Thoughts On Feminist Praxis For Men

[ismnotwasm]

For some reason, feminist praxis for men keeps getting marketed (and yes, “marketed,” as it is often portrayed as an object of consumption and a club, a problem with mainstream feminism itself) as 1) being “nice” to women and 2) somewhat rethinking masculinity outside of patriarchy. I don’t only mean cishet men either; I’ve seen this assertion in several spaces for men in the most comprehensive sense of what “men” means. This fascinates me because as a woman, especially as a Black woman, I find this bar low and asking so little involvement of men. The hurdles that Black women are expected to jump over before ever being considered feminist are astronomical compared to White women and trying to compare it to men, Black, White or otherwise is beyond laughable. So little is required of them compared to what is required of Black women, even as Black women’s Black feminist/womanist language and work are regularly appropriated or erased.

Yesterday I shared some tweets about this topic, including this one:



Though in terms of womanism, wholeness matters and healing matters—and beyond the scope of challenging sexism alone as feminism is often articulated as—this work towards wholeness is not solely individualized as it often is expressed in feminism. It requires commitment and work beyond individualized actions for personal situations, though those matter also. Feminist praxis for men is more than “being nice” to women. It’s about rethinking men’s ideology regarding all oppression, not only sexism. From there it involves men actually doing. Challenging the men in their lives. Checking their privilege. Not mansplaining. Not hogging the mic. Additionally it involves recognizing their role in speaking about domestic violence/rape, for example, and not as “women’s problem.” This involves men as well. And when I say it involves men, this is not to alter the statistical scope of women, cis and trans, as well as vulnerable non-binary individuals as the most common victims of rape and abuse, to center men. It’s to say that men as perpetrators of violence has to be a topic men discuss, not a "but men ‘too’" statement when men as survivors can be heard without silencing women.

Also there’s the issue of patriarchy itself; men’s feminist praxis cannot only be playing “good man” and call that a reformation of masculinity. Even as that personal masculinity reformation occurs, men have to realize that quoting bell hooks all day on this one topic, masculinity, is limited. bell hooks is the only source for some feminist men since they think feminism is solely about their own personal masculinity. She’s not even the only Black woman whose written on the topic. It’s that she’s placed as the bar that Black women have to meet in order to be considered feminists while for White women it’s having a pulse. Thus, she’s noticeable and not solely for her genius then.

While how we embody the oppressor within is where all feminist work begins, men’s own praxis can’t always be about themselves and self-therapy. If a man’s feminist praxis equals being “nice” to women and internal focus on masculinity and nothing else, it’s just large gaping holes in the work. I have a problem with this. It’s male privilege. Black women who are Black feminists/womanists aren’t allowed to do so little and be recognized as voices/thinkers. And praxis isn’t about recognition alone. It’s work against the many ways that oppression manifests (i.e. yes sexism, but also racism, homophobia, transphobia, transmisogyny, fat shaming, ableism, classism, colonialism, imperialism, capitalism etc.). But the amount of work Black women are expected to do versus everyone else? I am not interested in Mule Of The World Feminism where Black women move from status quo spaces to progressive spaces to still be servants while men are applauded for so little.

http://www.gradientlair.com/post/68350269717/feminist-praxis-for-men

This is sooo badass.