Gay Men and Feminism
July 26th, 2009 by Pelle BillingFeminism often positions itself as the ideology that cares about the rights of GLBT people. If you take a class on Women’s Studies or Gender Studies, you’ll learn about the concept of intersectionality, which claims that all kinds of oppression - whether based on gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, class, etc - interact.
This means that if you as a gay man want to accept the recognition you get from feminism (i.e. recognition and understanding that discrimination against gays exist), then you also need to accept that men are an oppressive class, and as a gay man you are part of that oppressive class. In other words, feminisms extends one helping hand, and uses the other hand to accusatorily point out gay men as oppressors.
My view on gender roles is that it is far from easy to determine which gender role is “better”, since there are so many downsides to both of them. Therefore I don’t believe in comparing the gender roles; instead, it makes more sense to try to improve both gender roles in tandem. From the position I take on gender roles, I don’t see why gay men should have to put up with being called oppressors (however indirectly), when there is an alternative that accepts their sexuality fully, without slapping the oppressor label on them.
IMO, the natural place for gays to fight for their rights is in a men’s rights movement or a gender liberation movement beyond feminism. As men, gay men experience many of the downsides of the male gender role, except for the downsides that are directly connected to heterosexual marriage and relationships.
Straight men and gay men have more things in common when discussing gender issues than do gays and feminist women.
Tags: masculism
July 26th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Interesting. Gay men and straight men both do have the common issue of going against the gender roles what men are “supposed to do”. I think this bond between feminism and gay men may be the result of their respective movements getting under way much much earlier than MRAs. This has allowed for them to grow individually and to recognize their similarities. I know I’ve brought this up time difference up before but I think its one of the biggest crippling factors MRAs have to make up for.
While I think intentionality is worth talking about I can imagine people reading this and accusing you of attempting to split hairs and drive a wedge between feminism and gay men. Tread carefully.
July 26th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
My post was a bit pointed on purpose. But I also believe that gay men could for a bridge between feminists and MRAs. Both camps will likely listen to gay men, while the two camps may not listen to each other.
July 27th, 2009 at 5:05 am
Gay men have had little to do with feminism in most countries I know of, and the relationship between straight and lesbian feminists has been an uneasy one, to say the least.
July 29th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
“Gay men have had little to do with feminism in most countries I know of,…”
I think this is right. Threr has been some kind of alliance in gender studies departments, but I don’t see how much that extends beyond academic circles.
“…and the relationship between straight and lesbian feminists has been an uneasy one, to say the least.”
Delightfully understated. Lesbian feminsts have vilified straight feminists as sleeping with the enemy, and I have seen some really pathological things on the internet about giving birth and heterosexuality in general. I think some of the apparent paradox is created rather than real, and has to do with lumping radical feminists in with feminists and then marvelling at the contradictions.
July 29th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
“As men, gay men experience many of the downsides of the male gender role, except for the downsides that are directly connected to heterosexual marriage and relationships.”
Not so fast. A huge number of gay men, maybe even a majority of the actual population, marry women in their younger years, and they face all the same bigotry in the family court system as straight men do. They face all the same instituitonal bigotry with regard to domestic violence enforcement that straight men do.
But there are advantages. My son is straight. I don’t think a straight father would give him quite the same advice I do about women, and that is because my experience of a realtionship with a woman was fundamentally different.
July 29th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
“A huge number of gay men, maybe even a majority of the actual population, marry women in their younger years, and they face all the same bigotry in the family court system as straight men do.”
Good point.
August 5th, 2009 at 3:51 am
“This means that if you as a gay man want to accept the recognition you get from feminism (i.e. recognition and understanding that discrimination against gays exist), then you also need to accept that men are an oppressive class, and as a gay man you are part of that oppressive class. In other words, feminisms extends one helping hand, and uses the other hand to accusatorily point out gay men as oppressors.”
I’m hearing that you are uncomfortable with taking responsibility for, or even acknowledging that men have historically, and continue to in many contemporary societies, oppress women. After reading your excellent post in which you explain to a woman that she needs to be responsible for the abuse she suffered, I am wondering how that sense of responsibility pertains to men. Is responsibility something we can only discuss as individuals? Is it that, in your personal experience, you never consciously chose to oppress a woman and therefore you feel uncomfortable accepting blame for actions that are not of your choosing? I’m trying to square things up here.
It’s simply dishonest to claim that men never have, or never do, oppress women, as it is likewise dishonest to say that women never benefited under patriarchy in any way. In my view, what is necessary if we are to reconcile and transcend gender is that we must all be honest about where we are and where we’ve been.
Pretending that men were helping women out by denying them voting rights is simply dishonest. Pretending that women are empowered by using men as sperm donors and wallets is equally dishonest. Women and men have been wounded by a system that has for millennia denied our full humanity. Patriarchy did, in fact, remove far more female agency than it removed male agency, though there were consolation prizes for females and prices to pay for males. Admitting that patriarchy benefits/benefited males does not mean that you must agree that women never benefited and men never lost out. All are true.
August 5th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Is responsibility something we can only discuss as individuals? Is it that, in your personal experience, you never consciously chose to oppress a woman and therefore you feel uncomfortable accepting blame for actions that are not of your choosing? I’m trying to square things up here.
Honestly yes I think it is something that can only be discussed as individuals. I’m not sure about the others but I only take blame and responsibility for the things that I do or don’t do. I take blame and responsibility for the times in my life that I have disrespected women but I am not going to do the same for actions that were carried out by other people when the only thing I have in common with them is gender just as I don’t expect all women to take responsibility for the actions of Mary Winkler, Andrea Yates, and Cara Harris. Speaking of why stop at gender? Why not do the same for race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc….
It’s simply dishonest to claim that men never have, or never do, oppress women, as it is likewise dishonest to say that women never benefited under patriarchy in any way.
While this is mostly true I note your selective wording to keep from saying women have ever oppressed men.
August 5th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
My general take on this is that both men and women have been oppressed by their gender roles. Who got the worst deal? I don’t know. But stating it this way is much closer to the truth IMO, than saying that men as a group have oppressed women as a group.
Concerning responsibility I think it needs to be individual. How can I be responsible for what other people do? I cannot control their actions so how can I be responsible? This is exactly what I wrote concerning the abused women. She can only be responsible for her own actions, not for the actions of the abuser.
August 5th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
“In my view, what is necessary if we are to reconcile and transcend gender is that we must all be honest about where we are and where we’ve been. ”
Exactly. And that’s the problem with feminism’s discourse on gender.
August 5th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
“Who got the worst deal? I don’t know.” This is either dishonest or uneducated. If you studied history you would know that women in this country had no rights, were not citizens, could not own property, WERE property… until quite recently. I assume, given your erudite approach, that you have studied history but that you cannot bring yourself to honestly admit that men, as a class, have and do oppress women, as a class. Until most people can admit this, no healing is going to happen because wounded people need to hear that those who wounded them understand and recognize that fact, and that they will discontinue the wounding behavior. Pretending that you “don’t know” doesn’t cut it.
Feminism is a philosophy which has helped many women (and men) to heal from heinous levels of abuse. It has it’s angry adherents. In fact, healthy healing processes entail anger, which is why I can excuse some degree of feminist bashing, but to continue to blame feminist/feminism forever is no different than women continuing to blame men forever. There are a lot of really aware and evolved feminists who would be more than happy to reconcile and heal gender wounds right along side you. I am one of them. But sly dishonesty does not promote your cause. If I can admit that some feminists are angry and say hurtful things about males, as a class, can you admit that some men hate woman and have perpetuated the oppression of women as a class?
August 5th, 2009 at 11:34 pm
What I find interesting is that when the conversation is about something in which women do have it the worst feminists want everyone to admit and shout it from the mountain yet whenever the situation is about some other group having it the worst feminists like to cry “Oppression Olympics”. And I say specifically feminists because they invoke that argument more than any other group I’ve seen. For some reason figuring out who has it the worst only matters when its women but otherwise its Oppression Olympics and such bickering gets in the way of progress.
…you cannot bring yourself to honestly admit that men, as a class, have and do oppress women, as a class.
That is because men as a class have not done so. The precious “patriarchy” that feminists go on about was started and is perpetuated by a subset of men but as usual they hold the entire class to the actions of some of its members.
Until most people can admit this, no healing is going to happen because wounded people need to hear that those who wounded them understand and recognize that fact, and that they will discontinue the wounding behavior.
I agree but the thing is a large portion of the people being held to the oppression of women are not doing the oppressing. Women are raped and abused by men and all of a sudden the entire male gender is responsible for stopping rape. This piece of advice you offer here would be much more effective if the people that have been wounded would actually go after the ones that wounded then instead of everyone that shares a trait with the one(s) that wounded them.
If I can admit that some feminists are angry and say hurtful things about males, as a class, can you admit that some men hate woman and have perpetuated the oppression of women as a class?
You admit angry words but want an admission of oppression in return? Let me ask if you are willing to admit that some WOMEN (not to be confused with feminists) have perpetuated the oppression of men as a class?
August 6th, 2009 at 4:52 am
Deva,
Your idea of “responsibility” seems more akin to “collective guilt and punishment”.
Do you also think that all straight people, including women, should be “taking responsibility” for the stoning of gay people in Iran, even if they don’t agree with it?
And why all the talk about the past? Let’s focus on what is happening here and now.
August 10th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Yeah, there’s something fishy going on here when we want people today to take responsability for what happened yesterday (Let’s blame all Germans for what Hitler did… forever.)
If shit happens today that my race, gender, or whatever is responsible for, I don’t think I should feel any guilt, because that is, as Unomi said, what this discussion tends to lead to. It’s not that constructive.
On the other hand, you could argue that Pelle is downplaying certain aspects or perspectives. We could imagine, because it’s hard to really know, that there has been tens of thousands of women who all wanted public power but weren’t allowed to (laws) and they were discriminated against, oppressed. But then again, I think Pelle is hesitant here because he really doesn’t wanna play the blame game. And as he said, aren’t we suppose to look at the downsides of men as well? And if we really do, then what picture does emerge? Let’s say, just for sake of argument, that women have had it far worse (I doubt it, and how the hell do you measure it). Then what good does it do for the men of today to stand up and say “I’m sorry”, other than to make the women “feel good”. That’s dishonest and weak if you ask me. And it’s not respectful to women.
This whole “you need to take responsibility” is misguided. But still understandable. If you read a lot of history, and gender courses (which you almost can’t escape), you’re trained to spot the unbalance between the sexes. And when someone, (Pelle), doesn’t talk about the oppression of women when they talk about history, one feels that they are either uneducated, lying or just plain stupid. Because that’s the way WE are TRAINED to read history. Imagine a history book that has footnotes or facts about biology/psychology alongside the text. That would be a different way to read history, and it would transform our view of ourselves as well. But the way we write history today is with our social constructionist glasses on. The consequenses are huge.
August 10th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
@unomi
“Deva,
Your idea of “responsibility” seems more akin to “collective guilt and punishment”.
Do you also think that all straight people, including women, should be “taking responsibility” for the stoning of gay people in Iran, even if they don’t agree with it?
And why all the talk about the past? Let’s focus on what is happening here and now.”
Very well put, unomi.
@Paddan
That’s a very balanced take on things. We need more perspectives that’s for sure. A main problem with postmodern feminists is that they absolutize their own perspective. If they were open to the whole range of perspectives, then I think that people would be more willing to take a look at the partial truth that they are bringing to the table.
February 3rd, 2010 at 10:32 pm
I’ve always thought, that gay men were at least theoretically the ulitimate anti-feminist group. It is a group that literally has no need for women or to interact with them in any way.
February 4th, 2010 at 12:52 am
“It is a group that literally has no need for women or to interact with them in any way.’
The ultimate MGTOWs. I once saw - it must have been ten or more years ago - an article in a major women’s magazine in the US - Cosmo? - in which the writer “wondered” if all this gay stuff was just a misogynist ploy on the part of men to evade women’s rightful sexual power. I am sure this writer thought of herself as a feminist and equally sure that masses of feminists would have flayed her alive for such a heretical or maybe just impolitic contention - good for them.
June 4th, 2010 at 8:16 am
Please don’t call me an oppressor… The male gender isn’t the culprit, the culprit is what the male gender has installed, as values in society. It’s like calling me an oppressive racist just because I’m white. So I’m therefore also oppressing jews…
Oh and you’re wrong. Gay men shouldn’t be feminists. Every fucking one should be a feminist, no specifics.
I consider myself a feminist, a vehement one at that, and I’m gay but I always wondered whether I would be one if I were straight… Oh and you got it wrong people, gay men, on average are more feminist than straight men. 1) They are more open minded. 2) They know about gender roles. 3) Our relationship to women is more equal, friend-like.