Ways in Which Feminism Benefits or Can Benefit Men

[Debater Slayer]

In what ways do you think feminism benefits or can benefit men?

I can think of a couple of benefits offhand:

• In my opinion, patriarchal culture and traditions can harm men just as much as women in some cases. For example, rape of men isn't usually taken seriously at all because of the idea that men are the "stronger" gender, so when feminists oppose patriarchal notions of "standard" gender-based roles and attitudes, men can benefit in this regard in that their ability to speak out against sexual assault and harassment of men increases.

• In some cases, men feel as though they shouldn't openly express their emotions because that would make them look "weak," "irrational," etc. By opposing the idea that women are more emotional than men and that men are supposed to suppress their emotions more than women, men can benefit from having more cultural leeway to express their emotions in a healthy and natural manner without feeling that they have to hold back due to socially imposed restrictions.

Please discuss and share your thoughts on this topic.

 

[Sunstone]

As Abraham Lincoln pointed out, if the powers that be can arbitrarily take away the rights of some of us, they can arbitrarily take away the rights of all of us.

 

[Alceste]

I would think that most people, male or female, would prefer to be with a person with independent income and a lack of sexual inhibition.

 

[Sunstone]

I would think that most people, male or female, would prefer to be with a person with independent income and a lack of sexual inhibition.

That, and the advantages of being with someone who has a life apart from you. Such people are, among other things, much more interesting.

 

[Alceste]

That, and the advantages of being with someone who has a life apart from you. Such people are, among other things, much more interesting.

Yeah, so true.

 

[Aquitaine]

If the aim is to eliminate (or reduce as much as possible) the negative restrictions placed on people via Gender Roles, Gender Expectations etc, then I think said aim is one that should be applauded and supported by Men...... and y' know... all people in general. ^_^

It's a no-brainer really.

 

[Penumbra]

In a very egalitarian culture:

-Men can feel less pressure to be the breadwinner in a relationship. If both sexes are understood as equally capable, their financial situation is the responsibility of both of them, modified perhaps by their educational levels and earning power, but not related to gender.

-Men can show more emotion if that's how they choose to express themselves. In many cultures, "anger" is sometimes socially acceptable for males but crying or apparent weakness is not. Sexism against women often places unfair expectations on men to be stoic.

-Homophobia and transphobia in general seem to be tied closely to enforcing gender roles and fear of femininity. An egalitarian society should generally be more accepting of diversity of sexual orientation and gender identity. Some men face homophobia or transphobia which would be reduced.

-Men can have less pressure for gender roles, such as being good at sports. Women usually have less pressure for being athletic, although we have other pressures for being attractive and so forth. But basically, the pressures tend to be different to some extent. Men may be viewed negatively if they are a nurse, secretary, baby sitter, teacher, or massage therapist, which doesn't have to be the case.

I'm also in favor of supporting egalitarian laws and social views for areas that protect men against rape, sexual assault, domestic violence, etc. And I'm also in favor of men being able to have equal legitimacy in the eyes of courts to have custody of children.

 

[Drolefille]

Everyone has pretty much named it here. I think men should have equal access to custody of children, but it's the paternalistic idea that women are better caregivers that has created that inequality. Addressing one without the other won't solve anything.

And I think that's what MRA get hung up on - they look at the immediate problem without seeing how it was created and how it likely needs to be solved. Even requiring legal parity would get overrided by individual judges' or advocates' biases.

 

[Alceste]

Everyone has pretty much named it here. I think men should have equal access to custody of children, but it's the paternalistic idea that women are better caregivers that has created that inequality. Addressing one without the other won't solve anything.

And I think that's what MRA get hung up on - they look at the immediate problem without seeing how it was created and how it likely needs to be solved. Even requiring legal parity would get overrided by individual judges' or advocates' biases.

They also spend way too much time trying to roll back rape legislation and rape culture to be more permissive instead of extending protection and help to include male victims.

Which seriously hurts their credibility regarding the legitimate issues they wish to tackle, like custody.

 

[Drolefille]

They also spend way too much time trying to roll back rape legislation and rape culture to be more permissive instead of extending protection and help to include male victims.

Which seriously hurts their credibility regarding the legitimate issues they wish to tackle, like custody.

Indeed. I do see some who advocate for actual men's issues and think that they would be served by working with feminists rather than against them.

Rape apologists or "think of the victims of women who lie about being raped" asshats are a whole other story.

 

[sandandfoam]

Feminism directly benefits me because I have daughters. It really beats me how any father can think that feminism is anything other than a godsend.

 

[Riverwolf]

One major benefit is that I can be perfectly comfortable admitting and displaying my overall feminine nature without having to expect homophobic slurs being thrown my way all the time.

 

[Willamena]

Feminism directly benefits me because I have daughters. It really beats me how any father can think that feminism is anything other than a godsend.

Not being a father, I have to ask, "Why?"

 

[work in progress]

Not being a father, I have to ask, "Why?"

I'm the father of two boys and have no daughters, but I think I can understand where he is coming from. How does a man who believes in "traditional" values square that way of thought with having a daughter?

I can't imagine being a father of girls in the most repressive and misogynistic societies today...say if we were living in Afghanistan, or Saudi Arabia...Yemen also comes to mind as places where a daughter is only valued as a commodity to sell off as a bride when she comes of age!

I can only imagine that the attitude of such men in these sorts of Old Testament-like patriarchal, misogynistic cultures, is to refrain from becoming too personally and emotionally attached to any woman...wives included. And that seems to match some of the descriptions some foreigners describe of male friendships in Afghan culture being far more intimate than straight males would be comfortable with over here.

It might be the attitude a farmer has towards animals, even their pet dogs and horses. Today, many us...myself included, are likely incapable of killing any animal...except bugs perhaps, partly because of the close friendships we have with our pets. We do not make a sharp distinction between human and non-human, when we recognize all that they have in common with us.

My father grew up on a farm, and after moving to city life out of necessity when I was too young to remember, one of his biggest issues was with the close attachment city dwellers had with their pet dogs and even cats. A farmer, who raised animals for slaughter...but had to cull his own chickens, maintained a wall of separation between man and animal. So, there would be no sense of bonding with the family dog, cats and a horse.

Likewise, the man who believes in misogyny, does not become emotionally attached to his daughters, since he will have to sell them off in marriage, mostly to much older men, and consign them to a future life of physical and mental abuse at the hands of their husbands and the female matriarchy of her new household. Her only hope of having any semblance of happiness in this life is to have many sons and become that favoured wife who becomes the matriarch and local enforcer of patriarchal oppression within the household!

Needless to say, only the most clueless men in a modern society which claims to value equality, would ignore the obvious fact that the future wellbeing of his daughters depends in large part on how the female half of the population is valued and respected as well.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

My view is that equality, egalitarianism, and humanism is beneficial for all, and that I prefer to live in a society where these ideals are present. This has no direct bearing on my being a man, or benefits me specifically as a man - I just find that these concepts result in a more positive and beneficial society for all, men included.

 

[Curious George]

Well many benefits have been named, but I would add cultural diversity, increased production, increased technological advancement, greater fulfillment of democratic ideals, better education, reduction of prison populations, and too many more to name. But if we are speaking about how feminism affects men in ways that are more beneficial to men than women, (in our opinion), I would suggest greater time and bonding with their children.

 

[Sunstone]

Statistically, women tend to vote against wars more often than men.

 

[Riverwolf]

I can only imagine that the attitude of such men in these sorts of Old Testament-like patriarchal, misogynistic cultures, ...

Dude, if you think it was bad in the culture presented in the Tanakh, check out pre-Christian Greco-Roman attitudes towards women. The Hebrews at the time were downright progressive in comparison.

 

[Penumbra]

Dude, if you think it was bad in the culture presented in the Tanakh, check out pre-Christian Greco-Roman attitudes towards women. The Hebrews at the time were downright progressive in comparison.

Pre-Christian Greco-Roman is a rather broad category. As a whole it was very sexist but there were pockets, like the Epicureans and the Stoics, that were generally cool with gender equality.

 

[Riverwolf]

Pre-Christian Greco-Roman is a rather broad category. As a whole it was very sexist but there were pockets, like the Epicureans and the Stoics, that were generally cool with gender equality.

That is true. Fair enough. ^_^

Though it is interesting to compare the Greco-Roman world, often regarded these days as the height of civilized thinking for their times(again, broadly defined), to the Celto-Germanic world(still broadly defined), which was in many ways far more egalitarian at least as far as gender is concerned. I don't know much about them, but considering the similar environments and closeness as far as geography is concerned, I'd wager the Urlo-Slavic-speaking tribes were much the same.

And from what I've seen of Persia at the time, they were very close to modern America in their egalitarian thinking, having (or at least promoting) ethnic, gender, and religious equality.