At AU, one of the most progressive, liberal and accepting universities in the country, I have never felt like I have been treated differently for being a woman. That is, until I read Tom Xiao’s column entitled “Don’t shame men for their masculinity.”
Xiao’s interpretation of feminist rhetoric is severely flawed. He says, “many claim that masculinity, a social construct, oppresses women and thus should be altered.” Feminists do not criticize masculinity; we criticize those who justify their oppressive actions by using their masculinity. Seeing a tall, muscular man does not upset me as a feminist. Seeing a man who raped a woman because he sees himself as dominant over her upsets me as a feminist. Masculinity does not oppress me; believing that masculinity is superior to femininity oppresses me.
Xiao also claims that certain feminist rhetoric may “face animosity from men because it basically tells men that the very qualities that define them are problems.” Well, that depends on what qualities you think define men. If you think of masculinity as aggressive and violent, then yes, feminists have a problem with that. But that is not how feminists define masculinity. In fact, feminists are fighting against that very idea: the social pressure our patriarchal society puts on boys to be exclusively “manly.” Understanding what exactly feminists are fighting against is crucial to the fight for equality.
The patriarchy that feminism is fighting tells men that they have no choice but to be masculine. The patriarchy tells men that they too must look like the model on the billboard, that they must be tall and muscular, that they cannot cry and be emotional. There is no reason why men cannot be small, effeminate and expressive if they want to be. If they don’t, that’s fine too. But what Xiao doesn’t realize is that the patriarchy is not just oppressing women. It is oppressing men too.
Xiao inadvertently suggests that feminists should not attack the patriarchal definition of masculinity. Xiao seems to believe “challenging social norms” or “pushing for gender awareness” may make men uncomfortable. Maybe it will hurt their feelings or make them question their identity. Oh, no! Why would a social movement ever want to change the way people fundamentally look at things?
Throughout the article Xiao references “radical feminists,” though no quotes are provided of feminists saying anything hateful towards men or masculinity. Sure there are some extremists, as there are in any social movement or group, but it wouldn’t be fair to equate all Christians with the Westboro Baptist Church, for example. So why are radical feminists being equated with the entire feminist movement? The fight for equality becomes infinitely more difficult when writers like Xiao discount the entire feminist movement because of the views of a few radicals. The fact of the matter is, women do not hate men. Women hate the idea that men are better than women.
Xiao cites an article with research indicating there are neurological differences between men and women explaining their traditional gender roles throughout history. While it is hard to argue with science, biology cannot take the blame for oppression. Biology does not demand women only earn $0.77 to every man’s dollar. Biology does not demand men catcall at women as they walk down the street. Most importantly, biology does not demand or even suggest that one gender is dominant over the other.
Feminism is an equality movement. Feminists fight for equal pay, equal rights, and equal treatment. I’m sure you’ve seen those words in the news before. Nowhere have you seen feminists fighting for “better pay” or “better rights” or “better treatment” than men. That’s because feminists simply aren’t fighting to be better than men. We are fighting for equality and freedom from the oppression of the patriarchy. I truly hope that Xiao and men everywhere can understand that; not only do women desperately need feminism, but so do men.
Miranda Cleland is a freshman in the School of International Service.
