tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post3047222991374703099..comments2024-03-28T21:41:32.110-04:00Comments on Grim's Hall: More on "Toxic Masculinity"Grimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-16533802400381427582017-01-19T23:36:51.589-05:002017-01-19T23:36:51.589-05:00I suspect you are correct. But sometimes you disru...I suspect you are correct. But sometimes you disrupt the enemy's timing by unilaterally taking a break. Or that's my theory, anyway.Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-89775349665304147632017-01-19T19:16:42.192-05:002017-01-19T19:16:42.192-05:00Prediction: The inauguration of Trump will not po...Prediction: The inauguration of Trump will not portend that any breaks are forthcoming.Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-61427489409218703432017-01-19T18:33:45.752-05:002017-01-19T18:33:45.752-05:00Cass, I want to come back to your comment that:
I...Cass, I want to come back to your comment that:<br /><br /><i>I really do worry that we're becoming so polarized - so angry all the time - that we're in real danger of losing sight of the need to work at preserving this fragile edifice we call, "civilization". At the same time, I find myself very angry at all the histrionics and emoting and IMO calculated tantrums.</i><br /><br />I have had this experience numerous times over the last few years. I increasingly fear we are so polarized and angry that communication is becoming impossible, and yet, I am angry and polarized and want to shout at people on the opposing side. I get pretty frustrated with myself on a regular basis over this, and as much as I want to work to bridge the gap, I'm also afraid at a key moment I'll go off on a rant and make things worse.<br /><br />I think I need a break.Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-11732463699239609562017-01-19T17:31:47.112-05:002017-01-19T17:31:47.112-05:00Are there really people who think there are societ...<i>Are there really people who think there are societies throughout history who have behaved in any other way whenever they had the upper hand? Show me a culture that doesn't exhibit a strong preference for insiders over outsiders. If you go back 100 years or so (and perhaps not that far), you'll be hard-pressed to find a culture that wouldn't act on this preference to engage cheerfully in the most shocking imaginable treatment of anyone in the out-group. </i><br /><br />Amen. I read someone a while back who called far left progressives, "Human nature deniers".<br /><br />Pretty apt when you think about it. They're always looking for a simple cause or fix to tendencies that are baked into us from the time we're born. Cassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00083557761155403492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-76449963168273984702017-01-19T17:28:47.854-05:002017-01-19T17:28:47.854-05:00One of the funniest (in a sad way) essays I ever r...One of the funniest (in a sad way) essays I ever read was written by David Horowitz - who used to be a radical leftist and is now almost just as far right. He was going around lecturing at colleges and one of the things he would talk about (in the context of racism, anti-Semitism, etc.) was just what Tom mentions -- that slavery was the norm in Africa and that most of the slaves sold to Europeans and American slave traders were captives sold by their fellow Africans.<br /><br />He said students were frequently just SHOCKED to hear this! And, that slavery is still rampant in Africa today! Who knew?Cassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00083557761155403492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-29252360884937734362017-01-19T17:07:41.491-05:002017-01-19T17:07:41.491-05:00Are there really people who think there are societ...<i>Are there really people who think there are societies throughout history who have behaved in any other way whenever they had the upper hand?</i><br /><br />Sure. The whole Kumbaya School of History pretends that only white men ever committed atrocities. I've had students who were shocked to learn that black West Africans were the ones who primarily enslaved other black Africans and sold them to white slave traders, or who had no idea about the brutal warfare between different tribes / nations of Native Americans, or that Native Americans in the antebellum South owned slaves, or that a small percentage of free blacks in the South owned slaves, etc.<br /><br />The question, though, is how we define the in and out groups. It has often not been by race but by other criteria.Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-2936191898415989332017-01-19T16:39:58.063-05:002017-01-19T16:39:58.063-05:00Racism in history: it's hilarious. Are there...Racism in history: it's hilarious. Are there really people who think there are societies throughout history who have behaved in any other way whenever they had the upper hand? Show me a culture that doesn't exhibit a strong preference for insiders over outsiders. If you go back 100 years or so (and perhaps not that far), you'll be hard-pressed to find a culture that wouldn't act on this preference to engage cheerfully in the most shocking imaginable treatment of anyone in the out-group. People act like white Europeans are special in this way, instead of simply being the guys who've had the most swat in recent centuries. Do men typically act this way whenever they have the whip hand of women? Uh, yes. Women, too. Everyone. That's not to say I don't think it's a good idea for every group in power to examine its own conscience, but every group not in power might profit from the same exercise, if less urgently.Texan99https://www.blogger.com/profile/10479561573903660086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-10838224467833225282017-01-19T16:24:09.588-05:002017-01-19T16:24:09.588-05:00Hm. Let me back out of that trap I set for myself....Hm. Let me back out of that trap I set for myself. I do see a bigger role for deductive methods that just biology, but it would be for theories that were developed out of induction, and that were constantly tested by further induction as they were applied.<br /><br />It's been a long time since I've needed to recall this stuff.Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-82888778229244479152017-01-19T16:00:36.871-05:002017-01-19T16:00:36.871-05:00Similarly with race / ethnicity, my insistence on ...Similarly with race / ethnicity, my insistence on a solidly inductive approach means I am not willing to make claims that go beyond my evidence. I don't accept that we can just assume a priori every white American in the 1800s was racist and that their racism held a higher ideological commitment than, e.g., professionalism, a commitment to law, etc. Those are the kinds of commitments ethnic studies folks seem to demand, so I am not welcome in those departments.<br /><br />Methodologically, most race/gender studies folks seem to be overwhelmingly deductive in approach. They assume racism / misogyny and then explore how it affected the people, cultures, etc., they are writing about. This is something they share with Marxist / Marxian approaches to history. I don't see any evidence that these deductive methods work, though.<br /><br />Are there exceptions? I'm sure there are, and again, I am not terribly well-read in either area, so everything I'm saying here is anecdotal. But that's been my experience so far.<br /><br />I am not completely opposed to deduction in history, BTW, but I think it would have to be based in biological facts, not political or moral theories.Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-87710541226903106172017-01-19T15:25:55.169-05:002017-01-19T15:25:55.169-05:00Cass, I agree with what you're saying, and I s...Cass, I agree with what you're saying, and I share the same concern.<br /><br />Where I think race and gender would be interesting to study is in history, e.g., how and why have different cultures developed different norms, and how have those norms affected the individuals, cultures, and broader history of those societies. For example, something that's been discussed here is how polygamy may have affected Muslim cultures, or how the idea of chivalry affected Western cultures. There's some really interesting work that could be done in that field.<br /><br />However, there's little room for social activism in the work I would like to do. I wouldn't condemn anyone and may never use the term "misogyny" -- those kinds of judgments are for the reader of history, not the historian. Because of my way of doing things, I've had a few run-ins where, when my ideas did not a priori fit with gender studies orthodoxy, they were dismissed without consideration and with some display of irritation on the part of the gender studiers.Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-73710773235857298472017-01-19T12:18:49.558-05:002017-01-19T12:18:49.558-05:00... no good can come of any discussion that involv...<i>... no good can come of any discussion that involves the word "intersectionality." They might as well rub blue mud in their navels.</i><br /><br />OMG :) That made me laugh out loud.<br /><br />Tom, I do have a limited interest in how other people experience/interpret the world around us, and I strongly suspect - in fact, I know this is true of men and women - that our experiences and the way other people treat us are at least partially influenced by mundane things like whether we're male or female, pretty/handsome or ugly, short or tall, dull or sharp witted, etc.<br /><br />I agree - in principle - that there's some value in studying these things. But I also think sensitivity is too easily turned into a cudgel to beat The Other over the head with. This is where some feminist doctrine/dogma goes wrong with me. I don't *want* to be a member of a protected class that IS TOO JUST AS SMART/STRONG/CAPABLE AS MEN!!!11! It's hard to wrap one's mind around that much cognitive dissonance.<br /><br />When I talk to my DIL, she says, "I want to listen to people who feel ignored". That's a noble and kind sentiment, and one I was actually taken to task by Grim for violating in 2008 in the runup to Obama winning the universe :p And he may have been right to reproach me. Subsequent events lead me to think Obama was never really on the level about improving race relations. I think he made them worse, in part for political gain and that horrifies and angers me.<br /><br />And yet... I feel deeply that people of all races should work harder on an individual level to understand each other. I feel the same way about men and women - and I believe that effort must be EQUALLY shared (not men being exhorted to understand women and at least some women saying, "Who cares what men think/feel - they are privileged."<br /><br />Well shoot - so are women in some respects.<br /><br />So I honor my DIL's willingness to listen, while worrying more than a bit about being too open to specious arguments and guilt. But she's pretty level headed, and it's her life. When I look at her works - what she does, as opposed to what she says - they are worthy of respect and IMO, virtuous.<br /><br />I really do worry that we're becoming so polarized - so angry all the time - that we're in real danger of losing sight of the need to work at preserving this fragile edifice we call, "civilization". At the same time, I find myself very angry at all the histrionics and emoting and IMO calculated tantrums.<br /><br />So there you have it :pCassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00083557761155403492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-79568303474327237752017-01-19T12:07:06.374-05:002017-01-19T12:07:06.374-05:00I have a funny , totally unwarranted gut feeling t...<i>I have a funny , totally unwarranted gut feeling that most of the women "studied" in "women's studies" are the activist agitators, rather than the women who have actually done things- led nations, developed medicines, fomented revolutions, captained armies, built companies, etc.</i><br /><br />I share that feeling :pCassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00083557761155403492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-64931703278939021122017-01-19T11:32:37.350-05:002017-01-19T11:32:37.350-05:00I'd be the first to agree that conventional fo...I'd be the first to agree that conventional forms of both masculinity and femininity can be toxic, and in principle I have no problem with colleges trying to teach young adults to think more clearly about them. But no good can come of any discussion that involves the word "intersectionality." They might as well rub blue mud in their navels.Texan99https://www.blogger.com/profile/10479561573903660086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-80582499023892870942017-01-18T22:17:29.485-05:002017-01-18T22:17:29.485-05:00Part of the context of this discussion is in my pr...Part of the context of this discussion is in my previous post on the New Civics:<br /><br /><a href="http://grimbeorn.blogspot.com/2017/01/what-happened-to-civics-education.html" rel="nofollow">What Happened to Civics Education?</a><br /><br />The relevant point here is that social engineering has gradually become more important than education in some educational settings. I don't object to an honest, open discussion or course on any topic. However, social engineering to fundamentally disrupt our common American culture and install lefty utopianism in its place is another matter entirely.Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-90619708101880971102017-01-18T22:06:40.969-05:002017-01-18T22:06:40.969-05:00I really think gender and race/ethnicity are fasci...I really think gender and race/ethnicity are fascinating subjects and that, in a different setting than I am likely to actually find, I would enjoy studying them both at a graduate level. However, my experiences with them in grad school have been that in practice they are circular fields: Their premises assume their own conclusions in many cases. To me, this comes across as a form of dishonesty, but I'm not satisfied with that explanation and would have to do a lot more reading to develop a better one.<br /><br />Here's one example. A professor once explained to me that it was perfectly legitimate to simply assume a white American in the mid-1800s was racist because racism was so prevalent in that culture. Hence, when it came to a court case we were reading about where a white judge ruled against a black man, although there was absolutely nothing in the documentary evidence to suggest that racism was a factor, we could simply assume that the judge's racism was indeed the real source of the ruling. There is something to that argument, but it is also pretty circular. I ran into similar assumptions in women's studies.<br /><br />I think these fields are legitimate and interesting fields of inquiry, but many (not all) of the manifestations of that inquiry, the actual departments and professors and publications, seem to be harmful. That's a shame.Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-60051650546003549812017-01-18T21:09:14.220-05:002017-01-18T21:09:14.220-05:00Grim writes: What I think they're being ta...Grim writes: What I think they're being taught as is systematic ideas on a roughly Marxist model.......<br /><br />Grim you are correct: Feminism is a Marxist Precept. It is an attack on the family. <br /> <br />"Feminism" was simply another name for 'class warfare', the Marx/Lenin prescription for war on Right Order."<br /><br /><br />Dad29 explains it all, at the Link<br />https://dad29.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-origins-of-feminism-lenin.html<br /><br /><br />........The communist economy does away with the family. In the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat there is a transition to the single production plan and collective social consumption, and the family loses its significance as an economic unit. The external economic functions of the family disappear . . . In the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat the family economic unit should be recognised as being, from the point of view of the national economy, not only useless but harmful. The family economic unit involves (a) the uneconomic expenditure of products and fuel on the part of small domestic economies, and (b) unproductive labour, especially by women, in the home — and is therefore in conflict with the interest of the workers’ republic in a single economic plan and the expedient use of the labour force (including women). --Kollontai<br /><br /><br />-Mississippi<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-15697302848899077802017-01-18T20:39:44.575-05:002017-01-18T20:39:44.575-05:00I have a funny , totally unwarranted gut feeling t...I have a funny , totally unwarranted gut feeling that most of the women "studied" in "women's studies" are the activist agitators, rather than the women who have actually done things- led nations, developed medicines, fomented revolutions, captained armies, built companies, etc. ravennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-85397802504287880712017-01-18T20:32:07.557-05:002017-01-18T20:32:07.557-05:00I am slightly mis-stating the requirement, it turn...I am slightly mis-stating the requirement, it turns out. All undergraduate students must take a course in cultural diversity. If they are in the College of Arts & Sciences, they must additionally satisfy a multicultural requirement (defined as African American, Asian, Native American, or African studies -- an odd 'multicultural' requirement in a state with a very large African American population, for whom the course is presumably not 'multicultural' at all). <br /><br />Five Women's Studies courses satisfy both requirements in a single course; several others satisfy the diversity but not the multi-culti requirement, requiring a separate course focusing on one of the approved cultures.Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-82898584037026236822017-01-18T19:46:09.162-05:002017-01-18T19:46:09.162-05:00What percentage of students ever take a womens'...<i>What percentage of students ever take a womens' studies class, anyway? I don't know the answer.</i><br /><br />I don't know either, but I know that UGA requires a "diversity" elective of all students -- for satisfying which women's studies intro courses are an option. It may well be that many students end up exposed to the basic structure even if relatively few go on to pursue it as a major. (Psychology is the largest major.)<br /><br /><i>Just out of curiosity: how many of you know a womens' studies major?</i><br /><br />I do, but even more people who teach it.Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-77105997073404192452017-01-18T19:41:51.034-05:002017-01-18T19:41:51.034-05:00OK, let me circle back to my original questions. ...OK, let me circle back to my original questions. I asked if you all would have a problem with classes on toxic femininity.<br /><br />Grim responded that there *are* colleges are "loaded with" classes that brand traditional femininity as toxic. I responded that there may be some, but I haven't seen them. I haven't yet seen any real evidence that this is in fact what's being taught, even in Women's Studies (a fringe major), but I'll be happy to accept any evidence that I am wrong. Nor have I seen evidence that colleges are "loaded with" these courses. I'm sure there are some, because Cornell West exists and he's not alone. But "loaded with"? What percentage of students ever take a womens' studies class, anyway? I don't know the answer.<br /><br />Christopher B, I think, basically argued that he thinks the subtext of these classes is that males, by virtue of being male, are toxic (not that certain behaviors commonly associated with some subset of males are toxic). If I saw that going on, I would oppose it, and frankly the Duke Men's Project mentioned in the original post sounds like that kind of class. One of the others sounded more focused on violence against women and children and peers, which is a real problem (albeit unlikely to be solved by academicians talking about it). I don't find such talk objectionable on its face, though.<br /><br />Douglas pointed out that the real problem is lack of self control, not masculinity or femininity. I agree.<br /><br />raven said (I can't say it better): <i>We see places where individuals are polluting male honor by using their strength to hurt the innocent. We want them to change thier actions. They see an entrenched system of male patriarchy in which All male values and strengths are evil. They want to break the system.</i> If that's what these classes are about (the Duke one sounds like it, the other one I read about didn't) then that's destructive and wrongheaded. At any rate, before we break the current system, I'd want some pretty strong assurances a better one was forthcoming :p<br /><br />Just out of curiosity: how many of you know a womens' studies major? I've never met one, and I was unable to find a single stat on womens' studies major popularity (as in, it didn't make any of the lists). The only thing I found was a salary table in which they were the lowest paid major :p<br /><br />Shocked face.<br /><br />Cassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00083557761155403492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-26540338993136708262017-01-18T19:04:15.527-05:002017-01-18T19:04:15.527-05:00By the way, that's not my personal opinion -- ...By the way, that's not my personal opinion -- it's <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory" rel="nofollow">the history of the development of these 'critical studies' fields</a>.Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-76472267069939008452017-01-18T18:56:15.915-05:002017-01-18T18:56:15.915-05:00What I'm remarking on is that you seem to beli...<i>What I'm remarking on is that you seem to believe that these ideas are being taught as though they were unassailable mathematical formulas or natural laws.</i><br /><br />Surely not. What I think they're being taught as is systematic ideas on a roughly Marxist model: the whole field of "studies" operates on a similar dialectical analysis of history into competing classes (economic classes, for true Marxists; but 'classes' by analogy to sex or race, for other sorts). Since it's a systematic mode of analysis, the specific material is not important: once you learn the system, you can apply it to anything at all and come to the approved conclusions. (Indeed, just as Marxists do with any set of economic facts.)<br /><br />In any case, the University of Georgia's Institute for Women's Studies section <a href="http://iws.uga.edu/" rel="nofollow">publishes all its syllabi</a> on their website.Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-68645271026486008362017-01-18T18:44:57.630-05:002017-01-18T18:44:57.630-05:00I mention textbooks because my DIL is (in addition...I mention textbooks because my DIL is (in addition to teaching) a textbook author. So I'm pretty sure they're used, but at any rate I did say at some point, "textbooks and course materials", which I think covers readings.<br /><br />People are exposed to all sorts of ideas in college - that's really kind of the whole point. And the ideas don't all neatly align with each other. People are free to agree or not.<br /><br />What I'm remarking on is that you seem to believe that these ideas are being taught as though they were unassailable mathematical formulas or natural laws. I am sure that people in women's studies (hardly the majority of students) encounter more than their share of feminist ideas that you and I would both disagree with. I'm pretty sure the average student encounters them too, but to a far lesser degree.<br /><br />The vast majority of classes I took afforded no place for a professor to tell me how I should behave (and in fact, I was never told or even had it suggested to me what I should do or want as a woman). Social sciences majors and philosophy majors may see more of this, but then they also probably see lots of other ideas too.<br /><br />I have little patience for social justice warriors. As a matter of fact, I'm just re-reading Sowell's book on social justice and his Knowledge and Decisions.<br /><br />Formal teachings are one thing. Social and professional pressure are another. As I mentioned before SAH Moms were one of the most unbelievably judgmental social groups I've ever encountered - they criticized each other about everything - not using the right products, not raising their kids the right way, not joining the right playgroups, little Johnny's not being potty trained by 6 months of age... no issue was too small and few women I knew didn't care what the others thought about them.<br /><br />This is part of being human, and I think we need to be a little careful about overinterpreting what sound to me like normal human frictions and fears that come with the territory. Especially for women, who are famed for constantly wondering, "Am I a Wendy, or a Peter Pan? A Scarlett, or a Melanie?" <br /><br />That's kind of what we do, and we're different from men that way.<br /><br />Cassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00083557761155403492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-61984358672697541862017-01-18T18:28:48.031-05:002017-01-18T18:28:48.031-05:00What I find is that they are themselves uncomforta...<i> What I find is that they are themselves uncomfortable with the bias against motherhood -- not an absolute bias against it in all circumstances, but a clear suggestion that there is an incumbent duty to careerism even if motherly duties suffer. </i><br /><br />Ummm... I'm pretty sure that's called juggling work-life responsibilities. It would be weird if women who have children did NOT feel that way, given that taking good care of your kids means missing work sometimes. That's why I did not work when my kids were off school. The one time I tried to, it was very uncomfortable.<br /><br />My husband never, ever took off work even once because our kids were sick. I didn't have a problem with that, but if he had done so, it would have been looked down upon because (duh...) he's a man and where the heck is your wife?<br /><br />Women who do nothing but work are also judged harshly by other women - if you're thinking that pressure only goes one way (or is the creation of feminism), you are sadly mistaken. I saw full time mothers and wives criticize working wives and mothers for decades when I was a SAHWM. Things often look different from the inside.<br /><br />Cassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00083557761155403492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-69805077072162267812017-01-18T18:22:51.840-05:002017-01-18T18:22:51.840-05:00For example, President Obama displays toxic femini...<i>For example, President Obama displays toxic femininity all the time. </i><br /><br />OK, that was awesome :)<br /><br />Seriously, he's an odd mix. The trash talking and brash arrogance come across as more male than female but he's definitely in touch with his feminine side (and not in a good way).Cassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00083557761155403492noreply@blogger.com