Men in feminism

Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the majority of pro-feminist authors emerged from France including François Poullain de La Barre, Denis Diderot, Paul Henri Thiry d'Holbach, and Charles Louis de Montesquieu.[1] Montesquieu introduced female characters, like Roxana in Persian Letters, who subverted patriarchal systems, and represented his arguments against despotism. The 18th century saw male philosophers attracted to issues of human rights, and men such as the Marquis de Condorcet championed women's education. Liberals, such as the utilitarian Jeremy Bentham, demanded equal rights for women in every sense, as people increasingly came to believe that women were treated unfairly under the law.[2]

In the 19th century, there was also an awareness of women's struggle. The British legal historian, Sir Henry Maine, criticized the inevitability of patriarchy in his Ancient Law (1861).[3] In 1866, John Stuart Mill, author of The Subjection of Women, presented a women's petition to the British parliament, and supported an amendment to the 1867 Reform Bill. Although his efforts focused on the problems of married women, it was an acknowledgment that marriage for Victorian women was predicated upon a sacrifice of liberty, rights, and property. His involvement in the women's movement stemmed from his long-standing friendship with Harriet Taylor, whom he eventually married.

Parker Pillsbury was born on September 22, 1809, in Hamilton, Massachusetts. His parents were Oliver Pillsbury and Anna Smith. He died on July 7, 1898, in Concord, New Hampshire. When he was little, he went to district schools until he attended Gilmanton Theological Seminary to graduate in 1838. After a year he became a minister at the Congregational church at Loudon, NH. Later on, he married Sarah H. Sargent. With his wife he only had one child, Helen Pillsbury. He became Massachusetts Abolitionist and woman suffrage leader.[4] His Acts of the Anti-Slavery Apostles was history of the New England Abolitionist movement.[5]

Parker Pillsbury and other abolitionist men held feminist views and openly identified as feminist, using their influence to promote the rights of women and slaves respectively.[6][7] Pillsbury helped draft the constitution of the feminist American Equal Rights Association in 1865 serving as vice-president of the New Hampshire Woman Suffrage Association. In 1868 and 1869, Parker edited The Revolution with Elizabeth Cady Stanton.[8]

In 1840, women were refused the right to participate at the World Anti-Slavery Convention in London. Supporters of the women attending argued that it was hypocritical to forbid women and men from sitting together at this convention to end slavery; they cited similar segregationist arguments in the United States that were used to separate whites and blacks. When women were still denied to join in the proceedings, abolitionists William Lloyd Garrison, Charles Lenox Remond, Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, and Henry Stanton, all elected to sit silently with the women.[9]

One argument against female participation, both at the World Anti-Slavery Convention, and commonly in the nineteenth century, was the suggestion that women were ill-constituted to assume male responsibilities. Abolitionist Thomas Wentworth Higginson argued against this, stating:

I do not see how any woman can avoid a thrill of indignation when she first opens her eyes to the fact that it is really contempt, not reverence, that has so long kept her sex from an equal share of legal, political, and educational rights...[a woman needs equal rights] not because she is man's better half, but because she is his other half. She needs them, not as an angel, but as a fraction of humanity.[9]

American sociologist Michael Kimmel categorized American male responses to feminism at the turn of the twentieth century into three categories: pro-feminist, masculinist, and antifeminist.[10][11] Pro-feminist men, believing that changes would also benefit men, generally welcomed women's increased participation in the public sphere, and changes in the division of labour in the home;[11] in contrast anti-feminists opposed women's suffrage and participation in public life, supporting a traditional patriarchal family model.[11] Finally, the masculinist movement was characterized by men's groups, and developed as an indirect reaction to the perceived femininization of manhood.[11]

The men’s liberation movement (MLM) is a social movement which started in the late 1960-70s.[12] The MLM stresses the negative portions of traditional masculinity. [reference needed] The MLM and the men’s rights movement (MRM) are different. MRM addresses the unequal or unfair treatment of men. MLM promotes liberation for men from stereotypes, such as the idea that men cannot express their feelings and emotions because they are men. Feminist and gender scholars believe that the MLM was created among heterosexual middle-class men to respond to the cultural changes occurring at the time.[13]

The MLM began in the early 1970s as consciousness-raising groups to help men free themselves from the limits of sex roles. Proponents of men's liberation argued that male bonding is a mechanism to conform men's identities to a single sense of masculinity, which reinforces patriarchy.[reference needed] In lieu of such bonding, MLM called for the open acknowledgment of the costs of masculinity: men's entrapment in their fixed role as the breadwinner of the nuclear family and the taboo against men expressing emotions. [reference needed]

The link between the biological male sex and the social construction of masculinity was seen by some scholars[14] as a limitation on men's collaboration with the feminist movement. This sharply contrasted with sex role theory, which viewed gender as something determined by biological differences between the sexes. Other key elements of the men's liberation movement were the ideas that genders are relational and each cannot exist without the other, and that gender as a whole is a social construction and not a biological imperative. Thus, second-wave pro-feminist writers[15] were able to explore the interactions between social practices and institutions, and ideas of gender.

The men's rights movement was formed in the 1980s as a splinter breaking away from the men's liberation movement, as part of a backlash to feminism.[16][17][18] This group claimed that men's rights were being reduced by feminism, that feminist advances had not been balanced by the elimination of traditional feminine privileges, and that the men should empower themselves by revitalizing their masculinity.[17] This argument was also echoed in religious circles with the Muscular Christianity movement.

The feminist movement is divided on whether or not men can be considered feminists. Male-exclusionary feminists believe that men can not be true feminists because they do not have the experience of living as a woman, such as facing the discrimination and stereotyping that women do.[19] They may also believe that male feminists might have ulterior motives or be insincere ("performative") in their feminism.

As feminist writer Shira Tarrant has argued, a number of men have engaged with and contributed to feminist movements throughout the history.[20] Today, academics like Michael Flood, Michael Messner, and Michael Kimmel are involved with men's studies and pro-feminism.[9][21][22]

There is debate within feminism over whether or not men can be feminists. Some feminists, like Simone de Beauvoir in her seminal text The Second Sex, argue that men cannot be feminists because of the intrinsic differences between the sexes.[23] Separatist feminists also hold this view, arguing that only by rejecting the masculine perspective entirely can feminism allow women to define themselves on their own terms, and that the involvement of men in the feminist movement will inculcate the values of patriarchy into any social change. Some writers[24] hold that men do not suffer the same oppression as women, and as such cannot comprehend women's experience, and as such cannot constructively contribute to feminist movements or concepts.[25][26]

The painting Anka, 2010, by Wilhelm Sasnal, is a pro feminist depiction of the artist's self-aware, independent wife

Others argue that men's identification with the feminist movement is necessary for furthering the feminist causes. A number of feminist writers maintain that identifying as a feminist is the strongest stand men can take in the struggle against sexism against women. They have argued that men should be allowed, or even encouraged, to participate in the feminist movement.[27][28] For some, the participation of men in the feminist movement is seen as part of a process of the universalization of the feminist movement, necessary for its continued relevance.[29] One challenge of motivating men to participate, or promoting their inclusion, in feminism has been linked to the disconnect between gender and intersecting components of identity. One example of this is that some African American men have been unable to carry over the fundamental principles and lessons of the struggle for civil rights into a meaningful contribution to the struggle to end sexist oppression. However, at a more primary level, the bonds formed in the civil rights movement established valuable solidarity among African American women and men.[30] This is an approach that may be transferable and equally useful to the feminist movement. Making these important connections understood by women and men might greatly benefit feminism. As described in the theory of strategic intersectionality,[31] utilizing the experiences of one part of our identity that intersects with another provides insightful tools to further improve the available tactics of the feminist movement. Other female feminists argue that men cannot be feminists simply because they are not women, cannot understand women's issues, and are collectively members of the class of oppressors against women. They assert that men are granted inherent privileges that prevent them from fundamentally identifying with feminist struggles and thus make it impossible for them to identify with feminists.[32]

One idea supporting men's inclusion as "feminists" is that excluding men from the feminist movement labels it as solely a female task, which could be argued to be sexist in itself. This idea asserts that until men share equal responsibility for struggling to end sexism against women, the feminist movement will reflect the very sexist contradiction it wishes to eradicate.[28] The term "profeminist" occupies the middle ground in this semantic debate, because it offers a degree of closeness to feminism without using the term itself. Also, the prefix "pro" characterizes the term as more proactive and positive. There has been some debate regarding the use of the hyphen (identifying as a "pro-feminist" as opposed to a profeminist), claiming that it distances the term too much from feminism proper.[27]

Masculinity scholars seek to broaden the academic discourse of gender through men's studies. While some feminists argue that most academic disciplines, except women's studies, can be considered "men's studies" because they claim that the content of the curriculum consists of primarily male subjects, masculinity scholars[54] assert that men's studies specifically analyzes men's gendered experiences. Central to men's studies is the understanding that "gender" does not mean "female," the same way "race" does not mean "black." Men's studies are typically interdisciplinary, and incorporate the feminist conception that "the personal is political." Masculinity scholars strive to contribute to the existing dialogue about gender created through women's studies.[55]

There are various arguments and movements that support the cause for gender equality as it relates to feminism. Jackson Katz suggests that we have a responsibility to help youths to create a society that will prevent future generations from experiencing the current issues regarding gender equality.[56] Gender studies is often referred to as women's issues. Women's issues are sometimes viewed as issues that men contribute to. Katz argues that women's issues should be men's issues as well. Katz believes that when both genders work together, there is a change that the next generation can use to avoid suffering similar tragedies.[57]

We owe it to young men. These boys didn't make the choice to be a man in a culture that tells them that manhood is a certain way. We, that have a choice, have an opportunity and a responsibility to them.

— Jackson Katz, TEDxFiDiWomen conference, November 2012

In 2001, a Gallup poll found that 20% of American men considered themselves feminists, with 75% saying they were not.[58] A 2005 CBS poll found that 24% of men in the United States claim the term "feminist" is an insult. Four in five men refused to identify themselves as feminist, but when a specific definition is given the number fell to two in five. An increasing number of men said that feminism had improved their lives, in comparison to polls taken in 1983 and 1999, with an unprecedented, but marginal plurality of 47% agreeing. 60% believed that a strong women's movement is no longer needed.[59] However, a YouGov Poll of Britain in 2010 found that only 16% of men described themselves as feminist with 54% stating they were not and 8% specifically claiming to be antifeminist.[60]

In 2001, a qualitative study of men's perception of feminism showed pervasive patterns of linear reasoning. Researchers found that the participants identified two genres of feminism and two strains of feminists, and dubbed it the 'Jekyll and Hyde' binary. The participants would classify feminism and feminists as either "good" or "monstrous".[61] In 2016 the study was repeated by a new team of researchers to find that the binary persisted, as "unreasonable feminism" and "fair feminism.[62]

• ^{Note 1} Men's rights activists cited by Wood, J.T. (2011) include:

• Farrell, Warren (May–June 1991). "Men as success objects". Utne Reader. pp. 81–84.
• Fiebert, Martin S. (1987). "Some perspectives on the men's movement". Men's Studies Review. American Men’s Studies Association. 4 (4): 8–10.
• Gross, Michael (June 2000). "The lethal politics of beauty". George. 5 (5): Front cover, 52–59, 99–100.
• Mansfield, Harvey C. (2006). Manliness. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300122541.

• ^{Note 2} Men's rights activists cited by Khan, J.S. (2009) include:

• Clatterbaugh, Kenneth C. (1997). Contemporary perspectives on masculinity: men, women, and politics in modern society (2nd ed.). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. ISBN 9780813327013.
• Fox, John (March 2004). "How men's movement participants view each other". The Journal of Men's Studies. 12 (2): 103–118. doi:10.3149/jms.1202.103. S2CID 144761642.
• Lingard, Bob; Douglas, Peter (1999). Men engaging feminisms: pro-feminism, backlashes and schooling. Buckingham England Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Open University Press. ISBN 9780335198177.
• Mann, Ruth M. (January 2008). "Men's rights and feminist advocacy in Canadian domestic violence policy arenas: Contexts, dynamics, and outcomes of antifeminist backlash". Feminist Criminology. 3 (1): 44–75. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.413.6328. doi:10.1177/1557085107311067. S2CID 145502648.
• Rickabaugh, Cheryl A. (March 1994). "Just who is this guy, anyway? Stereotypes of the men's movement". Sex Roles. 30 (5–6): 459–470. doi:10.1007/BF01420603. S2CID 144990317.

• NOMAS website
• White Ribbon Campaign website