Posts by Megan Wegan
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Cultures and violence, in reply to Chris Waugh,
They are the baseline, the Normal. But that doesn’t make all of them powerful. And the question arises – if success is epitomised and embodied by People Like Me, why I am I, personally, not sharing in that success?
And having privilege doesn't necessarily mean having power. Which is a huge part of the problem. "Everything is supposed to work for me, but I feel powerless. So what am I meant to do? If the world is set up for (white, cis, hetero, able men like me, and I still feel "emasculated", then what alternative do I have but violence?"
And really, I don’t think it’s your place to sort these problem men out. I really do think it’s up to us men to sort our shit out and put an end to male violence against women, children and each other, and it’s up to us white men to put an end to the myth of white male supremacy. And I don’t think we lose anything by doing so – I really think we gain. But if you have any ideas for what I, personally, or men, collectively could be doing better, do share, because I have a daughter and I know what future I want for her.
I don't know. Truly, I don't. I wish I did.
I will say that I don't think it's just up to men. It's my job, because it affects me and my friends. But no, they're not listening to me. I will say, I think it starts at childhood. (And I am really reluctant to tell anyone how to parent.) For a very basic example, we teach girls - and boys - that a boy teasing her, physically and/or emotionally means he likes her. So, when they grow up and have internalised that idea, what are they meant to do when a girl doesn't respond to teasing they way they want? Hollywood tells women that being 'pursued' is romantic. But in real life, if it's unwanted, it's stalking, and it is petrifying. We teach boys not to have feelings, and then are surprised when they can't articulate them.
This is where I get all wanky and feminist and talk about how the patriarchy hurts everyone. If we buy into the belief that men are angry because they're missing out on things they used to have (and as an aside, things they've been missing out on, in the case of women's suffrage, for nearly 100 years in the US - so who is teaching them this?), then we ignore the fact that men can and should be better than that.
To bring it back to shootings, yes, the idea of masculinity is really important. And Wampole is right that we need to have an understanding of that. But I don't think that we serve anyone well when we talk about what men have "lost" to others. Shouldn't we talk about what they have to gain?
-
Hard News: Cultures and violence, in reply to Russell Brown,
(And I don't read that piece as though she's describing your boys. I'm sorry if I implied that it did.)
-
And I have been the victim of violence at the hands if the kind of men she's describing. Can we agree to politely disagree, please?
-
someone has to engage these men and bring them along because some of (a lot of them) have fucking bushmaster semi automatics.
OK, and I ask this sincerely, because I really do want to do something about this, and I genuienly don't know what, but why does it have to be me? Why isn't it you guys.
Because the guys carrying weapons, aren't very likely to listen to me.
-
Hard News: Cultures and violence, in reply to Russell Brown,
OK, I was going to sit on this overnight, but since I can’t sleep, here goes.
Sorta. The words you’ve quoted, inside quote marks, do not appear anywhere in the column you’re quoting.
Um. They really do. The full paragraph:
For women, things are looking up. We can vote, we can make more choices about our bodies than in decades past, we’ve made significant progress regarding fair pay, and more women are involved in American politics than ever before. The same can be said for minorities. However, because resources are limited, gains for women and minorities necessarily equal losses for white males. Even if this feels intuitively fair to many, including those white males who are happy to share resources for the greater benefit of the nation as a whole, it must feel absolutely distressing for those who are uncomfortable with change and who have a difficult time adjusting to the inevitable reordering of society.
And therein lies my problem, and why I (possibly too glibly, but it’s Twitter), invoked Privilege.
There absolutely needs to be a conversation about masculinity and what it means. But if that’s centres around the things that the scary feminists and the civil rights movement took away, it’s not going to get anywhere. And it’s dangerous. Because I agree with Danielle that it pretty heavily implies that women getting the right to vote, control over their bodies, and a fair share of the economic pie means young men get to rage.
I’m not lacking in empathy, though yes, I struggle to find it for someone who killed 20 children. (And I don’t know if Adam Lanza felt this way, or if he had massive mental health issues, or anything, and I dount we ever will. My response to the article wasn’t about him, it was about the idea of “commodities of whiteness and maleness”.)
But I don’t understand that in anyone. I don’t understand what makes people violent. I understand it on a theoretical level, and while I may talk a really good game about punching people in the face, I am well aware that I never actually, could, and I struggle with people advocating it on my behalf.
But I also don’t understand how you can invoke race in a column about gun crime and not mention that young black men are overwhelmingly more likely to die in a gun crime.
Perhaps if we didn’t teach men that they have to be strong, and macho, and not cry, and a combination of Benedict Cumberpatch, Bruce Willis and Anderson Cooper, they’d have an easier time of it. That’s a conversation that is absolutely needed, and in this country as well. That’s what the Chemaly piece does. By not talking about men being “asked to yield what they believed was securely theirs.”
Maybe I over-reacted to that piece. Possibly, it’s because when I read about men’s place in the world being usurped, I think about that Fox News Suzanne Venker piece. Possibly, it’s because when I had the temerity to write about masculinity this week, I was told, within about 4 hours, that I deserve to be raped. Possibly, it’s because I just don’t care that men are having to give up their toys to women and minorities, because it’s about fucking time. It’s not up to us to mop the brow of dudes who can’t handle the fact that women are equal to them, and so are men and women of colour. Because doesn’t that put us right back where we started? Apologising for any gains we might have won, and make it impossible to ask for more. Yes, we need to understand that people are going to struggle with the feeling that they don’t fit and that they’ve lost something, but when you centre it on what men have lost to women and minorities, you ignore the very many men who don’t react violently to that. And you make it an easy excuse. And you also make it really hard to wrest any more power away from them.
-
I admit it. I was wrong. And I take back anything I said. It's the girls' fault.
I would argue that maleness and whiteness are commodities in decline. And while those of us who are not male or white have enjoyed some benefits from their decline, the sort of violence and murder that took place at Sandy Hook Elementary will continue to occur if we do not find a way to carry them along with us in our successes rather than leaving them behind....From the civil rights and feminist movements of the 1960s and onward, young men – and young white men in particular – have increasingly been asked to yield what they’d believed was securely theirs.
SERIOUSLY.
-
Hard News: Cultures and violence, in reply to Russell Brown,
She seems a bit of a nut herself, frankly.
I haven't read it properly, not the commentary, but doesn't she acknowledge that she has mental health issues herself, plus a history of abuse?
-
Hard News: Cultures and violence, in reply to Russell Brown,
The paragraph
Fair call. But the fundamental biological differences between those with and without high levels of testosterone are clear. If you want to modulate testosterone driven behaviour you must acknowledge it is real.
Which I get isn't what Bart was saying.
But we see all the time: Well, we can't do anything about this, because well, men are wired to be aggressive, or whatever. (Or, for that matter, peeps be crazy, or guns are everywhere, or whatever).
When I complained to a friend on Monday about ridiculous high levels of street harassment in Wellington on the weekend, he said..."yeah, men and alcohol". Which a) it's way more complicated than that, and b) stop making it sound like it's a natural way of life, and we can't do anything about it. We can and should.
Anyway, I am aware this is something of a threadjack, so I'll stop.
-
Hard News: Cultures and violence, in reply to Russell Brown,
Point of furious agreement long since reached :-)
Fair and balanced, that's me.
However. I, like Danielle, am wary of anyone who says "oh, but testosterone". The dude who broke my ribs when I was a teenager doesn't get to use that excuse any more than I get to say I provoked him cos I was on the rag.
-
Hard News: Cultures and violence, in reply to Danielle,
I dunno, I am obviously leery. It seems awfully like saying women shouldn’t have control of the nuclear button because once a month they get bitchy.
Yes. This. It's not like women, and young women in particular, are immune to the effects of hormones.
Sure, let's acknowledge that testosterone plays a part in the development and behavior of young men. But let's use that to do a better job of raising them, and explaining hyper-masculine culture, rather than as an excuse?