Rolling Maleness and Masculinity Discussion Thread

Same as mookieproof - At 6'4", pretty much anywhere I stand, I'm going to block someone's view, so I'm most comfortable against a wall or at the bar if there's one with sightlines. Don't feel the need to be 10' from the stage anymore. But if I'm on the floor, like you, if there's one taller person in the venue, I always laugh that they'll move in front of me.

Speaking from experience and the anecdotes of others, tall white dudes at concerts are equal-opportunity dickholes to everyone. I don't know how many times I've probably very nearly gotten mashed for berating a dude 1.3333 times my size because he parked himself directly in front of a woman .5 his size.

some hard-to-say real talk coming up: afaict you are seeing this show of hostility through a competitive lens. to me, that kind of aggressive behavior is hostility. there is no chance of me "winning" that encounter. i have been studiously monitoring my choice of attire to ensure that i am not singled out as a person to grope for over 2 decades. by myself for about 10 years or so. it's tiring and yet i keep doing it because i enjoy going to shows. but like it's not a competitive environment. half the people don't walk into the show knowing "their team" will lose. i am no one's rival, opponent, or enemy. i am merely attending a musical performance.

i'm not even saying that monitoring my attire works, it's just a preventative measure that makes me feel safer
going to a musical performance can be dangerous for lots of reasons for lots of people, but that doesn't make it competitive

I agree with you re: this action being hostile.

This is not, from my viewpoint, an either/or situation; there is a competitive "I must have the best vantage point in the house" streak married with "I belong here more than you" hostility that informs all of this.

I guess "I must have the best vantage point in the house" is not something I even consider within my grasp 99% of the time -- I just go where I feel comfortable and can (hopefully) see what I want to see. The idea that I must (or even might) get "the best" view rarely enters my mind tbh. On the occasions when it does, I park myself there early and wait patiently. If I'm lucky, I will have a buddy to talk to.

"competitive streak" otm -- i don't think i have one, or it's very weak

It's basically a competition which the majority of the participants hadn't been informed of. Like so many of the pissing contests particular dudes perpetuate to the bemusement of everyone else.

i'm sorry you guys. that all sounds sucky. i look like a taller combination of larry, daryl, and his other brother daryl so people just tend to leave me alone. and give me room.

i tend to stay in the back when i see music. as long as i can hear it i'm good.

Im 6 3. i block people's view all the time, even though i never try and get close to the stage at shows. i have had aggro dudes give me shit for it. i don't hardly go to shows anymore so it all works out in the end

if there is an unhealthy injection of competition into a noncompetitive sphere, and it makes people feel bad because it's accompanied by hostility, let's try to squash that
just an idea

I think it's a capital idea. It might be a harder sell with those who are doing the unhealthy injecting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncSkQ4nOmiQ

metal shows are a whole other kettle of fish

indeed
i still think it's worth trying even if it is a hard sell. none of this is going to be easy.

go to shows with seating, problem solved

I once saw a woman in general admission at a concert aggressively box out a couple of kids (probably 8 & 10 yrs old) when they were trying to move up for a better view. Those front row fans will fight anyone for position.

xp
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSRU1G44fMGAdSeqFGLDZN5XziWU7IN6sVK4bdgFRN951g_rM6x

a friend recently confided to me that he treats moving in public spaces as a competition, so that he races against others to get to the next staircase or train platform faster than the people around him. He says he can’t help it, it’s not particularly pleasurable for him. I felt sorry for him!

I can relate. I have a similar mindset. It’s less about a race for me and more about optimization. I don’t want to beat you somewhere, I just want to get there as efficiently and quickly as possible.

this guy wants to beat you, it’s not about optimization

more about optimization

if you train your brain to solve problems all the time, it will find new problems to solve, even when they are not worth solving.

People are just obstacles, not competitors to me. I don’t know which is worse.

Competition is not inherently bad.

quoth treesh in response to tombot's assertion that 'when you’re under 25 you are still just a simian with a little less hair':

This is dehumanizing rhetoric and can only serve to alienate young men from feminist perspectives. I mostly see male feminists talking this way — people like Stephen Marche who wrote a column in the Times about the bestial nature of male sexuality. I don’t know why it’s considered constructive to make these essentialist arguments but people are doing it. Seems to have little to do with the purpose of the #metoo movement, which as I understood it was about stopping sexual harassment and assault, not insisting that we are all guilty in the eyes of God style fatalism.

I've been thinking about this a bit in light of a debate I went to about masculinity which had a lot of discussion about how we treat boys growing up and so on. this idea that there is a beastly predatory side to masculinity is v deeply ingrained and not at all unique to feminism - it's ubiquitous; it's the dad who's suspicious of his daughter's boyfriend. the other side of the coin to this distrust and dislike of other men is, ofc, a fraternity based on shared bad boy urges, that collective letting off steam after you're tired from fighting yr own bestial nature all the time cf. porn.

possibly related: I think a lot of men feel worthless in a particular sort of way. this idea that implicit in the notion that men have to prove themselves and be active, while women are prizes, is that men are in and of themselves worthless. it's tied to male homelessness, suicide, at least some criminal behaviour and general disregard of their own welfare. I think it's easy for men to embrace this under the guise of feminism or morality or whatever. but yeah, I wonder about nature and nurture and the effect of this understanding of masculinity on boys, on how they are treated and viewed and how they internalise it.

great post

this idea that implicit in the notion that men have to prove themselves and be active, while women are prizes, is that men are in and of themselves worthless.

"seed dispensers" iirc

I might argue that the subtext there is less that men are in and of themselves worthless and more that said worthlessness is framing device erected so that the women who get chewed up by the patriarchy have something philosophically comforting to fall back on (see also Christianity and slavery in the US).

only it's not comforting at all

...or a passive-aggressive ploy to fish for reassurance and require emotional labor of women?

He: I'm worthless because I haven't yet slain a mammoth for you.

She: Oh no, sweetie, don't tear yourself down so. You're great at gathering mosses!

i'm terrible at gathering mosses :(

I'm a loser baby, so why don't you kill me

emotional labour definitely feeds into this. its hard to be tender or loving with someone you don't trust. i don't think it's a ploy though, in general, even if, like everything else, it is sometimes deployed manipulatively.

Hey you can't spell manipulative w out man

or egomaniac

It doesn't have to be a ploy; it's endemic to the way our society is set up to function and how men and women are socialized to interact with each other.

The Laura kipnis article I posted in the Weinstein thread may have some relevance here

"the pedestal which is really a cage" is a great quote re: this. googled it just now and found that it's somehow attributed to RBG, but I remember reading it in a 90s catharine mackinnon book

ok so that mackinnon book is from 1984. maybe the aphorism itself is older than that even.

quoth treesh in response to tombot's assertion that 'when you’re under 25 you are still just a simian with a little less hair':

This is dehumanizing rhetoric and can only serve to alienate young men from feminist perspectives. I mostly see male feminists talking this way — people like Stephen Marche who wrote a column in the Times about the bestial nature of male sexuality. I don’t know why it’s considered constructive to make these essentialist arguments but people are doing it. Seems to have little to do with the purpose of the #metoo movement, which as I understood it was about stopping sexual harassment and assault, not insisting that we are all guilty in the eyes of God style fatalism.
I've been thinking about this a bit in light of a debate I went to about masculinity which had a lot of discussion about how we treat boys growing up and so on. this idea that there is a beastly predatory side to masculinity is v deeply ingrained and not at all unique to feminism - it's ubiquitous; it's the dad who's suspicious of his daughter's boyfriend. the other side of the coin to this distrust and dislike of other men is, ofc, a fraternity based on shared bad boy urges, that collective letting off steam after you're tired from fighting yr own bestial nature all the time cf. porn.

possibly related: I think a lot of men feel worthless in a particular sort of way. this idea that implicit in the notion that men have to prove themselves and be active, while women are prizes, is that men are in and of themselves worthless. it's tied to male homelessness, suicide, at least some criminal behaviour and general disregard of their own welfare. I think it's easy for men to embrace this under the guise of feminism or morality or whatever. but yeah, I wonder about nature and nurture and the effect of this understanding of masculinity on boys, on how they are treated and viewed and how they internalise it.

― ogmor, Tuesday, December 5, 2017 11:17 AM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

These are good posts and also bring up something I've been thinking about a lot lately, which is the relationship (and whether there is a necessary relationship) between male feminism and self-effacement. I tend to agree with Treesh that there's really no good that can come of the Stephen Marche brand of fantasy ("Oh, we men are so horrible in our dark souls!"), and that this almost results in a kind of underhanded inversion of feminism, or a subtle justification of the status quo. Relatedly, I think there is a danger in attaching only negative connotations to the sorts of traits we have historically seen as male -- aggression, competition, etc. Instead I like to think that (1) aggression and competition can be channeled in less harmful ways (2) women can also be more encouraged and permitted to express aggressive and competitive feelings (3) we can teach men not to do things like grope women without teaching them never to be aggressive or competitive. In fact #3 seems like it shouldn't even need saying, but based on the writings of people like Marche it obviously does.

And relatedly, there's no reason the same man (or woman) can't have both aggressive and sensitive tendencies, and why not encourage both? Why not try to allow for healthy ways to express the entire range of human emotion?

Why say 'self-effacement' when we can just say castration?

xp to preserve the status quo :(

at least that is what it seems like for me

afaict the sort of change you are describing requires women to be seen as equal to men in every way and that clearly still makes some people (people in prestige positions?) uncomfortable.

good posts. glad to see real discussion!

xp - i think it's because self-effacement is not actually castration

I don't know what "positive" aggression or competitiveness look like (outside of, like, competitive sports)

I've been working in a woman-owned law firm since summer, one that also has a few old-school alpha male types, and it's been interesting to see the dynamics at play, but ultimately I think it's so good for the work environment to have more of a balance of power between men and women. I have seen for example how when a female colleague was uncomfortable with the way a male higher-up treated her (not sexual but just overly aggressive in a way that I think some men are more socialized to tolerate but that probably isn't good for anyone). The woman felt very comfortable going to the female boss about it, the boss made sure the male supervisor got the message, he listened, and everything was fine in the end. None of this makes the workplace more stressful or "uptight," -- if anything, less so. It's the most comfortable place to work I've worked so far.

I don't know what "positive" aggression or competitiveness look like (outside of, like, competitive sports)

― Simon H., Wednesday, December 6, 2017 10:26 AM (four minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Trying to excel at something, for example, has an element of aggression to it and can have an element of competitiveness to it as well in the right context. If you are in a class that is graded on a curve, for example, you are necessarily competing with your peers. I guess you could argue that we just shouldn't have classes graded on curves, but as long as we do it seems perfectly reasonable and healthy to try to do as well as you can in the class.

I agree with this - I think there is a danger in attaching only negative connotations to the sorts of traits we have historically seen as male - but I don't think aggression is good or particularly masculine, although certain expressions of it obviously are. A lot of the efforts to identify masculine behaviour seem incredibly superficial to me. I think you could address all of the obviously troublesome stuff and still have characteristically male behaviour. I also don't really buy the implicit suggestion that gender differences actually decrease as you go 'up the class ladder' or whatever, I just think the expressions are subtler (cf the cute phrase "the gentrification of masculinity" in a grayson perry doc which has stayed with me).

I think some of it is that even the word "aggression" has a negative connotation, but if we think of, e.g., the feeling a person gets as they are out for a run and trying to make it up a very steep hill and trying to give themselves that extra boost to make it over, that's in some sense an "aggressive" feeling, but the connotation of "aggressive" is I guess taking things from other people or using power against others in unfair ways.

I would describe the former sensation as determination, not aggression. Aggression is inherently interpersonal.