Showing posts with label masculinity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label masculinity. Show all posts

Sunday, March 7, 2010

Manology: Exploring 21st Century Masculinity



I send spring greetings! I write to let you that my on-going course for men, Manology: Exploring 21st Century Masculinity, will be starting a 12 week spring run on March 11th.  Please feel free to spread the word through your networks.  All men 19 years and older are welcome.  Women - in addition to encouraging you to support men to consider checking out Manology, women will be welcomed as participants on May 6th, in our co-gender dialogue session!!  Here are the Manology course details below: 

Course Description:

Manology is an on-going, drop-in course for men 19 years and older, of all stages, backgrounds, orientations, and ethnicities. It is delivered by a diverse team of educators and facilitators with a wide range of knowledge and skills to share. Men are celebrated and supported, and are offered insight, experiences, and conversations on the physical, mental, and spiritual journey of manhood. It’s for men who are interested in exploring male identity and are ready to encourage other men to do the same. Dates: Thursdays, 7:30 - 9:45 pm, March 11 - May 27 Cost: $12 drop-in, $10 for registered men. Site: Roundhouse Community Centre, downtown Vancouver.

To check out upcoming themes and presenters, or for more info, please visit our website: www.masculinity21st.wordpress.com  
Manology has garnered solid attendance since it's beginning last Sept, as well as media interest.  Print interviews can be found at:
http://www.davidhatfield.ca/media.php   As well, Manology will be featured in an interview on Joy 10 TV  that will air March 20th on a show called "Winds of Change". 



-     -     -     -     -       
David Hatfield, Leadership Consultant & Facilitator 
e: david@davidhatfield.ca
w: www.davidhatfield.ca 
p: 604-255-3597

skype: davidbhatfield

Saturday, December 12, 2009

New Dockers 'wear the pants' ad campaign for soft khakis brings charges of sexism

This ad campaign is a breath of fresh air targeted at the forgotten demographic of males who need to get in touch with their masculinity if they have forgotten how. Most marketing companies target females and in so doing have no difficulty in showing men as bumbling idiots living with the competent, super wife (proxy mommy) who does most of the buying and household management. The Marxist victimfemis have gotten their knickers in a bonnet over it and will be screeching sexism to the UN High Commission on Progressive Speaking and Political Correctness. (In case you are an ill informed femi that was sarcasm - the organization is fictional but metaphorical.)

Men today can go through school from JK to K12 and never see a male teacher. Men today are outnumbered as University grads in all degree programs by 148 female degrees -100 male. Many men are feminized and don't even know it because they have lacked good male role models. Moms in Canada and the USA respectively get sole physical custody in 90% and 84% of cases. Similar situations exist in the UK, Australia, NZ and many other western democracies.

Its almost as though everywhere men are ensconced they drink their Lattes at the behest of some invisible curtain of Feminist Political Correctness hanging over them that has taken their family jewels and done something to them that is not in keeping with good breeding.

I'll buy some more Dockers, I've been a fan for a very long time, and be glad of the chutzpa to target men as the buyers not the "super woman" we see portrayed in commercials and TV sitcoms. If you like the approach let Levi Straus know here. I have. http://www.levistrauss.com/Company/ContactUsForm.aspx?loc=2. MJM

Links where this is discussed:

http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2009/12/09/2009-12-09_new_dockers_ad_campaign_for_soft_khakis_brings_charges_of_sexism_over_.html#community

http://current.com/items/91664049_new-dockers-wear-the-pants-ad-campaign-for-soft-khakis-brings-charges-of-sexism.htm

New Dockers 'wear the pants' ad campaign for soft khakis brings charges of sexism

Wednesday, December 9th 2009, 2:05 PM

The Dockers 'Man-ifesto,' part of the new ad campaign for its khakis brand, implores men to 'wear the pants' once again.
The Dockers 'Man-ifesto,' part of the new ad campaign for its khakis brand, implores men to 'wear the pants' once again.

Take our Poll

Khakis get 'manly'

Real men are set to wear the pants again - at least if you believe the new Dockers ads for khakis. But some are seeing subtle sexist overtones in the costly new ad campaign.

One of the new ads says, "It's time to answer the call of manhood," and the company's Web site exhorts men to "wear the pants."

A "Man-ifesto" posted on Dockers.com begins, "Once upon a time, men wore the pants, and wore them well. Women rarely had to open doors ... Men took charge because that's what they did."

"Disco by disco, latte by foamy non-fat latte, men were stripped of their khakis and left stranded on the road between boyhood and androgyny," the ad continues.

"Just because the Dockers ads are tongue in cheek does not mean that they're not sexist," wrote WalletPop.com blogger Jami Bernard in a recent post. "It's one thing to encourage men to man up, another to tell them to ‘wear the pants' - an expression that taps directly into the old question, ‘Who wears the pants in the family?'"

Dockers is reintroducing the brand - which, according to The New York Times, many young men associate with the 1990s and "casual" Fridays - with a big-budget blast including radio, print, poster and online advertising. Social media like Facebook and Twitter will be used in the ambitious ad campaign, which debuted earlier in December, and TV commercials will begin in February, with Dockers ads returning to the Super Bowl after an eight-year hiatus, according to The Times.

But just whom are they hoping to attract with the ads? Jennifer Sey, Dockers' vice president of global marketing, said in an interview in Brandweek that "sensitivity, chivalry, ambition and decisiveness" are on her wish list for the traits of "the modern idea of a man." The new promos hopefully will "inspire today's men to be men," she said in the interview.

Walletpop.com's Bernard feels the Dockers' ads "take an unnecessary snipe at gay men through the use of common wink-wink stereotypes. According to Dockers, a real man doesn't eat at salad bars or order nonfat lattes."

The new ad campaign may succeed at making 25- to 35-year-olds khaki-conscious. Jim Calhoun, president for the Dockers brand at Levi Strauss, told The Times, "I don't think that we, as leaders of the category, have done much to keep the khaki category fresh and exciting, to give the consumers a reason to buy."

Whether or not younger men will fall for soft slacks in muted shades remains to be seen. But one thing Dockers has going in its favor: an attractive price. The khakis generally sell for $25 to $55.



A couple more comments from the Current site:

I think it is interesting that anyone, male or female, would get so much of their own self identity from clothing; or from someone telling them that if they wear certain clothing they will be percieved as the person they want to be. I also think it is interesting that as a society we still see the relationship between men and women as one of dominence. That we feel that one or the other has to be bigger, better, badder or stronger than the other. I think it would be nice if we could just accept each other as equals with our own specific traits and strengths that are not necessarily bound by gender. We are all just people, different 'parts' but basically the same. The only thing that makes us different is our own self perception. Seems to me that the folks this ad is targeting might want to work on their self esteem.

rhubarb64
  • The ad is selling clothing but the message is the important issue not the clothing. It has broken the politically correct feminist hold on marketing departments. Your message is the same old - same old feminist drivel about us all being people and the same. Tell that to all the dads who lost custody of their children because of feminist mythology. Tell that to the 24,000,000 children who don't have dads in their lives because family courts give mom 84% physical custody in the USA and 90% in Canada. If you believe in equality then get to work on equal shared parenting with moms and dads.

    Men and women are fundamentally different - not the same - and years of feminization of men with propaganda about men finding their feminine side is trash talk. Why don't we instead talk about women finding their masculine side. We are men not hybrid's created in Dr. Femi's bio lab.

    The ad has little to do with clothing but at lot to do with the distance men are from their own masculinity. If you think this has anything to do with male self esteem you are dreaming in technicolour. I challenge you to look at the following in your artificial world next time you get up in the morning: Don't do anything to your hair but brush it, no straightening, no hair spray, no conditioner, don't fret over what to wear just throw on a suit, don't wear lipstick or makeup. Don't fret over which panties to wear unless you are planning to get undressed during the day to enjoy your sexual liberation.

    Do what many office men do, brush your teeth, your hair put on some comfortable or office appropriate suit and off you go. I say office or indoor work because there are no feminists working construction, fixing electrical lines, working in the sewers, operating that noisy jackhammer, climbing telephone poles in ice storms, placing steel in skyscrapers exposed to the elements, welding steel outdoors at -30 in northern Canada, de-icing airplanes in frigid conditions, working in mines below ground or offshore oil rigs pumping oil out of the bottom of the ocean, as some examples of why men earn more than women. When by mid morning coffee break all the another Sisters at the office are gathered around without you making furtive glances your way about the crisis you must be having give us a report on your self esteem.

    The only glimmer of truth in your soliloquy is both men and women are people and should be equal. Lets work on the latter like the feminists did in the 60's instead of all this 3rd wave feminist psycho babble women are victims men are oppressive patriarchs.

    The ad is the message not the clothing but I'm a Docker's pants fan and always have been. I still have some of different colours - even tan but I prefer navy blue.
    Mike_Murphy

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

A Feminist Rant from McGill University ~ OFF THE BOARD: The fight for men's rights

My response to a Feminist rant in the McGill University Newspaper is below the article.MJM







Carolyn Gregoire | Published: 12/1/09


Discrimination against men has, understandably perhaps, never occupied a prominent position on the feminist agenda. Recently, however, the rise of the men's rights movement has led men's rights groups and feminists alike to call issues specific to male identity into question. A recent article on Slate's women-oriented webzine DoubleX entitled "Men's Rights Groups are Becoming Frighteningly Effective" has spurred contentious debate extending beyond the feminist blogosphere as to whether feminism should encompass issues of men's rights.

The article was triggered by the actions of men's activist group RADAR (Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting) who gathered in Washington this October to lobby against issues such as false allegations of rape and domestic violence, unrecognized domestic violence against men, and child custody rights for divorced fathers.

Many women, and not only those who identify as feminists, are outraged by the measures these groups have taken. Rather than addressing the negative impact that patriarchy and gender stereotypes have on men and calling for change, RADAR chooses instead to undermine the prevalence of rape and domestic violence against women. Relying on hyperbolic claims and sensationalism - suggesting, for instance, that domestic violence laws represent "the largest regression in civil rights since the Jim Crow era" - RADAR succeeded in blocking the passage of several domestic violence bills, such as the Violence Against Women act. It is also worth noting that many of the movement's leaders are themselves accused batterers.

Though issues of men's rights and injustice towards men deserve attention, the anti-feminist approach employed by RADAR and many other men's rights groups in battling these issues is counterproductive and alarmingly reactionary. RADAR's attempt to take funding away from "discriminatory" women's-only shelters, rather than fighting for resources for male victims of domestic violence and sexual harassment, epitomizes this ineffectual methodology.

While it's true that all human rights are men's rights and that history is essentially a men's rights movement, discrimination against men should be a feminist concern because male and female rights are inextricably intertwined. Though a patriarchal society operates for male benefit, societal standards of masculinity are also harmful to men in real ways which deserve to be acknowledged. Rigid definitions of masculinity which narrowly cast men into aggressive, machismo, bread-winning roles are damaging to men, and further, they are damaging to men in ways that are also damaging to women. Following this line of reasoning, many feminists fight for fathers' rights as a means of countering the socially sanctioned notion that nurturer or caregiver must be a female-occupied role. A central objective of the feminist movement is debunking gender stereotypes, even when they apply only to men.

Male victims of sexual harassment, domestic violence, and rape deserve to be recognized and taken seriously, mothers should not be unjustly favoured over fathers in child custody proceedings, and individuals of both genders do not deserve to be systemically limited and harmed by rigid social definitions of masculinity. Feminist concerns and men's rights are not mutually exclusive, and should meet on the common ground of seeking gender equality - the irony of it all is that we're both fighting the same battle. As feminist Gloria Anzaldua suggests, "Men, even more than women, are fettered to gender roles … We need a new masculinity and the new man needs a movement.

While it's true that all human rights are men's rights and that history is essentially a men's rights movement, discrimination against men should be a feminist concern because male and female rights are inextricably intertwined. Though a patriarchal society operates for male benefit, societal standards of masculinity are also harmful to men in real ways which deserve to be acknowledged. Rigid definitions of masculinity which narrowly cast men into aggressive, machismo, bread-winning roles are damaging to men, and further, they are damaging to men in ways that are also damaging to women. Following this line of reasoning, many feminists fight for fathers' rights as a means of countering the socially sanctioned notion that nurturer or caregiver must be a female-occupied role. A central objective of the feminist movement is debunking gender stereotypes, even when they apply only to men.

Male victims of sexual harassment, domestic violence, and rape deserve to be recognized and taken seriously, mothers should not be unjustly favoured over fathers in child custody proceedings, and individuals of both genders do not deserve to be systemically limited and harmed by rigid social definitions of masculinity. Feminist concerns and men's rights are not mutually exclusive, and should meet on the common ground of seeking gender equality - the irony of it all is that we're both fighting the same battle. As feminist Gloria Anzaldua suggests, "Men, even more than women, are fettered to gender roles … We need a new masculinity and the new man needs a movement."

http://www.mcgilltribune.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticle&ustory_id=6ae2c632-12be-4a4c-9c7c-842b184b7297

….feminism should encompass issues of men's rights.

Several flavours of feminism have been identified over the years and the movement seems somewhat splintered and indeed incoherent. The current flavour encompassing Victimization is the loudest and most pervasive. This version is narcissistic, propagandist, mendacious, and not entirely adult in its approach. After all if the premise women are always victims at the hands of the patriarchy strikes me that you are mere children in adult bodies requiring the nanny state to be your new “patriarch”. You have simply requested a new protector of a collective sort which is in keeping with the Marxist roots of feminism. In short your narcissistic notion that any flavour of feminism could encompass men’s rights issues is “dreaming” out loud.

Here are a few samples of today’s flavours of Feminism:

Victim Feminism: – the 3rd wave relying on the psycho babble of the Duluth Wheel that all men (patriarchy) are oppressors and all women victims.

Maternalist: A virulent strain of feminist supremacy specializing in custody by moms only and in some cases as a lunatic fringe of moms who lost custody and cannot get over it. These tend to be the ones who will quickly slime anyone, male or female, who disagree with their premise and will spend inordinate amounts of time, using taxpayer resources, to research their foe and create hate websites vilifying these enemies. If you visit their blogs you will understand better why they lost custody.

Lifeboat Feminist: If on a boat and it starts sinking they will rationalize they are more than equal to or greater than men. The men will give up their lives as they always have but the LBF rationalizes someone has to raise the children and they are more qualified. Equality isn't really their goal it is supremacy. They cannot walk the walk but can spin a good yarn to try and talk the talk about equality. This term has its roots from a brave Irish Independence newspaper columnist named Kevin Myers.

Gender Feminist: This appears to be the author’s category. It is clear there are no gender roles with exceptions of course, one of which is related to custody of children, where women are supreme and men incompetent. They are full of contradictions, one of which was just described, and a most confusing breed of female.

Equalist Feminist: The original flavour which few will disagree with.

The rest are Real Women: The vast majority who need no ideology to know they are equal and go through life unfettered by any ideology and some even decide to be stay-at-home parents .

In other words until you get your act together in the feminist movement platitudinous statements about encompassing men’s rights are blather.

“… RADAR succeeded in blocking the passage of several domestic violence bills, such as the Violence Against Women act.”

Last time I checked this regressive and blatantly discriminatory act still exists. Your lack of research is typical, however, of feminist rants which are much adieu about nothing. It is one of the most regressive acts in the modern history of a western democracy. It is built on feminist mendacity some of which is evident in this article based on nothing but supposition such as: “It is also worth noting that many of the movement's leaders are themselves accused batterers. .” Your credibility sits at Zero but then what else is new when we see feminism doing its “dirty work.”

“…the anti-feminist approach employed by RADAR and many other men's rights groups in battling these issues is counterproductive and alarmingly reactionary."

Here is a quote from one of your predecessors and please absorb its meaning in the context of this silly and naive remark of yours.

"Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage."
Sheila Cronin, prominent member of NOW

What was that you were saying about hyperbole?

“RADAR's attempt to take funding away from "discriminatory" women's-only shelters, rather than fighting for resources for male victims”

So the way forward is to hoard your resources even if you recognize a need for someone else needing help. A very feminist approach but not very “motherly” don’t you think. As a movement you need to get your act together and lobby with the men. More resources would likely flow without taking from the other.

“While it's true that all human rights are men's rights and that history is essentially a men's rights movement, discrimination against men should be a feminist concern because male and female rights are inextricably intertwined.”

Next time try not to get overly intellectual and you might actually be understandable. The last 7 words are the only thing that makes sense.

“…patriarchal society operates for male benefit, societal standards of masculinity are also harmful to men in real ways which deserve to be acknowledged”

Oh please! Is this mythical patriarchy that rules all our lives similar to SPECTRE that James Bond used to fight? What in heaven’s name is “societal standards of masculinity” other than inane and effete attempts at pseudo-intellectual babbling.

“Rigid definitions of masculinity which narrowly cast men into aggressive, machismo, bread-winning roles are damaging to men in ways that are also damaging to women.”

You have seen far too many Hollywood movies or been hanging out in too many bars listening to too many narcissistic pick up lines by hormonally induced and imbibing males. Since when is bread winning machismo? What does that make all those women who are earning a living?

“…We need a new masculinity and the new man needs a movement."

Please get over yourself. Masculinity is one of the finest forms of human kind on the face of the earth. It’s the men who run into burning buildings to save lives and give theirs up in the bargain. How quickly we overlook the firefighters and police officers, pretty much exclusively male, who went into the world trade Towers knowing they might not ever get out alive. If you are a victim trapped in a place imperiling your life you may feel better knowing that out there is a burly man who is rushing to find you and if he does he will lift you up over his shoulder and carry you to safety or die trying. I’m paraphrasing a well known Canadian female journalist who witnessed the aftermath of 9/1/1.

It’s the gender who has invented almost everything useful, explored the earth, risked and lost life and limb fighting oppressors (was that the patriarchy) in major wars and men like me who spent 10 years as a stay-at-home father raising two girls from infancy who can put their nurturing capabilities up against any woman in the world.

We need no lessons in masculinity from feminists nor do we necessarily think highly of men whose only apparent way to show their notion of equality is give up their masculinity to declare they are feminists. Feminism is derived from female and I am no female, therefore, I am no feminist.

Having said that I don’t know any man of sound mind who would disagree with the notion both genders are equal and different.