death and Taxes » Down To Earth, Grounded Superman Finds His Humble Home (And Men Should, Too) said:
[...] role of men today has been coming up a lot as of late. An entire “Men’s Rights” movement continues to build momentum, and Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker caused a stir this week, when she wondered whether [...]
August 03, 2010 at 11:55 pm, Stephen Joseph Martin said:
You have to scratch your sack in public, but cry in the closet to be a real man!
August 12, 2010 at 4:57 pm, Jose said:
Men's rights/masculist activists and organizations (at least real ones; don't care about false MRAs like Angry Harry) want gender equality just like feminists do.
September 23, 2010 at 2:58 pm, Gas Mask Bra: An Astounding Challenge for Men | Death and Taxes said:
[...] the Men’s Rights movement gets up in arms, CNET reports that eBra will soon unveil a “counterpart device for [...]
October 23, 2010 at 1:20 am, J. Durden said:
Mis-post, ignore
October 23, 2010 at 1:20 am, Enchilada said:
Stupid article.
October 23, 2010 at 1:23 am, Demosthenes XXI said:
And men like you, Andrew are part of the reason why there is a “men's rights movement.” Despite the myriad problems that beset modern American men today, you would rather revel in the illusion that there are just a small number of men who are “whining over nothing.” And this is because like most Western men, you see your fellow man in a ditch trying to crawl out and you casually say; “Buddy, that ain't my problem….”
But there are men like me who are willing to reach down to that man and say; “Stand up with your head high, brother. You may be down, but you are not out.”
Many of us do agree that there needs to be some re-thinking regarding the traditional roles of men in modern society. But to have those definitions co-opted by ideas and roles that are proving harmful, subordinate, and toxic is not the answer. Most importantly, we as men should have the right to re-define ourselves as we see fit; feminism gave women that right. Why shouldn't men have that same right?
October 25, 2010 at 5:37 pm, Angle, Reid and The “Man Up” Meme: The Pitfalls Of Gendered Attacks | Death and Taxes said:
[...] male has lately been undergoing an identity crisis: there’s the clearly self-conscious Men’s Rights movement, a shifting economy in which women are tops, and the optimal male has been brought down to size. [...]
October 25, 2010 at 7:38 pm, Denis said:
I think that this article is deliberately equating traditional masculinity with the MRM, which is absolutely false.
Bad Journalism = Propaganda
October 29, 2010 at 7:22 pm, cheeze whizz said:
Andrew you seem to be missing the point. There ARE large discrimination issues facing men in todays world.
In family matters women are routinely given more rights than men. Children's custody and paying of support favour women.
In matters of violence… violence by men towards women is seen as a terrible crime yet violence by women towards men is seen as amusing.
In matters of health… women continue to recieve far more spending on health yet men have a shorter life expectency. Prostate cancer kills far more people every year than breast cancer yet has a fraction ofn the research funding.
And mens rights groups seek to protect and restore equality for all men including homosexual men so your homophobe slur is an outright lie.
December 15, 2010 at 9:23 pm, Paul Elam said:
You should visit my site at avoiceformen.com and read the fine articles by MRA's, included two gay men that write for my site.
Perhaps you might learn something other than to shame men for the idea they have collective needs.
This article, as reflected in your comments, is a total fail, and more macho patriarchal than any MRA I know could come up with.