Tag Archives: men

Top 10 Worst Things to Happen to Women This Millennium

Check out this hilarious list of the ten worst things to happen to women this millennium (written by men). They’re spot on!  The top 7 at least are definitely the worst things to happen to women so far – and the millennium has just started!

Here’s part of the list.  Check out the whole thing here.  Seriously.  Go.  Right now.

6. Bridalplasty

As if we needed any illustration of how crazy-making the Marriage Industry has become, there’s a reality show wherein engaged women compete to win the wedding—and plastic surgery procedure—of their dreams. The winner isn’t allowed to see her groom until the wedding day, when her new look is revealed. Is she getting her face butchered for the wedding or her husband? Either way, it’s bad for women, the country, the world, the human race, and really just too fucked up for words.

5. Reality TV

The Bachelor, America’s Next Top Model, Rock of Love, Bridezillas, My Super Sweet 16, Toddlers and Tiaras, The Swan, Joe Millionaire, Married by America, For Love or Money, Jersey Shore, Farmer Wants a Wife, Flavor of Love, I Love New York, The Cougar … shall we go on?

4. Vajazzling

It’s when a woman glues crystals to her “vajayjay.” And yes, it’s real. Why would women do this? It’s not entirely clear. Is it art? Is it peacocking? Ladies: we’re already excited about your pubic area. You don’t have to rip out all the hair and glue stuff to it…

Read on!

The Frisky compiled a list for men, but they aren’t as funny.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Good Men Project

The Good Men Project – a website about men that’s not sexist and heterosexist, for single men and fathers.  Check it out.  Here’s their about:

First, we’re try­ing to make the world a bet­ter place. Seri­ously. In that pur­suit, we give 25 per­cent of our prof­its to orga­ni­za­tions that help at-risk boys.

Sec­ond, we’re try­ing to rede­fine what a men’s mag­a­zine can be. Sure, we write about sports. Yes, we write about sex (although we do it with­out sell­ing sex). But unlike so many other men’s mag­a­zines, we don’t patron­ize or car­i­ca­tur­ize our audi­ence. We try to bring out the best in men, and we do that by pro­duc­ing con­tent that chal­lenges men to think deeply—and to talk about the things they don’t usu­ally talk about.

With a name like the Good Men Project, some folks assume that we’re going to tell men how to be good. This assump­tion has led at least one media critic to sug­gest that we might be a “con­ser­v­a­tive culty thing.” Oth­ers have called us “fem­i­nists” because, we sus­pect, we cel­e­brate, pub­lish, and appear to be very pop­u­lar with women. (Ms. Mag­a­zine said we are “what enlight­ened mas­culin­ity might look like in the 20th century.”)

We sup­pose we are a dif­fi­cult mag­a­zine to cat­e­go­rize, and that’s exactly how we like it. We’re not inter­ested in telling men how they should go about liv­ing their lives, nor are we intent on pro­mot­ing a cer­tain “image” of mas­culin­ity. We’re inter­ested instead in cre­at­ing a com­mu­nity where men (and the women who love us) can talk openly and hon­estly about their lives.

 

And here’s one of the many great articles from the website about Peggy Orenstein’s new book, Cinderella Ate My Daughter:

Men and the Sexualization of Young Girls by Hugo Schwyzer

Encour­ag­ing princess culture—however innocently—contributes to the sex­u­al­iza­tion of girls. Men can be part of the solu­tion to the ‘princess prob­lem.’

This may sur­prise the read­ers of the Good Men Project Mag­a­zine, but we’re part of a prob­lem: the princess problem.

More and more experts rec­og­nize that “princess cul­ture” does great harm to girls. I don’t know how many GMPM read­ers also read Red­book, but it’s worth check­ing out this story: “Lit­tle Girls Gone Wild: Why Daugh­ters Are Act­ing Too Sexy, Too Soon.” In it, Peggy Oren­stein (the author of the new and impor­tant Cin­derella Ate My Daugh­ter: Dis­patches From the Front Lines of the New Girlie-Girl Cul­ture), makes the case that a lot of the pre­ma­turely sexy behav­ior and dress we’ve all noticed is actu­ally rooted in some­thing we think is very inno­cent: the world of princesses.

You may balk—what’s sexy about a lit­tle girl in a pink princess cos­tume? But sexy, as it turns out, is not the same thing as sex­u­al­ized. Sex­u­al­iza­tion is not just impos­ing sex­u­al­ity on chil­dren before they’re ready and view­ing girls as sex­ual objects, but also valu­ing a girl for her appear­ance over her other attrib­utes. “Princesses are just a phase,” Oren­stein writes, but they mark a girl’s “first foray into the main­stream cul­ture. … And what was the first thing that cul­ture told her about being a girl? Not that she was com­pe­tent, strong, cre­ative, or smart, but that every lit­tle girl wants—or should want—to be the Fairest of Them All.”

This may be true, but how is it our prob­lem as men? Many—maybe even most of you who are read­ing this—don’t have daugh­ters. A lot of you aren’t dads at all. Whether you think lit­tle girls dressed up as Snow White are cute or not, what does the prob­lem Oren­stein describes have to do with you?

Well, for starters almost every man has—or will have—a lit­tle girl in his life. If not a daugh­ter then a niece, a lit­tle cousin, your buddy’s kid, your son’s friend from play­group. And if you care about the well-being of these girls, this issue of princess cul­ture and sex­u­al­iza­tion mat­ters to you. The bad news is, you may be part of the prob­lem; the good news is, you can be part of the solution.

♦◊♦

Thank­fully, most men aren’t sex­u­ally attracted to pre­pu­bes­cent girls. But it doesn’t mean that we don’t have a very strong response when we see a 6-year-old dressed up as cute as can be. For men, com­pli­ment­ing older girls and women for their looks is often sex­u­ally charged and likely to get you in trou­ble. But as fathers, uncles, and oth­ers notice, lit­tle girls of princess age rarely have the same cau­tion and sus­pi­cion about older men as their older sis­ters. Often trans­par­ent in their eager­ness for atten­tion and val­i­da­tion, they light up at praise. And no com­pli­ment is eas­ier to give than “You’re so pretty.”

Five-year-olds in princess cos­tumes are cute. But the prob­lem is that the com­pli­ments we give as fathers, uncles, and coaches have an impact on the self-esteem of lit­tle girls. As they grow up, they real­ize quickly (cer­tainly by age 8 or 9) that Cin­derella cos­tumes won’t cut it any­more. If they want to sus­tain the same level of atten­tion that they had when they were adorable first-graders, they’re going to need to employ a dif­fer­ent strat­egy: sex­i­ness. And that sex­i­ness gets our atten­tion all over again.

Wait a minute, you’re think­ing. I don’t leer at 10-year-olds in miniskirts. I don’t tell my niece that she’s hot. I wish girls would wait longer to be sexy! How am I part of this problem?

As Oren­stein and oth­ers point out, lit­tle girls take their cues about what is desir­able by look­ing at how boys and men respond to older girls and women. The father who lav­ishes ado­ra­tion on “Daddy’s lit­tle princess” but ogles high school cheer­lead­ers is send­ing his daugh­ter a clear mes­sage. The mes­sage is that the princess phase won’t last much longer, and if you want to grasp and hold adult male atten­tion, you need to be sexy.

This sex­i­ness has very lit­tle to do with sex, and every­thing to do with the crav­ing for val­i­da­tion and atten­tion. While all chil­dren want affir­ma­tion, princess cul­ture teaches lit­tle girls to get that approval through their looks. Lit­tle girls learn quickly what “works” to elicit ado­ra­tion from mom and dad, as well as from teach­ers, uncles, aunts, and other adults. Soon—much too soon—they notice that older girls and women get val­i­da­tion for a par­tic­u­lar kind of dress, a par­tic­u­lar kind of behav­ior. They watch their fathers’ eyes, they fol­low their uncles’ gaze. They lis­ten to what these men they love say when they see “hot” young women on tele­vi­sion or on the street. And they learn how to be from what they hear and see.

♦◊♦

This doesn’t mean that good dads shouldn’t let their daugh­ters dress up as princesses. It doesn’t mean that good dads, good big broth­ers, and good uncles should never, ever tell a lit­tle girl that she looks “cute” or “beau­ti­ful.” It does mean that those good grown men need to make sure that they’re also giv­ing her plenty of com­pli­ments that focus on her other qual­i­ties, like her intel­li­gence, her kind­ness, or her ath­leti­cism. But some­thing else mat­ters just as much: how we look at and talk about other girls and women.

Too many men do every­thing they can to pro­tect adored daugh­ters, nieces, and lit­tle sisters—while mak­ing lit­tle attempt to dis­guise their long­ing for other young women who aren’t all that much older than the child they cher­ish. Girls who are raised to see com­pli­ments as cur­rency quickly learn that if they want to keep their praise flow­ing in, they’ll need to do more to “earn” it. And too often, they learn exactly how to earn it from by lis­ten­ing to the words and fol­low­ing the eyes of the men they love and trust most.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

People in jobs traditionally held by the other sex are judged more harshly for mistakes

Keri Chiodo, Association for Psychological Science

In these modern times, people can have jobs that weren’t traditionally associated with their genders. Men are nurses; women are CEOs. A new study examines perceptions of people in high-powered jobs and finds that they’re likely to be judged more harshly for mistakes if they’re in a job that’s not normally associated with their gender.

“The reason I got interested is, there was so much talk about race and gender barriers being broken,” says Victoria Brescoll, a psychological scientist at Yale University and first author of the study. In the 2008 presidential election, a woman came close to getting a nomination, and an African-American man ended up president of the United States—a job formerly reserved for white men.

But just getting a job with high status isn’t enough, Brescoll says; you have to keep it. She suspected that people who have a job not normally associated with their gender would be under closer scrutiny and more likely to get in trouble for mistakes. “Any mistakes that they make, even very minor ones, could be magnified and seen as even greater mistakes,” she says.

Brescoll and her colleagues, Erica Dawson and Eric Luis Uhlmann, came up with a list of high-status jobs that are normally held by one gender or the other. This was easy for men, but actually quite difficult for women; the one they came up with was the president of a woman’s college. For this study, they compared that to a police chief, a traditionally male role. They pre-tested the jobs to make sure people perceived them as having similar status and also being associated with one gender or the other.

About 200 volunteers read a scenario in which either a police chief or a women’s college president made a mistake, sending not enough police officers (or campus security officers) to respond to a protest. The gender of the police chief or college president varied; different people read different texts. Then they were asked how they judged the person who made the mistake.

People who were the non-stereotypical gender were judged more harshly; the volunteers saw them as less competent and deserving of less status. The same was true in other tests with a female CEO of an aerospace engineering firm and a chief judge. The study is published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

“There is an effect called the glass cliff,” Brescoll says. Like the glass ceiling that keeps women from rising higher, the glass cliff is what counter-stereotypical individuals (such as female police chiefs) are in danger of falling from. “You don’t really know, when you’re a woman in a high status leadership role, how long you’re going to hang onto it,” she says. “You might just fall off at any point. Our study points to one way that this may happen for women in high-powered male roles.”

###

The APS journal Psychological Science is the highest ranked empirical journal in psychology. For a copy of the article “Hard Won and Easily Lost: The Fragile Status of Leaders in Gender-Stereotype-Incongruent Occupations” and access to other Psychological Science research findings, please contact Keri Chiodo at 202-293-9300 or kchiodo@psychologicalscience.org.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Controversial RateBU.com lets students vote on hotness of women

Despite the amazing ability and talent and maturity within undergraduates, they continue to make themselves look like complete assholes.  Then again, when the only role model in your life is MTV’s new series Skins, how could you end up as anything but pathetic?

_________________________________________________

Students at Boston University can now log onto RateBU.com, rate their female classmates as being hot or not, and help compile a list of the top hotties on campus. As you would guess, the site has angered numerous students and prompted the student government to take action.

“Unique? Not really. Still fun? Absolutely!” the homepage explains

The Web site was created by Justin Doody, a sophomore in the engineering college who got the idea from watching the movie, “The Social Network,” according to The Quad student magazine, which first reported the news.

Unlike Mark Zuckerburg’s earlier “FaceMash” — which pulled photos of women off campus servers — all of the content on RateBU is submitted by users, which Doody believes makes his site legal.

“I saw an opportunity to do it in a different way,” Doody told me. “I think most people understand the site is a big joke and not meant to be taken seriously… It’s not meant to be malicious at all.”

This week students have been fighting back and discussing what can be done to shut the site down. The student government passed a motion Monday night condemning the “offensive Web site” and encouraging students to not use it, according to The Daily Free Press. And at least one Facebook group has organized to protest the site.

“I think it’s completely disgusting and degrading,” said Nicole Rojas, a junior journalism major who created the Facebook group. “I don’t believe degrading girls should be a form of entertainment.”

The number of photos on the Web site grows each evening. The site’s main page claims that it has already counted more than 630,000 votes on more than 400 women. Doody said he has more than 4,000 registered users and more than 3,000 of them have voted on the site or submitted photos. A large number of those users are women, he said.

And there are plans to add a section for photos of men and to expand to other schools.

“I have receive an incredible number of requests from girls” asking for men to also be judged on the site, Doody said. “I never meant for the site to be sexist at all.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Mengagement Rings

Yes, I know this is not newsworthy, but this New York Times story was popular enough to show up in my Google News feed.

So here’s the scoop: more men are wearing engagement rings.  Why is this interesting?  Because I love gender history.  See, men obviously haven’t always worn engagement rings.  In fact, it wasn’t until about 50, 60 years ago that men even started wearing wedding rings.  Women wore rings.  Why, you ask?  To mark that they were taken or “bought” when marriage used to equate more of a purchase than a union (which actually wasn’t that long ago).

Now, more men are wearing engagement rings, partly because their female fiancees require them to, and also because they are increasingly choosing to do so.

The article also interviewed two incredibly important sociologists of gender, Stephanie Coontz and Barbara Risman, yet their significance is barely mentioned.  Here’s what they say about this move towards gender equality:

While the arrival of men’s engagement rings may not be the next step in gender equality, it is another sign that male infidelity is becoming less and less acceptable, said Stephanie Coontz, a history professor at Evergreen State College in Olympia, Wash., and the author of “Marriage, a History: How Love Conquered Marriage.”

[I’d like to add that Coontz has written several other fascinating sociological texts, one of which is “The Way We Never Were” about how the happy, white, nuclear family never really existed – we just idealized it on Leave it to Beaver.]

“It’s a logical extension of our increasing rejection of the double standard of sexuality,” she said. “We talk a lot about infidelity, but actually infidelity was much more highly approved of among men in the past than it is today. The double standard was so extreme that in the late 18th century we have letters from men bragging to their wife’s brother about activities outside the marriage.”

Leading up to her first marriage, in 1974, Barbara Risman didn’t wear an engagement ring.

“I was a very serious second-wave feminist, and at that moment in history any marital tradition that seemed gender-specific seemed prima facie oppressive,” said Ms. Risman, 54, who is the head of the sociology department at the University of Illinois at Chicago. [And also the author of Gender Vertigo in which she examines the normality of non-traditional families.]

That was then.

Ms. Risman, who was divorced in 1998, is set to marry Randall Liss, 56, an options trader, next spring. Not only does she want to wear an engagement ring, she expects her fiancé to wear one, too…

“We both made this commitment, and to be quite frank, it’s just fair,” Mr. Liss said. “And it makes me feel good…”

“The feminist movement and I have matured,” she said. “Now there’s a sense that we should look carefully at what the traditions are and reinvent them so that we keep the good part of it and share it…”

Why wear rings at all,  I’m not sure.  Probably because we love shiny things, but at least it’s a move towards gender equality.

Either way, we need to shake up some of these outdated traditions, like a man proposing to a woman.  Shouldn’t we discuss this, rather than being swept up in the romance?  It’s kind of a big decision.

But, then again, more than half of all marriages end in divorce anyway.  And you know what the leading cause of divorce is, right?  Marriage.

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Dude, You’re A Fag: Compulsory Heterosexuality in the Making of Masculinity

This was taken from a paper submitted in my Sociology of Gender class.  Hope it breeds some interesting discussions!  Check out this fantastic article by Michael Kimmel, sociologist and historian of masculinity, for his analysis of the recent gay suicides.

___________________________________________________________


Zach Harrington

On October 10, 2010, National Coming Out Day, another homosexual teenager, Zach Harrington, took his life after a night of repeated bullying.  Harrington’s tragic death is part of a larger trend of recently publicized homosexual teen suicides as the result of bullying.  Publicity surrounding their deaths has helped spread awareness about the issue of violence in schools and has given hope to thousands of homosexual teenagers through such aid organizations as the It Gets Better Project and The Trevor Project.

News articles and websites repeat their names and stories: Justin Aeberg, Billy Lucas, Cody Barker, Asher Brown, Seth Walsh, Tyler Clementi…yet, despite the obvious pattern of predominantly male aggressors and victims, discussions have focused on homophobia as the root of the attacks.

By examining the homophobic harassment these young men endured at t

he hands of mostly white heterosexual men, it becomes apparent that heterosexuality, masculinity, and power are linked.  The use of homophobic epithets, physical violence, and sexist remarks by white heterosexual boys serve as a form of gender policing to reinforce masculine dominance.

While the main goal of these projects is to prevent suicidal teenagers from taking their lives, dialogue about their harassment has revealed how commonplace homophobic bullying actually is.  After spending a year at a California high school, C. J. Pascoe, in her book Dude, You’re a Fag: Masculinity and Sexuality in High School argues that in using such homophobic epithets as “gay” and “fag” towards other heterosexual males, straight boys “repudiate the specter of failed masculinity” and reinforce their masculinity and power over other men, homosexuals, and women.

By interviewing male and female students, along with teachers and school officials, Pascoe shows how this process of masculinity is not only harmful to homosexuals, but all members of the social order, as it prevents the development of multiple masculinities, genders, and sexualities.

Although these hypermasculine actions have been identified as virulent homophobia or dismissed as “boys being boys,” Pascoe’s work reveals how institutions are integral in influencing young adults to embrace these traditional gender norms and heterosexism, as this praxis of masculinity is reinforced through school rituals, pedagogy, discipline, and the ignorance of the damaging effects of bullying.

Chapter 3: Adolescent Male Homophobia

In this chapter Pascoe shows how the fag trope is used as a temporary identity to police heterosexual masculinity.

Its fluidity is powerful enough that boys police their behaviors “out of fear of having the fag identity permanently adhere and definitive enough so that boys recognize a fag behavior and strive to avoid it” (Pascoe 54).  Students responses to the use of “fag” clearly demonstrate the performance and accomplishment of gender, as boys “performed” male effimancy for laughs but quickly reinforced their own “correct” masculinity (Pascoe 61).

When called a fag, a boy immediately thrust the fag “hot potato” onto another boy to reaffirm his own masculinity.  Pascoe states that “gay” is gender-neutral and regularly deployed by both girls and boys against both people and inanimate objects.  The use of “fag,” on the other hand, demonstrates a gendered homophobia which equates effeminacy with powerlessness.

Racialized Contexts of “Fagness”

Although male students were quick to define faggotry and label others as faggots, Pascoe reveals how its definition was racially-specific depending on its context.  According to white boys, “fags cared about the style of their clothes, wore tighter clothes, cared about cleanliness,” and danced (Pascoe 60-61).

Although African American boys privileged stylistic dress and were renowned for their excellent dance skills, the fag epithet did not apply to them.  Pascoe interestingly compares the treatment of the openly white, gay dancer Ricky to the African American dancer K. J.  While both were very talented and both carefully crafted their dancing outfits, K. J. was lauded by the crowd for his obvious connection to hip hop, while Ricky was ostracized for his “faggness” (Pascoe 76).

Pascoe insightfully notes, “Precisely because African American men are so hypersexualized in the United States, white men are, by default, feminized, so white was a stand-in for fag among many of the African American boys at River High” (Pascoe 71).  Despite blacks’ limited use of the term “fag,” Pascoe states that African American boys were punished more frequently for engaging in fag discourse (Pascoe 76).

Chapter 4: Compulsive Heterosexuality

Pascoe argues that when boys sexually objectify, sexualize, or simply flirt with girls, they are reinforcing their own heterosexuality and protecting themselves from the fag hot potato.

By discussing how they could manipulate girls’ bodies, to “break their walls,” make them fart, orgasm, or defecate, as well as their actual physical manipulation of girls bodies through teasing or flirting, boys demonstrated dominance over the world around them (Pascoe 86).  These stories bolstered gender stereotypes of women’s bodies as out of control and reinforced men’s objectification and master over women.

Conclusion

More than ever, Dude, You’re a Fag proves deeply relevant to our current dialogue of homophobic bullying and the resulting teen suicides.  Less than two weeks before Harrington committed suicide he had spoken at a public hearing to declare October his city’s gay history month.

Although Harrington imagined more acceptance from the hearing’s adult attendees after years of being bullied by young boys, the council meeting quickly became “a place where the same sentiments that quietly tormented him in high school were being shouted out and applauded by adults the same age as his own parents.”[4] Nikki, Zach’s older sister who also attended the meeting, stated:

“‘When we talk about our feelings in a hypothetical way and we send our toxic thoughts out in a public setting that way, they will affect people in a negative way…People need to think about the things they are saying and ask themselves, ‘Is this right?’”[5]

Harrington’s case reveals the ultimate consequences of allowing such heteronormative and sexist performances of masculinity to continue in high school—after receiving years of positive feedback from other males and having their sexism and homophobia ignored or reinforced by school officials, young continue this toxic cycle of masculinity on into adulthood.

**If you have an encouraging message you would like to share with teenagers via the It Gets Better Project, click here.**

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized