Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > General Bullshit > Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era

«‹›2 »

BornAPoorBlkChild: Sep 24, 2012

1.0 out of 5 stars Read this book with a critical eye, February 15, 2014
By
Wordwatcher (Montreal) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era (Hardcover)
Many reviewers claim that Kimmel is �sympathetic� to the targets of his accusation�that is, to men who feel entitled to privilege and become hostile to those who have stolen it from them. Kimmel is by no means sympathetic to these men. He is by no means sympathetic to any men at all, in fact, except converts to his form of feminism. He is condescending to men at the very best. After all, he writes from his own position of privilege as an articulate academic and therefore as someone with considerable political influence both within the academic world and beyond it, because the university, far from being an �ivory tower� in isolation from the larger world, is a primary force in that world by virtue of producing its leaders in every field.

Many reviewers write that Kimmel�s �insights� have opened their eyes. Their eyes must have already been closed for a long time, though, because feminists have been saying exactly the same things for decades. Egalitarian feminists have always wanted equal opportunities for women and men. But they have always blamed only ignorant men (and women) for inequality. Ideological feminists, on the other hand, have asserted what amounts to an innate superiority of women over men. They have always blamed men as such�not this or that group of men�for every form of evil and suffering. And these are not marginal women, who can be dismissed as extremists. On the contrary, they are highly influential as academics, activists, politicians, lawyers, judges, journalists and so forth. Their books are on the reading lists of every course on women�s studies. Not surprisingly, they produce what has become conventional wisdom in the circles that govern public life. And they are vigorous gatekeepers, allowing no dissent when it comes to contempt for men. In short, they enjoy their own form of privilege. And many women�not all but many�find it expedient to excuse or even condone these ideological �excesses.� As a result, they�re shocked to realize that men are beginning to challenge the notion that history has been a titanic conspiracy of men to oppress women and that women have some right to revenge. If Kimmel has added anything at all to the public debate over sexism, he does so not because of his ideas but because of his assumed authority as a man. Being a (privileged) man himself, he must be saying something that other men prefer to hide, right? Not really, because the second part of that statement does not necessarily follow from the first. But Kimmel is adding nothing new even in this respect. Other (privileged) men have adopted feminism, even ideological feminism, for either altruistic or cynical reasons of their own. President Obama is one current example among many.

Many reviewers agree that the anger of white men, at least of young white men, is due to their illegitimate sense of entitlement to privilege. But where, I wonder, do they get this sense of entitlement? From nostalgic stories about a lost golden age that their grandfathers had enjoyed? I don�t think so. In college, they read about countless gender �studies,� which purport to show that men are still privileged and implicitly oppressive (although not all professors teach their students to think analytically or critically about the dubious assumptions, methods or interpretations of those studies). As boyfriends, husbands and fathers, they hear only the currently �dominant discourse,� which assumes that women belong to a victim class, that men belong to an oppressor class and that still more laws must be changed to protect women or to �level the playing field� for women (even if doing so gives them unfair advantages to women and undermines fundamental legal principles). I could go on and on.

I do agree that men, especially young men, have a sense of �aggrieved entitlement� but not an illegitimate one. On the contrary, I suggest, they have a perfectly legitimate one. What our society denies them as men is not privilege but a healthy sense of identity specifically as men. That�s a long story. And yes, I am writing a book about it.

For the time being, I�ll challenge Kimmel to demonstrate a necessary correlation between caring about men and the various pathologies that he cites: hatred toward the opposite sex, hatred toward other races and hatred toward other forms of sexuality. Some men are indeed guilty of one or more (just as some women are). And some of those men do indeed join movements that purport to care about justice (just as some of those women do). But neither fact de-legitimates the cause of seeking justice�which, by the way, has nothing to do with revenge. Speaking for myself, at any rate, I�m not only a male academic, one who cares deeply about the condition of men, but also a male member of an ethnic minority and a male gay person. I don�t agree with everything, of course, that members of these groups claim in my name or on my behalf. Instead of denouncing them self-righteously, however, I try to argue with them as patiently and rationally as I can. I don�t always succeed in that respect, but I try. My goal is to bring about reconciliation between the sexes, after all, not to promote an enduring standoff. For the record, I see nothing at all to gain for men by returning (if that were even possible) to some earlier form of masculinity. And I would never consider voting for the Republicans, much less joining the Ku Klux Klan.

BornAPoorBlkChild fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Jun 30, 2014

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:20

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 20, 2024 10:24

Smoking Crow: Feb 14, 2012; *laughs at u*

i'm not reading that op

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:21

Frog Act: Feb 10, 2012

yeah me neither. :gas:

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:21

Twee as Fuck: Nov 13, 2012; by Lowtax

he's mad as heck and he's not gonna take it anymore

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:21

MotherFuckingT-REX: Feb 8, 2011; I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT
I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT I WANNA THROW IT

Smoking Crow posted:

i'm not reading that op

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:22

Yaldabaoth: Oct 9, 2012; by Azathoth

Masculinity died when men became rich enough to pay other men to do their fighting for them

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:22

Sir John Feelgood: Nov 18, 2009

why would i read that when i could be posting

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:24

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

If you are "masculine" but unlikeable/unfuckable you are basically a trained ape, hth.

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:25

Momplestiltskin: Jan 15, 2014; Got any extra firstborns?

lol even just the bolded part is too long to care to read

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:25

Frog Act: Feb 10, 2012

maoist pussy i don't "get" you

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:25

Bloopsy: Jun 1, 2006; you have been visited by the Tasty Garlic Bread. you will be blessed by having good Garlic Bread in your life time, but only if you comment "ty garlic bread" in the thread below

Twee as gently caress posted:

he's mad as heck and he's not gonna take it anymore

It's HIS money and he wants it NOW!

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:26

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Fandyien posted:

maoist pussy i don't "get" you

I am always happy to help someone "get" me. I am for socialism to the extent it does not interfere with coke-fuelled hot-tub gatherings of the people. I am for feminism to the extent it does not result in women with armpit hair. In general, I am for good things but not the negative excesses of said good things. If you have any further questions, I am happy to answer.

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:30

a shiny rock: Nov 13, 2009

im gay

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:31

Twee as Fuck: Nov 13, 2012; by Lowtax

Yaldabaoth posted:

Masculinity died when men became rich enough to pay other men to do their fighting for them

so, the roman empire?

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:32

.lnk to the past: May 3, 2005; psoting while drunk

feminists are fat ugly and annoying so who gives a poo poo

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:32

jalopybrown: Oct 11, 2012

masculinity is about suppressing emotion and lifting heavy things, not writing stupid novellas reviewing some other garbage

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:32

Frog Act: Feb 10, 2012

Maoist Pussy posted:

I am always happy to help someone "get" me. I am for socialism to the extent it does not interfere with coke-fuelled hot-tub gatherings of the people. I am for feminism to the extent it does not result in women with armpit hair. In general, I am for good things but not the negative excesses of said good things. If you have any further questions, I am happy to answer.

sounds pretty good to me tbh

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:34

Effectronica: May 31, 2011; Fallen Rib

Race Realists posted:

1.0 out of 5 stars Read this book with a critical eye, February 15, 2014
By
Wordwatcher (Montreal) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era (Hardcover)
Many reviewers claim that Kimmel is �sympathetic� to the targets of his accusation�that is, to men who feel entitled to privilege and become hostile to those who have stolen it from them. Kimmel is by no means sympathetic to these men. He is by no means sympathetic to any men at all, in fact, except converts to his form of feminism. He is condescending to men at the very best. After all, he writes from his own position of privilege as an articulate academic and therefore as someone with considerable political influence both within the academic world and beyond it, because the university, far from being an �ivory tower� in isolation from the larger world, is a primary force in that world by virtue of producing its leaders in every field.

Many reviewers write that Kimmel�s �insights� have opened their eyes. Their eyes must have already been closed for a long time, though, because feminists have been saying exactly the same things for decades. Egalitarian feminists have always wanted equal opportunities for women and men. But they have always blamed only ignorant men (and women) for inequality. Ideological feminists, on the other hand, have asserted what amounts to an innate superiority of women over men. They have always blamed men as such�not this or that group of men�for every form of evil and suffering. And these are not marginal women, who can be dismissed as extremists. On the contrary, they are highly influential as academics, activists, politicians, lawyers, judges, journalists and so forth. Their books are on the reading lists of every course on women�s studies. Not surprisingly, they produce what has become conventional wisdom in the circles that govern public life. And they are vigorous gatekeepers, allowing no dissent when it comes to contempt for men. In short, they enjoy their own form of privilege. And many women�not all but many�find it expedient to excuse or even condone these ideological �excesses.� As a result, they�re shocked to realize that men are beginning to challenge the notion that history has been a titanic conspiracy of men to oppress women and that women have some right to revenge. If Kimmel has added anything at all to the public debate over sexism, he does so not because of his ideas but because of his assumed authority as a man. Being a (privileged) man himself, he must be saying something that other men prefer to hide, right? Not really, because the second part of that statement does not necessarily follow from the first. But Kimmel is adding nothing new even in this respect. Other (privileged) men have adopted feminism, even ideological feminism, for either altruistic or cynical reasons of their own. President Obama is one current example among many.

Many reviewers agree that the anger of white men, at least of young white men, is due to their illegitimate sense of entitlement to privilege. But where, I wonder, do they get this sense of entitlement? From nostalgic stories about a lost golden age that their grandfathers had enjoyed? I don�t think so. In college, they read about countless gender �studies,� which purport to show that men are still privileged and implicitly oppressive (although not all professors teach their students to think analytically or critically about the dubious assumptions, methods or interpretations of those studies). As boyfriends, husbands and fathers, they hear only the currently �dominant discourse,� which assumes that women belong to a victim class, that men belong to an oppressor class and that still more laws must be changed to protect women or to �level the playing field� for women (even if doing so gives them unfair advantages to women and undermines fundamental legal principles). I could go on and on.

I do agree that men, especially young men, have a sense of �aggrieved entitlement� but not an illegitimate one. On the contrary, I suggest, they have a perfectly legitimate one. What our society denies them as men is not privilege but a healthy sense of identity specifically as men. That�s a long story. And yes, I am writing a book about it.

For the time being, I�ll challenge Kimmel to demonstrate a necessary correlation between caring about men and the various pathologies that he cites: hatred toward the opposite sex, hatred toward other races and hatred toward other forms of sexuality. Some men are indeed guilty of one or more (just as some women are). And some of those men do indeed join movements that purport to care about justice (just as some of those women do). But neither fact de-legitimates the cause of seeking justice�which, by the way, has nothing to do with revenge. Speaking for myself, at any rate, I�m not only a male academic, one who cares deeply about the condition of men, but also a male member of an ethnic minority and a male gay person. I don�t agree with everything, of course, that members of these groups claim in my name or on my behalf. Instead of denouncing them self-righteously, however, I try to argue with them as patiently and rationally as I can. I don�t always succeed in that respect, but I try. My goal is to bring about reconciliation between the sexes, after all, not to promote an enduring standoff. For the record, I see nothing at all to gain for men by returning (if that were even possible) to some earlier form of masculinity. And I would never consider voting for the Republicans, much less joining the Ku Klux Klan.

the funniest thing about this is the writer's location

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:34

Corey Plumper: Nov 22, 2008

jalopybrown posted:

masculinity is about suppressing emotion and lifting heavy things, not writing stupid novellas reviewing some other garbage

Yea

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:35

Prettz: Sep 3, 2002

Twee as gently caress posted:

so, the roman empire?

more like the earliest days of agricultural society

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:35

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

I wish I could invent specious two-word categories and then blame them for my problems. Ideological feminists! Cultural Marxists! Agglutinative Jesuits! It was the cerebular Zionists and the constructivist splenetics who brought us here! Also I am not a lunatic and you can trust me because I vote for democrats.

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:38

Frog Act: Feb 10, 2012

Effectronica posted:

the funniest thing about this is the writer's location

i thought quebecois were largely conservative nasally jagoffs

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:38

Justin Tyme: Feb 22, 2011

im for feminism but im also for masculinity

like the two aren't mutually exclusive; men can still be men without being reduced to sniviling faggots in the name of equality. someone post those "i need feminism because ____" pics tia

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:39

Frog Act: Feb 10, 2012

masculinity is fine and feminism addresses many of it's more toxic elements so they pretty much have to coexist if we want decent gender roles

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:40

Vorik: Mar 27, 2014

Anyone who idolizes hypermasculinity is most certainly a raging homo and no doubt has a collection of dildos in his closet.

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:41

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Fandyien posted:

masculinity is fine and feminism addresses many of it's more toxic elements so they pretty much have to coexist if we want decent gender roles

Whoah.

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:42

Frog Act: Feb 10, 2012

sorry i mean i hate feminazi dykes.

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:43

babypolis: Nov 4, 2009

girls are better than boys because at least girls learned how to hold a conversation

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:44

Twee as Fuck: Nov 13, 2012; by Lowtax

Prettz posted:

more like the earliest days of agricultural society

nah not really back then the people who could afford not to fight were few and many the first civilization that came to heavily depend on mercenaries doing the fighting for themselves were the roman (also brought their downfall because of how complacent lazy and decadent they became without war to turn them in real instead of ~~playing on steam~~ watching coliseum games and eating like pigs).

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:46

Yaldabaoth: Oct 9, 2012; by Azathoth

Prettz posted:

more like the earliest days of agricultural society

And agriculture was invented by women, coincidence?

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:50

Effectronica: May 31, 2011; Fallen Rib

Fandyien posted:

i thought quebecois were largely conservative nasally jagoffs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89cole_Polytechnique_massacre

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:51

1gnoirents: Jun 28, 2014; hello

this jsut in: both genders are pretty bad

men superiority jerks: suck
women superiority jerks: suck

fin

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:52

toggle: Nov 7, 2005

Smoking Crow posted:

i'm not reading that op

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:54

Iprazochrome: Nov 3, 2008

Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:54

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Naked&Afraid is a good show, it basically showcases toxic masculinity.

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:55

jalopybrown: Oct 11, 2012

1gnoirents posted:

this jsut in: both genders are pretty bad

men superiority jerks: suck
women superiority jerks: suck

fin

femdom makes me horny so i disagree w/ the 2nd one

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:57

babypolis: Nov 4, 2009

Twee as gently caress posted:

nah not really back then the people who could afford not to fight were few and many the first civilization that came to heavily depend on mercenaries doing the fighting for themselves were the roman (also brought their downfall because of how complacent lazy and decadent they became without war to turn them in real instead of ~~playing on steam~~ watching coliseum games and eating like pigs).

surprisingly enough twee as gently caress is completely misinformed and confused about history too

# ? Jun 30, 2014 21:57

1gnoirents: Jun 28, 2014; hello

i wish there was an equality porn section where both the man and woman are assertive. anytime i try to search for anything remotely like that i get either women butt raping a dude or like the woman like going eee im a rag doll put your man stick in me so whatvvs

# ? Jun 30, 2014 22:02

babypolis: Nov 4, 2009

u sound like awierdo

# ? Jun 30, 2014 22:03

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 20, 2024 10:24

Effectronica: May 31, 2011; Fallen Rib

1gnoirents posted:

i wish there was an equality porn section where both the man and woman are assertive. anytime i try to search for anything remotely like that i get either women butt raping a dude or like the woman like going eee im a rag doll put your man stick in me so whatvvs

looks like you just figured out when feminists really mean when they say pornography is inherently exploitative

# ? Jun 30, 2014 22:04

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > General Bullshit > Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era

«‹›2 »