Comments on: “Architects of our own adversity”: a long post about men’s complicity in their own oppression, and the difference between self-acceptance and self-love http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/ Sat, 13 Mar 2010 21:44:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: robert http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-68039 robert Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:33:30 +0000 http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-68039 hi all. hi all.

]]> By: alex http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-44461 alex Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:34:02 +0000 http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-44461 hi nice site. hi nice site.

]]> By: Labyrus http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-39611 Labyrus Fri, 30 Mar 2007 08:43:36 +0000 http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-39611 HughRistik-> I think you've misunderstood. When a group of boys ridicules another boy for crying, not only are they attacking him as an individual, they are also policing the social norm that "boys don't cry", and reinforcing it. This is a collectivist analysis, but I don't see how the Rwandan Genocided created or reinforced any norms about colour in Rwanda. HughRistik-> I think you’ve misunderstood. When a group of boys ridicules another boy for crying, not only are they attacking him as an individual, they are also policing the social norm that “boys don’t cry”, and reinforcing it. This is a collectivist analysis, but I don’t see how the Rwandan Genocided created or reinforced any norms about colour in Rwanda.

]]> By: HughRistik (formerly "Aegis") http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-37651 HughRistik (formerly "Aegis") Mon, 26 Mar 2007 02:32:35 +0000 http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-37651 Hugo said: <i>It’s true that men are frequently oppressed by other men. When a group of older boys or male coaches ridicule a young man for crying or showing fear, that’s a way in which men are complicit in their own oppression.</i> Huh? This is not "men complicit in their own oppression," because the males oppressing and the males being oppressed <b>are not the same males</b>. Let me apply this kind of collectivist analysis to another characteristic, like race: <i>It’s true that blacks are frequently oppressed by other blacks. When the Hutus slaughtered the Tutsis in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_genocide" rel="nofollow">Rwanda</a>, that’s a way in which blacks were complicit in their own oppression.</i> Hugo said:
It’s true that men are frequently oppressed by other men. When a group of older boys or male coaches ridicule a young man for crying or showing fear, that’s a way in which men are complicit in their own oppression.

Huh? This is not “men complicit in their own oppression,” because the males oppressing and the males being oppressed are not the same males. Let me apply this kind of collectivist analysis to another characteristic, like race:

It’s true that blacks are frequently oppressed by other blacks. When the Hutus slaughtered the Tutsis in Rwanda, that’s a way in which blacks were complicit in their own oppression.

]]> By: John G. Spragge http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36641 John G. Spragge Fri, 23 Mar 2007 07:21:41 +0000 http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36641 I haven't any concern you will literally beat anyone. I suspect that your certainty about what men and boys "have" to do will (if it hasn't already) lead some of those who hear or read you to place themselves on the "other" side of a destructive divide, the one between people who value (or claim to value) emotions, sensitivity, and the arts, and those who value (or claim to value) practicality, efficiency, and results. We already have few enough artists who bridge this divide (Saint-Exupéry comes to mind), and I would prefer not to see it widened. I haven’t any concern you will literally beat anyone. I suspect that your certainty about what men and boys “have” to do will (if it hasn’t already) lead some of those who hear or read you to place themselves on the “other” side of a destructive divide, the one between people who value (or claim to value) emotions, sensitivity, and the arts, and those who value (or claim to value) practicality, efficiency, and results. We already have few enough artists who bridge this divide (Saint-Exupéry comes to mind), and I would prefer not to see it widened.

]]> By: Hugo Schwyzer http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36281 Hugo Schwyzer Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:55:30 +0000 http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36281 That's a good insight, Jeff, and you're right. As long as we're not using the PHMT (for newbies, that's "patriarchy hurts men too") to rationalize poor choices, I'm prepared to admit that even adult men can feel trapped and overwhelmed; there's no question many men feel absolutely incapacitated and "choiceless". That’s a good insight, Jeff, and you’re right. As long as we’re not using the PHMT (for newbies, that’s “patriarchy hurts men too”) to rationalize poor choices, I’m prepared to admit that even adult men can feel trapped and overwhelmed; there’s no question many men feel absolutely incapacitated and “choiceless”.

]]> By: jeffliveshere http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36276 jeffliveshere Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:27:58 +0000 http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36276 <i>The little boy who is beaten for showing fear or for weeping is not responsible for the beating he endures. But when he grows older, and belittles other men for showing those same emotions, he is making a choice. He has transitioned from victim to volunteer. The fact that he is too frightened or too ignorant to make a different choice doesn’t change his responsibility to make a better decision, and it doesn’t mitigate his own complicity in the perpetuation of a very Great Crime.</i>--Hugo Responsibility is a slippery little beast, sometimes. I think it's important to recognize that boys and men are also susceptible to the larger institutional frameworks as well, just as everybody is. So, if a particular boy-who-grows-older doesn't make the choices that you would encourage him to make, there is an important sense in which is he responsible, but there is also an important sense in which we are all responsible for our complicity in creating/continuing traditional institutions. I try to remember this when interacting with, say, angry-had-a-bad-divorce-MRA's, because, while I think that they ought to make different choices, it's helpful to understand and keep in mind that patriarchy has hurt them too--and influences them probably as much as a kid is influenced by getting beat up on the playground or some such. The little boy who is beaten for showing fear or for weeping is not responsible for the beating he endures. But when he grows older, and belittles other men for showing those same emotions, he is making a choice. He has transitioned from victim to volunteer. The fact that he is too frightened or too ignorant to make a different choice doesn’t change his responsibility to make a better decision, and it doesn’t mitigate his own complicity in the perpetuation of a very Great Crime.–Hugo

Responsibility is a slippery little beast, sometimes. I think it’s important to recognize that boys and men are also susceptible to the larger institutional frameworks as well, just as everybody is. So, if a particular boy-who-grows-older doesn’t make the choices that you would encourage him to make, there is an important sense in which is he responsible, but there is also an important sense in which we are all responsible for our complicity in creating/continuing traditional institutions. I try to remember this when interacting with, say, angry-had-a-bad-divorce-MRA’s, because, while I think that they ought to make different choices, it’s helpful to understand and keep in mind that patriarchy has hurt them too–and influences them probably as much as a kid is influenced by getting beat up on the playground or some such.

]]> By: One Utah » Blog Archive » A very busy bloggy day http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36226 One Utah » Blog Archive » A very busy bloggy day Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:03:48 +0000 http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36226 [...] Hugo has one of his more interesting posts, “Architects of our own adversity,” that strikes me as one of the wiser things I’ve read lately about personal transformation.  It’s long but well worth reading - one of the best paragraphs (emphasis in the original): I was the architect of my own adversity. I couldn’t blame God. I couldn’t blame my parents’ divorce. I couldn’t blame my genetic inheritance for my predisposition to become an addict, and I couldn’t blame my hormones for my chronic infidelities. I certainly couldn’t blame the women I’d married. My misery was a result of a series of choices I made. Hormones and family history helped shape those choices, but the final decisions were always mine. I came to realize that my sense of my own helplessness was an illusion, one I used to justify my bad behavior and one I used to justify a chronic refusal to change. [...] […] Hugo has one of his more interesting posts, “Architects of our own adversity,” that strikes me as one of the wiser things I’ve read lately about personal transformation.  It’s long but well worth reading - one of the best paragraphs (emphasis in the original): I was the architect of my own adversity. I couldn’t blame God. I couldn’t blame my parents’ divorce. I couldn’t blame my genetic inheritance for my predisposition to become an addict, and I couldn’t blame my hormones for my chronic infidelities. I certainly couldn’t blame the women I’d married. My misery was a result of a series of choices I made. Hormones and family history helped shape those choices, but the final decisions were always mine. I came to realize that my sense of my own helplessness was an illusion, one I used to justify my bad behavior and one I used to justify a chronic refusal to change. […]

]]> By: r@d@r http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36206 r@d@r Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:49:34 +0000 http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36206 thanks everybody for a diverse and reasoned discussion. it's such a relief to find people with somewhat disparate views on such a highly charged topic actually communicating instead of flaming out. you have all made me think a great deal harder about these things, and as someone who's spent most of his life thinking about them nearly every day, that's saying something. thanks everybody for a diverse and reasoned discussion. it’s such a relief to find people with somewhat disparate views on such a highly charged topic actually communicating instead of flaming out. you have all made me think a great deal harder about these things, and as someone who’s spent most of his life thinking about them nearly every day, that’s saying something.

]]> By: Space Chick http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36155 Space Chick Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:27:35 +0000 http://hugoschwyzer.net/2007/03/21/architects-of-our-own-adversity-a-long-post-about-mens-complicity-in-their-own-oppression-and-the-difference-between-self-acceptance-and-self-love/#comment-36155 Ariella, you're right: both sexes should act "professional" at work, and not rely on emotions when logic is required. And yes, it's a problem for men and women alike that sometimes we can't turn that off when we're not at work. I spent years learning not to cry in front of the guys. Or show that I liked someone, for that matter. Any perceived weakness was a threat. Now that I'm married, I'm slowly learning that it's ok to show emotion at home; I can let my guard down and not have to be strong about everything all the time. What was really surprising was to hear a retired colonel tell me essentially the same thing: that one of the hardest things for him has been learning how to open gates in the emotional walls he had built, so he could let his wife and kids into his heart. So, I agree with Hugo: men need to learn to relax their defenses instead of "becoming" those defenses, but sometimes so do women. I suspect everyone has defenses, it's just that they are different in nature. Mine match guys' defenses, because I'm in a profession where I deal with guys as an equal, on equal ground. Other women have other defenses, which I mischaracterize as "fluff" or "airheadedness". Those are still defense behaviors, I just don't initially see them that way, but those are what other women use because they operate in a different environment. "a world in which women (and their male “collaborators”) have usurped traditional male privileges for themselves" That, right there, is the problem. There shouldn't BE traditional male privileges, and the fact that some people are unhappy that certain privileges are no longer available to them, or off-limits to others, is just too bad. I'm just as uneasy with the idea of traditional female privileges (like, "just cry at them and they'll let you off easier..."). Ariella, you’re right: both sexes should act “professional” at work, and not rely on emotions when logic is required. And yes, it’s a problem for men and women alike that sometimes we can’t turn that off when we’re not at work. I spent years learning not to cry in front of the guys. Or show that I liked someone, for that matter. Any perceived weakness was a threat. Now that I’m married, I’m slowly learning that it’s ok to show emotion at home; I can let my guard down and not have to be strong about everything all the time. What was really surprising was to hear a retired colonel tell me essentially the same thing: that one of the hardest things for him has been learning how to open gates in the emotional walls he had built, so he could let his wife and kids into his heart.

So, I agree with Hugo: men need to learn to relax their defenses instead of “becoming” those defenses, but sometimes so do women. I suspect everyone has defenses, it’s just that they are different in nature. Mine match guys’ defenses, because I’m in a profession where I deal with guys as an equal, on equal ground. Other women have other defenses, which I mischaracterize as “fluff” or “airheadedness”. Those are still defense behaviors, I just don’t initially see them that way, but those are what other women use because they operate in a different environment.

“a world in which women (and their male “collaborators”) have usurped traditional male privileges for themselves”

That, right there, is the problem. There shouldn’t BE traditional male privileges, and the fact that some people are unhappy that certain privileges are no longer available to them, or off-limits to others, is just too bad. I’m just as uneasy with the idea of traditional female privileges (like, “just cry at them and they’ll let you off easier…”).

]]>