noahgibbs | (no subject)

You're viewing

noahgibbs's journal
Create a Dreamwidth Account Learn More

Reload page in style: site light

I'll write this here in my space, because it certainly doesn't belong in any bigger or broader space.

When you say, emphatically, "all men are X," you are not inviting the question, "what can I do to stop being X?" Whatever man you know of who is *least* X has not stopped being X. It suggests that as a man, you *will* not get out of that category with any human degree of effort.

So "all men are X" doesn't encourage "stop being X." Rather, it states "you will be X no matter what you do, no matter what effort you exert."

Is that a good thing?

Depends on X.

(It can also be a straight-up social signal, invitation to fight, or filter on who's listening, e.g. "all men are trash." But I'm ignoring that at the moment.)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

beachglass

"all men are pigs", "all men are dogs", and so forth.

makes it seem like all men are the same, regardless of the way they were raised, personality traits, etc.

it's definitely stereotyping. it's sexist, I suppose.

is this in reference to a personal issue? hope everything is okay.

"all women are crazy!" is one that makes me cringe & just really bothers me so much. =|

From:

noahgibbs

It's in reference to a friend, who is going through that feminist realization that many men treat many women poorly. It's not about my behavior, nor really about hers.

I'm writing this here because it would be inappropriate and, in a small way, damaging for me to write it where she'd be likely to see it.

It really, truly is appropriate for her to do some overreacting to convince herself it's *okay* to react that way to men. I'm not the target audience, and I *really* don't need to go into her space and react defensively.

So: I kibitz here in my space, where it harms nobody.

"Sexist" is a hard word - progressives have captured "racist" and "sexist" to mean "structurally racist" and "structurally sexist." Which leaves no easy way to refer to "individually racist" nor "individually sexist." That's why you'll hear "reverse racism isn't real." They mean there is no *structural* racism against white people in the US (it's true, there isn't.) But an individual person saying "honkies are rude, can't cook and smell bad" can still be personally (not structurally) racist and we have no useful word for "personally racist." Progressives are only allowed to refer to structural racism, and conservatives can only refer to cross-burning racism, and preferably not even then.

"All men are trash" is not structurally sexist, and is a counterreaction to structural sexism. But it's potentially individually sexist in the other direction :-)

From:

beachglass

bravo, well said.
you're a gentleman & a scholar.

so, she must be, say, 16? how did it take her so long to realize that *some* men treat *some* women poorly?

some women treat some men poorly, too. just sayin' ;)

I feel the way she apparently feels about most men is how I feel about the entire human race. I'm not sexist, in any meaning of the word. I think a woman can be as shitty as any man can be, pardon my french.
it's all environmental, I think. in most ways.

Edited (typos) Date: 2017-05-26 08:55 pm (UTC)

From:

noahgibbs

She's older than that. But she's still understanding how deeply structural sexism pervades our culture -- and that can take a lot longer. Some people never get it.

Some women definitely do treat men poorly. It's just that the average goes the other way, and (in most cases) the social and cultural cues go the other way.

She's not really raging because she thinks women are better. She's raging because a lot of culture gives men more of a pass than it should for some awful stuff. It's easy to see that happening for years (or decades) before you can quite articulate the pattern.

From:

tenacious_snail

this is really useful.

I struggle a lot with the question "what is a man?" as well as looking at the various reasons why I do not want to be in the category of "man" or the category of "women". People using all "$N are ______" is certainly part of why that is an active problem for me.

I also recognize that some number of reasons why I don't want to be a man is because too many men are [insert negative thing which I do not wish to be]. But it is much more useful, I think, to think of it as "too many men are violent" or "too many men treat women as sex dispensers" because we can change that. Or at the very least, in our lifetimes and in our spheres, we can change "most" to "some", which will eventually become "few".

From:

noahgibbs

Thank you.

And I agree, it's much more useful to use phrases like "most" or "too many" if men are your audience. Even before progress against "too many," those other words (including "too many") admit to the possibility that, with work, you can be a man and not be that thing.

So yeah. It's not always the case. But often "all men are X" is a necessary reaction which you don't have to take literally (but don't say so out loud.) Black people get to rage against white people and white culture, and we get to optionally listen, but not really respond. Women (and men, and enbies, and others) get to rage against male people and male culture, and usually it's not an invitation to respond. Nor really meant literally.

(Sometimes it is. But usually it's meant to elicit a social reaction. "All men are dangerous" is socially "true" in the sense that we should remember it. But a 97-year-old man who is 30 seconds from dying of pneumonia is unlikely to menace anybody again, ever. "All men are dangerous" is a socially useful reaction. Just not, like, 100% literal.)