men, masculinities and gender politics

Authors

Articles by date

  • 23 Apr 2009

    Robert Jensen is a professor in the Department of Journalism at the University of Texas at Austin. First published in ZNet Commentary, February 22, 2002

    Feminists hate men. How do we know this? Because it is repeated over and over in the media and by right-wing politicians and other so-called guardians of the moral values of the society.

    If feminists hate men, then it stands to reason that men should stay clear of -- or do their best to attack -- feminism and feminists.

  • 23 Apr 2009

    A group of Australian men's rights activists has been harassing and traumatising women and children. Gerry Orkin makes the link between the Blackshirts and Islamic sharia law.

    Funtua, Nigeria. Melbourne, Australia. Miles apart, but not so different when it comes to some men's ideas about family values.

  • 23 Apr 2009

    Cliff Cheng, University of Southern California (USC), U.S.A.

    Masculinities are an organising principle. Organisations, be they work or social ones, use both masculinities and femininities to organise themselves. In modern organisations, femininities tend to be thought of as inferior to masculinities. In fact, modern organisations, which are characterized by hierarchy, need to find ways to inferiorize workers from managers. Gender (feminniities and masculinities) is one of those ways.

  • 23 Apr 2009

    Chris Dixon reflects on the inspiring tools and difficult lessons left by his father.

  • 23 Apr 2009

    Chris Dixon found that his gender and sexuality are both shaped and shapeable.

  • 23 Apr 2009

    Chris Crass outlines practical strategies for minimising everyday domination.

    1. Practice noticing who’s in the room at meetings - how many gender privileged men (biological men), how many women, how many transgendered people, how many white people, how many people of color, is it majority heterosexual, are there out queers, what are people’s class backgrounds. Don’t assume to know people, but also work at being more aware – listening to what people say and talking with people one on one who you work with.

  • 23 Apr 2009

    The political and theoretical challenges issued by contemporary feminism have provoked a range of cultural responses about men, and about masculinity. The dominant reaction is typified by the media-sponsored reassertion of tough male roles in popular drama (1), mirroring in style, if not extent, the narrow constrictions of the female beauty myth. By contrast, the last twenty years have witnessed a small but growing concern with the limitations and oppressive nature of conventional masculinity. This article seeks to describe the current ‘state of play’ in research which examines the politics of masculinity, arguing that the quality of theory is dependent upon its treatment of power relations.

    [Citation: Leach, Mike. (1994). The Politics of Masculinity: An Overview of Contemporary Theory. Social Alternatives, 12(4), January, pp. 36-37.]

  • 23 Apr 2009

    Men's rights groups use flawed methodology to make false claims about the impact of fatherlessness. In Fatherhood and Fatherlessness (Australia Institute, Discussion Paper No. 59, November, pp. 21-23) Michael Flood reveals the junk science behind the National Fatherhood Forum's claim that "boys from a fatherless home are 14 times more likely to commit rape".

  • 23 Apr 2009

    “What do you mean I’m sexist?” I was shocked. I wasn’t a jock, I didn’t hate women, I wasn’t an evil person. “But how can I be a sexist, I’m an anarchist?” I was anxious, nervous, and my defenses were up. I believed in liberation, for fighting against capitalism and the state. There were those who defended and benefited from injustice and then there’s us, right?

  • 23 Apr 2009

    This text tries to place antisexist politics by men in a larger social context. It discusses men’s groups and the issue of identity politics in general. It demands a “renewal” of antisexist politics by men and ends with a look at some attempts at realizing some of the ideas discussed in the text.

    Part 1: In defense of the idea of antisexist men’s groups.