Splitting Up the Sexes
By Raza Rasheed, Staff Columnist
Published on Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Tiny Wagner College in New York recently created a small firestorm by announcing the creation of a “Foundation for Male Studies” with the intent of offering male studies as a full-fledged academic discipline. While many worry Wagner’s program is just a cynical attempt to legitimize anti-feminist screeds, the idea of a Male Studies discipline is not, in and of itself, a bad idea. At the right institution and in a disciplined, level-headed and intellectually vigorous environment, Male Studies could offer a valuable and important contribution to academia. As just such an institution, Dartmouth should seize this opportunity to show progressive leadership, much like it did by creating the first Women’s and Gender Studies program in the Ivy League years ago, and separate Male Studies from Women’s and Gender Studies, endowing the field with its own department.
The field of Gender Studies is dominated by feminist critiques of patriarchy. This is fitting and proper considering the tremendous oppression that women worldwide have faced and continue to face, and given that for centuries women were completely ignored in mainstream academics except by the occasional crackpot espousing ignorant theories of female inferiority. However, this focus on women’s issues has largely pushed out serious discussion of men’s issues, which while not as grave in magnitude, are important and worthy of consideration nonetheless.
For instance, American men commit suicide at almost four times the rate of women, are twice as likely to be alcoholics and are more than three times as likely to have some mental illnesses such as Antisocial Personality Disorder. Men have also fallen starkly behind women in most educational indicators in recent decades. Boys in high school have substantially lower GPAs, are twice as likely to be suspended and are half as likely as high school girls to be proficient in writing. At the collegiate level, women now account for 57 percent of bachelor’s degrees and 62 percent of master’s degrees, and make up such a dominant portion of the applicant pool that some colleges even practice a kind of “affirmative action” to avoid skewed gender ratios — as Blair Sullivan ’10 wrote about recently (“Too Few Good Men,” Feb. 22).
None of these trends are well understood, but all are serious and all are under-researched. This is at least in part due to the fact that Male Studies have been, by and large, rolled into Women’s and Gender Studies, where men’s issues must compete for attention with global women’s issues and are often smothered by the environment that pervades the discipline, which is not by and large conducive to such discussions. This is not to say that professors, students and researchers within Women’s and Gender Studies are inherently hostile toward or dismissive of men’s issues. But realistically, it is often difficult to broach the concerns that men face in the wake of an emotionally charged discussion about misogyny, sexism or sexual assault.
There is a valid concern that splitting Male Studies into its own field might devolve into a reactionary, anti-feminist quagmire, but that just makes it all the more important that schools like Dartmouth show leadership, get out in front and set a positive tone to discuss men’s issues. The discipline will never grow into anything legitimate if it’s monopolized by those who would use it solely to critique feminism, and Dartmouth is one of the few schools with the scope to be able to do this field justice without harming the existing Women’s and Gender Studies program or giving undue voice to those whose only intent is to torpedo vibrant discussion of gender issues. The endeavor would almost certainly be awkward at first, but being progressive about a contentious issue is rarely a cakewalk, and the results could be tremendously important.
The global culture of patriarchy has too long worked to the detriment of both genders — females in the obvious sense, and males in that it has become fashionable to assume that men face no serious issues worthy of discussion or study. It is time to correct this damaging imbalance by extricating Male Studies from the shadow of Women’s and Gender Studies and legitimizing it as a field unto itself. This must be done without removing funding from Women’s Studies, not only for political purposes, but because both genders face important issues that deserve full and vigorous attention. Gender studies should never again be a zero sum game.
I applaud the idea of a men’s studies program, but find the spririt in which it is proposed condescending. Men’s issues are, if anything, more grave than women’s, seeing as men live 5-6 years shorter lives, die more often of suicide and homicide, and comprise 93% of all workplace deaths. Men are not victims of patriarchy: that term is over-used to the point of being meaningless.It must be debatable whether women have been oppressed in the first place if one is to truly study masculinity. Society has always had rules for both men and women, and to assume one group was oppressed is to assume the other is the oppressor. Why then have the so-called oppressors always died in greater numbers to protect the so called oppressed? If men truly world wide devalued women, wouldn’t men send women out to die in wars, fires, mines, forests and oceans? If we are to truly study gender, then all preconcieved notions must be set aside for true discussion and discourse to take place. Allowing feminist theory to be the basis for the men’s program is simply to make the women’s studies twice as large.
By JenK on Apr 13 | 11:01 am
Whenever I read articles like this, I have a difficult time forming a response.
But as an MRA, I definitely am compelled to respond.
First off, Feminism is not the “default outlook” of everyone, and though it amounts to a State Religion, sometimes disagreeing with Feminism is not only “proper”, sometimes it’s mandatory if you believe in such things as “equality before the law”.
Who gave Feminists the right to decide what’s “equal” anyway?
You state Mens Issues are “not as important” as women’s issues, and repeat all the required shibboleths, yet avoid one of the main points to taking a fresh start approach, rather than trying to “amend” Mens Studies to actually reflect, you know…mens issues.
And that main point?
Feminism has made a lot of contentions over the years. The adherents to this ideology have cast men as “oppressors”, and battle “The Patriarchy™”…yet have never, not once, NEVER shown these things to exist.
Case in point?
BOTH the US, and the UK, have just completed multi-million dollar studies looking into sexism and the wage gap. Both studies set out to “root out” sexism, and reccommend changes.
The problem was, neither of these studies could find sexist causes, unless you define “choice of the women involved” as “sexism”.
BOTH of these studies utterly failed to find sexism, and in fact outlined that single, never married women are doing quite a bit better than men of the same circumstance.
Never heard this before?
Hardly surprising, the information goes directly against the desired meta-narrative of the Mainstream Media and the Religion of Feminism.
Which is why literally DECADES after common Feminist tropes are shown to be outright lies (Superbowl myth, DV is ONLY perpetrated by men, etc…), people still continue to believe.
Without programs like this to FORCE the world to acknowledge these issues, Feminists, Politicians, and Media Moguls alike would continue to ignore, suppress, and demonize men and boys with impunity.
Feminism is a hate movement, though they dress up their hate speech in academic sounding language. Men have the right to be free of their influence in Academics should they choose to, and these attempts to shame, ridicule, or suppress Male Studies is increasingly being shown to be the deliberate stifling of the Male voice that it is…
By Factory on Apr 13 | 5:40 pm