Editor’s Note: I wrote this (obviously) over a year ago, but felt nervous about posting it while things were still so heated, and left it as a draft. Well, re-reading this today I’ve decided it’s worth posting anyway, as things have only gotten worse–and yet things also seem to be approaching a watershed moment.
I have been doing a great deal of thinking since the Gillette ad impacted the scene this week. I’ve watched the ad. I’ve read the reactions and the defenses. And, at long length, I’ve come to a few conclusions.
By itself the ad is not that big a deal. It was designed to cause controversy, and it delivered. I’m still not sure why society has gone from “corporations are evil” to “corporations are our moral superiors and we should let them preach to us”, but whatever. They go where the money is, and I can see how Gillette might want to hide their “business as usual” behind a patina of “let’s end ‘boys will be boys'”. Yes, I’m doubting their sincerity here. But that is so far beside the point that I’m going to leave it right there.
Ultimately what this ad represents is just one more salvo in the Second Battle of the Sexes. This is not just a continuation of The Battle of the Sexes; this is something new and unique. The First Battle of the Sexes, back in the 1960’s through 1980’s, were to level the playing field. That battle was largely won by women, and it was largely a good thing.
The Second Battle of the Sexes is not about equal opportunity. It’s about subjugation. It’s about “it’s our turn to dominate.” It’s about redefining roles, not just for women, but for men. It’s about mutation of “toxic masculinity” from being a label for those men of baser instinct to being internally redundant–masculinity itself is toxic. Maleness is the root of all the wrongs in the world, and it must be thrown down. They even have the American Psychiatric Association on their side:
In my practice as a psychotherapist, I’ve seen an increase of depression in young men who feel emasculated in a society that is hostile to masculinity. New guidelines from the American Psychological Association defining “traditional masculinity” as a pathological state are likely only to make matters worse.
True, over the past half-century ideas about femininity and masculinity have evolved, sometimes for the better. But the APA guidelines demonize masculinity rather than embracing its positive aspects. In a press release, the APA asserts flatly that “traditional masculinity—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful.” The APA claims that masculinity is to blame for the oppression and abuse of women.
The report encourages clinicians to evaluate masculinity as an evil to be tamed, rather than a force to be integrated. “Although the majority of young men may not identify with explicit sexist beliefs,” it states, “for some men, sexism may become deeply engrained in their construction of masculinity.” The association urges therapists to help men “identify how they have been harmed by discrimination against those who are gender nonconforming”—an ideological claim transformed into a clinical treatment recommendation.
ERICKA KOMISAR, The Wall Street Journal
Because some men and boys are taking their masculinity in a bad direction, all men are to blame and must be fixed. And by “fixed” they mean made indistinguishable from women. We’re told these days that it’s perfectly fine to be gay, to be queer, to be transgender, to be female. There are few left advocating that it’s okay to be male. Oh, they’ll tell you such advocacy is unnecessary, as men have all the privilege and always have, but that in itself sounds suspiciously like an argument meant to stir up anti-male sentiment.
There’s no doubt in most any reasonable man’s mind that there are bad men out there who need to be stopped. One only has to watch Kristina Kuzmic’s latest video to see these horrid men on display. The examples she gives should horrify any decent man. It made me mad to watch it, and had those men been with me in person I’d have been ready to punch them in the nose.
But that’s the trouble with our modernized society. Any horrible person (and it’s by no means limited to men) can be horrible with near impunity, kept safe by the anonymity of the Internet. Not only does stern scolding not affect them, they feed on it. (And this is one reason why, however well-intentioned, Gillette’s call to action is likely doomed from the start.)
So here we are, facing a Second Battle of the Sexes. Part of the trouble is that a large portion of the female side still thinks they are fighting the First Battle, while the rest (perhaps a smaller portion, but certainly louder) are fighting the next war and using the others as cannon fodder.
The Gillette ad is a fine example of this. It’s a Second Battle of the Sexes assault on men using First Battle weapons. It’s an appeal to the noble, protective aspects of masculinity wrapped in a “men are our equals, so give us a hand here” message from the First Battle. It completely ignores any culpability on the part of women. Its as if they honestly believe that a constant barrage of “all men are rapists, masculinity is evil, they all need to be displaced and overcome” isn’t partly responsible for some men adopting an “us vs. them” mentality. Male “safe spaces” where they might have been able to learn how to channel their masculinity appropriately have been under attack for years. Activities they enjoy are increasingly held up as examples of toxicity because of the poor examples of a few. And yet males of sufficient celebrity or the right political leanings are regularly given a pass.
These toxic feminists have worked hard to make men feel guilty for being men. Competition? Bad. Aggression? Bad. Protective nature? Outdated, unwanted, unnecessary and, yes, bad. So it’s ironic, and even cynical to appeal to men’s protective nature when it’s useful, while simultaneously denigrating and undermining it.
I can already hear the arguments building. “We’re not all like that! We love and respect men! We have wonderful husbands who are raising our sons to be wonderful young men! We don’t want to emasculate men, we just want the bad ones to stop. We’d never let things go as far as you’re suggesting!”
Let’s step back a minute, then. Via this Gillette ad men are being asked to stand up to the jerks among us, the ones who aren’t treating women respectfully as equals. We’re being asked to use our influence to set them straight and keep them in line. We’re being appealed to through our positive masculine qualities, as if it’s okay to be masculine.
So can we turn to you, women, with a similar request? There are some rotten elements among you, too. Some are using you to further their fight to overthrow men. Some are undermining your own reasonable objectives (see that Kristina Kuzmic video. Most of her examples of people who disagree with her fighting back against the sleaze-bag posters were women). Can we ask you to use your influence to set them straight and keep them in line? If our bad apples are on us, and our responsibility to clean up, can we agree that your bad apples are on you? Can we work together as equal partners to set our houses in order?
Maybe then our job of policing men will be easier, as fewer will have the excuse that they’re only fighting back against an increasingly hostile society that doesn’t value them and doesn’t want them. And in the process you’ll help yourselves, as the same women who are hating men and seeking their downfall are also the ones putting down any woman who doesn’t make the life choices they feel you should make. It’d be ironic if women shrugged off the expectations of men only to then saddle themselves with the expectations of other women who care nothing for their happiness, only their own agendas.
Perhaps the real “battle of the sexes” should be against those who would pull us apart and make us fight one another instead of working together to make things better for everyone.