This semester, a men’s issues awareness group has been trying to organize and be recognized as a student group on Ryerson’s campus. This has been a hot news story for Ryerson media as a similar group was denied student group status in 2013. I’m a co-organizer of the Ryerson Feminist Collective; we are currently applying for student group status with the Ryerson Students’ Union. My fellow co-organizers, Jackie Mlotek and Areezo Najibzadeh, and I have been doing a lot of interviews with Ryerson media about our group as well as our opposition to men’s issues awareness groups. Each time we have talked to a reporter, I have added more each time. As of now, these thoughts are scattered amongst a variety of Ryerson media and could possibly not be included in the articles, so I’m going to put them all together here.
Fear on Campus:
One of the reasons I do not support men’s issues awareness groups is that students are fearful of them organizing on campus. Several sexual assault survivors have disclosed that they have not been attending their classes after seeing men’s issues presence on campus. The specific group on campus has claimed that they are not misogynistic because 45% of their membership is women. A few women being comfortable and feeling safe enough to join this group does not negate the fear other women, feminists and survivors feel. Men’s issues groups have a long history of harassing and threatening women, feminists and survivors across university campuses, I don’t blame people for being fearful and suspicious of these groups.
Intersectional or Bust:
Intersectionality is the acknowledgement that people experience multiple oppressions and privileges simultaneously. Many feminists have recognized that any discussion of gender cannot be done without an intersectional framework as race, class, sexuality, ability, etc. influences the way one experiences gender. For example, my experience of being a white woman is very different than a Black woman’s experience. Men’s issues groups do not seem to have taken any type of intersectional approach in their work. Issues these groups address are often chosen by white, straight, cisgender men based on their experiences. Discussions of other identities and issues that do not affect white, cisgender, straight men are absent from the conversation.
I’ve never seen or heard of men’s issues groups address issues that do not impact white, straight, cisgender men. They have been absent from any discussions of men of colour experiencing police brutality. They are very vocal about how there are more men in prisons than women, but the overrepresentation of Black and Indigenous men is never mentioned. Transgender men are not even included in discussions of men’s issues. The group on campus wants to discuss literacy rates in schools; will the experiences of Black youth who are pushed out of school be part of this discussion? How about the unequal practices in suspending students from school based on race? Where does poverty and class come into these discussions? I haven’t seen any men’s issues groups out protesting the closure of a men’s shelter.
Are you really addressing men’s issues when you only talk about those experienced by the most privileged of the group?
Men’s issues groups completely ignore the social structures that shape experiences. Men’s issues groups gather angry young men and provide them with an outlet for that anger which is to blame women and feminism. Young men are angry; pointing the blame of that anger to feminism and women adds fuel to the fire. This does not constructively dismantle where that anger comes from. The unattainable expectations of men today were not put in place by women and feminism, they came from a patriarchal system. While patriarchy undoubtedly privileges men, the system also harms them. A lot of the issues men face would be resolved with the dismantling of patriarchy. So why blame feminism and women? It’s a lot easier and unlike patriarchy, we are a tangible source of blame that you can see. Plus, they may not want to dismantle a system that ultimately privileges them.
Men’s rights groups only address larger social structures when they perceive themselves as a victim of those oppressions. In the wake of several school shootings in the United States, many have pointed out these shooting rampages are mostly committed by white men. Men’s issues groups call this sexism and racism. You cannot be sexist towards a man and cannot be racist towards a white person; there’s no such thing as reverse racism and sexism. These things have historical context and are upheld by institutions; they do not apply to you when are privileged in that system.
These groups also call for equality, which implies that men do not have equal status to women. Men have never had to fight for their rights based on their identity of being male. Men have fought for other rights based on other aspects of their identity such as race, ability, class, sexuality, etc., but never based on being men.
A Way to Talk about Men’s Issues:
Men do have issues and they should be discussed; I don’t oppose these groups for simply wanting to talk about the issues men face. The White Ribbon Campaign does an excellent job talking about men’s issues; it’s done within a framework that recognizes the privilege of being a man and that harmful ideas of manhood can lead to violence against women. It frames manhood and men’s issues in the larger context, which is missing in men’s issues groups. The White Ribbon Campaign talks about men’s issues without being disrespectful or threatening towards women, sexual assault survivors or feminists.
It is possible to talk about men’s issues in a healthy way but current men’s issues and rights groups cause both harm to the individuals who join them and those who oppose them. Men’s issues groups simply maintain the status quo; men stay angry and unaware of their privilege while women remain marginalized and vulnerable to men’s expression of that anger.
White Ribbon Campaign: http://www.whiteribbon.ca/