Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Like A Thief In The Night Previous entry: Rowdy Roddy Reporter In “They Lie”

Men Speak Out and much is learned

Books

Not too long ago, a friend of a friend joking-aggressively asked me while we were out and about what the difference between misogyny and sex is.  Mind you—-we were sober.  So I kind of blinked at him and was like, “Come again?”  I know the game Bait The Feminist, but this one didn’t even make a lot of sense.  He tried to clarify, but it wasn’t helping.  I kept thinking he was trying to imply that feminists think straight male sexual desire itself is somehow anti-woman, but he knows that I can’t possibly think that, so I was confused.  Later I thought about it and decided to give him the benefit of the doubt—-maybe there are men out there who really do struggle to find a way to desire women that doesn’t have a backlog of misogyny and resentment towards women.  God knows that our culture doesn’t do much to help men out in this regard, and in fact encourages men to resent women for being desireable, and to rectify the dissonance between feeling vulnerable towards women because you desire them and feeling superior to women because of your social station by making the act of intercourse a symbolic conquering of the female body.  In case that sort of heady language is confusing, a good deal of porn simplifies things by making women choke on cocks, look generally uncomfortable, get double-pronged in painful-looking ways, get spat upon, and get called names like “slut” and “whore”. 

Still, I find myself confused.  In my experience, men are not complete fools and are fully capable of choosing to define sexual desire for themselves in ways that aren’t dominating and cruel towards women.  There’s even porn out there that’s not that bad.  But I couldn’t help but be concerned—-is it that hard to tell the difference between straight male desire and misogyny?  What do feminist men think of this issue?  Lucky for me, Shira Tarrant put together a wonderful anthology of men’s views of feminism called Men Speak Out: Views on Gender, Sex, and Power, and you’ll be gratified to know that not only do the men in this volume understand the distinctions very easily, some of them taught me a thing or two that I hadn’t thought about in this regard.  For women guessing at what men are thinking, the issue of lechery is always confusing—-what percentage is hate/resentment/power play and what percentage is genuine lust when a man looks at you like you’re meat, grabs at you, or hollers at you from a car?  From the men in this anthology who have the privilege of not only having male brains themselves, but access to male-only spaces where men are a little more open about these things, the answer becomes clear: It’s 100% about power.  Genuine lust is something you feel on the inside and is idiosyncratic and under your control.  Men aren’t so different than women after all.  But expressing your sexuality in a way that establishes your power is something done to feel strong, to dominate, to show off to other men, and to satisfy insecurities.  And that is why lecherous gazes, wolf whistles, and calling someone a “cunt” from a moving vehicle is not, contrary to the claims of anti-feminists, a “compliment”.  It’s an expression of dominance, a way for men to signal to themselves, to women, and especially to other men that they are ranked higher than women.


From the men in this volume, I got clarity on this issue.  I also learned something else that is more painful—-women who play along with male lechery, who perform the role of the supplicant by undressing for the “Girls Gone Wild” crew or otherwise by resolving this issue by pretending that this is about lust, and not power, are in fact being laughed at by the men who coaxed them into it, and pitied by others who didn’t.  Ugly, but true.  I’m not talking about making yourself up to be sexy, or having fun in sexy situations where you have real power.  But more the women who perform humiliating sexual behaviors for men that they don’t enjoy outside of the fact that there’s a surface approval papered over male contempt for them.  Luckily, most of the men in this volume may pity women who play along, but they drip with contempt for men who express their sexuality in these homosocial, misogynist rituals like harassing women on the street, or talking smack about women you have sex with in male-only spaces.  So that made me happy. 

There’s a lot more going on in this book than an examination of lechery, but I liked the ways different men touched on that issue, because they bring a lot of clarity to an issue that feminists have made more complex than maybe it is.  We’re so focused on women’s survival mechanisms that we fail sometimes to talk about the basics, which is why the dominant class acts out in specific ways. Not that the first discussion isn’t absolutely necessary, but it’s often conducted at the expense of the latter, and this book goes a long way towards rectifying that problem.  There’s stories in here of men confronting each other in various ways on the issue of sexually humiliating women on various levels, from the most mild example of confronting young men using a girl’s legs for homosocial boundary maintenance (admit you were staring at her, or have your admission to the heterosexual group questioned) to more serious issues, like groping women in public to show off your dominance to a heart-warming story of a man brought into feminist activism by a TV show that promoted rape and violence against women.

Men also talk about the interesting problem of deciding between relinquishing privileges and utilizing them for the greater good, which isn’t always that easy a distinction for a feminist man to make.  The book is thankfully light on the tedious discussion of whether or not men can be called “feminists”, a discussion that makes me say, “Call yourself hoodwinks, for all I care, but get on board!”  There’s insights into the men’s rights movement, into fatherhood for feminist men, into the pressures of fitting masculine standards that value dominance and cruelty, and into queer sexualities and masculinity.  I would have liked a little more examination from men into why it’s so easy to let women do all the shit work in our feminist era, but apparently, that sore spot is a discussion for another time.  Maybe Shira Tarrant can put together that book?  Men Talk About Housework, Child Care, And Why Equality In This Area Still Slips Away.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 07:53 PM • (101) Comments

Wonderful post.  I love your longer posts like this one, they always give me different ways of thinking about things that I hadn’t thought of before.

Comment #1: kmeyer57  on  06/30  at  08:34 PM

Your male acquaintance was probably confused over lust vs. objectification.  I’m also curious about the distinction.

Comment #2: pablo  on  06/30  at  08:55 PM

I remember when my husband taught me the distinction between “guys” and “men.”  The point he made was similar to this.  The guy will show off for other guys and make an ass out of himself through lechery, but a real man doesn’t have to because he’s completely comfortable with himself and because he doesn’t feel the dog-like need to be in a pack.

Comment #3: Spooky Skeptic  on  06/30  at  08:56 PM

As a man whose ex-wife used to do much (way too much) of the cleaning, I have to say that my ability to not mind a mess hasn’t changed one bit now that the toilet and laundry and dishes and whatnot are solely my responsibility.  Things pile up, but there’s now no one around who will judge herself harshly if the work doesn’t get done.  If there’s privilege there, it wasn’t coming from me.  But I was still a beneficiary.  Did I take advantage, or was the advantage given?  Does it matter?  Somewhat, but I doubt it was in the top five things that caused our breakup.

Now that we’re divorced, I often find myself laughing a bit when she complains about how tired she is after work, how there isn’t much time for cleaning, how behind she is on television, how little she sees her friends and family, how hard it is to go to school and work, and otherwise say all sorts of other things I had said oh so many times.  Privileges aren’t really noticed as much until their gone.

In the meantime, I’ll clean the toilet when I get to it.

Comment #4: jon  on  06/30  at  08:58 PM

Damnit!  That should be “they’re gone” not “their gone.”  And to think I majored in English….

Comment #5: jon  on  06/30  at  09:01 PM

Thank you Amanda.  Your exploration of these gender politic issues is dead on, at least from the male end.  Since you seem interested, I thought I’d add my views on the question you left in the last paragraph:

I would have liked a little more examination from men into why it’s so easy to let women do all the shit work in our feminist era

I will first disclose that I myself am a male, albeit one who respects women and is also open-minded, and who tries not to project my own issues on the opposite sex.

But I think the reason “it is easy” is because in this day and age women make the decision about who they sleep with and who they have a relationship with.  Our parent’s don’t arrange our marriages anymore, and women aren’t consider homemakers and obedient house-wives anymore, so in this new vacuum women get to choose who they want to be with and men have to accept their choices.

If a women is not attracted to you, there is nothing you can do.  It’s not about being “cool”, “suave”, or “understanding” or anything at all really.  Women are attracted to whomever they are attracted to for any number of reasons, and most of them defy understanding unless you know them.  Some women are gold-diggers.  Some women are attracted to dominant men.  Some women are afraid of reliquishing control and their insecurities cause them to seek out those men who don’t subconsciously challenge their sense of inadequacy.  Some women need every man to notice and/or love them.

The list goes on— but I don’t think men are leaving all “the shit work” because it is easy.

I get just as irritated with the shallow minds of men who can only talk tits and ass, as I get irritated with women who don’t listen to anything you have to say. 

Men either feel that they don’t have a choice (a hope or a prayer), or—like some people, a few women included—they just don’t understand any better because their whole life is about fulfilling their own ego.

Again, I am just offering these thoughts.  I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Take care.

Comment #6: ginardo napoli  on  06/30  at  09:04 PM

my ability to not mind a mess hasn’t changed one bit now that the toilet and laundry and dishes and whatnot are solely my responsibility.  Things pile up, but there’s now no one around who will judge herself harshly if the work doesn’t get done.

In other words, the great thing about being a dude is that not only do you not have to live up to a woman’s needs and desires, but you don’t even have to knowledge them as existing in any legitimate way.  The things you want out of life matter, and your worldview (the difference between dirty and clean, for example) is based on pragmatic thought.  Things important to a woman are barely to be acknowledged, and her worldview is not to be trusted by its very nature.

If there’s privilege there, it wasn’t coming from me.

Yes, sweetie, it was.  Expecting someone else to put her own needs on hold and deny her own way of seeing and understanding the world (and trivializing those needs, desires, views, etc when they aren’t convenient for you) so that you can be more comfortable is the fucking DEFINITION of privilege. 

I’m not even going to touch the “shoe’s on the other foot” bullshit about being busy, not having enough free time, etc.

Comment #7: The Opoponax  on  06/30  at  09:09 PM

Women are attracted to whomever they are attracted to for any number of reasons, and most of them defy understanding unless you know them.

As a bisexual woman, I can tell you that men are exactly the same.  It’s not like men go around fully open to pairing off with anyone with their desired set of sex chromosomes, only to be frustrated by those evil bitches who have the NERVE to be all picky and shit.  I’ve been dumped by what feels like scores of guys because I didn’t happen to have that je ne sais quoi they’re looking for in a long term partner.  And vice versa when I’ve been on the dumping end.  Same has happened with women, and in mostly the same ways.

Comment #8: The Opoponax  on  06/30  at  09:14 PM

Love this post. Thank you, Amanda.

Ginardo, I’m not entirely sure what you’re getting at. I don’t see how not being able to control who someone else is attracted to means you have to leave all the hard work to women. Men don’t get to say whether women will be attracted to them—and women don’t get to say whether men will be attracted to them. I don’t see the connection between that and housework.

(Unless you’re saying, “Men have to jump at the first woman who’s willing to sleep with them, and put up with what she wants,” but in that case…we’re still talking about women having to do all the work. “What she wants” is rarely to cook all the meals and clean all the toilets and run most of the errands. So I’m still confused.)

Also: “women get to choose who they want to be with and men have to accept their choices.” This is different how from men choosing women and women having to accept their choices, as has often historically been the case? Except that now (more often, anyway) both parties get to choose. I don’t see the problem.

Comment #9: Nenya, Vala of Peanut-Butter Cookies  on  06/30  at  09:15 PM

maybe there are men out there who really do struggle to find a way to desire women that doesn’t have a backlog of misogyny and resentment towards women.

Yes. Yes there are.

It sounds like I want to read this book.

men are not complete fools and are fully capable of choosing to define sexual desire for themselves in ways that aren’t dominating and cruel towards women.

Well, men may be capable of choosing this, but it isn’t as simple as you make it sound. It’s not like ordering a different item off the menu. I don’t have a good metaphor for what it IS like, though.

Comment #10: MH  on  06/30  at  09:20 PM

Well, men may be capable of choosing this, but it isn’t as simple as you make it sound. It’s not like ordering a different item off the menu. I don’t have a good metaphor for what it IS like, though.

I didn’t necessarily read that as Amanda saying that it’s easy for men to define sexual desire for themselves, or anything like as easy as ‘ordering a different item off the menu’, anyway.  I would compare it to the struggle that women face in trying to define what it means to be a woman for ourselves, outside the cookie-cutter patriarchal models we’re typically offered.  It’s by no means an easy life to live, but most women who aren’t completely deluded eventually have to fight at least some of those battles if we don’t want to have our humanity snatched away from us.

Comment #11: The Opoponax  on  06/30  at  09:25 PM

Genuine lust is something you feel on the inside and is idiosyncratic and under your control.

Que?

Expressing lust may be under your control, but the feeling itself isn’t.

Comment #12: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  06/30  at  09:37 PM

I think the “shit” work has a lot to do with the fact that women are socialized into the fact that they “have to be” clean, while men are socialized in two ways that make them less likely to do housework: 1)  If you ignore it long enough, a woman will do it for you, and “guys” are dirtier than women anyway.

My personal opinion is that guys could be a little cleaner, on average (with a big standard deviation) and women could, on average, could tolerate being a little messier (I’m a guy, if it isn’t obvious already).  The thing that kills me is watching my wife being unable to tolerate a mess, even when it’s just clothes than can be left till next weekend to be washed.  The way she was raised (in India) is that it HAS to be done NOW or it will gnaw at her.  My male upbringing and harsh practicality mean that I don’t care until I don’t have anything to wear to work (it happened a couple of times when my wife and I were separated due to schooling for a year).  Over time, my wife and I have tried to come to more of an average, although I’ll admit she still does more of the work than I do.  Our household is kind of funny in that we’ve split up duties by type rather than “you do dishes one day, I’ll do them another day,” we do “you do dishes, I’ll do vacuuming, you do cat litter,” etc. 

I would like to see a day when people argue on equal footing over why they didn’t have clothes to wear to work, rather than “why didn’t you wash clothes honey?”  (i.e. my preference is for people of equal cleanliness requirements to find one another and for the bullshit expectations that women will do all of the work to just go away). 

It doesn’t help when a lot of women raise their boys to be “momma’s boys” either.  My mom tried to do that with me and my friend’s mom did it to him.  Ick.

Comment #13: BlazingDragon  on  06/30  at  09:37 PM

my dad SWEARS he isn’t a feminist; this declaration makes me giggle. (not that he is anti-feminist in any way. my dad is the person who inspired me most to become a feminist)

he works (and works and works! he loooooooooooves his job and typically works 70 hours a week. willingly) my step mom doesn’t work.

my dad does half the housework. well, a third at the moment, because i have to live with them because of my medical situation, and i do a lot of it. but when i can’t do something, HE does. he does more than my step-mom, really.

Comment #14: denelian  on  06/30  at  09:47 PM

The thing that kills me is watching my wife being unable to tolerate a mess, even when it’s just clothes than can be left till next weekend to be washed.

Why is this sort of thing ALWAYS framed as a deficiency in the woman rather than a failure of the guy to invest in better standards? 

I’ve noticed, in my living arrangement with a guy wherein I am generally the sloppier and lazier one, that no matter the specifics of who wants what, my personal tastes on the matter are the “wrong” ones, whereas as feminist as my roommate is, somehow his standards of cleanliness and ideas about what needs to be done when and how, and whose responsibility it should be, are always the correct ones.  The last time I lived with men, I had the higher standards and, magically, even though my approach to housework hasn’t really changed much (in fact, I’m probably neater now, if anything), I was cast as the obsessive neatfreak who refused to relax about everything having to be done NOW.

Comment #15: The Opoponax  on  06/30  at  09:49 PM

Brilliant, Amanda.  It’s really scary to think that (some of) the men who desire us hate us at the same time.

But I think the reason “it is easy” is because in this day and age women make the decision about who they sleep with and who they have a relationship with.

So do men.

Comment #16: SarahMC  on  06/30  at  09:55 PM

Great post and very relevant considering recent events. I guess all that women can do is to be smart enough to know what is in their best interest and secure enough to wait for it. Emotional equality is paramount, the rest usually follows.

The “guys” vs “men” analogy in another comment was spot on and can be further illustrated by the simple fact that confidence and persistence are usually attractive whereas arrogance and oppression are not. And there’s no great mystery as to why guys who don’t respect women seem to only date women who don’t respect themselves. Still, that need to feel superior is self defeating.

Comment #17: meingoldcountry  on  06/30  at  09:59 PM

Pablo: objectification is reducing someone to an object.  I’m really unsatisfied with the concept as a tool to critique sexism, because it does get conflated with “being lustful towards someone”.  Women get objectified in ways outside of sex—-we’re objectified as walking wombs, as sources of cheap labor, etc.

Comment #18: Amanda Marcotte  on  06/30  at  10:12 PM

Expressing, then, Piator.  And yes, men can feel lust without screaming, “Suck it, cunt!” at someone in order to show their friends how cool they are.  In fact, I’d argue that contrary to the strenuous claims of sexists, “Suck it, cunt” is not a compliment about someone’s great beauty at all, but an expression of power disguised as said, um, “compliment”.

Comment #19: Amanda Marcotte  on  06/30  at  10:17 PM

women who play along with male lechery, who perform the role of the supplicant by undressing for the “Girls Gone Wild” crew or otherwise by resolving this issue by pretending that this is about lust, and not power, are in fact being laughed at by the men who coaxed them into it, and pitied by others who didn’t.

how is that in any way surprising? i think that is the obvious assumption.

Comment #20: chibi  on  06/30  at  10:32 PM

Well, there’s so much feminist interest in what women get out of that, and in order for that inquiry to be properly complex, we have to pretend that men aren’t just sitting around being proud of themselves for being able to get the women to humiliate themselves for their pleasure.  All the talk of choice and empowerfulness seems a bit stupid if you realize that the intended audience sees only degradation.

Comment #21: Amanda Marcotte  on  06/30  at  10:42 PM

Your acquaintance sounds like the kind of guy who blames feminism when some woman in a bar rejects his offer to buy her a beer. I don’t think anyone can honestly confuse misogyny and lust, and anyone who’s intelligent enough to formulate the question can figure it out on their own. Guys like your acquaintance know perfectly well that they resent women for making them feel vulnerable, and they know how they and their male friends talk about women when there are no women around. They’re just disingenuously whining so they can blame someone else for their petty feelings. I don’t doubt that there are men who are honestly troubled by their conflicting feelings towards women and deserve to be leveled with, but they aren’t the men who try to bait feminists.

Comment #22: junk science  on  06/30  at  10:56 PM

>what percentage is hate/resentment/power play and what percentage is genuine lust when a man looks at you like you’re meat, grabs at you, or hollers at you from a car? [...] It’s 100% about power.

I’m partly on board here, and partly not, and I want to ask about these categories. Yes, looking at someone “like [they’re] meat” is of course denigrating by definition, in that it is reducing someone to flesh. Grabbing a stranger is assault and maybe battery, and hollering out of a car is unquestionably rude. So it’s a very easy logical step to the conclusion that these are 100% about power, at least in the sense that they at least require exploiting one’s power, and maybe in the sense that they necessarily involve flexing it or exhibiting it.

But the logical connection there is so tight, there’s no interesting question about it.

What’s interesting to me—and something I’m curious to hear your response to—is whether “lecherous gazes” are always “about power,” or ways of signaling higher rank. I’m much less sure, and even seriously doubt, that looking is always signaling, and that it’s “100% about power,” and 0% about lust.

So sure, there are disgusting gawkers who are signaling, who WANT to be seen. But in your scheme of things, is there no furtive lustful gazing? No gazing that wants not to be seen (and thus wants to signal nothing), and also doesn’t revel in its hidden access? No lustful gaze that’s not in the same category as yelling “cunt”? I mean, is there no way of characterizing looking at a woman desirously—and I mean, not just at the color of her eyes and contours of her haircut—with desire for her as a sexual being and admiration for her attractiveness?

That is, it seems to me that men must be vigilant about when one kind of looking slips over into the other, but I feel like your scheme is missing something if it would have looking be “100% about power.”

Comment #23: EE  on  06/30  at  11:02 PM

My male upbringing and harsh practicality mean that I don’t care until I don’t have anything to wear to work

This isn’t a trait that comes from being raised a boy.

Comment #24: Em  on  06/30  at  11:10 PM

whether “lecherous gazes” are always “about power,” or ways of signaling higher rank. I’m much less sure, and even seriously doubt, that looking is always signaling, and that it’s “100% about power,” and 0% about lust.

I would guess that here, it depends on the context of the lecherous gaze.  Such a gaze directed at your girlfriend, in an egalitarian and power-neutral relationship, is obviously more about lust than anything else, though unless done with serious irony I’d call a “lecherous” gaze in the bedroom still a power trip on a certain level.  There is, after all, a difference between a gaze that is “lecherous” and one that is lustful, sexy, passionate, etc. 

The word “lecherous”, etc are usually used when the sexual advances are unwanted, in my experience.  And especially when the gazer has power over the gazed upon.

Comment #25: The Opoponax  on  06/30  at  11:12 PM

Expressing, then, Piator.  And yes, men can feel lust without screaming, “Suck it, cunt!” at someone in order to show their friends how cool they are.

Oh, hell yes, and noted. 

I was just taken back a bit with this comment because of a recent episode where I couldn’t help noticing that a friend’s 16 year old daughter had, um, very nice breasts, and obviously didn’t realise that kneeling on the floor in a low-cut top exposed them to view.  There is a distinct difference between pretending not to notice, and thus not embarrassing the girl or myself, and not actually noticing and appreciating, which I did.  I’ve recently had a similar comments from a female friend waxing lyrical over a male butt, but with no intention of bringing said admiration to the attention of the owner.

I don’t think I’ve ever hung out with anyone who’d consider “suck it cunt” to be a way of gaining male status points, although we tend to be considerably more candid about women between ourselves than we are to their faces.

Comment #26: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  06/30  at  11:15 PM

I mean, is there no way of characterizing looking at a woman desirously—and I mean, not just at the color of her eyes and contours of her haircut—with desire for her as a sexual being and admiration for her attractiveness?

If you’re really looking at a stranger thinking, “Wow, she’s hot. How nice to have an attractive woman in my vicinity. I wonder if I’ll have the opportunity to interact with her,” does it really occur to you to scream “Cunt!” at her, or grab her ass as she walks by? Would you want to make yourself unattractive to someone you were genuinely attracted to? I don’t see how this line can be easy to cross, but maybe I’m missing something.

Comment #27: junk science  on  06/30  at  11:19 PM

I also learned something else that is more painful—-women who play along with male lechery, who perform the role of the supplicant by undressing for the “Girls Gone Wild” crew or otherwise by resolving this issue by pretending that this is about lust, and not power, are in fact being laughed at by the men who coaxed them into it, and pitied by others who didn’t.  Ugly, but true.

Damn skippy. They aren’t given the respect afforded to porn stars or even prostitutes. The GGW-man fears actual professional sex workers - after all, they’re getting paid, and winning bread is something respected by them. They perceive that the sex worker has agency (though they wouldn’t know what the word means in context), and a woman with agency is a frightening thing.

But a Girl Gone Wild? The ultimate patsy. They see a woman getting scammed into doing something lustful - it’s like they have the mind control super-power they dreamed of as a adolescent jerk, that could make any girl take her clothes off at their command. And they will snarkily comment about how dumb these women are, often to the point of saying they’d never even want to have actual sex with them, due to their complete stupidity and drunkeness, often with a snarky comment about how she’d probably throw up on them in bed.

It’s watching the pretty girl in high school who laughed at them when they asked for a date get her comeuppance at last. They get to watch her (ie, her surrogate) be humiliated before their eyes.

Comment #28: Joe Max  on  06/30  at  11:20 PM

I don’t see how this line can be easy to cross, but maybe I’m missing something.

Or, for that matter, does it ever really occur to you to blatantly undress a junior coworker with your eyes?  Stare longingly at a 14 year old without a care in the world who notices?  This stuff is understood by the entire civilized world to be completely unacceptable.

I think it’s fair, however, to make a distinction between sexual harrassment and simple public expression of lust.  I will admit that I feel flattered when someone on the street tells me I’m beautiful (even if it’s in a lustful way rather than, I dunno, a dispassionate statement of fact or something).  But I NEVER feel that way when someone hollers “DAYUMMM, bitch!  Tha’s a fine ass!” in my general direction.

Comment #29: The Opoponax  on  06/30  at  11:27 PM

>I think it’s fair, however, to make a distinction between sexual harrassment and simple public expression of lust.

OK, sure, so what about gazing that’s not about EXPRESSING anything, but rather enjoying looking, in a way that—I would like to think—can be done without immorally exploiting one’s power to look without risking anything?

Comment #30: EE  on  06/30  at  11:30 PM

OK, sure, so what about gazing that’s not about EXPRESSING anything, but rather enjoying looking, in a way that—I would like to think—can be done without immorally exploiting one’s power to look without risking anything?

Honestly, whether it’s a performative thing or not, where I come from it is generally considered rude to stare lustfully at someone in a way that people are likely to notice.  Unless maybe it’s someone you’re already romantically linked to, or you’re in a situation where picking someone up is considered appropriate, like for instance at a party.  But, yeah, if I wore something a little more revealing than usual to work and all my male colleagues spent the whole day staring that telltale foot or so below my head, it would piss me right off.  Seriously, do you have no self control at all?

If you want to sneak in a furtive glance or two, and it’s not a painfully inappropriate situation, sure, why not?  But I don’t really think that’s what anyone here is talking about when we talk about sexual harrassment.

Comment #31: The Opoponax  on  06/30  at  11:36 PM

Re: Opoponax:

>The word “lecherous”, etc are usually used when the sexual advances are unwanted,

Right, exactly. So let’s not beg the question by using a potentially-loaded word like “lecherous.” Because of course if “lecherous” implies “unwanted,” then it’s not exactly an interesting conclusion that unwanted gazing is unwanted.

So, when Amanda says “For women guessing at what men are thinking, the issue of lechery is always confusing,” let’s give these women the benefit of the doubt that they’re not confused about something so obvious as not wanting what they don’t want. Rather, I wonder if what’s potentially confusing is when gazing by strangers is a reflection of power and when it’s something else, like “respectfully looking lustfully at a stranger.” What becomes interesting and difficult for me to think about is how to characterize THAT.

Amanda seems (to me) to uncharacteristically make a leap to saying (something that can be read as meaning that) all lustful gazing is about power. And so I want to push against that. When is sexual gazing at strangers—not at one’s girlfriend, as you said—respectful and not “about power”?

Comment #32: EE  on  06/30  at  11:38 PM

Contrary to the other listed examples of male behavior, lecherous gazes, especially when done invisibly to other males (rather than to impress them), often expresses male *powerlessness* rather than power. Someone who doesn’t know how to relate to a woman he finds attractive isn’t putting her in her “place,” necessarily, by this bit of body language but rather, often, inarticulately conveying his anguish at his isolation and inability to bridge the gap. To imply that nearly every bit of male behavior that may be problematic at some level, and especially brief bits of body language, is intended to exert psychological control over a woman is really not true; is plenty objectifying of men; lacks empathy about the nuances in male experience; and when you step back from an ideological lens, is somehwat lacking in common sense. This is a sexist culture in many ways, and plenty of male behavior is sexist as well as obnoxious, such as the other items listed. Further, these behaviors are male social or group pathologies in addition to individual failings. But not every bit of problematic behavior is diagnosable in crude political terms; or rather, with regard to some discrete behaviors, these descriptions may obscure more about some men’s motivations than they disclose, and may prove counterproductive for men who believe feminsm has value but who are better at and more comfortable judging themselves as politically deficient than at developing relevant social skills.

Comment #33: gil  on  06/30  at  11:38 PM

what about gazing that’s not about EXPRESSING anything, but rather enjoying looking

I don’t see anyone saying that it’s immoral just to look at someone lustfully. People look at you and you look at them all the time, and no one has the energy to care much about that. If you get to the point that you’re staring at someone and obviously making them uncomfortable, I would think it’s obvious good manners to stop staring. Other than that, no one’s really talking about silent and unobtrusive lust.

Comment #34: junk science  on  06/30  at  11:38 PM

I think the catcalls and whistles and so forth are indeed 100% about power, but I don’t think that means they’re necessarily about signaling or claiming dominance. In some situations, where there’s a (perceived or real) class difference between the men and the women, they may instead be a claim of parity. (You can argue that that’s really a claim of dominance, but the argument has to go through a few levels of indirection and assumption, so it’s not as clearcut as one might want it to be.)

My anecdote for this is the time I spent photographing a construction site on a college campus one summer, where the guys doing the work would consistently accost passing women with anything from a simple “hello” to “hi baby” to a wolf whistle. At one point I asked a few of them why they did this, and they claimed (with no immediate reason to disbelieve them) that it was a reaction to the feeling they had that they were effectively invisible. They were the sweating muscles on the other side of the sawhorses, maybe looked at for tone or line or posture, but never as actual human beings. And so they tried to even the score by provoking some kind of response that acknowledged their agency.

Now of course why they felt particularly dissed by women and/or only accosted women in this way is also part of the patriarchal equation, but that once again was complicated by the fact that men and women passing by the site tended to react to the workers (independent of accosting) in different ways.

Comment #35: paul  on  06/30  at  11:40 PM

I wonder if what’s potentially confusing is when gazing by strangers is a reflection of power and when it’s something else, like “respectfully looking lustfully at a stranger.” What becomes interesting and difficult for me to think about is how to characterize THAT.

See my above few posts.  I refuse to be such a man-hater that I think men really can’t tell the difference between appropriate and mutually desirable sexual attention and harassment.

Comment #36: The Opoponax  on  06/30  at  11:41 PM

Of course lustful glances can be attempts to exert power as well. This understanding should certainly not be lost. My point is that the post seemed on this point to oversimplify the matter in an unproductive way.

Comment #37: gil  on  06/30  at  11:41 PM

re: Junk Science:

>Other than that, no one’s really talking about silent and unobtrusive lust.

OK, so if the issues raised here are as simple as “sexual harassment is bad” and unobtrusive lust is fine, then what is it that women are confused about, when Amanda mentions that some women are confused?

Comment #38: EE  on  06/30  at  11:43 PM

what is it that women are confused about, when Amanda mentions that some women are confused?

...

They want to know why guys yell nasty things at them and grab their asses. Is it because the guys are acknowledging that they’re hot, or because the guys are trying to put them in their place? They already know that when someone simply looks at them lustfully, it’s probably because they find them attractive. There’s no confusion there.

Comment #39: junk science  on  06/30  at  11:49 PM

BlazingDragon: The thing that kills me is watching my wife being unable to tolerate a mess, even when it’s just clothes than can be left till next weekend to be washed.
The Opoponax: Why is this sort of thing ALWAYS framed as a deficiency in the woman rather than a failure of the guy to invest in better standards?


I’m not sure I’m ready to call this a gender issue.  Everyone I have ever discussed cleanliness with of any gender or sexuality believes that their habits are the only sane and reasonable ones.  I agree with an earlier post that assuming having lower standards excuses you from work is insensitive to the wants/needs of your partner, but I think you’re being a bit over-critical of BD, who seems to really want to do his share, but wishes it was less painful for his wife to compromise.

Comment #40: bethany  on  06/30  at  11:54 PM

Your male acquaintance was probably confused over lust vs. objectification.  I’m also curious about the distinction.

The distinction is not that hard to draw with more precise understanding of its meaning . A lot of people don’t really understand the term objectification and so they often fall back on the “piece of meat” analogy which doesn’t really get at the difference between lust and objectification.

Objectification, in the sexual sense, is simply perceiving and/or treating someone as merely a means to ones sexual gratification utterly without regard for that persons own desires, in other words treating them instrumentally, and thus as an object in not acknowledging their agency.

In simple terms the difference between lust and objectification is the difference between what you want to do with them vs. what you want to do to them.

Comment #41: Praxis  on  07/01  at  12:51 AM

paul:  At one point I asked a few of them why they did this, and they claimed (with no immediate reason to disbelieve them) that it was a reaction to the feeling they had that they were effectively invisible.[...] And so they tried to even the score by provoking some kind of response that acknowledged their agency.

That, my friend, is _fascinating_.

Comment #42: FlipYrWhig  on  07/01  at  01:16 AM

But expressing your sexuality in a way that establishes your power is something done to feel strong, to dominate, to show off to other men, and to satisfy insecurities.

Following up on pete’s point, I wonder how often the harassing power play is a way to say something like, “_That one_ probably thinks she’s too good for a guy like me.  I’ll make her feel uncomfortable and take her down a peg.”  That way it’d be like attraction gone all panicky and insecure only to erupt as domination and vindictiveness.  Is the harasser most interested in finding an evidently vulnerable target and increasing her discomfort—or in making the target feel shocked into vulnerability?  Did the book have anything to say about that?

Comment #43: FlipYrWhig  on  07/01  at  01:37 AM

(Oops, I said “pete” and I meant “paul.”  Sorry for the apostolic switcheroo.)

Comment #44: FlipYrWhig  on  07/01  at  01:39 AM

I was just taken back a bit with this comment because of a recent episode where I couldn’t help noticing that a friend’s 16 year old daughter had, um, very nice breasts, and obviously didn’t realise that kneeling on the floor in a low-cut top exposed them to view.


Dude do you ever stop? Seriously, stop. Or don’t. But you’re still an asshole.

Comment #45: banisteriopsis  on  07/01  at  05:05 AM

and obviously didn’t realise that kneeling on the floor in a low-cut top exposed them to view.

Yes, “obviously” she must not have realized that anyone could see her breasts, or she would have hastily covered them in fear and shame. She wasn’t apparently trying to titillate you, therefore she must not have realized her sexysexy body was visible to your eyes, or she would obviously have corrected her grievous error. QED.

Maybe she doesn’t obsess over who can and can’t see her breasts at any given time, maybe she hasn’t learned to make every physical movement a studied and artificial gesture, because maybe she hasn’t learned that all the men around her, even—especially—the ones old enough to be her dad are weighing and assessing and threatening and judging.

But with men like you around and about, I know she’ll learn that important lesson very soon. Girls always do.

Comment #46: sophonisba  on  07/01  at  06:45 AM

So far, it seems like I’m the only person to weigh in to feel this way, but I am not okay with any romanticized glancing of any kind amongst strangers in general public.  Everyone here seems to have accepted that public spaces are these heterosexually romanticized marketplaces, with all humans around a visual buffet for your eyes.  Are we all supposed to be so narcissistic that all other humans are always reduced to less than ourselves?  That if I decide I want to look at somebody and think sexual thoughts, I can do that, regardless of whether that person wants me thinking sexual thoughts about hir?

Perhaps this comes from living in NYC with the barrage of male-to-female street harassment that occurred on a daily basis, but I have no interest in being “admired” or “appreciated” by men, be it for the bone structure or the cut of my damned hair or my general feminine awesomeness.  So to me, there is no way to “respectfully show appreciation” because such a display is predicated upon the assumption that I care what that man thinks, that I somehow look like this for the pleasure of that man, etc.

So be it the under the breath “beautiful” just as we pass on the sidewalk, the kissy kissy noise as I walk by, or any of the aforementioned nasties that might emit from a man’s lips- they are all unwelcome.  They reek of hatred at their worst, and blindly trolling for female interaction at best.

Even gil above talks about how the lecherous gaze speaks not of the powerfulness, but of the powerlessness of the gazer.  What about the person at whom the gaze is directed?  Who cares about this man’s feeling of power or lack thereof when there is another party in the interaction, someone forced to be made known by a man that she was the object of his gaze.  Throughout history, while men work out their feelings of power vs. not-power, there are an infinity of women upon whose backs and psyches this conflict is worked out.

Comment #47: Eyeballs Off!  on  07/01  at  09:13 AM

(I wish I had more time for a lengthier post, but I’ve got to get to work soon so just the gist…)

On the point of even feminist men not doing their fair share of shit work, I think one important contributor is modern America’s culture of total suspicion of any interaction a man has with a child (even his own).  That doesn’t leave a lot of space for men to really get comfortable around children and particularly work on developing new role models rather than simply channel one of the existing patriarchal roles.  I think if American men had less automatic suspicion cast their way and more space to work out a new role as babysitter/encourager/friend/booboo medic to kids of any age then when their own kids come along they/we will be far more comfortable with the other shit work that goes along with it.

Of course none of this is new here, if anything feminist women and men are at the forefront of exploring those new roles.  But even as a starting-to-finally-get-feminism kind of man, from my privileged place I see the process of learning how to be the kind of man who nurtures children as a very risky endeavor.  For example, I am nowhere near ready to babysit someone else’s kids without my wife there with me;  my perception is that it would be way too easy for one bad night with the kids to turn into a legal nightmare for me.  And maybe my perception is just flat wrong.  Regardless, I’m years behind my wife in knowing what to do with kids, and if we ever have any of our own I’ll have a lot of work to do not to saddle her with an unfair load.  My $0.02.

(OK, now I’ve GOT to go to work…)

Comment #48: KL  on  07/01  at  09:18 AM

“Why is this sort of thing ALWAYS framed as a deficiency in the woman rather than a failure of the guy to invest in better standards?”—Opoponax, The

It isn’t.  If asked, I’d say it is a good thing, even if doing so suggests I’m less-than-good.  But is it a good thing to aspire toward, personally?  I’m busy and have different priorities.  I’ll dust my bookshelves some other time, clean the toilet when it bugs me, mop the floor when something spills and I have time to do the whole thing, etc.

Are you saying the guy always should invest in better standards?  Should the gal then be expected to earn as much as the average guy, and is SHE deficient if she doesn’t?  Should she do as much yardwork?  Should she repair half the broken coolers and vehicles?  Should she be told to try harder if she can’t open a jar?  Men and women will always fail to invest in better standards if they have each other around.  Damn differences in different people fucking up Utopia again!

I wasn’t a perfect husband, and I gave up that ideal quickly when I couldn’t be that.  My wife wasn’t perfect either, but she sure tried.  Her circumstances allowed her to perform the role (and that’s what it is) longer than mine, and that role made her very unhappy as it expected so much from her.  I may have been “privileged” in that I didn’t notice her unfulfilling life for too long, but she wasn’t being honest with herself, so she hid that truth from me.  It’s hard to always step in and help when I wasn’t asked, didn’t really make much of the work a priority, and she actually insisted that it was her job as a wife (yes, sometimes using those words.)  I’m all for equality in a relationship, as I’m in favor of it in the abstract as well, but if someone wants to sweep the floor, I’ll gladly let that person do so whether it’s a woman, man, child, robot, or a Buddhist monk who’d like some rice for his bowl.

I’m definitely privileged in that I was able to step away from the role of The Husband easier than my then wife was able to get away from her role as The Wife.  She’s already taking care of some other guy, while I’m happy dating (and living alone.)  But was I privileged in regards to housework?  Not really, since I didn’t gain much from it.  Plus, she didn’t scrub the bathtub nearly as well as I did.

Comment #49: jon  on  07/01  at  09:38 AM

Jon - here’s what you are missing. Women do not magically as a group all want to be neatfreaks.

BUT WE ARE HELD TO THAT STANDARD BY POWERFUL SOCIAL DISAPPROVAL.

It starts when we are kids. Seriously, every relative who came to my house would constantly tell me to help with the housework, with nary a word to my many male cousins. At every holiday, women and girls do the cooking and the cleaning up. Women and girls run the birthday parties, the cub scout outings, etc.

And we are sooooo judged if we don’t live up to freaking impossible standards.

After so many years of it, you internalize it. You begin policing yourself. You don’t invite people over if your house is too messy (ie, messy at all) or you spend the whole time apologizing and agonizing and not having any fun.

After all, it’s YOUR job, isn’t it? I mean, he might HELP, but it’s really all down to you.

And then, He gets all in your face about the fact that you are busy doing all this work and it’s just not that important to him and he doesn’t get why you can’t just relax and WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU???

So seriously Jon, maybe you should fucking ask someone why our standards are so fucking high.

You’re right that it is ridiculous, but you are wrong that it is an individual matter that can be solved by individual people.

Comment #50: magikmama  on  07/01  at  11:02 AM

\“Pablo: objectification is reducing someone to an object.  I

Comment #51: Automaton  on  07/01  at  11:05 AM

\“I guess all that women can do is to be smart enough to know what is in their best interest and secure enough to wait for it.  meingoldcountry on 06/30 at 08:59 PM \”

Yet, here there you were, a self proclaimed PUMA member. How do you propose to reconcile the statement above with your political position? Considering that position has direct result of taking women\‘s basic health right away.

Either you don\‘t understand \“best interest\” or you are very confused what election can do to laws and regulation.

Comment #52: Apple T  on  07/01  at  11:10 AM

The Opoponax, THANK YOU.

First off, with regards to Jon, I only just stopped dating someone who thought and spoke exactly the same way. His standards were “lower” than mine and he was happy that way, so if I was unhappy, it was MY job to fix it, and not HIS. That meant that if I didn’t like, say, every dish in his house being piled in the sink, or if I didn’t like tripping over boxes of baseball cards being “stored” in the bedroom, or if I didn’t like the stench of cat urine on the rug, I was welcome to clean it myself when we got married, because he sure as hell wasn’t going to. Why should he? HE was happy. Besides, my unhappiness with the situation probably just came from my fucked-up upbringing as a girl and from strange sociatal expectations that had brainwashed me. Why couldn’t I see that I would be happier if I could just learn to “relax” and not be so neat??

Honestly, I didn’t really mind doing the cleaning. I minded not being appreciated for making the house not a complete wreck and embarrasment - not to mention a complete biohazard. Why should he appreciate me? I was cleaning for myself, not him, and why should he be grateful? Of course, he DID reap benefits from his mother and friends being more willing to visit (yes, he wanted his mother to visit, snarky jokes aside), but still - No gratitude for the lil’ brainwashed woman.

And to finish this story up with a response to Napoli, the gentleman above dumped ME, not the other way around, because he suddenly realized one day that he didn’t want to ever be married again. So, yes, men chose who to sleep with, too - they don’t just passively accept the first woman who comes along to claim them as ‘hers’ (complete with a flag planted in the butt, I suppose, to paraphrase a favorite comedian).

Amusingly, Jon, I work full-time and I miss my ex-boyfriend not at all in that regard - I WAS cleaning my home AND his, and now I only clean mine. And since I “clean as I go” instead of letting things pile up like he did, it’s so much easier and less stressful. So before you laugh in your sleeve about your dumb ex-wife, I would like to point out that she’s probably also cleaning for her NEW boyfriend that you mentioned. There’s a very good chance that she may wake up one day and realize that she’s tired of being a mother for HIM, too.

And I’m sick to death of these slobby “boys”. My father is a man and he doesn’t want to live in squallor. Yes, Mom cleans up for him, but at least he appreciates it and makes it clear that he does. At this point, I want some freaking appreciation or nothing at all.

Oh, and a postscript - the ex-boyfriend is now nosing around because he misses the sex. Good advance planning, Romeo.

Comment #53: Faye  on  07/01  at  11:51 AM

I’m busy and have different priorities.  I’ll dust my bookshelves some other time, clean the toilet when it bugs me, mop the floor when something spills and I have time to do the whole thing, etc.

If a woman told you that she was busy and would dust the bookshelves when she got around to it, clean the toilet when she damn well thought it needed to be, etc. you’d accuse her of being a lazy slob.  Not so much because you’re an evil, evil Mayunnnn, but because your male privilege gives you the ability to regard your opinion on this sort of stuff as the correct one, and her opinion, whatever it is, to be flawed.  Your privilege also allows you to expect her to go out of her way to make you comfortable or cater to your needs.

Are you saying the guy always should invest in better standards? 

I think there’s room for compromise, but before there can be compromise both sides have to agree that we’re not talking about One Correct Way (which is always coincidentally the man’s way), we’re talking about two separate individuals with their own differing standards.  And then BOTH sides have to bend a little—that’s what compromise means.  Compromise doesn’t mean she does what you say.  Sometimes you have to do what she wants, too.  If she’s willing to look past the dusty bookshelves, you’ve got to agree to scrub the toilet once a week, whether it looks rank yet or not.

Should the gal then be expected to earn as much as the average guy, and is SHE deficient if she doesn’t?  Should she do as much yardwork?  Should she repair half the broken coolers and vehicles?  Should she be told to try harder if she can’t open a jar?  Men and women will always fail to invest in better standards if they have each other around.  Damn differences in different people fucking up Utopia again!

WTF are you talking about?

Fate is taunting me for that whole “I don’t want to be a man-hater” comment, isn’t she? 

Seriously, I think that in a practical sense both people should work together to make sure everything gets done in a manner that satisfies both people and allows them to play to their housekeeping strengths or tastes or skills or whatever you’d call it.  In my house, I tend to deal with the bathroom, whereas my roommate prefers to vacuum and dust.  This is fine because I hate vacuuming/dusting and he always does a halfass job cleaning the bathroom. 

But if you’re not able to easily agree on an arrangement because the two individuals’ preferences don’t match up, then yeah sometimes you have to do things you don’t want to do in order to make sure everything runs smoothly.  My main point is that this ought to go equally for both men and women, but in my experience generally women are expected to conform to what the man wants.  Even if the man is a feminist, because it’s one of those areas of unexamined male privilege that even feminist men aren’t often good at recognizing and abandoning.

Comment #54: The Opoponax  on  07/01  at  11:58 AM

First of all, boot camp reveals there is no inherent male inability to be tidy and clean. Women should be able to make the men in their lives do pushups till they cleaned to the women’s standards.

Maybe she doesn’t obsess over who can and can’t see her breasts at any given time

Like the plumber who doesn’t obsess over the visibility of his crack at any given time? But doesn’t the oppressive social pressure to maintain cleanliness standards extend to the amount of cleavage one can sport at any given time? This doesn’t excuse male bad behavior. Guys should use the guidance from the Seinfeld episode: Glancing at cleavage is reflexive. Staring is not.

Can anyone explain to me the dynamic of the strip club? The one time I went, a bunch of guys watched a woman writhe around a pole, taking her clothes off, so they could put dollar bills in her underpants. This might work as foreplay for the guys, but there was no afterplay.

Comment #55: Hector B.  on  07/01  at  11:58 AM

EE said: Right, exactly. So let’s not beg the question by using a potentially-loaded word like “lecherous.” Because of course if “lecherous” implies “unwanted,” then it’s not exactly an interesting conclusion that unwanted gazing is unwanted.

It’s not begging the question. I agree with your overall point - I had the same defensive reaction to the gaze question, until I realized that the “lecherous” part is the important one. Consider the context: “lecherous gazes, wolf whistles, and calling someone a “cunt” from a moving vehicle…”
Clearly admiring glances or furtively checking someone out is not in the same category as openly leering. Keep that distinction in mind, and don’t get distracted by “gaze”.

Comment #56: Theaetetus  on  07/01  at  12:00 PM

Should the gal then be expected to earn as much as the average guy, and is SHE deficient if she doesn’t?  Should she do as much yardwork?  Should she repair half the broken coolers and vehicles?  Should she be told to try harder if she can’t open a jar?  Men and women will always fail to invest in better standards if they have each other around.  Damn differences in different people fucking up Utopia again!

I don’t do yardwork because my apartment complex has paid yardworkers and I don’t have to bother with it. I open my own jars with those nice little plastic grip things and - if that fails to work - I get my dad to open it on one of his visits and transfer the jar contents to something more forgiving. Why, what do men do when they can’t open a jar? Pray to Thor? I’ve tried that, but the results are a bit spotty.

I’ve yet to date a guy who can repair a vehicle which is too bad, because I’d find it very sexy. Currently, I take the car to the shop when it breaks down. I didn’t realize that some guys still think that car-fixing is something guys are born knowing. I DO know that the last boyfriend would have been REALLY turned on if I could repair cars - one less thing he had to deal with.

It sounds like you had a really “traditional” setup, Jon, with the wife as homemaker and you as heavy lifter / breadwinner. That’s nice and all, but you still could have at least helped with the housework, or at least appreciated her for it, or at least not maintained an attitude that the housework was a self-imposed torture she brought on herself and not a valid desire for a different level of cleanliness than you. Seriously, nothing dulls passion in a relationship like a “What’s wrong with YOU?” condescending attitude.

Comment #57: Faye  on  07/01  at  12:08 PM

jon. The Opoponax’s point was back there past the gas station on the left. You just missed it. I get that you’re still a little sore from your marriage, but what she said was this: that no matter what her standards were, her male partners considered them incorrect. If she was less neat than he, she was a slob; if she was more neat, she was an oppressive neatfreak. Regardless, it was the man’s preferences that were supposed to control, and she should STFU and adjust her behavior to them.

although we tend to be considerably more candid about women between ourselves than we are to their faces

That’s an enormous understatement. Working in the sex industry, you stop being the kind of woman men have to pretend to be nice to—it’s like the way that many people forget waiters can hear and understand what they’re saying. Only in a strip bar, there’s no worry that any female whose opinion affects your life might here. It was quite an education about how “nice men” act when their wives and girlfriends aren’t present.

Comment #58: mythago  on  07/01  at  12:15 PM

Yes, I know it’s the idiotic social standard that tells women what priorities she should have and men what priorities he should have.  And I know that it is easier for a man to get wiggle room from the social expectations.  But saying women are stuck with their role is like saying I am stuck with mine: wrong.

This cleanliness expectation differential can exist in many relationships: husband and wife, college roommates, army barracks bunkmates, The Odd Couple, Ernie and Bert, what have you.  What’s different for husbands and wives is that women and wives are trained to act one way and men (husbands or not) are told to take care of themselves or find a woman.  That explains many male/female relationship expectations, but it’s not an excuse for the imbalances, at least not on the individual level.  Many men do a crap job of taking care of themselves, and some women think it’s wonderful that they can take care of a man, and I admit that’s absurd.  But many who think it’s absurd either still do it or don’t still do it, for a host of reasons.

And while I am willing to play the part of the whipping boy for this issue and will probably regret saying this, I have to say that any woman who does all the housework without being asked and then wonders why she doesn’t get all the appreciation she expects is fucked in the head.  To repeat that over and over again is even more fucked.  She can blame it on an unappreciative man all she wants, but if she can’t express her expectations up front, she’s always going to be disappointed.  That’s true for putting on makeup, doing her hair, sex, education, her birthday, or anything else: no stated expectation when there is one will rarely result in that expectation being met.  There’s just no getting around the fact that people with different priorities will have different levels of appreciation for things being accomplished.  There were many days my four-to-midnight shifts at an old job wasn’t appreciated, my stressful workday at the prison wasn’t met with enough gratitude upon arriving home, and my other priorities weren’t even allowed to be worked toward for one reason or another.  And her great job of cleaning the house wasn’t always noticed and acknowledged to a satisfactory degree, either.  We laugh about it now, but are still much happier living apart.

So all you women out there who don’t want to date or marry men with different standards, then don’t.  I’m all for it.  I’m dating another “slob” and things are pretty great (and she’s messier than I am.)  Probablty won’t marry her, but not for that reason.  And if you want the proverbial him to change, then have at it.  But ask yourself first: is it gratitude you’re after or a clean house?  The utility aspect is one thing (I can navigate my living spaces with ease,) but if you’re after happiness and can’t ask for some gratitude then you are fucked in the head.  Maybe that man is an ass, but are you making yourself miserable seeking praise for things he doesn’t value?  Talk this out, damnit!  Tacit understandings that aren’t understood aren’t a good basis for a relationship whether it’s feminist, post-feminist, traditional, or even some bizarro master/slave thing involving collars and dog bowls.  Most of my personal growth happened after I was called an asshole or a failure, whether it was by me, someone I love, or someone I respect.  And my biggest periods of wallowing in stupidity came when everyone around me was either afraid to say something or unsure how to call me a jerk (or, worse, thought I was doing just great.)  If life is about getting better, then we have to talk about these and many other things.

Comment #59: jon  on  07/01  at  12:43 PM

The idea that it’s the woman who needs to conform to the standards of the man is stupid.  I get that.  Calling someone you love a neatfreak or slob except in extreme situations is ridiculous as well, and anyone who insists that the other person conform entirely to their standards, no matter what they are, is a tyrant unworthy of appreciation.  If, after talking it out, no mutually-beneficial expectations can be made, then either deal with that dynamic or shitcan the relationship.  If you aren’t feeling valued in your relationship, do something about it or get out.  That’s all I can say to women, men, teens, pets, professional football players, the inmates at the prison in which I work, or anyone else feeling stuck and unhappy.

I did a hell of a lot more housework on year 12 of the marriage than year 1.  Was it equal?  Not the housework.  But she didn’t do an equal job of yard or income-gaining work.  Boo freaking hoo.  And no, I didn’t blame her for being different.  Were there stresses?  Hell yes.  Did we talk about them?  Not enough, at least not in the right way.  Were there divides that couldn’t be met?  Yes.

Comment #60: jon  on  07/01  at  01:04 PM

But ask yourself first: is it gratitude you’re after or a clean house?

Either/Or Fallacy much? Why not both? I like a clean house. But when I have to do TWICE the cleaning because there are TWICE the people in my home, yeah, I appreciate a spot of gratitude. I expect that when you were doing HALF the spending because you were providing money for TWICE the buyers, you would have liked some appreciation too. What’s the alternative? She stops cleaning and you stop working and you get to be dirty and homeless because neither of you could say Thank You For All Your Hard Work once in awhile?

...if you’re after happiness and can’t ask for some gratitude then you are fucked in the head.

Why do you men ALWAYS assume that I was a Stepford Wife that never expressed that I wanted appreciation? You can bet your ass I asked for some appreciation. I couldn’t make him say Thank You Honey, though I certainly would have rewarded him in my own ways if he had bothered. And, yeah, I could have left. And probably should have. But one has to - sometimes - hope that someone will grow up and join the human race rather than remain an emotional child forever who never thinks of others or their STATED feelings.

Comment #61: Faye  on  07/01  at  01:26 PM

Jon, you are acting as if “housekeeping standards” are genetic, and immutable, and thus there’s nothing anyone can do about them but either defer to the other person (person = man, of course) or leave the relationship.

Seriously, if you are a slob and your partner needs the house to be neater than you’d like, why is it such a problem to make a fucking effort to help them have their home the way they’d like it to be?  I mean, really? 

I think a lot of this also has to do with the way that patriarchal society constructs the male female relationship as an adversarial one.  Shit, when I care about someone, and they tell me that they want/need X, I fucking do whatever I can to give them X unless for some reason it’s just absolutely unworkable or unreasonable.  Is thhis really that foreign to men?

Comment #62: The Opoponax  on  07/01  at  01:27 PM

Seriously, if you are a slob and your partner needs the house to be neater than you’d like, why is it such a problem to make a fucking effort to help them have their home the way they’d like it to be?  I mean, really?

Agreed, this is NOT a black-and-white issue. SOME of the things you can do, besides throw in the relationship towel, include:

1. Actively helping out to make your partner happy. (She’s tired? Do the laundry. She’ll be happy.)
2. Identifying areas of compromise (like not dusting the bookshelves, but cleaning the toilet).
3. Proactively NOT making it worse. Put your dirty dishes in the dishwasher, not the sink for her to load the dishwasher. Put your dirty clothes in the hamper so she doesn’t have to stoop-and-collect.
4. If you REALLY can’t stand housework, earn a little extra money, take the SIMS route and hire a maid to help out occassionally.

And so on.

I think a lot of this also has to do with the way that patriarchal society constructs the male female relationship as an adversarial one.  Shit, when I care about someone, and they tell me that they want/need X, I fucking do whatever I can to give them X unless for some reason it’s just absolutely unworkable or unreasonable.  Is this really that foreign to men?

I’m thinking that it is, although I can’t imagine why. My partner asked for a LOT of things from me, and I willingly obliged, but I ask for a simple Thank You For Doing The Dishes or for him to move a storage box to the garage because I kept stubbing my toe going from bedroom to bathroom at night, and you’d think it was the end of the world. “Why can’t you do it?” whines resound. “Why, yes dear, my bad back won’t suffer at all moving YOUR baseball cards to YOUR garage attic. And feel free to cook your own dinner tonight.” Which I WOULD have said, but god knows he preferred Whataburger to Chicken Parmesiana anyway, so what good would it have done? Sigh.

Comment #63: Faye  on  07/01  at  01:42 PM

.  But she didn’t do an equal job of yard or income-gaining work.  Boo freaking hoo.

I currently make more money than my roommate, and because of this I contribute more, financially, around the house.  Stuff like grocery shopping, incidental bills, stuff that comes up (running to the hardware store for lightbulbs, for instance).  I still expect that the two of us will divide housework evenly and don’t expect any extra contribution around the house simply because he’s eating my food and using my lightbulbs or toilet paper or whatever.  Because that’s what friends do.  He’s done the same for me when our situations have been reversed.  If spouses and long term SO’s don’t rate that level of consideration, I think I’ll stay single forever, thanks…

And, by the way, on the subject of earnings equality, yes, I can see a situation where it would be perfectly kosher to ask one’s spouse to find a way to contribute more.  I can fully see a conversation like, “sweetie, I know you love your career as a freelance basketweaver, but I just took a paycut at work which means that we won’t be able to afford this place anymore if you don’t find a way to contribute more financially.” There would be nothing wrong with that, any more than there would by anything wrong with, “I don’t want our house to smell like cat pee all the time, could you please make a regular habit of cleaning the litter box?”  Relationships are about communication and compromise.  Considering that you dont’ seem to understand this very well, maybe that’s why yours didn’t work out?

Re yardwork, you keep harping on that, and maybe it’s just because I’m an urbanite, but seriously unless you have an incredibly high-maintenence yard I doubt it compares at all with the constant repetitive (and MANDATORY) tasks that compose housework.  If the plants don’t get watered one week, no big deal.  If nobody cooks for a week,  you go hungry.  And if you do have a really high-maintenance yard, that’s usually something that is a personal choice, veering into the level of a hobby.  And sorry, but “my hobby is time consuming” does not give you a pass to not contribute around the house.

Comment #64: The Opoponax  on  07/01  at  01:48 PM

If you aren’t feeling valued in your relationship, do something about it or get out.

Also, this is not always plausible. You yourself have pointed out (gleefully) that your wife’s quality of life has dipped sharply since she left you. Now she has to go to work and school - presumably the school is to get a degree to get a job that will pay higher (sustainable) wages.

Laughing and saying, “Haha, guess the dirty toilet seems not-so-important now!” misses the point that your wife was unhappy, and you didn’t feel the need - apparently - to address that unhappiness.

Comment #65: Faye  on  07/01  at  01:52 PM

There sure is a lot of anger when I’m basically agreeing with you guys that people need to compromise and talk things out rather than have seething resentment destroy everyones’ ability to even look at the opposite sex without anger.  I did do a fair amount of compromising, but I also was dumbfounded at the level of anger that went away after we discussed things.  And when I thanked her afterwards, it wasn’t a forced “Thank you for the dinner you cooked and then demanded gratitude for” kind of a thank you, but a real one.

And living in the desert, I’d lose nearly everything if I didn’t water for a week (unless it rained.)  So yes, yardwork is important.  Not for everyone, and I didn’t do it for the praise (he said, mentioning it.)  Tree branches rubbing away at the roof tiles?  Important to maintain that while also keeping the shade.  Swamp coolers don’t set themselves up.  And that darn patio won’t sweep itself.  I could have a sterile landscape, but we liked the yard to look a certain way, and I liked it a certain way and did something about it.  And I did most of that work and liked it.  Probably because I’m a brainwashed male automaton or something, but thems the breaks.

Comment #66: jon  on  07/01  at  02:00 PM

I’m double-posting, but I suspect that male “slobbiness” could be just as much as function of soceital expectations as female “cleanliness”.

The assumption is that “slobiness” is a normal state of affairs and that society pressures women to be cleaners. However, what if “cleanliness” is the normal state of affairs (and it SHOULD be - I definitely get sick less often than my there’s-mold-in-my-cereal-bowl-from-last-month ex-husband) and men are trained by society that mommy / wifey will take care of that for them?

I’ve noticed that the slobbiest of men I know either just came directly from mommy or from a divorce OR they have actively given up trying to date. Most of my new dates make a perfunctory effort to clean, at the very least in order to not frighten off visiting women.

Props on the poster who pointed out that boot camp is proof that men CAN be clean when/if they want to. And a lot of military men maintain that discipline throughout life, I’ve noticed. Mental note that when/if I have boys, they’ll be grilled in homemaking, too. And - anecdotally - my brother WAS grilled in neatness and his wife absolutely adores him because he doesn’t cause more work for her and actually helps with the messes their children makes.

Comment #67: Faye  on  07/01  at  02:02 PM

Jon, I’m sorry, but the anger (at least from me) comes stemming from your first post where you basically stated the following:

1. You didn’t feel the need to help keep the house clean because you like dirt and your partner’s wishes be damned.

2. Your partner’s wishes weren’t real anyway, because she was a brainwashed-by-society woman.

3. If only your partner could have been like you, she would have been happy with you. Since she wasn’t like you, the relationship was doomed. (What - you couldn’t have changed a bit?)

4. You don’t have male priviledge because you didn’t want/need her cleaning, thus ignoring that you DID have male priviledge because she DID want/need you to be clean, but she didn’t get to ask for that.

5. Postscript - isn’t it humorous that now that she has to do “her job” (cleaning) and “my job” (earning money), she’s now miserable? Haha!

Now, I realize you probably didn’t mean these as bad as it sounds. You are probably a nice guy and I’d probably like you in real life. But this attitude is very pervasive in men, and it wreaks relationships, and I’m tired of it. And you don’t even seem to realize what is offensive about it! That is frustrating.

As for the lawn: yes, grass in the desert is a luxury and a bad one. Something like 70% of people in the world don’t have reliable access to water and we’re wasting it on our lawns. You want shade? Get an awning. You want greenery? Get a nice cactus and desert plants. I live in Texas and it’s criminal the waste that goes on here. Sorry to mench, but it’s a much bigger deal than most ‘Mericans realize.

Comment #68: Faye  on  07/01  at  02:10 PM

Noticing someone is cute is one thing.  But momma always told you it’s not polite to stare.

Men will stare at women in a very deliberate, rude way and make sure the woman knows it, or other men do, and it’s a power play, a way to say, “Yes, staring is rude, but I have social license to treat you rudely because I outrank you.”  A lot of men try to blur these distinctions to confuse women, and it often works, but what I liked about this book was that the men in here avoid just such bullshit and clarified that yes, men realize that staring is rude and so when they do it in that way that seems to be about deliberately making you uncomfortable, it is indeed on purpose.  Really, we like to pretend it’s confusing, but when the interactions happen in real life, it’s not.

Comment #69: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/01  at  02:18 PM

I wasn’t able to post this earlier and it seems a bit out of place now, but…

I’m not sure what exactly to say to address the disparity of labor.  Self-analysis is often fairly difficult.  My wife certainly does more of the everyday housework, despite our original intentions of equal division.  She happens to be the messier one, but we’ve both had out standards move towards each other’s over the years.  But as to the “why” in the disparity, I’d mainly have to say inertia.  Neither of us seems to care quite enough to change our habits.  And as has been commented above, the pressure from society is more on her than me.  She is very insistent the house be, at least in appearance of being clean, if someone is going to see it and dislikes the idea of someone else cleaning it besides us, though mainly herself.  We recently hired a cleaning service (which is much cheaper than I expected and I find that a bit disturbing) and she is annoyed that she feels so troubled by it.  Writing all this it seems it can all be concentrated down to the cause being objectification of women as cheap labor.

Comment #70: Anecdotal Male Feminist  on  07/01  at  02:19 PM

Amanda seems (to me) to uncharacteristically make a leap to saying (something that can be read as meaning that) all lustful gazing is about power.

No, I really didn’t.  And I am distrustful of men who seek exceptions to basic rules like not having a double standard for men and women.  Boring your eyes through men to make them uncomfortable is rightfully considered rude.  So why on earth would you think it’s okay to do to a woman?  We all know the difference between looking and staring.  If you’re having trouble figuring it out, ask yourself, would you do it to a man?

Comment #71: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/01  at  02:22 PM

Tree branches rubbing away at the roof tiles?  Important to maintain that while also keeping the shade. 

Wow, who knew picking up the phone once every couple years and calling up the tree maintenance dudes with the crane and the big pruning tools was pretty much exactly the same thing as scrubbing toilets…?

Swamp coolers don’t set themselves up.

That’s, what, a Saturday afternoon?  Once?  Maybe once every 5-10 years, when it’s time to replace your old swamp cooler (wtf is a swamp cooler? god lawns are stupid…)

And that darn patio won’t sweep itself.

Wow, ten minutes every weekend, if you get around to it…  Holy shit you are one industrious fucker, aren’t you?

I could have a sterile landscape, but we liked the yard to look a certain way, and I liked it a certain way and did something about it.

In other words, what I said before.  If you have a high maintenance yard, that’s a choice.  In other words, a hobby you like to spend time tinkering with.  Having a time consuming hobby does not excuse you from contributing to housework.

Comment #72: The Opoponax  on  07/01  at  02:33 PM

Wow, who knew picking up the phone once every couple years and calling up the tree maintenance dudes with the crane and the big pruning tools was pretty much exactly the same thing as scrubbing toilets…?

Hubby, I changed my mind - I want to trade. smile

I’m willing to give Jon the benefit of the doubt to assume that he did the actual tree-trimming, but I agree that none of that equals the level of making sure there are clean dishes to eat off of, clean floors to walk on, clean clothes to wear, clean beds to sleep in, and healthy food to eat.

Comment #73: Faye  on  07/01  at  02:37 PM

Wha?!?  When I first read “Do you know the difference between misogyny and sex,” I thought it was the start of a lame joke. I was shocked when there was no punchline and it turns out it was an actual, earnest question.

Sounds as if the guy had bought into a host of resentful stereotypes—probably uncosnciously, through years of subtle, pervasive conditioning in an environment that still has a long way to go. A lot of men have some strange ideas of what constitutes “sex,” confusing power-play and real-sex. The whole complaint about “objectifying” is very valid. I still have to watch myself—conditioning is an insidious thing. But suggesting that a feminist equates sex with misogyny sounds like sour grapes because his particular version of sex was rejected, at some point.

Gaining awareness of other people as people is a huge thing ... and sadly, not easily obtained, it seems. Everything we see is filtered by our perceptions/biases—if we don’t know we have them, we don’t see the skewed perception.

Comment #74: Cathexis  on  07/01  at  02:38 PM

Actually, the stats prove Faye right, so going around and around is pointless.  It’s been found that single women clean the least, cohabiting women clean more than that, and married women clean the most.  So it’s not just a differing standards issue.  It’s that men make messes that women have to then clean up.

Comment #75: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/01  at  02:46 PM

And that the harder it is for a woman to leave, the more work she has to do because her man has that leverage against her.

Comment #76: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/01  at  02:46 PM

Man ... I see the Comments section has devolved into the old “Housework” debate. Admittedly, I used to have a blind spot on this.  It was a marriage counselor who opened my eyes to another perspective ...

WIFE: And he will let the house get *filthy*! 
ME (unfazed): I just have a higher threshold for disorder.
COUNSELOR: So you prioritize your own view over hers?
ME (mildly irritated): No, I just have a higher threshold for disorder.
COUNSELOR (pateiently): So you prioritize your own view over hers.

I was about to give a more forceful, irritated “correction” when I paused ... as it finally started to sink in.

He was right. I was imposing my persepctive as the objective reality and ignoring her perspective. I was placing my view of the situation as the “real one” and giving my wishes priority. But there were two people in any relationship. I was assuming only one reality ... one viewpoint, thus giving my own convenience priority. I hadn’t thought of it in those terms, before. Until I achieved that shift in perspective, I’d have blithely argued all day.  When the situation was successfully “reframed” ... suddenly it didn’t seem like a position I wanted to continue, much less defend.

Comment #77: Cathexis  on  07/01  at  02:55 PM

Actually, the stats prove Faye right, so going around and around is pointless.  It’s been found that single women clean the least, cohabiting women clean more than that, and married women clean the most.  So it’s not just a differing standards issue.  It’s that men make messes that women have to then clean up.

*happy swoon*

I shouldn’t distrust myself so much, but I was really, honestly starting to worry that I was wrong about this. But I genuinely felt that my husband caused more cleaning for me than I had had living alone. And my more recent break-up experience has shown this too. Oddly, the ex-boyfriend would make a BIG deal about doing the laundry once in awhile or scraping the plates into the trash after dinner sometimes, but I just felt that I was drowning in housework all the time. Now that I’m single again, I can’t help but notice that the apartment is CLEANER, but I’m rarely doing housework - not at the level that I was, anyway. Sometimes he visits to drop off an item I left at his house or for some other mundane reason, and I always find I’m picking up soda cans (recycle bin is RIGHT by the door) and old magazines and other stuff that he just sort of sheds. It’s exhausting.

I will NOT get into the “the laundry basket is where the dirty socks go, and not the floor for me to pick up, and what part of BAD BACK is hard for you to remember” argument. My head hurts.

Does anyone have a link to a study like this? I would so much like to post it on the wall at home.

Comment #78: Faye  on  07/01  at  03:06 PM

I think the catcalls and whistles and so forth are indeed 100% about power, but I don’t think that means they’re necessarily about signaling or claiming dominance. In some situations, where there’s a (perceived or real) class difference between the men and the women, they may instead be a claim of parity...

At one point I asked a few of them why they did this, and they claimed (with no immediate reason to disbelieve them) that it was a reaction to the feeling they had that they were effectively invisible... And so they tried to even the score by provoking some kind of response that acknowledged their agency.

Bullshit.

I’ve noticed that men of lower status/class tend to publicly harass women more, but I’m not buying that it’s about establishing parity.

When it comes down to it, many of those guys, by every measure, are losers.  They maybe didn’t finish high school.  They certainly didn’t go to college.  They probably earn minimum wage and/or can’t hold down a job.  Any woman they can date is not up to what they think they’re entitled to.  So, they harass women in public, oftentimes women who are more intelligent, better educated, more attractive, and more successful than they are.  In the end, those men are making sure to establish their dominance.  No matter how loserly they are, they still get to claim superiority and the inherent male right to dominate and humiliate women in public.

Comment #79: keshmeshi  on  07/01  at  03:21 PM

I haven’t noticed a class difference in street harassment.  Seriously, I hear about this, but I get it from men of every race and class marker.  In fact, it’s the expensive cars that tend to be the ones you hear more crap streaming out of.

Comment #80: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/01  at  03:28 PM

This comments thread is hilarious.  jon says, my ex-wife was socialized to be a compulsive neat-freak and couldn’t deal with my marginal slobbery, and Opoponax breaks out with good god, I’m so tired of goddamned useless men who won’t clean up the house!  Hey, what about this:  I’m tired of goddamned nitpicky women who insist on every dust-mote being carefully collected!  Is that a valid feeling for me to have?  Of course not, because it’s from me a MAN directed at a WOMAN, therefore it’s misogyny and sexism and my being a lazy no-good bastard; while a WOMAN having critical feelings towards a MAN is empowerment and feminist and positive!  Faye says “either/or fallacy much?”  To which I reply, double standard much?  I should adjust to YOUR standards, but you shouldn’t be expected to adjust to mine?

In real life, it’s BOTH genders flipping out about unimportant, meaningless shit!  What matters is whether you love and respect the other person enough to live with their flaws and shortcomings.  My mom and dad fight like cats and dogs sometimes; they’ll celebrate their 50th anniversary in 3 years.  Don’t tell me it’s because my mom is trapped in a marriage she can’t get out of; her family has way more resources and is much closer-knit than my father’s, so it isn’t the patriarchy that’s keeping them together.  If it’s more important to you to have an equitable division of housework by whatever personal criteria you have (change more diapers!  mop the floors more!  clean the toilets weekly!  adjust to MY standards of cleanliness!) than to live with someone you love and have fun with, if your love is predicated on how much housework they do rather than how much you enjoy being with them…then find that kind of person!  And lotsa luck in your quest!

Comment #81: liberalrob  on  07/01  at  05:00 PM

liberalrob, if you would actually read my comments, I clearly stated that I didn’t mind cleaning after my mate - I minded being taken completely for granted. I also - for the record - minded when he went out of his way to make my life harder. Just so we’re clear about what we’re arguing about.

You might also - had you done some actual reading prior to posting - have seen that my ex and I split for reasons totally separate from the housework. However, yes, when I start ‘getting serious’ about someone again, a desire to not live in a complete pig-sty is a priority for me. Doubtless YOU have priorities that I don’t share. That doesn’t make you an idiot - although the rest of your fucktard post DOES.

smile

Comment #82: Faye  on  07/01  at  05:18 PM

And that is why lecherous gazes, wolf whistles, and calling someone a “cunt” from a moving vehicle is not, contrary to the claims of anti-feminists, a “compliment”.  It’s an expression of dominance, a way for men to signal to themselves, to women, and especially to other men that they are ranked higher than women.

Also, it’s a way to signal that they are assholes just like their friends.  “Yay, we’re all assholes!  Best asshole friends forever!”

Remember the Mr. Microphone ad from the 70’s?  “Hey baby, be back to pick you up later!”  Yeah, that’s a great selling point!  Buy Mr. Microphone, and turn your car stereo into a bullhorn so you can harass the chicks!  Woohoo!

I really think you’re overthinking it.  Wolf whistles and catcalls aren’t consciously about power over women.  They’re more about bonding and ranking within a group, if the harasser is in a group at the time.  (If it’s a solo guy, that’s a different story.)  I also wonder if there’s not an element of selection bias in these “male feminist” “revelations” about What Men Really Think.  I think men who self-identify as feminist are most likely not representative of men as a whole (wouldn’t you have to agree?) and may not be accurate in their depictions of men’s motivations.

Interesting review, nonetheless.

Comment #83: liberalrob  on  07/01  at  05:21 PM

I really think you’re overthinking it.  Wolf whistles and catcalls aren’t consciously about power over women.  They’re more about bonding and ranking within a group, if the harasser is in a group at the time.  (If it’s a solo guy, that’s a different story.) I also wonder if there’s not an element of selection bias in these “male feminist” “revelations” about What Men Really Think.  I think men who self-identify as feminist are most likely not representative of men as a whole (wouldn’t you have to agree?) and may not be accurate in their depictions of men’s motivations.

both/and.  Exert power over women to prove you’re a manly man amongst men.  Also, I somewhat expect many feminist men weren’t always in that category.  And regardless, have access to many free expressing decidedly non-feminist men.

Comment #84: D  on  07/01  at  05:30 PM

liberalrob, if you would actually read my comments

Faye, you know I hang on your every word and every sentence I write is about you!  For example:

Props on the poster who pointed out that boot camp is proof that men CAN be clean when/if they want to.

Yeah, especially when they have a 6’ 4” 200-lb DI ready to kick their ass if they don’t!  Damn, that’s what these women need, rent-a-Sarge!

That doesn’t make you an idiot - although the rest of your fucktard post DOES.

Ooo, I’m humiliated yet again!  What a burn!  You sure told me!

Comment #85: liberalrob  on  07/01  at  05:38 PM

God what an asshole.  You sure think you’re cute, dont you?

Comment #86: kw  on  07/01  at  05:45 PM

Wow, liberalrob, you sure seem pretty angry. I hope spewing all over the thread made you feel better.

Comment #87: junk science  on  07/01  at  07:32 PM

Amanda, the “outranking” observation is dead on.

But she didn’t do an equal job of yard or income-gaining work.

Snerk. *I* am the one in my household who does the income-gaining work and the yard maintenance. (Pool, too.) And I wouldn’t trade it for a freaking second for all the laundry, meal preparation, shopping, household management, dishes, etc. etc. etc. that my at-home spouse does, day in, day out. I mow the lawn, what, once a week? Maybe in between I occasionally have to worry about fertilizer or the odd brown patch. Oh, and maintaining the chemical balance in the pool? BACKBREAKING. I tell you, I have to lean way over to get that proper sample for the little chemical kit!

So when I hear men wail about how their wives never mow the lawn, I know what bullshit it is. Nice try though.

Comment #88: mythago  on  07/01  at  08:22 PM

Your blockquote loses some of it’s thunder if you include my next sentence, mythago.

Anyhow, I compromised, she compromised, we both compromised together and we compromised apart.  I’d say that we have a happier relationship now, our children (and I watch them three nights a week) are doing as well as can be expected, and we really are better off as individuals now that we’re apart.  We now laugh a lot about our marriage (she’s got more bitter laughter, but it’s still laughter) and are actually quite a lot more aware of how and who we are as people and are determined to act as individuals in the future.  I have my doubts that we won’t fall back into any bad habits when the opportunities present myself, but at least we both know that they are and can talk to each other about them.  Plus, I get to criticize the relationship she has with the guy who she cheated with, and she gets to hear things she needs to hear.  Win-win, if you ask me.  And yes, I’m being both a bit of a jerk and also very serious in saying that.  And if you think she doesn’t tell me a thing or two, then you haven’t met her.  Trust me, she gives as good as she gets.

Comment #89: jon  on  07/01  at  08:48 PM

It’s interesting how men’s burden of automotive repair, furniture moving, and appliance troubleshooting often comes up as a defense of women doing the bulk of household shitwork. Personally, I only know one man who is capable of any car repair that is more involved than changing the oil. Most people hire mechanics. Few men don’t do automotive repair, few men fix household appliances, and there’s rarely cause in most households to move heavy objects around with any frequency. Newer automobiles are difficult for the non-professional to work on; plastic parts and casings make the repair of appliances impossible (mostly people just buy a new model); and I suspect only a tiny, itty-bitty minority of women ask their male partners to rearrange furniture for several hours each week. When I inherited the lawn mowing chore from my elder brothers, I somehow managed to handle it, and even kept up with schoolwork and a social life, all at the tender age of twelve!

So I guess the fair division of labor between the genders involves women doing the bulk of the work, and men being “on call” for tasks they’ll never perform.

Comment #90: ksms  on  07/01  at  09:04 PM

Keshmeshi - I second your bullshit. I just can’t drum up any sympathy for men who feel that they need to exercise their class rage by intimidating and humiliating girls and women. My empathy just dries the fuck up.

Paul, their feelings of “invisibility” and need to assert that they’re really there, and shouldn’t be ignored, is simply a fancy way of saying “That stuck-up bitch didn’t even notice me. I’m going to make her notice.” And it’s doubtful that any of the men would have reacted particularly well if their co-workers had tried to get their daughter or sister to acknowledge their agency. “Hey, man, it’s okay that you shouted “nice tits” at my thirteen year old daughter. You were just acting out some class rage. No problem.” That’s a probable reaction, right? Since they’re all brothers together in their fight for some respect from the dominant class.

Paul <Now of course why they felt particularly dissed by women and/or only accosted women in this way is also part of the patriarchal equation, but that once again was complicated by the fact that men and women passing by the site tended to react to the workers (independent of accosting) in different ways.>

Yes. Women and girls probably reacted by keeping their heads down, hoping they wouldn’t be noticed and verbally harassed. Men walked by naturally, knowing they wouldn’t be harassed. Not very complicated at all really: women fear men far more than men fear other men. I think it might have something to do with guys being a lot bigger than women, and most sexual violence against girls and women being committed by men, but I might have to spend the rest of the summer studying this theory to really figure it out.

Comment #91: ksms  on  07/01  at  09:20 PM

Newer automobiles are difficult for the non-professional to work on; plastic parts and casings make the repair of appliances impossible

And, of course, there’s the fact that most of the things typically mentioned are things where it’s affordable (and considered perfectly normal) to call in a professional.  When the trees in my family’s yard needed pruning, my mom called the tree pruning dudes, just like everyone else on our street did.  Everyone I know who owns a car takes it to a mechanic when it breaks down.  If mowing the lawn is a huge issue for you, you can pay a neighbor kid to do it for like $15 a pop.  Same goes for shoveling snow.  There are entire genres of installation, repair, and maintenance professionals to call if you want to install a new AC system (finally looked up a swamp cooler!) or just about any other major home improvement, and nobody would consider you an elitist for using their services.

Contemplate hiring a maid, though, and you are A) a gold-digger/“rich bitch”, B) an evil traitor to Teh Oppressed Working Classes, or C) neglecting your womanly duties.

Comment #92: The Opoponax  on  07/01  at  10:03 PM

Maybe this is just me, but… most of the heavy lifting in my household is done by both of us, as object that heavy tend to also be bulky enough to require two people.

(I do 90% of the laundry, clean the kitchen 100% of the time, I cook for myself, would cook for her if she didn’t live on drive-through food, take out the trash and recycling, ...)

Comment #93: pepito  on  07/01  at  10:03 PM

B) an evil traitor to Teh Oppressed Working Classes

You betray the working class by… hiring one of them?

I’ve got to betray me a chef!

Comment #94: pepito  on  07/01  at  10:45 PM

Your blockquote loses some of it’s thunder if you include my next sentence, mythago.

Actually, I omitted the next sentence because I figured you were getting enough flak about your obvious bitterness that your wife complained! about housework!!!! when you MOW THE LAWN!!!!!!!

Opoponax, there actually is support for women hiring a maid - or at least a ‘cleaning service’ - when she says that it’s being done to pick up the husband’s share of the work. “It saved our marriage”, that kind of thing. It’s seen as an appropriate and preferable response to either divorcing his lazy ass, or sucking it up and admitting that he’d rather cling to his male privilege than admit that, yes, cleaning the gutters once a year is probably not more onerous than preparing meals 3x/day 7x/week. You don’t often hear men grumble that they’ve TRIED to get their wives to change the damn oil in the car, she just won’t do it, and so he finally gave up and takes the car to the oil change place.

Comment #95: mythago  on  07/01  at  11:31 PM

Eyeballs off,
Thanks for saying something about my post. I agree that people shouldn’t try to make others uncomfortable, of course, and especially not strangers who have done nothing to them. But anxiety, loneliness, and hurt at exclusion or marginality are dominant facts of many people’s experience in certain situations or at some periods of their lives, and I think it’s understandable that these feelings sometimes emerge awkwardly in body language for brief moments despite a general intention to respect others’ privacy. Yes, women as a class get the worst of this fact and it must be worse than irritating at times when these glances (and the rest of the stuff Amanda mentioned in her post) add up as one dares to simply walk down the street. Ultimately, though, it seems to me that for men (or anyone) to focus on issuing themselves a negative command (I mustn’t glance at her inappropriately! etc.) is likely to prove counterproductive after a while—self-consciousness can become obsessive and can easily feed a subjective sense of marginality and grievance. Better perhaps for people to keep the general goal of courtesy in mind but to focus on making their actual relationships and lifestyle satisfying, which will presumably remove a lot of the tension that gives rise to these conflicts in the first place.

Comment #96: gil  on  07/01  at  11:46 PM

Paul, their feelings of “invisibility” and need to assert that they’re really there, and shouldn’t be ignored, is simply a fancy way of saying “That stuck-up bitch didn’t even notice me. I’m going to make her notice.”

I didn’t think Paul was trying to solicit sympathy for these harassers.  I do think it’s interesting that they would describe their conduct in terms that relate to class—even if what it ultimately proves is that they’re using class backlash to justify—self-servingly—outbursts of male privilege.

Comment #97: FlipYrWhig  on  07/02  at  03:24 PM

I would have liked a little more examination from men into why it’s so easy to let women do all the shit work in our feminist era, but apparently, that sore spot is a discussion for another time

Why not now?

What kind of work you do is about negotiation and power, so I think the rest of your article essentially answers that question.  As you have pointed out in other posts, it’s not only gender, but also race and class that must be taken into account simultaneously.  Even women in SAH situations hire out this work, if they are financially able,  to those lower in the socioeconomic order than themselves.

This is a tangential issue, perhaps, but if you want to ask why men don’t step up to do more of this work without being nagged, that’s trickier issue, but there are solutions for men to do this work and find it gratifying enough that they want to do more.

Comment #98: Michael Tuchman  on  07/02  at  04:30 PM

As one of the contributors to the book, thank you for the great review!  I don’t often post online, and I didn’t have a chance to read through all the other responses, but I wanted to mention, in response to your last concern about housework, childcare, etc., that there are two books I know of that touch on these issues.  They’re a matched pair, and although I seem to recall the first (written by women) as being better than the second (written by men), they’re both pretty solid.  Here are links to their amazon pages:

http://www.amazon.com/Bitch-House-Solitude-Motherhood-Marriage/dp/0060936460/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215028138&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Bastard-Couch-Explain-Feelings-Fatherhood/dp/B000GG4FN6/ref=pd_sim_b_1

Comment #99: Tal Peretz  on  07/02  at  04:50 PM

Men Speak Out is great because it reminds me that there are men out there grappling with their privilege and internalized sexism.  It is too easy to forget that not everyone thinks women are just to be looked at or just to be fucked.

Comment #100: Lady Madonna  on  07/03  at  02:11 AM

As another contributor, thanks, Amanda, for a very fine and thoughtful review.

And this is another piece I almost contributed; it touches on the housework issue a bit.

http://hugoschwyzer.net/2005/11/30/relinquishing-control-some-thoughts-on-men-women-and-the-domestic-sphere/

Comment #101: Hugo Schwyzer  on  07/06  at  11:56 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.