From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: Philosophy for Gordon (Was Re: Choice for men)
Date: 28 Sep 92 18:39:07 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.002219.991@panix.com> gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
>In spite of the title, this was about draft registration
>most recently.  I suggested draft registration is part of a
>larger problem which I call the "culture of violence."
>
>gf:
>| >| >      ...  Instead of attacking feminism, men could be 
>| >| >using feminist analyses to decode their own problems.  
>
>hg:
>| Is the following feminist analyses?
>| #War provides men with the perfect psychological backdrop to give vent
>| #to their contempt for women.  The very maleness of the military -
>| #the brute power of weaponry exclusive to their hands, the spiritual
>| #bonding of men at arms, the manly discipline of orders given and
>| #orders obeyed, the simple logic of the hierarchical command - confirms
>| #for men what they long suspect, that women are peripheral, irrelevant
>| #to the world that counts, passive spectators to the action in the
>| #center ring.
>|                 -- ("Against Our Will", Susan Brownmiller)
>| 
>| What should I make with such "analyses" that contradicts so much
>| the way I felt in the army?  
>
>It depends what you're trying to do.  If you're looking for
>a stick to beat feminism with, you can focus on the apparent
>blanket condemnation of men in the first sentence.  If
>you're looking for usable ideas, you'll probably find the
>passage superficial and look for something else.  Which do
>you want to do?

Actually, neither (though I agree that it's misandrous and superficial).
An interesting game to play is to try to reverse it (being as sexist
an generalizing as possible):

    Family provides women with the perfect psychological backdrop to give 
    vent to their contempt for men.  The very femaleness of the family --
    the cunning power of femininity and maternity exclusive to their hands,
    the spiritual bonding in midwivery and parenting, the womanly craft
    of orders given and orders evaded, the simple logic of religious
    mother-worship -- confirms for women what they long suspect, that men 
    are peripheral, irrelevant to the world that counts, frustrated 
    spectators to the action in the center ring.
                   -- ("Against Whose Will?", apologies to Brownmiller)


Is this "game" at all useful?  I would suggest that it provides some
usable ideas:  an outspoken declaration of typically unrecognized/hidden
societal sexism against men; a clear caution against accepting feminism 
as a movement for equality; a possible way to achieve the same political
power as feminists.

I don't suggest using it to bash feminism, or as a way to achieve
political power (I don't think men will be able to use the "victim"
approach), or as a particularly accurate way to imagine society.

It does provide a grain of salt for interpreting some feminist statements, 
however, and some explicit points for discussion of men's issues.
Is family life like that?  What sorts of sexism are being overlooked
by society, media, politics?  What are the penalties of sexist beliefs 
for men themselves?  What should men do for equality?  Are there reasons 
to believe men will benefit from an equal society?

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged