Real Men Don't Need "Special Rights"

Fri, 2007-11-30 17:48


Photo by Flickr user S.Languay. Used under a Creative Commons license.

So… some bozo writing for Redbook magazine rehashes a plate full of stereotypes about men and tries to call it “male secrets.” And some (relatively uncharacteristic) bozo at WebMD decides his site has to channel it.

Jeff Fecke, at Blog of the Moderate Left has a nice takedown…

Last night, I had a pain in my knee. (Probably bursitis; nothing major.) At any rate, I went to WebMD to check my symptoms and reassure myself that it was, indeed, nothing major, and I came across their list of most-read stories. Number one on that list? “11 ‘Don’t-Tell-the-Wife’ Secrets All Men Keep.”

Really? “All Men?”

The pain in my knee receding into the background, I opened up the story. And it did not disappoint in its craptacularness.

Like all “X things that are absolutely true about any given gender” stories, it was a mix of things that are true for all human beings, things that aren’t true for all human beings, things that aren’t true for all men but are supposed to be, and things that are just naked, raw sexism at its worst.

He said it here.

Fecke calls bullshit on each of the 11 “all things true” items in turn. Follow his link, above, if you want to find the original WebMD post as I’d rather not send them the traffic.

Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon takes her own stabs at the list. One that really hits home to me:

Secret #4: Earning money makes us feel important

In more than 7.4 million U.S. marriages, the wife earns more than the husband — almost double the number in 1981. This of course is a terrific development for women in the workplace and warmly embraced by all American men, right? Right?

Yeah, well, that’s what we tell you. But we’re shallow, competitive egomaniacs. You don’t think it gets under our skin if our woman’s bringing home more bacon than we are — and frying it up in a pan?

A lot of people come to me with questions like, “What do you feminists mean by ‘male privilege’?” This is a good example. Can you imagine a woman saying, “I know it’s shallow of me, but I need to make more money than you in order to feel all woman. Would you be a dear and hold back on your career to soothe my ego? Thanks!” while running out the door, sure the answer is yes. We’d rightfully consider that borderline sociopathic unwillingness to be generous to your chosen life partner, if a woman said it. But a man does, and it’s not considered right exactly, but at least just a cute “boys will be boys” matter that women are expected to tolerate.

She said it here.

See? It really is male privilege to say “By the way, hon, my ego is more important than you so do you mind, like, y’know, handicapping yourself economically? Besides, like, I can’t get it up if I’m not earning more money than you.”

It’s also… um… well, since it’s mostly conservatives[*] who are into this whole male-dominance thing, isn’t it worth pointing out that asking women to deliberately sideline themselves so they don’t outperform their partners sort of… like… affirmative action for men? I mean, and really, there really did used to be laws like that — in 37 states in the U.S. for instance, during the depression there were laws forbidding women from taking traditional male jobs, especially if they had a working husband. And… really… when you think about all the conservative handwringing over the ill effects of affirmative action on everybody else then doesn’t it stand to reason that… well… look at it this way…

Maintaining social conventions, let alone passing legislation, in order to artificially bolster the self-esteem of men by, say, handicapping otherwise perfectly capable, competitive women means you think men are really wimps, babies needing momma and daddy to pretend they’re really all grown up…

Now if we lived in such a society then we might predict a particularly mollycoddled set of men men would come up with, and make most popular on WebMD, a list of, oh, say, eleven fictional “truisms” they believe excuses them of any maturity, responsibility, authority, equality, choice, or authenticity. (Oh wait!)

Actually, as Marcotte puts it

...this entire list is insulting to men. Yes, it insults them in a way that a lot of men embrace, because it lets them off the hook for both house work and emotional work. But it paints men like little babies that immediately start to whine the moment even a minor task is asked of them.

Yeah, weird how anti-feminists who go on and on about “male bashing” feminists never notice how much utter bullshit they routinely bury men in! Sheesh! Thanks but no thanks, guys. I have a feeling real women like real men, not little boys all pretending to be big while wimping out on pretty much all responsibility that doesn’t involve bringing home money and shooting at something (each of which the average woman seem able to do about as well as the average man, or could if law, convention, stereotype, and fragile ego didn’t get in the way.)

[**] Yes, yes, some progressives too, but they’re generally chagrined rather than smug when called on it.

Submitted by 1785 (not verified) on Sun, 2007-12-02 04:40.

That is a great picture. You can feel that child's exuberance.

Submitted by 1785 (not verified) on Sat, 2007-12-01 16:02.

Redbook publishing generalized Top 10 lists to sell advertising shill disguised as a magazine is par for the course of that industry. I just can't believe it was the top viewed story on WebMD.

I just want to ask those baby boys conservatives if that view hold true if it was a matter of survival, that your household need two incomes just to survive. Have they asked any men working minimum wage or less, trying to support a family about this? How much do you want to bet that ego waggling becomes less of an issue under those circumstances?

Thank you for such a great post.

Submitted by 1785 (not verified) on Fri, 2007-11-30 19:35.

The breadwinner ideal is one of the Weebles of male privilege; it wobbles but won't fall down. I consistently hear at least half of my male students embrace it, usually with really subtle statements like "I want/expect to earn more than my future wife." It's hard to counter, because it's often paired with some notion of responsibility for children, which most of us would consider a *good* thing. Sure, you can argue (and I do) that men ought to view responsibility for their offspring more expansively, but at that point the debate has already shifted away from male privilege.

And yeah, figleaf, I'm glad you pointed out that men have enjoyed affirmative action in the workplace at least since the birth of capitalism. To take another example: German law mandated higher wages for male industrial workers from the early twentieth century until well after WWII, and the trade unions vigorously defended it. Prior to about 1900, German husbands owned their wives' income. Most of the Western world seems to have had similar legislation.

Amanda Marcotte also nailed this dude on relegating all the *emotional* work to wives, too. She could've said more yet about how the two spheres are totally interconnected. That is, when men feel they've discharged all their responsibility by bringing home a paycheck, they can delude themselves into thinking that it's their female partner's job to keep everyone (kids, man, and self) happy and satisfied. (For those who followed the links back to the original posts, this relates to point no. 8 from the Redbook article, which holds that men are too cretinous to understand relationship talk.)

[Ooh, good point about the even-more-downside of the provider business. And to be perfectly honest I think not wanting to be *emotionally* involved with my children would be... um... psychotic? I mean they're *your children!* What part of "your" doesn't compute in a sentence like that? Thanks, Sungold! --fl]

Submitted by 1785 (not verified) on Sat, 2007-12-01 15:26.

My husband must be a freak, because I've always earned more than him, and he's always been, not only fine with it, but proud of me. To him it just means WE earn more money. Hell, that's what it means to me, too

However, I have the more portable career, while he's in academia (and thus subject to the whims of the academic marketplace), so I've moved twice for the sake of his job. But I knew that from the start, so I can't really complain.

And ugh. Why do people feel the need to write such crap?

Submitted by 1785 (not verified) on Fri, 2007-11-30 19:55.

I can't believe they hauled out the "woman drivers" one. I honestly thought that had died out around the time sitcoms started showing couples with one bed.

For the record, I own a car that's nearly as old as I am and I've driven her from Canada to Mexico and back again. I know how to fix her, I know how to take her off-road and handle her on ice, I've gotten her up to 110mph on the desert straightaways, I've never gotten a ticket or been in an accident, and there isn't a damn thing manly about any of that.

I'm stealing the line here, but: If competence is a guy thing, I'll strap it on.

[Hmm... It never occurred to me but yeah, the authors of that article could have been in their 60s or 70s, in which case maybe they would still be talking about the whole "women drivers" thing... and maybe "them bra-burning wimmin's libbers" too. And even then they should be old enough to know better. :-) Thanks, Holly. --fl]

User login