I don’t see how you can complain that he responded by saying he isn’t interested in theory. The only reference you made to it “working out in practice” was to say you didn’t see the theories “fleshed out” which isn’t a very direct way of saying “be practical!”

Hugo likes to tell stories. If you want details from him, ask him to tell a story that illustrates whatever claims you think he’s telling and you may get more of an answer that way. :)

So you can see how it works out in practice, yet you are unable to give the kind of answer I want, which is to explain specifically how it works out in practice. Well, that at least illustrates your commitment to embracing contradictory ideas.

This is a view of masculinity that explicitly supports women’s rights. It’s also not pacifist, to say the least. Folks who are unhappy that the story Hugo Schwyzer mentioned included girls giving cookies to boys and boys moving heavy objects might take note.

Well, it doesn’t support women’s rights to not be invaded, shot at, or colonized. I’m really tired of seeing this used (in discussions that don’t even pertain to the war) by white feminists who haven’t taken the time to learn about the situation.

Using tokenism to make a point is offensive, especially since the facts on the ground in Afghanistan are that the invasion has caused a lot of sexual abuse, forced many women into prostitution, and has been condemned by RAWA, which is the only group that represents Afghani women.

Some soldier in this war’s view of masculinity isn’t particularily relevant to me - he’s already sold his manhood out to the state.

I think Hugo is doing fine. Boys are rising men, and they work in a largely heterosexual society with conflicting ideas of masculinity. Hugo is teaching them to enjoy their maleness, in a positive way, and there is nothing wrong with that. I celebrate my stepson’s growing masculinity, and it doesn’t matter what his orientation is. He’s a beautiful young man, and he’ll be a fine adult man, and gay or straight, he’ll be male. Lovely.

Men are not women and women are different than men and we can all enjoy that. Many of our friends are gay which might not surprise you, and we can maintain delightful conventions of behavior that have nothing to do with dissing sexual stereotypes. I dearly love and respsect our gay friends, but they aren’t women and we aren’t men and we can enjoy that too. Please, take the PCness and put it aside for a bit and think about that.

My stepson is cool with gays and straights. Regardless of what his sexuality is,, he will treat his partner with respect. He enjoys the company of women (God knows he lives with enough of them! :-) and he enjoys the company of men (he plays competitve team sports, quite well). I am firmly confident he will be an honorable friend and lover to his friends and lovers. I wish someone like Hugo were in his life too, but his wonderful Dad is there and he’ll do fine.

You know, we can recognize our differences and enjoy them, without disrespecting each other. If a nice young man opens a door for me, am I offended? Hell, no. I’m a woman of a certain age. Should I feel ashamed that I need to ask that nice young man to unscrew a bottle cap? Hell no. He’s got a physical strength I don’t have. Assuming he respects that I can be as accomplished as he can intellectually, and I do, why should I mind that we are different physically and that we apply some harmless social conventions? We don’t have to all go androgynous to recognize that we all have something to provide and respect in our diferences.

Vive la difference.

I get that, and I appreciate it. I just can’t get my head around how the approach is qualitatively different from what a man with “a far-right social and religious agenda” does. They also view masculinity as “maturity in a specifically male way.” Having grown up in a religious family and a red state, I knew many men who were decent men in terms of taking responsibility for their families, not using overtly sexist or homophobic language, being generous and helpful to those in need, etc., and were still sexists and homophobes–which was primarily demonstrated through Othering women and gays, usually in covert ways. Would these men have raped a woman? No. Would they have hired a woman? Also no. Would they have called a gay man a “faggot” to his face? No. Would they have hired a gay man? Also no. Etc.

And all of that was wrapped up in being not only a masculine man, but A Good Man, by their definition–which, outwardly, doesn’t appear to differ significantly from yours. What lies beneath makes all the difference, but how does your framing compete with men who still incorporate Othering into their definitions of masculinity (reinforcing what the young men with whom you work are already predisposed), but have just sent it underground, so to speak?

I can see how your framing works more clearly when juxtaposed against the framing of a manhood which is depedendent on overt displays of oppression, belittlement, and discrimination. It’s when sexism and homophobia are conveyed in subtler ways that the framing seems to break down. Not every man who has a far-right social and religious agenda is a Promise Keeper, you know? My dad told me my whole life that men and women were equal, yet conveyed to me over and over in subtle ways that they really weren’t. If I had been a male, I’m not sure I would have been able to extricate masculinity from Othering, mainly because I would have had no reason.

SS, one way of thinking of masculinity is to think of it as “maturity in a specifically male way”. I am teaching young men to embrace responsibility and maturity , but I am specifically labelling those attributes as “masculine.” Again, not to suggest that women don’t have the potential for equal maturity, but to make the idea of responsibility more attractive and compelling to the audience of anxious young men I am trying to reach.

Call it my version of political repackaging.

I appreciate your attempts both at your work and explaining your work to us! We definitely need to help create a “New Masculinity”. It needs to be inclusive and supportive of women and girls.

As men (and boys) we need to work with each other. The modern feminist movement has helped women and girls better understand themselves over the past 40 years. The Pro-Feminist (or Feminist if one prefers) Men’s Movement has done little, despite the efforts of many wonderful men and women.

From my life experience often it is important for men to work with other men and later build coalitions with women’s groups. Where we try to work directly with women and girls at first, often our blinders get in our way.

While I certainly don’t agree with everything you say, I respect your efforts. Thanks!

who will offer them a more expanded understanding of the joys and possibilities of being male

How do you present “the joys and possibilities of being male” without necessarily juxtaposing that against not being female? What are the joys and possibilities of being male? What are the joys and possibilities of being female? (Aside from the obvious fatherhood v. motherhood.)

we’ve got offer a vision of what it means to be a man that is grounded in justice, grounded in compassion, grounded in a respect for diversity — but also grounded in a sense that there is something magical,, unique, wonderful, and positive about masculinity itself

Is there something magical, unique, wonderful, and positive about masculinity iteslf? For some reason, this strikes me as odd. Maybe it’s because I associate “masculinity” and “femininity” with gender more than sex and because I’m gender-queer, told my whole life how “boyish” my personality is, but neither masculinity nor femininity seem to me to be intrinsically magical, unique, wonderful, or positive. I’m not suggesting we must reject masculinity as a false construct, but what about as a neutral construct? Why does it not make more sense to relay the message that masculinity (or femininity) is not inherently magical et. al, but is what you make of it?

As you pointed out, “We live in a culture where the only folks who seem to celebrate the specifically masculine are those who are pushing a far-right social and religious agenda.” Don’t they also believe that their vision of masculinity is magical, unique, wonderful, and positive? And are they actually wrong? Based on their definitions of manhood, masculinity is all those things, too.

I understand why it’s useful to frame it the way you have, but I’m still not sure that I see anything more than the same construct with “but be nice to girls and gays” tacked on. Which, you know, is great, but I don’t know that it’s about teaching masculinity as much as as teaching respect for The Other.

-’Masculinity’ and ‘Femininity’ are concepts that aren’t biologically attached to the categories of ‘male’ and ‘female.’

-They are, however, historically and culturally attached.

-Given thousands of years of culture that tell us what masculinity and femininity are, it may not be such a bad thing to rehabilitate them as concepts accessible to both genders, rather than trying to extinguish them.