The feminist movement, according to bell hooks, aims to end sexist
oppression by overcoming “imperialist white-supremacist capitalist
patriarchy.” While the feminist movement has at times taken the shape of a men
verses women dichotomy, there are more constructive approaches. In her work, bell
hooks suggests that even though women and men face different oppressions, both women
and men must find ways of working together to effectively overcome patriarchal
oppression. Working in the texts, Ain’t I
A Woman: Black Women and Feminism, Feminist
Theory from Margin to Center, Writing
Beyond Race: Living Theory and Practice, and We Real Cool: Black Men and Masculinity, I argue hooks encourages both
men and women to overcome sexist oppression as comrades in solidarity, not
enemies.
First, I will discuss ways in
which to encourage male participation, the need to better understand
masculinity, the importance of rejecting anti-male feminism, followed by the
need to recognize male pain. Lastly, I will conclude with embracing diversity.
Integrated throughout the paper will be text from hooks supporting concepts of
men and women working together as comrades in solidarity.
Encouraging Male Participation
Male participation in the feminist movement has been less than optimal,
if not, there likely wouldn’t be a need for a movement anymore. According to
hooks, “Women’s liberationists called upon all women to join feminist movement,
but they did not continually stress that men should assume responsibility for
actively struggling to end sexist oppression.”
[i]
Sadly, there seems to permeate an unproductive stereotype that feminist work is
a woman’s work and men are the enemy, but this couldn’t be further from the
truth. Not only is this thinking unproductive, it is also contributing to
sexist oppression. Distinguishing who may or may not participate in the
feminist movement on account of gender is also using gender as an oppressive,
discriminating factor. As hooks noted in
Writing
Beyond Race, we need to “move away from the us/them dichotomies which
promote blame and prevent us all from assuming accountability.”
[ii]
Male participation in ending sexist oppression starts with accountability and
concern for women’s liberation. However, that participation is hindered when
feminists, often women, within the movement exclude or marginalize male
involvement due to gender, which in turn allows men to relinquish their
accountability in the movement. As hooks points out, “Accountability is a more
expansive concept because it opens a field of possibility wherein we are all
compelled to move beyond blame to see where our responsibility lies.”
[iii]
Accountability requires that we collectively recognize we are living within
dominator culture and collectively take responsibility to overcome senseless
oppressions.
The exclusion of men in the feminist movement is not simply a matter of
misogyny, or men having no concern for the liberation of women. Feminist
tactics that have neglected their own part in male exclusion undermine their
own goal to end sexist oppression. According to hooks, “This lack of [male] participation
is not solely a consequence of anti-feminism. By making women’s liberation
synonymous with women gaining social equality with men, liberal feminists
effectively created a situation in which they, not men, designated feminist
movement ‘women’s work’.”
[iv]
While there is work being done by feminists to find constructive ways of
bonding women together in a sense of comradery and sisterhood, there has been
less attention given to the encouragement of men’s efforts in the feminist
movement. Limited male participation cannot be reduced to misogyny alone, but
also the tactic of feminists excluding potential participants.
Not only should feminists refrain from excluding male participation,
feminist should be encouraging male participation, or better put, encourage participation
independent of gender. More recently, the #HeForShe campaign is working to
change the aim of feminism as women’s work. Their mission statement echoes
hooks’ call for diverse gender participation in the movement to end sexist
oppression by stating, “it’s not just a women’s issue, it’s a human rights
issue.”
[v]
Though the #HeForShe campaign might suggest binary gender distinctions in the
title, I think it’s still worth noting that there is an effort to widen the
genderized distribution of feminist work beyond the role of women, and the
“women only” mentality, which at its roots perpetuates the oppressions of
patriarchy.
Encouraging male participation also means moving past blame. It is easy
to misidentify the problem of sexism with a personified male trope, when
identifying the abstract idea of sexism requires more thought and work. In Writing Beyond Race, hooks discusses the
need for moving past blame:
“We are more
energized by the practice of blaming than we are by efforts to create
transformation, we not only cannot find relief from suffering, we are creating
the conditions that help keep us stuck in the status quo. Our attachment to
blaming, to identifying the oppressor, stems from the fear that if we cannot
unequivocally and absolutely state who the enemy is then we cannot know who to
organize resistance struggle.” (pg. 29)
We have the capacity to transcend our reductionist blaming tactics, but
we will be far more effective if we learn from our past and target ideas
instead of people. This is not an easy task, because as humans we can easily be
defeated with violence, or even apathy, but a hateful idea can live on like a
parasite jumping from host to host. Overcoming dominator culture requires we
accurately identify the various systems of oppression at work, instead of
blaming another.
[vi]
Encouragement of male participation includes overcoming blaming culture, and
embracing a willingness to listen. Men need not blame themselves for inventing
sexism, any more than women should, but we should not shirk the responsibility
to eradicate it.
Understanding Masculinity
A common criticism of the feminist movement is the condemnation of
masculinity. Unfortunately, toxic interpretations of masculinity make it
difficult to identify what is masculine and what is patriarchal oppression. In
pushing against patriarchal oppression, feminists are often criticized of
emasculating men. Hooks points out, “…imposed upon the consciousness of the
American public [is] the notion that any career woman, any woman who competed
with men, was envious of male power and was likely to be a castrating bitch.”
[vii]
When domination is considered a masculine quality, any attempts to challenge
unjust domination will be perceived as emasculating. When violence is
considered a masculine quality, any attempts to challenge unjust violence will
be perceived as emasculating. When power
is considered a masculine quality, any attempts to redistribute power to other
genders will be perceived as emasculating. In order to end the oppression of
unjust domination, violence, and power imbalances we need to decouple the idea
that these qualities are inherently masculine. To the extent we ignore issues
related to masculinity, we undermine our own goals and objectives to end sexist
oppression and usher in gender liberation.
Rejecting Anti-Male Feminism
Another common tactic used by feminists is a reductionist approach that pits
men as the enemy of feminism. Anti-male feminist views, though unproductive,
still rear their head in contemporary discourse. However, by falsely assuming
all men are misogynistic oppressors, the feminist movement has divisively cut
the possible number of participants in half. If a movement such as feminism
aims to end sexist oppression, but then uses gender exclusionary tactics,
labels, and language, anti-male feminists have already begun a journey counterproductive
to their primary objective. If misandry is the primary objective, it’s not
feminism.
Broad generalizations such as “men hate women” and “men are the enemy” are
often contributors to stereotypes against feminist and perpetuate false
assumptions of “feminist, man-hating lesbians.” Misogyny cannot justify
misandry, especially when misandry perpetuates misogyny. Feminism cannot be a
movement built upon “all men are the enemy” and then to be taken seriously as a
movement to end sexist oppressions.
[viii]
This mentality also alienates the participation of women who do not share
exclusionary sentiments. One example hooks points out in
Feminism: From Margin to Center is within the black
community.
“Despite sexism,
black women have contributed equally to anti-racist struggle, and frequently,
before contemporary black liberation effort, black men have recognized this
contribution. There is a special tie binding people together who struggle
collectively for liberation. Black women and men have been united by such ties.
They have known the experience of political solidarity. It is the experience of
shared resistance struggle that led black women to reject the anti-male stance
of some feminist activists.” (pg. 70)
There is much we can learn from this example. By binding together in
the spirit of solidarity, we can form a comradery that provokes us into action,
not as women against men, but men and women against sexist oppression. Moving
past anti-male feminism requires us to abandon the “battle of the sexes”
mentality that holds us back.
Another area in which anti-male feminist ideals have appeared is within
shaming men’s sexuality. Tactics deployed by anti-male feminists not only
create useless divisions among those who share a common goal to end sexist
oppression, they are also contributing to sexual shaming with harmful
psychological effects. It is the inverse of “slut shamming.” Sexual shaming regarding
any gender has no place in the feminist movement.
The extreme of anti-male sexuality can be seen is feminist lesbian mandates.
To clarify, not all lesbianism is misandist, just as male homosexuality isn’t
misogyny. Within the feminist movement there has been a significant effort put
into ending heterosexist oppression and liberation of the queer community. However,
radical feminist views prevalent in the 1980’s took anti-male stances that
require commentary. While these anti-male sexuality positions are slowly
dwindling, some dogmas and stereotypes still linger. Women’s sexual liberation
is closely linked to lesbian liberation, which is a positive advancement for
homosexuals. However, a feminist movement that condemns men’s sexuality and
mandates lesbianism is not sexual liberation. That is adopting the role of the
oppressor. As hooks, stated, “Just as the struggle to end sexual oppression
aims to eliminate heterosexism, it should not endorse any one sexual choice:
celibacy, bisexuality, homosexuality, or heterosexuality.”
[ix]
Just as a person can be committed to the feminist movement to end sexist
oppression regardless of gender, a person “…can be politically committed to
feminism regardless of sexual preferences.”
[x]
Though the feminist movement has struggled with abuses of male sexuality, male
sexuality cannot be the primary target to end sexist oppression. “As long as feminist
women condemn male sexuality, and by extension—women who are involved sexually
with men, the feminist movement is undermined.”
[xi]
We need to abandon and reject anti-male sexuality stances which create
unnecessary and harmful divisions.
Recognizing
Male Pain
Patriarchy hurts everyone. All lives matter. We are all in pain. Though
these statements may be accurate, they are also weaponized by white-supremacist
patriarchy to prevent genuine solidarity with those that are different from
ourselves. In this example, I’d like to focus on the black man.
The black man is in pain and due to stigma, toxic masculinity
perceptions, stereotypes, racism and sexism, the pain of the black male has
gone unaddressed, and “there is a crisis in the black male spirit in our
nation.”
[xii] Black males, from slavery to prison, from
schools to the projects, have endured relentless dehumanization. Black males
have often been relegated to another species, outside the category of human,
and referred to as the “endangered species” which also implies a subhuman,
animalistic undertone. It doesn’t take much to imagine the pain associated with
such dogmas and stereotypes.
Sometime the pain of black men is used in the
Oppression Olympics against black women as they argue over who is
more oppressed than whom. This is just another way patriarchy prohibits the
solidarity of souls. It only prevents black men and women from working together
to put a stop to collective suffering. “Historically and today,
white-supremacist patriarchy has found that the best way to prevent solidarity
between black females and males is to make it appear that females are getting
power while black male power is diminishing.”
[xiii]
This is a divide and conquer tactic used to further perpetuate white-supremacist
patriarchy. Patriarchy inherently create power imbalances where even those that
aren’t at the top of the pyramid will do whatever is necessary to protect what
little soft power they have in the pecking order. A person may not be on the
top rung, but it at least it’s not the bottom rung. This mentality divides the
oppressed groups into categories that pits the pain of one against the other.
For example, starting around the first wave feminist movement, “many
white women’s liberationists did not care about the fate of oppressed groups of
men.”
[xiv]
Though white women suffered from sexist oppression many were unable or
reluctant to realize that they still had more power and privilege than poor,
uneducated, non-white males. Dismissal of male concerns, in this case black
mens’ concerns, liberal feminists have failed to offer the olive branch of
solidarity with men whom are also oppressed by patriarchy. As hooks accounts,
“They were not eager to call attention to the fact that men do not share a
common social status, […] that all men do not benefit equally from sexism.”
[xv]
While the black man is in pain, this is not a rally cry or an excuse to
enable black men to assert patriarchal dominance to appease their pain. Rather
this is a realization that when the black man suffers, we all suffer. Ignoring,
patronizing, or misrecognizing black male pain is also another tactic of
patriarchy. Anti-sexist thinking in black men will not come from the ignorance
to their pain, but rather that the acceptance their pain is one of the most
human qualities they possess. John Bradshaw, in
Bradshaw: On the Family, uses the term “soul-murder” to describe the
deprivation of human feeling and shame.
[xvi]
However, in recognizing the genuine pain of the black man through mutual
sensitivity and vulnerability, toxic masculinity perceptions of patriarchal
thinking are undermined with love and concern for our black brother’s well-being.
Embracing
Diversity
Embracing our differences is essential to forming a sense of comradery
and solidarity, whether that’s through better understanding someone’s pain or
resistance to anti-male tropes. Hooks suggests, “If females and males are
taught to value mutuality, then partnership rather than the ethics of
domination will be valued.”
[xvii]
We must learn to value each other, independent of gender. The feminist movement
should stress the need to embrace our uniqueness, and not fear or hate what is
different from ourselves. It is diversity that makes all life possible on the
planet. Without embracing diversity, we risk the birth of new supremacist
attitudes. Embracing diversity in the feminist movement means we heighten our
consciousness to be aware of how those differences are not a hinderance, but
necessity. Valuing one another as unique and essential individuals is a good
start.
According to the text, hooks encourages both men and women to overcome
sexist oppression as comrades in solidarity, not enemies. They are many ways in
which we can improve, such as encouraging male participation, understanding
masculinities, rejecting anti-male feminism, recognizing male pain, and
embracing diversity. By working together in love and understanding we will be
better positioned to overcome hate and oppression.
Citations
[i] bell
hooks, “Feminism: From Margin to Center,” (South End Press, 2015), 68.
[ii] bell
hooks, “Writing Beyond Race: Living Theory and Practice,” (Taylor &
Francis, 2013), 12.
[iii]
bell hooks, “Writing Beyond Race: Living Theory and Practice,” (Taylor &
Francis, 2013), 30.
[iv] bell
hooks, “Feminism: From Margin to Center” (South End Press, 2015), 68.
[v] HeForShe,
s.v. “Our Mission,” accessed October 2, 2017,
http://www.heforshe.org/en/our-mission. “The world is at a turning point. People
everywhere understand and support the idea of gender equality. They know it’s
not just a women’s issue, it’s a human rights issue. And when these powerful
voices are heard, they will change the world. The time for that change is now. HeForShe
is inviting people around the world to stand together to create a bold, visible
force for gender equality. And it starts by taking action right now to create a
gender equal world.”
[vi]
bell hooks, “Writing Beyond Race: Living Theory and Practice,” (Taylor &
Francis, 2013), 35.
[vii] bell
hooks, “Ain’t I A Woman: Black Women and Feminism,” (South End Press, 2015), 180.
[viii]
bell hooks, “Feminism: From Margin to Center,” (South End Press, 2015), 69.
“Assertions like ‘all men are the enemy’ and ‘all men hate women’ lumped groups
of men in one category, thereby suggesting that they share equally in all forms
of male privilege. […] Anti-male sentiments have alienated many poor and
working-class women, particularly non-white women, from feminist movement.”
[ix] bell
hooks, “Feminism: From Margin to Center,” (South End Press, 2015), 153.
[x] bell
hooks, “Feminism: From Margin to Center,” (South End Press, 2015), 154.
[xi] bell
hooks, “Feminism: From Margin to Center,” (South End Press, 2015), 155.
[xii] bell
hooks, “We Real Cool: Black Men and Masculinity,” (Taylor & Francis, 2004),
134.
[xiii]
bell hooks, “We Real Cool: Black Men and Masculinity,” (Taylor & Francis,
2004), 135.
[xiv] bell
hooks, “Feminism: From Margin to Center,” (South End Press, 2015), 69.
[xv] bell
hooks, “Feminism: From Margin to Center,” (South End Press, 2015), 69.
[xvi] John
Bradshaw, “Bradshaw: On the Family,” (Health Communications Inc., 1996), 2.
[xvii]
bell hooks, “Writing Beyond Race: Living Theory and Practice,” (Taylor &
Francis, 2013), 35.
