Sunday, May 24, 2009

Review: Women Respond to the Men's Movement

Women Respond to the Men's Movement
edited by: Key Leigh Hagan
1992

I found this book in the used books section of a feminist book store in Madison, WI. It was a magical place, and I recommend A Room of One's Own to anyone visiting the area.

To give some context to the book: it is a collection of essays on the mythopoetic men's movement (M^3) of the early 90s. In the end, M3 was largely a fad that gained attention through some bestsellers, and then died out. The tenets of M3 are still around and woven into our modern patriarchy, although perhaps in more subtle forms. Because the book was published 17 years ago, some of the statistics and facts are incorrect and some of the views are very 2nd wave, but the essays are still extremely relevant to the current feminist struggle. Women's place in the world has change significantly in 17 years, but it is disturbing just how much has remained the same.

With any collection, some of the pieces are great and some are less than enlightening. Occasionally the various authors contradict one another. But as whole, this book does a wonderful job of exploring the meaning of male privilege and what that means to “men's movements”. Privilege is dangerous to the oppressed and poisonous to the oppressors. Addressing the poison is essential to creating lasting change and challenging the patriarchy, but it must be kept in perspective. “The men's movement and the women's movement aren't salt and pepper; they are hangnail and hand grenade.” - Barbara Kingsolver

The book explores the question of whether there is a need for a separate men's movement or if it is something that should be integrated into the feminist movement. Do men's movements challenge patriarchy or reenforce it? What should be men's role in the feminist movement? Both/And.

3 comments:

  1. The men's movement is still around in the form of teaching women how to raise their sons into strict gender roles:
    http://www.thefword.org.uk/reviews/2009/05/raising_boys_he

    ReplyDelete
  2. I always have trouble understanding how there can be a cohesive argument for a separate men's movement. Maybe it's because I visualize it as a simple dialectic, and the men's movement is the dominant framework.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree, in most cases it doesn't make sense to divide our resources by giving men a separate group. But I can see a benefit of teaching men new ways to socialize with other men. Many conversations that reinforce oppression occur in presence of the privileged group. Many batterer intervention programs work on the model of men speaking to other men to provide an example of positive masculinity.

    ReplyDelete