Comments on: Little things mean a lot

By: Aishlin

Aishlin — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 03:57:20 +0000

Thanks, Emma and PhysioProf. I’m not sure why we spend so much time talking about how “the patriarchy hurts men too”; this sort of discourse is not functionally demeaning to men anymore than “I’m white, so I can’t dance/play basketball/etc” comments are demeaning to white people.

By: Emma

Emma — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 22:00:29 +0000

“I’m always grossed out by the infantalization of men that appears in mainstream patriarchal discourse”

If it didn’t serve men’s interests (meaning men as a political class which controls the vast majority of wealth, resources, and power and men as individual member of that class who control the vast majority of wealth, resources and power) it wouldn’t be there.

And what CPP said.

By: Comrade PhysioProf

Comrade PhysioProf — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:55:14 +0000

we women are really the ones running the show because men are stupid/weak/helpless/ bumbling but it has to be a secret

What you’re missing here is the powerful subtext that the “show” that women run is the bullshit laydeez crappe nurturing show–cooking, cleaning, childrearing, etc–which there is no shame at all for men to be stupid/weak/helpless/bumbling about, because men devote their effort to expertise in the awesome manly menz power show–business, government, academia, war, drinking, sports, etc.

None of this “men can’t cook” shitte is demeaning at all to men, rather it is aggrandizing and affirming the relative value placed on the bullshit laydeez crappe nurturing show versus the awesome manly menz power show.

By: FrauTech

FrauTech — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:22:04 +0000

Hahaha because men are totally incompetent and can’t feed themselves, amirite?

Yes this cuts both ways. At my work where food is often brought in “baked by Joe’s wife” to home where my father was the usual dinner cooker and to my own home where it’s maybe 50/50. It makes men who enjoy cooking, and are capable of cooking, the targets of attempts to diminish their “masculinity” or “feminize” them. Yes that is using anti-female patriarchy methods against the men, alongside being straight-forward insulting to the women. This invitation definitely cuts both ways.

By: Western Dave

Western Dave — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 18:31:47 +0000

I’m with Perpetua. I do think discourses matter. And those subtle expectations my kids pick up from other people when they hear these comments also matter. But one of the reasons I talk about the work I do with and for my own children with the students I teach is because I’m trying to shape their expectations about what they can be or what they can expect from a partner. Because I think that’s really half the battle.

By: Historiann

Historiann — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 17:53:28 +0000

NO SPOILERS–I haven’t seen it yet. But I will say that it’s a recurring theme in Mad Men, at least the way I see it.

By: HistoryMaven

HistoryMaven — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 17:12:39 +0000

We’re reprising the theme of the Mad Men episode of last night. Sigh.

By: wini

wini — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 16:51:16 +0000

Thanks Historiann, that succinct explanation helped me plan my lecture today. Or, maybe, my scolding of my writing seminar’s horrible papers.

Yeah, that’s why the babysitting analogy seemed like a good one. My husband sacrifices his time to “babysit.” What is it when I take care of our son so he can work?

By: quixote

quixote — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 16:34:02 +0000

/I’m sitting here in a blaze of insight/ o_O !

Your last comment made a huge light bulb go off, Historiann. The point that people don’t get that it’s about power. That explains so much about their off-target reactions that I’ve never understood. (That’s not in reference to the comments here. Just in general.)

And, yes, the smiley face. Adding insult to injury.

By: Historiann

Historiann — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:42:19 +0000

One of the mistakes people make about discussions of power is that it’s about feelings rather than the conditions of one’s material existence. For example, white people frequently make the mistake of thinking that racism is just feelings–either they have or don’t have certain racist feelings, which might make some nonwhite people have feelings as a result. White people who think this way–that racism is something that lives in some people’s heads–ignore the very real material effects of racism.

I’d like to discourage people from thinking this is a post about feelings, and invite you all to see it as a comment on the conditions and expectations that shape women’s work and home lives. When others feel free to draft on women’s time and labor, it’s not about feelings, it’s about the conditions that materially affect our lives. So, whether a reader of the above e-mail is male or female, or offended or not by it, doesn’t really matter to me. What matters is how these assumptions about women’s labor and time affect how they’re perceived, evaluated, and advanced at work.