And crucially, men's involvement in activism in these areas must not be seen as community service -- empathic guys who just want to help out the women they love -- but serious work that will make men's lives better, too. Men have a real stake in feminism, and no, it's not just getting laid more often.I agree that men and women should work together but with the state feminism is in these days (or moreso the people involved, that would be feminists) I can see why men aren't exactly rushing to join. It can be pretty confusing to tell someone that they need to join their side while at the same time constantly reiterating that they and their issues will remain on the back burner. Perhaps that is part of the reason why men have taken to start their own activist efforts. While women certainly have legitimate greivences its pretty unfair to think that men will push their own greivences to the side to come running to ally themselves with women's advocates (which in fact plays on the damaging male gender role of putting everyone else before himself even to his detriment).
The more men who "come out" at work as dedicated fathers, the more comfortable the next generation will be in advocating for family-friendly work policy.Men's activists (MRAs) are starting to do just that. However two of the biggest road blocks they face are children's mothers/wives/ex-wives that refuse to allow them to take a bigger role in their children's lives and the court system that such women wield as a mighy hammer against those fathers. The people that will readily get on board with the idea of mom going out into the workplace people still think a dad (or any man for that matter) wanting to care for children is trying to brainwash them or wants to abuse said children. Hopefully over time things will get easier and ultimately that next generation will succeed but the fight on that front has already started. Remember women weren't just welcomed into the workplace with open arms at first, it took time just as this will take time.
Another area in which men must and generally haven't stepped up to the plate is in advocating for less sexism in the media.Men are stepping up but I notice that most of the sexism they are speaking out against is the mass amount of rampant sexism against men in the media. This is not to say that media sexism doesn't target women however Courtney seems to think that we should just pay a bit of lip service to the sexism that targets men (kinda like how with all the sexism that targets men all she came up with is one comment about Obama's interaction with the Saudi king at the G20 Conference) and then focus all efforts on the sexism that targets women.
But I will say that she does touch on why men and women aren't coming together on issues that affect all of us:
Some feminists fear that bringing men into the fold will lead to men's demands and desires crowding out anything women have to say. I understand that this is a real concern, but I also believe that it originates in the same fear-based place from which Zincenko operates. It assumes that women and men have distinctly different issues, rather than recognizing that we share the suffering that results from gender inequity and injustice.There are people on both sides that are concerned that joining forces would cause their own unique voices to be drowned out. Even though I notice she says that such fear is real for women after starting the article off with a snide comment about the men's concerns.
Ultimately, so much of this comes down to framing. As long we use the language of "women's issues," we will be separate and unequal. But when we talk about worker's rights, health care, media integrity, and freedom from violence as quality-of-life issues, we will all become less endangered and more enlightened.True. People like to frame issues depending who should have the "right" to speak on them. I think this comes from the fear of being drowned out as she mentioned above. That is why you have some media sexism framed as a woman's issue and some is framed as a man's issue, neither side wants to risk being placed at second fiddle to the other but both have devastating effects on the other (like women are being told that men are stupid and men are being told that women are sex objects). This leads to (at least) two big problems. 1. When you have only one group speaking on something you run the risk of the discourse on that something becomingn an echo chamber in which any and all dissenting voices, no matter how legimate or respectful, are crushed. 2. People will get so caught up over whose issue it is that soon that discussion takes center stage over the actual discussion about the issue.
Like I said she hits on some good stuff (like saying that men and women really should come together) and she lands in some pitfalls (this article is almost worded as if to say that men need to learn that helping women will ultimately help themselves, that is true to an extent but to expect men to just ignore their own pain is playing right in to that old male gender role). In closing I'll borrow a line from Courtney:
"Newsflash: Men aren't from Mars and women aren't from Venus; we're all struggling to make healthy, meaningful lives on the same damn planet -- and it's time we started acting like it."