About Me

My photo
Author of queer, wry sci fi/fantasy books.
Showing posts with label men. Show all posts
Showing posts with label men. Show all posts

Wednesday, 24 February 2016

Why I Hate Men

Hello hello!

Before I get down to brass tacks, two notes apply. First, I will be talking about harassment and violence in this post, as well as sexual assault. Second, when I talk about men, I am referring to cis and mostly heterosexual men. My experiences with trans men are more limited, and further, trans men do not have the systemic access to power that their cisgender counterparts do.

If you don't know what "cis" and "trans" mean, go here! Or even here. I will also be talking about patriarchy and male privilege, so before you tell me those things don't exist, please click on the links and do some research, so we can all save some time.

I hate men. 


First of all, #NotAllMen. For one thing, my romantic partner is a man, and some of my closest friends, the people I trust most in the world, are men. But still--in the space of a few years, I've gone from decrying criticisms of patriarchy and saying that patriarchy isn't a real thing, to actively participating in misandry and criticizing popular masculinity without remorse or apology--as much as possible, anyway.

How did that happen? How did a nice, egalitarian woman end up "hating men"? 


Well, feminism has definitely played a role in it, but there's more to it than that. It's given me a lens and a mirror, to reflect on and inspect my own feelings and thoughts. What I slowly discovered was that there were an endless number of habits I'd taken on that were solely for the sake of keeping men comfortable in conversations.

And more, I wasn't the only woman doing this--we were all doing it. From automatically defending men in conversations about rape and abuse, to citing "but I know so many decent guys", to folding into and agreeing with men's opinions whenever they piped up about a topic--even if those opinions disagreed with our own. If a man was upset, I, or someone else, would immediately try to comfort and console him. That doesn't sound like a big deal, but when you add all of that up, it results in a lot of emotional labour.

It goes deeper, too. Take those tendencies away from the allegedly banal setting of Facebook, and contextualize them within relationships. It's hard not to agree with one's father out of a sense of filial duty, even if one disagrees. Worrying about a partner's needs over one's own, even when they would willingly listen to your objections or requests.

As I started to notice those habits of my own, I noticed them in the women around me, too. People who don't fit in the rigid and limited gender binary, such as my trans friends and friends who don't like gender labels, STILL had many of the same habits of consoling men and being timid about expressing their own opinions.

This sounds like quibbling, says part of my brain. Isn't it making something out of nothing? But that part is still subject to all this socialization. How can we talk about any feminist issue when our complaints are downplayed? It's easier to say a woman is entitled and whiny than it is to admit that there are cultural links between, say, child marriage in the much-criticized Middle East and groupie sex culture from the 1970s.

It sounds minor, but these aren't the only habits I've developed. Every woman I know habitually treats walking alone as a small test of will. We carry our keys and memorize how to punch people and make sure we know where our Swiss Army knives are in our purses and pockets, "just in case". The chance of sexual assault is just treated as a fact of life, something to dread but accept as a risk. Women plan their routes around trying not to be alone, and go to bathrooms as a group, for just this reason. It becomes unconscious--until, at some point, one wonders why they always reach for a knife or a cell phone when walking alone, and considers that maybe, just maybe, that's messed up.

But what about men? 


Men themselves have reacted in a variety of ways to my changing perspective. A lot of my male friends have expressed discomfort or protested my opinions. More disconcertingly, the same friends will use pretty manipulative arguments to counter my own. Invoking the sacred bonds of friendship--all the more ironic when one has barely talked to a person in private, if ever--and using personal attacks were the most common "counter arguments" I saw. Fortunately, a surprising number have supported this misandry and verbal defiance of societal training, for which I am endlessly grateful. Every time a man does not attack me, verbally or physically, I am relieved.

When I was younger, women would bully me. I hated women, and trained myself to think that men were somehow better; more logical, more objective, and kinder. As I've grown up and started expressing uncomfortable opinions, I've found that male socialization is pretty much the same as female socialization, and that men gossip and express indirect aggression and use personal attacks, too. But where women eventually learn that these attacks do more harm than good, men don't--and I think a lot of women let men get away with them because we're trained to comfort them.

Now that I've actually been on the internet for a while, too, I've noticed that men or apparently male commentors tend to be more dogged and persistent in their attacks. After a while, I could tell the gender of "anonymous" commentors pretty easily just from the style of their comments.


But why kill all men? 


First of all, misandry is mostly a performative thing. At no point would I or any other feminist I know of pick up a gun and just start blasting men left and right, gunning them down. Nor would I suggest that feminists, including myself, go around dealing out rape to fix up gay men and make them like women. Nor would I say that women have the right to keep their male partners in line, as god intended, using force if necessary. Nor would I say that men are obligated to perform sexual services at our whim, and to keep the house clean. I wouldn't say that men need to look good at all times or they're slobs, and deserve harassment. I would not turn a blind eye to abuse of a man by his female partner because "that's just their relationship". I would not assume that his job is to be at home, raising the kids, or in the back of the church, remaining obedient and silent. I would not assume that a man is "asking for it" with the way he is dressed. I would not follow around and harass a man on the internet until he wrote many tearful blog posts about his harassment and stalking. I would not kill men because they had rejected me. I would not say men should not be believed when they say they have survived ugly incidents of sexual assault.  I would not say that men are complaining too much when they ask for more speaking parts in movies, or say that men's mere presence is ruining science fiction and video games. I would not support legislation against male reproductive rights, questioning whether men should be forced to care for accidentally sired children and deal with them from the first moment the cells start to divide--claiming, of course, that clusters of cells and children or babies are the same.

But apparently, men will do this to women, and when we complain about their treatment, continue to say that they're being unfairly maligned. And so that is why I "hate men": it is my way of whistling in the dark, of dealing with the statistical fact that about 1 in 4 North American women are sexual assault survivors--including too many of my friends to count. Being a woman means living under siege.

And you know what's worse? Change "men" to "white people" and "women" to "people of colour", or apply the pattern to disabled people, and the propositions still 'work'. Our world is messed up, and we need to change it.

And I do mean "we". For women, that means striking back against our training and tearing down our fears. For men, that means giving women room to speak, and a willingness to be uncomfortable, and even to give up some power. So, men: let women make jokes in which you are not shown in the best light. Strike back at your own sense of entitlement. Listen to black people, and First Nations people, and Asian people, and brown people (in no particular order) when they talk about their experiences. Listen to trans people and nonbinary people. Listen to disabled people.

Listen. Consider. Do not assume you are right.

Just listen.


***
\Thanks for returning to the nest. Leave a comment and say hi! I want to hear from you. Keep up with the new releases by getting on the mailing list. Buy my books on Amazon, and keep up with me on TwitterFacebook,Tumblr, and the original blog. This is the one and only SciFiMagpie, over and out! 

Friday, 21 February 2014

Blame It On The Girls: Boys in Disney and 'Princess Flicks' in General (Girlcember 10)

Hello hello!

Earlier last month, I watched Frozen and compared it to several other Disney movies. I went for a bit of a blog rummage and had a look at other reactions to the movie. They were evenly split between 'FEMINISM YAY' and 'Grrrr, no PoC and they made a hash of the original narrative of the story'. The PoC criticism is a very fair point, as we all know that Disney seems to drop the ball the minute its main characters are non-white, but the last bit, enh; we should be used to Disney making a hash of folklore by now. (I should mention that Kristoff, by the way, has been officially confirmed as being a Saami person--it may have been done messily, but I ended up learning a bit about the Saami people as a result of the debacle, so there's that, anyway.)

Now, what follows involves

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS 


for Frozen and other Disney flicks. Are we good? Good! Then let's talk about something completely different: the boys.


I noticed something interesting--the male characters in Frozen were really quite stellar. The nameless King, Hans, the Duke of Weaselton, and Kristoff were all portrayed with surprising subtlety. The Duke, for example, was a jerk with mostly good intentions, and was manipulated by Hans. Both Hans and Kristoff were pretty layered characters, which was a nice change. And the King was trying to be a good father, but gave his daughter really bad advice--something Disney fathers aren't usually allowed to do. All of this was a great change from the norm.

A change from what, though? Surely the princes aren't that important in Disney movies; it's more about the women, isn't it?


Prince-i-pals


Therein lies the problem. Male characters don't have a problem with character development and representation in 'non-princess' movies, but for most of Disney's history, the men have had even less character and personality than the princesses. Consider Phoebus from Hunchback of Notre Dame, John Smith from Pocahontas, Adam (the human version of the Beast) from Beauty and the Beast, Eric from The Little Mermaid, and the nameless princes from Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, and Snow White. Granted, the last three are older, but do the newer ones I mentioned really have that much more depth? Sure, there were sequels that expanded on these characters a tiny bit, but the most interesting princes/love interests in the 90s princess movie canon were the Beast (in Beast form), Quasimodo, Aladdin, and Shang-Li. You'll note that these are all societally-rejected or conflicted characters--Shang-Li's abandonment of Mulan on the mountain was very 'unprincely' and memorable. The majority, though, are bland as hell, and much less developed than the princesses. (A comprehensive list of princes and not-quite-princes can be found here.)



Source. Notice any similarities?

In contrast...


Consider princes from the most recent revamps of the franchise--the would-be princes in Brave are played for comedy, and are pretty dorky; Naveen from The Princess and the Frog is probably the most interesting character in the movie, and Kristoff and Hans have plenty of meat to their characterizations. The Prince in Enchanted was at least as interesting and sympathetic as the heroine, with faults to match (though the same cannot be said of Giselle's unmemorable other love interest), but I have to admit to a stumble with Flynn Rider. Flynn--in my opinion--is annoying as hell, but at least his thievery had more consequences than Aladdin's, and came with a deceitful personality. There's something to be said for that. In fact, like Naveen, he was arguably more interesting than Rapunzel herself, and went through more development. Disney has had a tendency to touch on subjects without actually exploring them, so the demonstration of more consequences and depth in a hero's personality and life is a very good progression. Real men (both in the sense of 'good men' and 'actual, 3-D humans that walk around and identify as male) aren't just villains OR heroes. They're lazy, strong, smart, stupid, naive, funny, lame, shy, and awkward; brash, quiet, gentle, sensitive, and sometimes, even boring. We're starting to see that shift, and it's overdue.


Is it changing?



Well, actually, the answer is yes. I don't know if it will lure more boys into the franchises, but at the very least, young girls are getting a better idea of what men can and should be like. Regardless of one's romantic or sexual preferences, getting the idea that men are more than cardboard superhero cutouts with money is pretty important. The idea that male characters can and need to develop right alongside their heroines is simply not there in a lot of female-targeted media. A lot of romance novels tend to blur over that or only add token development to the male leads, when they're not abusive and overly dominant jerks, of course.

So, all of that is very good, and girls deserve examples of realistic men--the song 'Fixer Upper' in Frozen encapsulated why quite beautifully, with the idea that no-one is perfect but love (and patience) can really help--but a constant refrain always punctuates this issue...



Source. Presented without comment.



But...but...princess movies are for girls!


Okay, but do they have to be? I do understand that princess movies are sort of a 'safe space' for a lot of women--girls and grown-ass adults alike--to bond over. However, the fear of boy cooties, much as it may be valid, is foolish and feeds into cloistering of gender roles. I have no doubt that these movies will still continue to be marketed to and written for girls.

This is a serious issue, because it means there's no hook for boys to participate in the princess culture thing easily. I touched on the way girls' toys are segregated in my previous list, and I want to continue with that point here; boys are still stigmatized for liking anything feminine. That's bad both for boys and for girls. Boys do, in fact, knit, bake, paint, and do other artistic things, and they aren't always puff-chested heroes or monsters when they do said things. The problem with assuming boys who do these things are gay is that it forces boys into an awkward feminine camp, to say nothing of the fact that leisure activities have little to do with one's sexuality, if anything.


What needs to be changed?


As always, I like to point the accusatory finger back at the audience rather than just decrying the company. I think Disney is honestly trying, and while they still have a long ways to go with both culture and equal representation, it's more important for us in the audience to adapt. Genderswapping characters and things like the Hawkeye Initiative are great for showing off systemic misogyny and sexism, but women have to take an equal role in making sure that our portrayals of men don't just continue the same negative trends. So, consider inviting a boy or two to that 'Princess movie night'. If you're a writer or artist, consider the way you're portraying men. Are your love interests all 'badass alpha males' or predominantly geeky boys? Are they ripped or otherwise 'perfect'? Is he a rich white dude, or is he a middle-class person of colour? It's time for us as creators to stop making our fictional characters self-inserts, the people we wish we could be or wish we could love. The world has enough cardboard princes. If even Disney can figure that out, so can the rest of us.

*****

Thanks for dropping by the nest once again. Don't miss any of the phuquerie. Find Michelle on TwitterFacebook, and on Tumblr. More interviews and witty commentaries are coming. Keep checking back to see those surprise posts, too. This is your darling SciFiMagpie, over and out! 

Google+