[Note: This version of the list is not the current version. The most up-to-date version of the list can always be found at this link.]
No time for blogging today – gotta draw, gotta go to work, blah blah blah. So instead, here’s a piece I compiled five or six years ago, originally as an exercise for a women’s studies class. It’s probably my most widely-read piece; as well as floating around on the internet, it’s been used in dozens of high school and college courses.
An Unabashed Imitation of an article by Peggy McIntosh
In 1990, Wellesley College professor Peggy McIntosh wrote an essay called “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack”. McIntosh observes that whites in the U.S. are “taught to see racism only in individual acts of meanness, not in invisible systems conferring dominance on my group.” To illustrate these invisible systems, McIntosh wrote a list of 26 invisible privileges whites benefit from.
As McIntosh points out, men also tend to be unaware of their own privileges as men. In the spirit of McIntosh’s essay, I thought I’d compile a list similar to McIntosh’s, focusing on the invisible privileges benefiting men.
Since I first compiled it, the list has been posted several times on internet discussion groups. Very helpfully, many people have suggested additions to the checklist. More commonly, of course, critics (usually, but not exclusively, male) have pointed out men have disadvantages too – being drafted into the army, being expected to suppress emotions, and so on. These are indeed bad things – but I never claimed that life for men is all ice cream sundaes. Pointing out that men are privileged in no way denies that sometimes bad things happen to men.
In the end, however, it is men and not women who make the most money; men and not women who dominate the government and the corporate boards; men and not women who dominate virtually all of the most powerful positions of society. And it is women and not men who suffer the most from intimate violence and rape; who are the most likely to be poor; who are, on the whole, given the short end of patriarchy’s stick. As Marilyn Frye has argued, while men are harmed by patriarchy, women are oppressed by it.
Several critics have also argued that the list somehow victimizes women. I disagree; pointing out problems is not the same as perpetuating them. It is not a “victimizing” position to acknowledge that injustice exists; on the contrary, without that acknowledgement it isn’t possible to fight injustice.
An internet acquaintance of mine once wrote, “The first big privilege which whites, males, people in upper economic classes, the able bodied, the straight (I think one or two of those will cover most of us) can work to alleviate is the privilege to be oblivious to privilege.” This checklist is, I hope, a step towards helping men to give up the “first big privilege.”
The Male Privilege Checklist
1. My odds of being hired for a job, when competing against female applicants, are probably skewed in my favor. The more prestigious the job, the larger the odds are skewed.
2. I can be confident that my co-workers won’t think I got my job because of my sex – even though that might be true.
3. If I am never promoted, it’s not because of my sex.
4. If I fail in my job or career, I can feel sure this won’t be seen as a black mark against my entire sex’s capabilities.
5. The odds of my encountering sexual harassment on the job are so low as to be negligible.
6. If I do the same task as a woman, and if the measurement is at all subjective, chances are people will think I did a better job.
7. If I’m a teen or adult, and if I can stay out of prison, my odds of being raped are so low as to be negligible.
8. I am not taught to fear walking alone after dark in average public spaces.
9. If I choose not to have children, my masculinity will not be called into question.
10. If I have children but do not provide primary care for them, my masculinity will not be called into question.
11. If I have children and provide primary care for them, I’ll be praised for extraordinary parenting if I’m even marginally competent.
12. If I have children and pursue a career, no one will think I’m selfish for not staying at home.
13. If I seek political office, my relationship with my children, or who I hire to take care of them, will probably not be scrutinized by the press.
14. Chances are my elected representatives are mostly people of my own sex. The more prestigious and powerful the elected position, the more likely this is to be true.
15. I can be somewhat sure that if I ask to see “the person in charge,” I will face a person of my own sex. The higher-up in the organization the person is, the surer I can be.
16. As a child, chances are I was encouraged to be more active and outgoing than my sisters.
17. As a child, I could choose from an almost infinite variety of children’s media featuring positive, active, non-stereotyped heroes of my own sex. I never had to look for it; male heroes were the default.
18. As a child, chances are I got more teacher attention than girls who raised their hands just as often.
19. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether or not it has sexist overtones.
20. I can turn on the television or glance at the front page of the newspaper and see people of my own sex widely represented, every day, without exception.
21. If I’m careless with my financial affairs it won’t be attributed to my sex.
22. If I’m careless with my driving it won’t be attributed to my sex.
23. I can speak in public to a large group without putting my sex on trial.
24. If I have sex with a lot of people, it won’t make me an object of contempt or derision.
25. There are value-neutral clothing choices available to me; it is possible for me to choose clothing that doesn’t send any particular message to the world.
26. My wardrobe and grooming are relatively cheap and consume little time.
27. If I buy a new car, chances are I’ll be offered a better price than a woman buying the same car.
28. If I’m not conventionally attractive, the disadvantages are relatively small and easy to ignore.
29. I can be loud with no fear of being called a shrew. I can be aggressive with no fear of being called a bitch.
30. I can ask for legal protection from violence that happens mostly to men without being seen as a selfish special interest, since that kind of violence is called “crime” and is a general social concern. (Violence that happens mostly to women is usually called “domestic violence” or “acquaintance rape,” and is seen as a special interest issue.)
31. I can be confident that the ordinary language of day-to-day existence will always include my sex. “All men are created equal,” mailman, chairman, freshman, he.
32. My ability to make important decisions and my capability in general will never be questioned depending on what time of the month it is.
33. I will never be expected to change my name upon marriage or questioned if I don’t change my name.
34. The decision to hire me will never be based on assumptions about whether or not I might choose to have a family sometime soon.
35. Every major religion in the world is led primarily by people of my own sex. Even God, in most major religions, is usually pictured as being male.
36. Most major religions argue that I should be the head of my household, while my wife and children should be subservient to me.
37. If I have a wife or live-in girlfriend, chances are we’ll divide up household chores so that she does most of the labor, and in particular the most repetitive and unrewarding tasks.
38. If I have children with a wife or girlfriend, chances are she’ll do most of the childrearing, and in particular the most dirty, repetitive and unrewarding parts of childrearing.
39. If I have children with a wife or girlfriend, and it turns out that one of us needs to make career sacrifices to raise the kids, chances are we’ll both assume the career sacrificed should be hers.
40. Magazines, billboards, television, movies, pornography, and virtually all of media is filled with images of scantily-clad women intended to appeal to me sexually. Such images of men exist, but are much rarer.
41. I am not expected to spend my entire life 20-40 pounds underweight.
42. If I am heterosexual, it’s incredibly unlikely that I’ll ever be beaten up by a spouse or lover.
43. Complete strangers generally do not walk up to me on the street and tell me to “smile.”
44. On average, I am not interrupted by women as often as women are interrupted by men.
45. I have the privilege of being unaware of my male privilege.
(Compiled by Barry Deutsch, aka “Ampersand.” Permission is granted to reproduce this list in any way, for any purpose, so long as the acknowledgment of Peggy McIntosh’s work is not removed. If possible, however, I’d appreciate it if folks who use it could tell me about how they used it; my email is barry-at-amptoons-dot-com.)
(Updated since the original posting to add some new items to the list.)
[Note: This version of the list is not the current version. The most up-to-date version of the list can always be found at this link.]
Only one point – as a teacher, I can see a lot more girls succeeding these days than boys. University admission is more female than male. Look at any standardized school-achievement test, and you’ll find girls doing better overall. The exception is in recent immigrant families, where girls are often overlooked in favour of the eldest boy in the family, even if the girl is the smarter of the two.
Also, in elementary education at least, men are outnumbered 6 to 1. The ratio of male high school teachers to female is also dropping to be about equal in most places.
This may be why education in the States doesn’t get nearly the funding it deserves, and why it always ranks right up there with nursing, another female dominated profession, when governments in Canada want to cut some spending. Still, the inequalities exist in the other direction in many educational institutions.
Look, I haven’t read all the comments, and I’m not going to. But I am going to say this: Women may not have 100% equality in the workplace, but rather than sitting around on our arses and continually bitching about it, why don’t we go out there and actively change things.
When we sit around and say ‘oh men have it better because…’ or continually blame them for their own short comings or ‘socially constructed’ strengths and weaknesses, then we, to an extent, are belittling the original feminist agenda. Feminism is all about empowerment, and to sit around just ‘talking’ about the problems does the same as ignoring them. If these things seriously bother you (I think you’re a little delusional about a lot of it, but hey) then go and do something about it. These things will only change with action.
I wonder where people get the idea that talking about things and doing something about those things are mutually exclusive, and that action for change occurs in isolation in silence.
I’m not suggesting that action and talking are mutually exclusive… what I’m saying, is that none of this is ‘new’ talk. In fact, while all the people say this is marvelous etc etc, I think you will find that a lot of the items on this list are about the environment in which men feel unable to come forward due to society’s ‘poof’ mentality (or supposed poof mentality). I really don’t think a lot of these things are issues, and as I read, I can see how many of them can be turned on their head as an advantage for women.
We’re too busy saying things are so crap, rather than looking around and seeing how well off we actually are. And if we still think we’re not well off, then now is the time for action. I’m not talking about bra burning or symbols of female emancipation, I’m talking about talking to people who CAN make a difference. Not a web audience of people who most of all couldn’t give a flying F about action
When I talk with my friends trying to work out a solution to something in my personal life this is really important stuff, when women do it’s trival gossip.
Whether it’s new talk or not, I can say that reading through this list and the many, many comments made about it has given me an insight that I didn’t have before into the views of many different people. And I think that there’s a lot to be gained from rational discussion – from taking into account ideas that you don’t agree with, rather than dismissing them outright and preaching to the choir.
I will certainly not argue with the fact that women–at least in western society–are much better off than we once were. (I think that is also true for men.) And that change has come through hard work and activism, and the fact that people’s minds have been changed, along with what’s considered acceptable and right. I am thankful for that.
But just because things are better doesn’t mean that we should ignore injustice where it still exists, simply because we should be happy with what we’ve got. And I think that an important part of that change must come through real, reasoned dialogue, which is approached in good faith with an open mind. It’s difficult, and I struggle with it, when I’d rather just dismiss or ignore someone’s ideas that I find repugnant, rather than try to understand their reasons for thinking that way. Also, I think it’s productive to really examine one’s own beliefs and why we hold them so dear. If nothing else, it makes me better able to argue with the people I disagree with!
Talking and thinking may seem counterproductive, but I think that going out and acting on ideas one hasn’t examined can be even more damaging.
OK Pheebs, what action should feminists take that they aren’t already taking?
I’ve seen the list before, and there is a lot of truth on it. I say that while still being offended by being lumped in a group with those guys.
One thing I have always noticed in any 2 sided argument is the tendency for both sides to do the same thing and each criticize the other for it. For example, a man posts his list of downsides to being a man, and the overwhelming response is “that’s not feminists fault”. Who said it was? Isn’t this the same thing as the men getting defensive and demanding that women take action to reduce male privilege?
I do think that women could do more to change their situation than they realize, but I also realize that there is a certain justified fear women can have about making a fuss and pissing the men off. Shouldn’t be justified, but it IS often enough that I can’t really fault any individual woman for saying men have more power, regardless of population stats or political position. On the other hand, most women that I personally know who were/are in abusive relationships were being pretty stupid to get into them in the first place (everybody knew and sometimes even warned them that the relationship would be that way). Two things to note there: 1.I said most, not all. 2. Saying that someone is being pretty stupid to get into an abusive relationship doesn’t mean that they are a stupid person in other areas, or even that they continued making stupid decisions regarding relationships.
Also – the argument about women doing more work in a day than men stikes me as crap- not because it isn’t true, but because in my home(and most of my friends), it is her fault. I told my wife before we were married that she was going to be doing most of the housework. Not because it was her job, but because she would be the only one noticing that the mantle had dust on it, or the carpet needs vacuuming, or there are spots on the mirror, etc. If she doesn’t clean, I don’t care. I’ll gladly help when the toys are scattered, I need a clean dish to eat off of, etc.(yes I am a slob). One interesting thing is that BOTH men and women do more housework after marriage than either one did while single (although women admittedly usually do much more than men, the men do more than they did single).
Two more things (the first one may be worth reading, the second- I just like to point out):
There have been a couple of posts upset about men complaining that their wives control their sex lives, as if this complaint says that the man thinks his wife exists to please his penis. I don’t think this is what is meant by that complaint. There are times whe I do not want to have sex(not as often as the wife, but it happens). however, if she asks twice, I will do it. I wouldn’t for a date or girlfriend, but she married me – what is a few minutes of my time? I waste more time filling her car up with gas… But she does not feel the same way. While I could ask my wife to cook me dinner, and she would, even if she didn’t feel like it, I can’t ask that she have sex if she doesn’t feel like it. I think most men don’t understand the difference. You would think that it would be the men who wouldn’t do it if they didn’t feel like it (after all, our body has to actually do something that we don’t have control over). But that’s just not the way it usually seems to be, and most men feel that is unfair (maybe their wife doesn’t cook dinner as a trade-off, or maybe they don’t feel that it is equitable). In any case, I hate that a lot of women accuse men of being borderline rapist when men complain that their wife doesn’t do something for them that they would probably do for their wife.
Regarding the workplace – I will say one thing that will probably get somebody upset – I have always argued that having the same JOB does not mean the same WORK gets done. For a lot of jobs, this does not apply, but it does skew the averages, especially in lower income jobs where people like to compare hourly rates. My first job was in a movie theater. There were girls(not being derogatory- I was a boy at the time) that had the same job as me (projectionist/manager). However, it always annoyed me that they got paid the same as I did, because when Thursday night rolled around, I could tote the movies up and down the stairs and build them up and break them down with no help. But when it was my day off, there had to be 2 people to do the same job, because the girls couldn’t carry the films upstairs. Why should my boss pay 2 people to do 1 person’s job? Same thing happened at a later job. I had the same position as the lady in the next desk, but I had the privilege of carrying the boxes of paper up and down the stairs, putting the office furniture together, and still being held to the same output standard as she was, while making less money. So that’s my venting – it’s not really relevant, as it just addresses that two people with the same job description don’t always do the same job (after all, there are high school girls who could carry the film upstairs, and boys that couldn’t, they just didn’t work with me).
So Jay’s experience is different and that means we’re wrong. Oh, yeah, and women and girls do less work because that’s what he’s seen and his vision and judgement are….what, exactly?
Yeah, Pheebs, thanks. That was productive. You do realize that by telling us to shut up you’re just bitching yourself, right?
Ginmar – who said you were wrong? I didn’t- My experience is my experience, not yours. I just wanted to point out that there is more to think about than just ‘I have the same job as you, so I do the same work’. I have been in the other position too, where I made the same money as the person next to me, even though she had to make arrangements for flowers to go to funerals, hospitals, etc. and help plan all group functions. She also had to do the same work that I did. That wasn’t fair either, but when it happens that way, people notice it. When it is a man doing extra tasks because he is a man and it is expected, nobody notices. This does NOT mean that pay inequalities between men and women don’t exist, just that we will NEVER be able to say that two people with the same job description should be paid the same, regardless of gender.
And I never said women and girls do less work. I said THOSE TWO did less work than ME. If they had been working with a different male, they may have done more work than him, just because he didn’t do as much as me. Everything men say isn’t meant to degrade women. Anything I say to degrade women is said sarcastically to my wife, and usually followed up by(or preceded by) her saying something equally bad about men (both statements false, and both of us know it).
Men and not women who started Microsoft.
Men and not women who started Google
Men and not women who started Dell
Men and not women who started HP (but it was a woman who almost destroyed it).
Men and not women who started Microsoft.
Men and not women who started Google
Men and not women who started Dell
Men and not women who started HP (but it was a woman who almost destroyed it).
Good point, but absolutely not relevant. Many women have started successful businesses, and many more might have if some of the male privilege didn’t exist to give men an edge in doing so. (would you invest in a company that is doing something completely differently than everybody else in the field, if it was run by a woman? Many investors wouldn’t, because it’s probably just a woman’s hare-brained attempt to participate in something she OBVIOUSLY doesn’t understand)(cause she’s a chick, and chicks just don’t get the business world). And yes, there really are a LOT of people with that attitude. More than most guys probably like to admit.
Yes, JohnB, and I find it telling that you seem to imply that that’s because of some sort of innate quality, rather than the sexism that tells women:
1) That they’re bad at math, and can’t be engineers.
2) That they’re supposed to be gentle little flowers who don’t have (or shouldn’t have) the ‘cutthroat instincts’ it takes to succeed in big business.
3) That they shouldn’t be working anyhow, because, after all, that interferes with their ability to take care of their husbands and children.
And you know what, JohnB, that’s without even going into how goddamn sexist the business world itself is, and how many extra hurdles a woman would have to face if she came to the table with the EXACT SAME idea, business model, and technology as the Google boys did.
BTW, HP was founded in 1939, Microsoft in 1975, Dell in the early 80’s. You think that the banks were just leaping to provide small business loans to young women who hadn’t graduated college yet the same way they’ve lept to make sure that Bill Gates and Michael Dell were able to pursue their dreams?
Christ, man, I just hope I’m able to get this comment in before some of the other posters here get to you . . . your ignorance is literally breathtaking.
I gasped.
—Myca
Interesting list. I was skeptical when I saw the title of the thread, but there are definitely valid points in it to ponder.
carla, Amp, if you’re still out there listening; I’m an Illinois citizen and remember when we HAD a female Senator (and black, to boot!). I voted for her. I did so because I thought her policies and ideas were better than her opponents, not because she was female or black. Unfortunately, she turned out to be a lousy Senator (at least in my opinion), and got turned out of office.
So now, a question; apparently the mechanism exists in Illinois to get a female candidate nominated for Senator in a major party. Why cannot this be repeated?
I disagree with some of the points of the list, and they exhibit such blindness that it causes me to discount her other complaints.
I know enough men who have been raped, who have been beaten by their girlfriend, who have been sexually harrassed in their job, that it *know* it’s not “vanishingly rare”. It’s just “vanishingly rare” that it gets reported.
When a man is assaulted in such a way, come on, who’s he going to report it to. And the few who dare to, get doubly assaulted by the female lobby.
Um – that is a really good point on a one at a time basis, and one that probably deserves to be discussed, but when talking about men and women as groups, it doesn’t really mean much. MOST men can shrug off an attack from MOST women. I know my wife was trying to drive home drunk once when we were dating. I wouldn’t let her, and she proceeded to slap the crap out of me in public. She hit me several times and kicked me. I didn’t even have a bruise in the morning. If I got drunk and hit her, I could send her to the hospital with one punch. She was still in the wrong, but I try to have a little perspective on it. I agree that attacks on men are MUCH more common than most people on this board would believe, but one of the reasons they don’t get reported is that when a man has sex against his will, he is usually completely CAPABLE of putting a stop to it, and doesn’t. That doesn’t mean it isn’t rape, but it is in a different category in my opinion.
…And we have the inevitable appearance of the guy trying to change the subject: “But women do it, too!”
With regard to work related issues, if we have laws like this, the tide may turn.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4429408.stm
“33. I will never be expected to change my name upon marriage or questioned if i don’t change my name.”
Second “I” should be huge, too, right? ;)
Thanks for the list, link will be spread through my journal. =)
[Thanks for catching that typo – I’ve corrected it. :-) –amp]
#24 often does not apply in Pagan or other alternative circles, where women are actually rewarded for having sex with lots of people, particuarly if they are bisexual.
Hah! #33 wasn’t a problem for us. As it happened, my wife’s “maiden name” was the same as mine. In fact, that’s how we met; we were seated alphabetically by last name in homeroom in high school in our Junior year.
Here’s a point-by-point analysis of this list:
http://craptaculus.com/site/thamus/437a30da.shtml
If anyone who is not familiar with Latin is unsure, yes, I am a man: Carolus is the Latinised form of the Anglo-French name. Now that is set straight… About the checklist, well, it is accurate, to some degree. Indeed, many men do act like jerks, boors, etc. But one might argue that the very principle of being a gentleman is in effect sexist. Since I try to adhere to that principle, does that make me sexist? I think not: I try to treat all people I meet with equality, regardless of race, gender, or religion. The people for whom I have no respect are those who are clearly incompetent (id est, those who evince ignorance with determination and refuse to see/acknowledge the basic things one of their age should know).
As for relations with a potential spouse/girlfriend, of either I have none, and never will have: even though I am not a homosexual (another maligned group against whom I have no prejudice; I just do not think their lifestyle should be forced in the public face), I have little romantic interest in women. Why? Simple. I cannot take time from my greater goals of self-improvement and to perhaps walk my personal “cursus honorum” to be romantically involved with any woman. In addition, in spite of my egalitarian and tolerant views, at times, I can be a rather hateful person (the world, and its corruption disgusts me), and my thin, mangy, appearance (like that of my brothers from Austria, Nigeria, and Germany) is unattractive to all but the most desparate, or maybe the most accepting of all women. I do not criticise women for finding my appearance unattractive: how many men would go for the “ugly” woman, just because she is not “hot?” I can find beauty in a woman twice, or thrice my age; I find beauty in the poor women in some of the world’s worst regions, for I admire their strength and will to live. If ever I do wed, then no “hottie” shall I seek, for this I do not need, and shall never have.
If more men could view things as I did (without my sometimes hateful view of the world), then perhaps things would be different. My advice, if I may humbly offer it, to the women who feel oppressed: work hard, and have faith. Even if the major religions do present God as a male, keep in mind that the nature of God can never be truly comprehended by any person. The “male” personification of God may arise from the ancient words for Him (e.g. “Dominus,” “Deus”), and, in Christianity, for example, from the connection between the Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity. I believe that in America, for one, we shall fall behind the rest of the world if we cannot rise above these petty differences in race, gender, and religion. I say to all men: treat all the women you meet with respect. Only the people who do not prove themselves worthy of your respect, regardless of race, gender, etc. should you think of badly.
But this is just my belief and manifesto. I do not compell anyone else to adopt it, except out of their desire to see the world differently.
Ach, ich habe sehr viele geschrieben!
Well, it’s nice to know Carolus isn’t sexist! I was worried about that one. And of course Kareem’s ‘refutation’ is so much more valueable to me than my own experience and the experiencesd of other women. Kareem assumes he’s original and carolus assumes we need to know he’s not sexist. Fascinating.
ginmar,
Where does the analysis (not ‘refutaion’) say you have to discount your own experience? It doesn’t. It in fact acknowleges most of the items as sexism, but places some of them in different categories. But, using your standards, this list attempts to tell me that it is more valuable than my own experience, does it not?
You are, of course, under no obligation to listen to me, or care that Carolus proclaims his lack of sexism, but why do you find it “fascinating” that the two of us posted comments on this list?
By the way ginmar, it does appear to be original. Every ‘refutation’ I have seen has actually been a pure reversal: pointing out that “women” have advantages too. The one I linked to attempts to point out deficiencies in the items themselves, as well as bring up the original checklist’s unspoken assumptions of using the groups “men” and “women” to make inferences individual people in the first place. Did you read the bloody list, or just assume you knew its contents?
You and carolus’ responses are both defensive; you take the list personally and you dimiss items that you don’t feel you do. Well! You don’t do them so they don’t exist, do they? Also, frankly, your attitude sucks. “Weepy face?” You poor dear. You don’t feel privileged? Have a sex change and then get back to me.
ginmar,
No, in fact, the list does acknowledge they exist, it just says that *some* of them should be no concern of yours. For example, the original list says it is a male privilege that women are expected to be 20-40 pounds underweight. “Expected by who?” and “Why should I care?” come to mind. You are an individual, act like one. Do you let other people’s expectations rule you? I don’t. Lots of things are expected of me, some specificaly because I am male. I get to pick and choose which ones I accept. You have that same ability, use it.
If your partner won’t do dishes, why is (s)he your partner? etc. It really is that simple. You are not some fragile china doll. You are a supposed to be a strong human being. That is why it uses the “weepy face” for those items that depend entirely on other people opinions: you don’t need to care.
You’re last sentence though really says it all, though. I am not a woman, therefore I cannot ever possibly comment negatively on even a single item on that list. I should just accept them without question. And yes, it was “defensive”: the original list was speaking about me, personally (me being a male and all), was it not?
Ginmar and Kareem, let’s please try to keep the discussion civil.
Kareem, out of curiosity, are you the author of the analysis you linked to?
I read it. It’s not the first analysis to take this approach (keep in mind I’ve probably read more responses to the list than anyone else!), but I agree that it’s a better and less common approach than the pure-reversal lists.
In particular, the complaint about me using “weaselly” words is one I’ve seen several times before. I’m not sure how to respond to that criticism; weasel-words make prose weaker, but this isn’t a work of prose, it’s a description of what women have told me and what I’ve read in the social science literature. It seems to me that truthfulness requires me to talk about what is probable; skipping those hated weasel-phrases would make the list less honest.
For instance, I wrote “If I buy a new car, chances are I’ll be offered a better price than a woman buying the same car.”
The analysis gave this a “blog of goo,” for using the weasel phrase “chances are.” But the social science research I’ve read on this question didn’t find that men were offered better prices than women 100% of the time; it found that most but not all of the time, men were offered better prices than women. “Chances are” seems like an honest way of describing that.
Now, the analysis you admire so much objects to “weaselly” phrases like “chances are.” But if I skip the weasel-words (“If I buy a new car, I’ll be offered a better price”) then I’m no longer being honest.
Kareem, given all that – and given that it’s a common problem for the things I’m talking about – how would you suggest I write the list to remain honest while avoiding so-called “weasel” words? If you have a solution, I really would be interested; I’m more than willing to revise the list to improve it, if people suggest improvements I can get behind.
* * *
Weasel-words aside, regarding the car-sales thing, I want to point out that the author of the analysis gives this item a “bigfatX,” and writes that ” car salesmen look for people who don’t know any better and price accordingly, even if you’re a man.”
Well, duh. But the real question is, faced with a woman and a man who know better (or don’t know better) equally, will they both be offered the same price?
A study published in Harvard Law Review tested the question empirically by sending testers to employ identical negotiating techniques at randomly selected car lots. The researchers found that, even though the negotiators used the exact same initial offers and the exact same negotiation strategy, car salespeople consistently offered men – and in particular, white men – lower prices than were offered blacks and women.
In practice, what people think of you makes a big difference in life. For instance, many economic studies have found that fat women – much more than fat men – are penalized in the job market for having extra weight. It’s not as easy to say “why should I care?” when you get a lower paycheck then an otherwise-identical thin woman would get.
More generally, as I wrote in an earlier post:
There’s more to that post, but the above is pretty much how’d I respond to the “weepy face” critique.
Kareem writes:
Not if you read the items logically. If I say “men, on average, are taller than women,” that doesn’t speak personally to any individual man, and if an individual man knows he’s actually shorter than the typical woman, there’s no reason for him to be insulted by my statement. On the contrary, my use of the dreaded weasel-words acknowleges that there are individual exceptions to the average I’m talking about.
So why do you take it personally?
I get to pick and choose which ones I accept
That says it all about your level of privilege, doesn’t it?
>>You’re last sentence though really says it all, though. I am not a woman, therefore I cannot ever possibly comment negatively on even a single item on that list. I should just accept them without question. And yes, it was “defensive”: the original list was speaking about me, personally (me being a male and all), was it not? >>
Not at all. You should not, however, assume that your experience is either representative or complete. I’ve never seen any clerk follow a black man around a store; that doesn’t mean that minorities are not suspected of shoplifting. I didn’t suspect minority customers of dishonesty when I worked retail, and did everything in my power to treat them with the same courtesy I showed towards all my customers; that doesn’t mean that minorities are not slighted by customer-service employees. I was followed around a store once as a white fifteen-year-old; that doesn’t mean that racism is not displayed towards black people, or that clerks suspected me for the same reasons.
>>Not if you read the items logically. If I say “men, on average, are taller than women,” that doesn’t speak personally to any individual man, and if an individual man knows he’s actually shorter than the typical woman, there’s no reason for him to be insulted by my statement. On the contrary, my use of the dreaded weasel-words acknowleges that there are individual exceptions to the average I’m talking about. >>
Exactly. “Male privilege” doesn’t translate to, “All men at all times are better off than all women,” but to, “Men do not suffer in any situation where women are disadvantaged by sexism.” For example, men do not have to wear makeup to work at Harrah’s. Some or most of the time is still better than none of the time, and most of the exceptions (male children, men in prison) apply to women, too.
Also, everything Amp said about choice. Ginmar’s ability to buy clothing is affected by the cultural insistence that she be a certain weight. The quality of the medical care she receives is affected by the cultural insistence that she be a certain weight. Her employment prospects are affected by the cultural insistence that she be a certain weight. Her insurance premiums are affected by the cultural insistence that she be a certain weight. And if she decides to keep herself underweight in order to prevent all of these problems, her health could very well be affected. Amp could probably find more examples than I can. It’s all well and good to tell people to buck up and ignore insults, inconveniences, and hidden fees when you yourself aren’t suffering them.
To add to the “treat everybody equally” defense: I could be as nice and as respectful to every person of color as possible, but that wouldn’t change the fact that people of color as a class don’t have institutional, economic, or cultural power. Same goes for gender.
Ampersand,
Then I suggest you rewrite the checklist to mean what you say then. If by “expected to be 20-40 pounds underweight” you really mean “If I’m fat and a woman I get worse pay rates”, say that. Do that for all the items you further explain above.
As for the weasel words, they are still weasel words. I’d suggest *emphasizing* them by not trying to apply it to “males” and not using first person pronouns. Besides, those items are *not* dismissed because they have weasel words, as you’ll note, several of them have both a blob of goo and a checkmark.
The biggest beef I have with the weasel words are that you *are* talking about averages, not people. It is sexist to treat people as a gender. It is, really.
piny,
Sorry, it is personal. That’s why the items start with “I” and refer to “me”. The Harrah’s case is interesting, I’ll grant you that. It seems to me to be a clear cut case of sexism. So I suggest that we change the checklist to something like “If I worked at Harrah’s, I would have the choice to not wear makeup”. This is not to dismiss that case, but “chances are” in the vast vast majority of cases, women choose to wear makeup. To dip into the “we got it bad too” pile: men can’t work as waiters at Hooters. Is that sexism, and if so, should it be allowed?
And I’m sorry, but your last paragraph does not convince me of anything. You seem to be talking about being overweight, not being underweight. If, in fact the item was meant to convey that fat women are subject to “hidden fees” because they are overweight and fat men do not have these, then let’s change that item to reflect that.
mythago,
You can choose too, you really can. There are valid instances of “male privilege, yes, but when it is merely “I am expected to stay at home with the kids”, that *is* a choice you can make.
It is very interesting that any of my objections can be dismissed by noting that I am privileged, so I can’t know.
It is sexist to treat people as a gender.
It is not sexist to recognize that people may be treated differently depending on their (perceived) gender.
any of my objections can be dismissed by noting that I am privileged, so I can’t know.
Choose not to know, or choose to ignore, rather than “can’t know”.
As I’m sure you know, choices do not occur in a vacuum. Everything from laws to social pressure affects our choices. It’s fine to say “I don’t care what people think of me,” when you forget that “people” includes police officers, potential employers, co-workers, and so on, not merely your friends and in-laws.
Wow, it’s like you’ve never even seen the word “underweight” before. That’s amazing.
The point isn’t that women are expected to be ‘not fat’ (although that’s true, and unreasonable) but that in order to meet the prevailing standards of ‘not fat’ most women would have to be unhealthily underweight.
Thus, it’s a two-fer. Set crazy standards and then mistreat women for not meeting them.
—Myca
Yeah, I don’t see the problem with saying “chances are” either. I am taking a Sociology of Gender course right now, and most of the research I’ve read confirms several points on your checklist (such as 37, 38, and 39). Surprisingly, a study I’ve read actually contradicts #44 (“On average, I am not interrupted by women as often as women are interrupted by men”). I can find the citation if you like. I think I’ve also read about some other disadvantages for women at the interactional level that you don’t mention in your checklist.
I agree, and I’m also confused by people who insist otherwise. I don’t think that cultural expectations completely determine how we live, but they do make a difference even when we reject them, because rejecting them requires expending energy and often paying a price (such as social censure, exclusion, guilt, or shame). For example, with #41 (“I am not expected to spend my entire life 20-40 pounds underweight”), it’s true that women don’t have to accept such a body image. Nobody is forcing them. Yet rejecting that body image may have hidden costs such as shame. These kinds of costs are difficult to quantify, but they are still real.
To understand how overarching cultural expectations do matter, I have thought of an example that is easier for me (and probably for other men) to relate to: paying for dates. Men don’t have to pay for dates. Nobody is forcing them. But there is still pressure to be chivalrous and fork up. Men who reject this pressure must still risk uncomfortable situations on dates when the bill comes. And men who choose not to pay may be made to feel guilty, as if they aren’t “real men.”
As for my reaction to the checklist in general: some of it I agree with, some of it I don’t. I don’t think there is any wrong with making a list that focuses only on male privileges, though I would also be interesting in seeing a list of what you believe to be female privileges.
Here are the main points I have problems with:
#16. “As a child, chances are I was encouraged to be more active and outgoing than my sisters.”
Yet the pressure on males to be active and outgoing can be a big problem for males who have naturally introverted temperaments. Actually, the pressure on all boys to engage in rambunctious, rough-and-tumble play can actually be a cause of bullying, because it gives physically larger, aggressive, and extroverted males an opportunity to victimize smaller, less aggressive, introverted males.
I think you could avoid this problem if you rephrased the point to something like: “As a child, chances are I wasn’t encouraged to be passive and timid.” Being encouraged to be passive and timid is clearly a disadvantage for females, while being encouraged to be active and outgoing is not so clearly an advantage for all males.
#28. “If I’m not conventionally attractive, the disadvantages are relatively small and easy to ignore.”
I agree that women who are not conventionally attractive may suffer more disadvantages than men who are not conventionally attractive. Yet I doubt that the disadvantages for men are “relatively small and easy to ignore.” For example, hasn’t it been shown that male status and job opportunities are positively related to height? Height is part of conventional attractiveness for males (think of the “tall, dark and handsome expectation). I agree with your basic point here, though I think the way you phrase it is an overstatement.
>>piny,
Sorry, it is personal. That’s why the items start with “I” and refer to “me”. The Harrah’s case is interesting, I’ll grant you that. It seems to me to be a clear cut case of sexism. So I suggest that we change the checklist to something like “If I worked at Harrah’s, I would have the choice to not wear makeup”. This is not to dismiss that case, but “chances are” in the vast vast majority of cases, women choose to wear makeup. To dip into the “we got it bad too” pile: men can’t work as waiters at Hooters. Is that sexism, and if so, should it be allowed?>>
So we can discuss individual cases of sexism, but arguing that they’re related to larger social trends is completely out of order? The hell with that. The Harrah’s requirement was defended in court as perfectly reasonable; if that’s not evidence of sexism as a social problem, or of a broad difference between the way men are privileged and women are disadvantaged, I don’t know what is. And you know that “choice” is disingenuous. Women choose to wear makeup because they respond to social pressure to do so. Women are expected to wear makeup, and they suffer if they “choose” not to: it can mean the difference between being hired and being dismissed. How about this? “No matter where I work, I will not be expected to wear makeup.”
Men also can’t work as call girls. Is it really sexism that women are relegated to the most demeaning jobs? I find it hard to believe you’re not being disingenuous here.
>>And I’m sorry, but your last paragraph does not convince me of anything. You seem to be talking about being overweight, not being underweight. If, in fact the item was meant to convey that fat women are subject to “hidden fees” because they are overweight and fat men do not have these, then let’s change that item to reflect that.>>
No, I am talking about being underweight. It’s as Myca said: women are expected to maintain a weight that is underweight. Women who are at a healthy weight for them have trouble buying clothes, getting jobs, paying fair rates for life insurance, and getting adequate medical care because of it.
Or even better: “No matter where I work, my refusal to wear makeup will not have a negative impact on my chances of being hired, promoted, or positively reviewed by my supervisors.”
Myca,
I was responding to a very specific counter-example which mentioned “fat women”. I am very familiar with the idiotic love affair some people have with underweight women (which includes “on average” “most” other women, by the way).
piny,
Then, please, by all means, ask for a rewrite of the list to remove the ambiguity and be very specific about what it means, in real terms, for each item. That is all the “weepy face” on that page means. What is wrong with asking for clarity on who we are talking about?
mythago,
No I did not forget who those people with negative opinions are: other items on the original list already deal with employment, political office, etc. If you really mean those things, let’s change the list already. If “expected by who” is answered as “police officers, employers, etc” then say that. “Expected to be underweight” by itself *does not have a meaning because you haven’t said expected by who*. Am I talking into a vacuum here?
I have a feeling I am going to get far far too many responses on this comment page to keep up with.
. If “expected by who” is answered as “police officers, employers, etc” then say that.
Oh, c’mon. I’m a lawyer and even I think you’re deliberately being pedantic here.
You’re taking “expected by whom” and interpreting it to mean “expected by people whose opinions have little to no impact on your daily life”, for some reason.
>>piny,
Then, please, by all means, ask for a rewrite of the list to remove the ambiguity and be very specific about what it means, in real terms, for each item. That is all the “weepy face” on that page means. What is wrong with asking for clarity on who we are talking about?>>
Wrong. The “weepy face” is not-terribly-clever emoticon-speak for, “Wev.” It means that mentioning those problems is whining, that the “vague, negative reactions of an unspecified group,” are totally unimportant to people’s lives . Not wanting makeup to be a condition of continued or aspirant employment is whining. Not wanting a personnel director to ask pointed questions about your children is whining.
The list is not ambiguous, merely general. Greater emphasis is placed on women’s appearance in hiring _and_ promotion _and_ social interaction _and_ customer service _and_ media coverage. You’re the one intent on reading either frivolity or vagueness into the list, and the only reason you’re making those arguments is that you’re invested in the idea that sexism and the attendant privilege of the class not discriminated against are neither widespread nor insidious.
The items as written, “My wardrobe and grooming are relatively cheap and consume little time,” “If I’m not conventionally attractive, the disadvantages are relatively small and easy to ignore,” and, “My odds of being hired for a job, when competing against female applicants, are probably skewed in my favor. The more prestigious the job, the larger the odds are skewed,” are perfectly clear and not at all inaccurate.
>>Ladies and Gentlemen, please welcome The Amazing Kreskin! Able to divine the Real Reason a particular woman was not promoted! Also able to know that no man is ever passed over for a lesser-skilled woman!>>
Also, whoever wrote this simply cannot read.
mythago,
I am taking it to mean that because some of the other items on the list were very specific about who/where/when, and the negative consequences. The “weepyface” items did not say who those people were, nor a reason why you should care what the other people thought.
Saying “who and why” would make the list much stronger, don’t you agree?
piny, I’m done with you. You seem to not be able to comprehend that I am saying that some of the items are not vague, but many of them are.
If, as you state, the “vague” ones really mean consequences like problems with employment, etc, it is not wrong to ask that the item specify what it means, exactly.
>>I am taking it to mean that because some of the other items on the list were very specific about who/where/when, and the negative consequences. The “weepyface” items did not say who those people were, nor a reason why you should care what the other people thought.>>
Incredibly pedantic. Think it through yourself. Not really the writer’s fault that you don’t understand why other people’s opinions impact on women’s lives, is it?
>>Saying “who and why” would make the list much stronger, don’t you agree?>>
No, it would make it pedantic. It would also be much longer, since the “who and why” is “any number of people in any nameable situation.” It would also be just as abstruse to people who can’t read things like this, “If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether or not it has sexist overtones,” and understand them.
>>piny, I’m done with you. You seem to not be able to comprehend that I am saying that some of the items are not vague, but many of them are.
If, as you state, the “vague” ones really mean consequences like problems with employment, etc, it is not wrong to ask that the item specify what it means, exactly. >>
[Weepy face.]
I can read. I’m talking about those items–you know, the overwhelming majority of items on the list, especially if you don’t count the ones dismissed out of hand–that are marked with the “vague [and trivial]” weepy-face. And the “critique” says in the beginning that concern over other people’s opinions is not merely vague but trivial.
And what you seem not to understand is that it isn’t merely employment that we’re talking about; sexism is not a limited handicap. A woman is disadvantaged by sexism in most interactions; not merely as an employee, but as a mother, daughter, sister, granddaughter, wife, girlfriend, employer, manager, supervisor, plaintiff, defendant, colleague, candidate, patient, caretaker, student, professor, and all of the other relationships that women enter into. Because she is a woman, a woman’s appearance is a liability whether she is buying a car or walking down the street, waiting a table or appearing as a plaintiff in a sexual-harassment case. _That_ is sexism, and that is what the male-privilege checklist is trying to describe. Talmudic lists unto the end of time are one way of communicating the pervasive influence of sexism, but they’re a waste of time and they’re only necessary to the least generous, most disingenuous readers.
the list really seem kind iffy on a few points 22 realy striks me as worng
Saying “who and why” would make the list much stronger, don’t you agree?
Not really. You can’t stop nitpicking.
luanda Writes: the list really seem kind iffy on a few points 22 realy striks me as worng
You’ve really never heard any jokes or semi-serious comments about “women drivers”?
Gee, a one-line dismissal really adds to the conversation.
Sorry, akeem, but treatingwomen’s concerns as trivial is nothing but arrogant and insensitive. Whether you believe it or not, it’s obvious that what women actually go through doesn’t interest you.
It’s really easy to dismiss something you don’t experience. But it’s necessary to dismiss the complaints of those upon whom your privilege is based.
Hmmm, to me, it looks like many “woman’s concerns” are trivial. Look at 33, 37, 38, and 39, for example. Those are purely a matter of choice (you don’t have to marry a jerk, etc), but they appear on the same list as rape and sexual discrimination in promotions. That trivializes the serious ones. Once again, it’s women hurting the women’s agenda.
Lilli:
First of all, how is it “women hurting the women’s agenda?” The list is clearly written by a man, not a woman.
Second of all, as many wise women have said, “the personal is political.” Let’s take this one, which you describe as a woman marrying a jerk:
If it were just one isolated marriage, then yes, you might have a point. But it’s not one isolated incident; it’s a common pattern found across huge numbers of marriages. These patterns happen not just because most men are jerks (most men aren’t jerks, by the way), but because the learned norms of our society make some paths – such as the “of course the man’s career is more important” path – the path of least resistance, for both men and women. To take other paths requires being a social rebel, pushing against centuries of accumilated prejudices and traditions.
It’s as if we’ve been given a menu, in which certain choices – “women should do most of the housework and childrearing,” for instance, or “the husband’s career is more important” – are printed in huge, bold print, and the alternatives are only in teeny, tiny print on the back of the menu where no one notices them.
Some people would say “well, if people are ordering the big, bold print items more, that must represent their preferences and we should never question them.” But feminists say “let’s try and create a new menu, where all the options are equally obvious, and then people will realize that there are a whole range of options they can choose from.”
Amp: also on that subject, wasn’t it you who did a cartoon about how the effects of sexism make it a rational choice for most couples that the man’s career should be protected? (Something about a tiny advantage screwing the woman over, if I remember).
Ampersand,
So I was wrong: it is a man with a lot of women followers hurting women.
Talk all you want of patterns and “pushing against centuries of accumilated prejudices and traditions”, it is still every woman’s simple choice. If your man doesn’t do the dishes or insists you change your name, he’s a jerk and you should get rid of him. It is that easy to defeat male-centered traditions. I know you deny it, but I think you are trying to make women into victims by denying that it is that easy.
And you are wrong, most men _are_ jerks.
>>Talk all you want of patterns and “pushing against centuries of accumilated prejudices and traditions”, it is still every woman’s simple choice. If your man doesn’t do the dishes or insists you change your name, he’s a jerk and you should get rid of him. It is that easy to defeat male-centered traditions. I know you deny it, but I think you are trying to make women into victims by denying that it is that easy.>>
No choice is ever simple, particularly when it involves things like dissolving a marriage. If you don’t understand that, you’ll never understand feminism.
Nick: Yup, I did that cartoon – you can see it here.
lili…. it is still very clearly male privilege that regardless of who actually does the housework in a home, if it is not “acceptably” (define at will) clean when entered by someone who doesn’t live there, it is the woman’s fault. If the man protests that it was his job, the third party is almost certainly going to either say or think that the man “doesn’t have his wife trained well” or is “pussy-whipped”. A bachelor who keeps a clean house is still generally considered to be either exceptional, wealthy enough to have a maid, or gay.
In any case, a man simply doesn’t have as much invested in housecleaning as a woman in US (and most western) society because it’s not his responsibility and this is so generally accepted that men who take the responsibility are considered exceptional.
As for “if a man doesn’t do the dishes or insists that you change your name he’s a jerk and you should get rid of him”, my husband is, in fact, somewhat irregular about doing dishes, though he is capable of it when he so chooses. I, too, am irregular about doing them. My husband asked me to take his name, and wisely pointed out that the name I was born with belongs to a father I’m not particularly close to. Is he a jerk? Frequently. He cooks, he takes care of the kids as an equal partner, he works full time, he cleans periodically, and he provides a freezer full of venison every winter. Why should I allow your definition of when to get rid of a man (because he has bought into certain systems and stereotypes) when overall he is my best friend and a more or less equal partner? How is that a solution for myself, my sons, or even my husband? How does dumping him in any way change the fact that he has male privilege, even if he only exercises it occasionally? Just askin’
Lili — going back, I looked specifically at the issues you described as “trivial”. Let’s examine the Catch 22’s inherent in each of them.
The name change: I’ve gone through it, twice. I reverted to my maiden name between marriages. Both times, my decision was analyzed extensively by people who had no vested interest in the outcome, and my desire to retain my maiden name (which is now my middle name) was viewed as “selfish” by an astonishing number of casual acquaintances “worried about the effects on my child(ren)”. In the case of my first marriage, any children were strictly theoretical. My second marriage was held up for almost a year as we wrangled over the name issue, not because of my husband, but because of the extreme disapproval of his entire extended family. Unless you want to insist that such decisions exist in a vacuum, and such issues as job security (it was often co-workers and employers who disapproved of retaining my maiden name) and cutting off contact with my husband’s family of origin are unimportant, then this is clearly an issue of privilege.
Household labor and child care: Watch any sitcom. Popular culture has it that the average man is so incompetent that he is unable to run a dishwasher or change a diaper without help. This is not a disadvantage to a man portrayed this way, it is an advantage. If a man cannot be trusted to perform a simple household or child rearing task because it is too difficult for him yet can be trusted to run governments and multinational governments, play with firearms and use lawnmowers, it is an excuse to allow men to bail from the boring and repetitive tasks of housekeeping and child rearing. This reinforces the concept that these tasks are the natural province of women, for whom these tasks are “uniquely suited”. Women like myself, conversely, who are not particularly interested or efficient housekeepers, and take a laissez-faire approach to child rearing, rather than being viewed as equally competent as similar men for “important work” are maligned as “unfeminine”. Is it possible to swim against this tide? Sure. Is it easy? It is not. It is exhausting. There are times in my life when I give up the fight for household equality simply because I need rest, and it is more restful to spend four hours a night after work cleaning house than to spend six hours per night arguing about it.
Career sacrifice: In what way is this trivial? A person who, for the sake of the household, decides to give up a career and either start again from scratch in a new area or work at home as a parent is giving up a great deal of autonomy, and is being placed in a very vulnerable position vis a vis the other adult householder. Again, if this were something that was viewed as an individual choice rather than a societal expectation, no big deal — but that’s not what we have. “Mr. Moms”, despite becoming marginally more common, are still considered exceptional and lauded for their “tremendous sacrifices”. At home mothers, on the other hand, are often vilified as lazy, unmotivated, or “buying into the stereotype” even if its their choice, for good and sufficient reason, to stay home and work.
The bottom line is that the issues raised in the Male Privilege Checklist are raised in the context of a society with specific assumptions about men and women that are harmful to both genders but vastly more harmful to women.
Well, yup. That about sums it up. Men bad, women good.
Are women even capable of doing anything bad to men in the 21st Century? Or do men have complete control and dominance in the sin department too?
I would like to see some research to back up many of those erroneous claims on the list – like that women pay more for cars than men? That list is just another ranting and raving diatribe designed to pump up the sisterhood and devalue men.
I never said “men bad, women good”; nor did I say that “men have complete control and dominance” over anything. Why not try reading what I said, rather than this made-up strawman stuff?
Go to your library and look this up: Ayres, Ian. “Fair Driving: Gender and Race Discrimination in Retail Car Negotiations.” Harvard Law Review, volume 104 (4), pages 817-872.
The researchers found that, even when using identical offers and negotiating techniques, men and whites were offered better deals on cars than women and blacks.
Odanu,
When I met my ex husband he couldn’t use the washing machine. He’d never learned, because his mother did it all for him. Her choice, mind you, because she wanted it done *right*. She socialized him to see housework as woman’s work.
In counter point my husband grew up with a Military stay at home Mom that insisted that her son’s not only learn to keep house, but that they do all the housework. I’m strive to meet her example with my own children. As a result of her socializing my husband he actually keeps house better than I do. But then again, I don’t care if someone says that he doesn’t have me trained. I would assume that people come to my home to visit me not to look under the rugs.
Yes, it often is expensive to choose to go against society’s norms. I can only imaging how angry and frustrated Rosa Parks had to be to sit in that front seat of the bus. She made the choice to buck and unfair, sexist and racist system and in doing so helped spark the civil rights movement.
My point is that even though I have three children to raise, and a husband that makes less than half of what I do and isn’t offered insurance.. I would quit tomorrow if my gender ever became an issue for promotion or pay. Every time a woman stands up and makes that choice she strengthens the movement as a whole. After all what is a movement but a group of individuals joined in the common cause of changing things.
We have come a long way, and there is a ways to go yet. The situation is worse globally, but even here in the state’s there is still progress to be made.
Rob,
Try this
It is a citation from Fair driving: Gender and race discrimination in retail car negotiations. Harvard Law Review.
Interesting study, but it doesn’t prove that blacks and women pay more for cars. It proves that blacks and women get worse starting offers, probably due to a racist or sexist assumption of incompetence on the part of the sales person. The negotiating methodology selected for the study is one which will automatically preserve that disparity.
To test whether a dealership was actually discriminating (as opposed to just taking advantage of people whom it thought didn’t know the real price) would be to learn the market value and minimum acceptable dealer markup for a particular car, and then send a variety of people into the dealership with that figure as their only, non-flexible, offer. A racist dealership will refuse to sell the car to a black person for that price, but will yield to a white person.
I think it’s funny that you think that these are two different things.
—Myca
Robert, I read the same study you did. The assumption that a woman or a person of color “didn’t know the real price” is a major piece of the discrimination. It also follows from this very well done study that, since different starting prices are offered to different classes of people, different people pay different prices for cars. Of course, in less than ten minutes of searching I found two abstracts of academic articles (in Economics) that discuss gender and race discrimination in auto pricing
It’s also interesting that you have led a life so free from discrimination affecting you that you demand proof that it exists. For those of us who experience it, daily and continually, the proof is constant.
For instance, I always take my husband with me when buying a car. He doesn’t know anything about cars, and I do, and I have generally done extensive study on the particular car I’m interested in. My husband’s sole role is to stand there and look like a white male. Although I do all the talking, I generally have a sheaf of literature on me regarding pricing and selling points, and I am the one who pays for and test drives the car, I am consistently ignored by the salesperson (tried one year to go to several different dealerships, but this behavior was so common I no longer bother), who talks instead to my non-responsive husband, and offers him the “white man” deal, which I then accept.
Because I have good credit and my husband has very little credit, I usually put my husband on as joint owner. Three guesses as to which of us the bill lists as the owner.
Mendy. I did not mean to imply that I do all the housework in my home. My husband makes an effort to do his share, and frankly my oldest son does more housework than either of us. That does not change the assumptions of outsiders, however, especially in this part of the US where I am still regularly criticized for working outside the home, even though both my children are school aged.
I haven’t always had the luxury of quitting a job due to discrimination. I did once, when my boss hit me in front of witnesses, but I had another job on the side that I ratcheted up to full time. I worked six years in the financial industry and was the primary provider of both income and insurance for my family during that time. I was promoted three times in the first four years, but then I was “glass ceilinged”. There were few positions for women above where I was, and those that existed went largely to women willing to be lapdogs to their bosses. I planned my exit and went back to school, and have changed fields completely.
The fact of the matter is that gender discrimination is so constant I deal with it daily. I volunteer with homeless veterans in a substance abuse recovery setting, as a group counselor. Every single time I start a group, there is always at least one client (usually but not always new to me) who feels that he has to make a pass at me or attempt to “put me in my place” by trying to embarrass or intimidate me through sexual innuendo or veiled threats. These guys have no power over me, and in fact my role puts me in power over them, but the simple fact that I’m a woman is a barrier I must overcome in every meeting in order to be clinically effective. That’s an aspect of male privilege.
I think it’s funny that you think that these are two different things.
I think it’s sad that you don’t know that they are.
Odanu, I would not be stunned or surprised to find that many car dealerships discriminate. Quite the converse, I am sure from experience that they do. I am merely stating that this particular study does not adequately support the conclusion it is being used for, owing to a flawed methodology.
It is certainly possible to blur the edges of “discrimination” to include having a poor opinion of the competence of a particular group; I don’t find that kind of linguistic sloppiness useful.
Ok, first of all, how does anyone at Harvard Law have any clue as to what really goes on at a dealership? You can find a stastistic, a report or a book written by somebody to support anything you want. Ever heard of Mein Kampf?
Being the son of parents who previously owned several car dealerships (Yes, my mother owned an equal share – and worked equally as much, and made an equal amount of decisions), and myself having worked at car dealerships in every capacity from from the lot boy/toilet cleaner to salesman to salesmanager and beyond, I can assure you that there is no conspiracy at the dealerships to sucker women into paying higher prices while giving men the “Skull and Bones Society Special Deal”. It is absurd for anyone to say that any business of any kind cares more about getting higher profits from one gender than another. All a car dealership or any other kind of business cares about is getting the most amount of product sold at the best possible profit with the most amount of repeat business. PERIOD! They couldn’t care less if it was a 3 eyed Martian, let alone whether its a man or a woman.
One thing that you may be interested to know is how much all dealerships and sales people – in all kinds of sales (not just cars), hammer into the salespeople the proper way to deal with women. There are countless numbers of books and courses on how to deal with women, because it is such a tricky area. I’m not talking about books and courses on how to get more money out of women, but rather that without a woman’s approval, the deal will never get done.
These courses hammer into salespeople things like the fact (yes another statistic) that 70% of all decisions about the car are made by a woman. So, when a husband and wife come in, and of course the husband does 70% of the talking, you had better listen 3 times as much to the 30% that the woman says. The market researchers also hammer into salespeople that it’s not about her timidity that she’s talking less, but because she’s evaluating you, what you say, how you look and how you treat her, to determine whether she finds you trustworthy. So, while husband is talking away at you 100 miles an hour that he wants a 4×4 Truck with 800 horsepower, you better put your mind into a different mode and start figuring out what the woman present wants, because what she wants is the only thing that really matters anyway. Even if husband does ALL the talking, and All the negotiating – once they get alone, she is going to tell him yes or no. That lays a virtual minefield in front of the salesperson. How do let the woman know that what she thinks is the most important to you, when typically she want to talk less? How do you properly make her feel that what she wants is important without paying so much attention to her that she feels you are hitting on her – or that her husband thinks you are hitting on her.
Also, salespeople get it hammered into them that even when a single man comes in by himself, you can still count it that 70% of the time, whether he buys or not, there is a woman behind the decision. I can’t tell you how many times I have seen this come true. A single guy gets all excited about a car, and comes back later in the day with a woman (ie. girlfriend, mother, sister or just a female friend) – she takes one look at it and says she thinks the color is ugly. I GUARANTEE you he won’t buy it anymore. If she says she really likes the blue one over there, 99% of the time, he will buy the blue one.
Car Dealerships, Realtors, Furniture Retailers and so on, have spent Millions upon Millions of Dollars over the past 2 or 3 decades training their salespeople to find out how to better relate to the female client, to make her satisfied, because they all realize that without female customers or female approval, they will go broke.
In all my years at a car dealership, I have never heard of anyone saying, nor exhibiting behaviour that insinuates that when a woman comes in the door, they see big dollar signs over her head. As a matter of fact, often it is very hard for a guy to do business with a woman because he gets so incredibly nervous about how to become friendly with her without her thinking he wants sex.
But I guess some guy at Harvard Law has a study and wrote a report, so…
Maybe this Saturday, we should all take an hour to stand at the door of Safeway and ask all single male and single female customers how much money they spent. If it shows that men spent on average $25 more than women, will it be fair to say that Safeway is sexist towards men and is trying to take advantage of them?
I will tell you about one form of blatant sexism that is found in many dealerships. Female salespeople get considerably more sales phone calls and sales customers who inquire at the reception desk sent to them than male salespeople. Many dealerships track the amount of all kinds of sales activity and it is easy for them to see this. One constant theme that keeps coming up when addressing this is that the receptionist is 99% of the time a female, and when confronted, the receptionist invariably will admit that she sends more business to the female salesperson because they want to make sure that the woman beats the men so she directs more business her way. It is a real problem that gets created, because people are out there running there little butts off to make a living, and it creates contempt between co-workers.
Yes, I know Warren Farrell is a Men’s Right’s Advocate, but don’t you think there’s some truth to it when he says that the most curious thing about sexism is that only one gender is considered to be sexist?
Odanu, I didn’t mean to imply that you did all the housework in your house, just making an observation about individual men. You are right that there are male privilege. There are men where I work (I work in an automotive manufacturing facility) that are hateful and sexist. My response is to call them on it loudly and often. I’ve found it normally stops there.
Yes, there are glass ceilings and this needs to be changed. I don’t know what area of the country you live in, but I live smack in the middle of the bible belt. So, I do see sexism every day. But, I do not allow it to keep me from living my life. I’ve also gone back to school to change fields, and the one I’ve chosen is primarily a male field. I’m a biology major with a chemistry minor. I’m not intimidated in the least, because that is what they want. They want us to see that glass ceiling or the male dominance of a field and just quit. I wasn’t raised that way.
And I never meant to imply that my quitting my job would be a luxury, because it wouldn’t. If I quit my job it would be a sacrifice, but one I’m willing to make. I work to live not live to work. Is my job important. Sure, but it isn’t the be all and end all to me either.
As far as clothes and makeup and weight go. I almost never wear makeup to work (most women do), I don’t dress like a model, and I’m around 40 pounds over weight. I’ve not found that it makes that much of a difference in my dealings with my employers. But I have noticed that it shades my interactions with other female coworkers.
For example, several months after I had my youngest child one lady I work with made the remark, “I hate to see you letting yourself go like this.”
I was aghast, because I honestly would have expected that from a male much more quickly than a female. *shakes head*
Anyway, the point of this is to say that I agree with you, and I think you have to fight it in whatever way you can.
Rob:I would like to see some research to back up many of those erroneous claims on the list – like that women pay more for cars than men?
Ampersand provides a cite.
Rob:Ok, first of all, how does anyone at Harvard Law have any clue as to what really goes on at a dealership?
So, Rob, you didn’t really want to see research. Your mind was already made up. You thought maybe research couldn’t be provided, and that would prove your position. You could have just said that your family is involved in selling cars, and that in your experience #27 was not valid. But then folks could have said that the fact that your family were fair business people didn’t translate into all car salesmen being fair and treating folks equal. So you avoided that, then got annoyed when a cite was provided. Then you go on to talk about female sales people getting more calls because “receptionists” direct them that way as some form of female solidarity. What I am curious about is why are “99%” of receptionists at car dealerships female? Is there some form of gender bias or discrimination at work?
And now you know why men stay silent about so many of these gender issues.
Why is it that 99% of the people who apply for a receptionists job are female?
And if that kind of sexism is at place in your workplace, should one just shut up about it because you’re a male? Imagine the huff if the genders were reversed and the men blocked the females from equal access to customers. Then it would be men trying oppress females and shoo them out of the marketplace and back to the home where suposedly all men want women to be – another beautiful assumption that is constantly made about men.
It’s no wonder so many men go silent on these issues. We can’t win if we say something, and we can’t win if we stay silent.
I did read the research, and it is so flimsy as to hardly be deemed anything of worth. Salespeople will very rarely initiate an offer. Their initial offer is the sticker price. The customer is the first one to initiate an offer. The salesperson also has no function in the negotiating process except to bring the customer’s offer to his manager, and then return to the customer with the manager’s counter offer. The manager rarely sees the customer or knows if the customer is black or white, and if the customer’s first name is say “Terry”, would not know the gender. From the description of how the study was done, no salesman or dealership would take any offer seriously from someone who spent only 3 or 4 minutes to decide on the vehicle they want. Only the most naive and inexperienced salesperson would engage in this kind of behaviour. There are over 40,000 different makes, models, sub categories and options packages for the average consumer to decide from in the marketplace. No salesperson worth his salt would even get into a negotiation without first establishing that this was indeed the car the person wanted – and that takes much more than a few minutes. Most managers won’t even look at an offer unless the salesperson has assured them that the car was test driven etc. etc.. Salepeople who don’t do this, don’t remain salespeople for long, and are very few and far between in that business.
The research looks like a sham. Put a little logic into it from your own personal perspective. Ever put something up for sale in the paper? Perhaps you want to sell your bicycle and get $200, so you ask $250. Someone calls and says they want to come by. Without even having a close look at the bike or even riding it down the driveway. They ask what your offer is, DO YOU SAY $210???? No, you tell them you’re asking $250 – MAKE ME AN OFFER, and they ask you if you will take $150 – and so on. If instead you just blurted out $210, you would have very little chance of actually ending up on $200, wouldn’t you. Soooo, you will very rarely find a professional salesperson willing to start off a negotiation that way. This makes me very suspicious of this man’s claims of how he did his research. I would have a hard time believing he went to as many dealerships as he says and actually found he could get that many salespeople to risk angering their managers by entering into those kind of negotiations. This man is just playing up that most people love to hate car dealers and won’t question what he says.
Also, using some logic, you never addressed that no business in the world really gives a crap who is buying their product, as long as they buy it. It truly is absurd to think that there is some “backroom conspiracy” to bilk more money out of one group of people than the other. Yah! All those sleazy car salesman are willing to give up significantly more of their commissions because of the “brotherhood”. Here’s a secret, there is no brotherhood. Men will sell their soul to meet the approval of virtually all women, but often couldn’t be bothered to offer to piss on one if his “male brothers” if he were on fire!
I noticed on other posts on this blog, that anything quoted from say – a Men’s Right’s Group is deemed to be spurious and false. You know what, quite a bit of it very well may be – but I’ll bet that the same amount of false statistics exist for Feminist Groups – it just seems inconceivable to people like you though, that anyone defending women’s rights could have done shoddy research.
At least there’s still the old saying: There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics.
By the way, I suppose that male police officers let more men off with warnings than women, too? Yup, there’s that “brotherhood” thing.
There is a sisterhood – but there is no brotherhood!
Rob, I actually believe that the stereotype for the police officer and the ticketing is that a male officer will always let a female driver off with a warning. The reasoning I’ve heard behind this is a) she cries or b) she says her husband will kill her if she gets another ticket.
Having family that works in law enforcement, I can tell you that though there are sexist cops, racist cops, and most other forms of prejudice; however they do ticket with equal frequency both male and female drivers that break the law. City governments make their money that way after all.
Rob:
Bah. Majority of men I know aren’t like that. Sure, some men do things for women they find attractive to get a date, or to improve the chances to have sex, but “seeking the approval of virtually all women”? No, haven’t experienced that, haven’t done that. (Sexual) approval of women is a transient thing, but friends(be they men or women, in my case, mostly men) and family are rather more permanent. Perhaps your male friends are just assholes.
No, Robert, look . . . to regularly attempt to overcharge the members of a specific group is discrmination. They may well be doing it because they’ve underestimated the savvy of members of that group, but that doesn’t mean that the actions is any less discrimination. Maybe black folks and women can eventually haggle the dealership down to the same price they offer white guys off the bat, but so what?
Think of it this way. If I’m holding interviews for a job position, and each time a black guy or a woman comes through the door, I assume they won’t be competent for the job, and have them jump through a series of extra hoops for the same position, that’s discrimination. It’s discrimination even if I defend myself by saying “Well, I would have done the same for anyone who looked as obviously incompetent as all those blacks and women do.” Eesh. That’s not a defense at all.
—Myca
Myca,
So you’re trying to tell me that someone in business to make money is going to be discriminatory to someone who’s trying to SPEND MONEY?
There is no discrimination! Everything and everyone is a nice, sexless, GREEN$$$$! It’s all about the money. You’d have to be Bill Gates to be so rich as to care about anything else.
To prove my point,
If you give me your credit card number and authorize me to make a $1000 charge on it. I will personally write a 10,000 word essay describing how men are the scum of the earth and we should all be castrated as punishment for the bad, bad people that we are. And I’ll even back it up with statistics and research.
Then I’ll post it on this blog!
No, Robert, look . . . to regularly attempt to overcharge the members of a specific group is discrmination.
Absolutely.
They may well be doing it because they’ve underestimated the savvy of members of that group, but that doesn’t mean that the actions is any less discrimination.
Sure. But the study in question doesn’t demonstrate that blacks and women will be overcharged. It demonstrates that blacks and women will be given a worse starting price, in an artificial scenario. The methodology the study used will not provide any means of correcting for that, and so the study is useless in determining whether blacks and women are being overcharged.
I am not arguing that there is no discrimination against blacks or women at car dealerships. I’m arguing that this study doesn’t demonstrate it.
Maybe black folks and women can eventually haggle the dealership down to the same price they offer white guys off the bat, but so what?
So then there isn’t price discrimination. Price discrimination has to be calculated on the basis of the actual price, not on the basis of some numbers that get bandied about in the informal negotiation to set the price.
Robert wrote:
You’ve misunderstood the study. The study demonstrated that blacks and women are given a worse starting price, true. But that was just the first step.
In the second step, regardless of what the opening offer was, the testers counter-offered the dealers an identical price for the car (“After waiting about five minutes the tester then made a counter offer that was estimated to be the cost of the car to the dealership.”) Contrary to what you’re claiming, Robert, the disparity of the starting offer was completely erased at that point in the procedure.
After that, testers used the identical negotiating strategy – and being black or being female led to a worse agreed-upon selling price (what Robert calls “an actual price”).
So two people – one black woman, one white man – walk into a car dealership. They each ignore the salesman’s opening offer and instead offer to pay the same price for the car. They then use an identical negotiating strategy, but the salesman is willing to go lower for the white man, and as a result the agreed-on selling price for the white man ends up being lower.
If that’s not proof of price discrimination, what on Earth would be?
Well.
Never mind then.
I’ve heard of it, of course. However, there are important differences between Mein Kampf and HLR that you don’t seem to have considered. Mien Kampf, unlike something published in the Harvard Law Review, did not have to pass through a peer review process in which the methodology and conclusions were reviewed by scholars, who could refuse to allow the paper to be published until they were satisfied that it met professional standards. Nor did the writer of Mein Kampf have to go through a long process of becoming a qualified, trained scholar before he could begin to write.
What does someone at HLR know about car dealerships? Well, he knows that if he trains black women and white men to act identically, dresses them similarly, and sends them to buy a car, the white men will get offered better prices. Even if that’s all he knows, that seems like a finding worth discussing to me. How do you explain this finding?
Rob, no one here has said anything about a “backroom conspiracy,” nor about some “brotherhood.” Please try to actually respond to what others here say, rather than making up straw men to attack.
My belief is that people can have subconscious biases which can cause them to act against their own best financial interests. So a waiter might, without realizing it, be ruder to a black customer, even though that might reduce his eventual tip. Or an employer might pass over an objectively superior female job applicant in favor of an almost-as-good male applicant that he feels somehow “more comfortable” with.
None of this requires anyone to consciously act against their best financial self-interests, and it certainly doesn’t require a conspiracy; rather, it just requires that being racist (or sexist) can cloud people’s judgments just a little, so they make bad decisions.
So in the case of a car dealer, maybe she or he is more likely to subconsciously believe that black customers are “holding out” on them, and can be persuaded to accept a higher price. If so, then that subconscious racist belief would lead to the dealer quite rationally trying to maximize profit by not being wiling to be bid down.
So in the case of radical feminists, they might automatically consider all men who offer any opposition to be someone to be criticized? They might automatically consider that anyone who opposes their theory to be too dimwitted to see the light and must be illuminated by the freer thinking feminine aspect of life? Is that what you are saying?
Could it not be that the feminist mentality, after 30 years of constant man-bashing has such a prejudice toward men, that men cannot possibly offer any defence without being widely criticized?
Is that what you are saying?
Or does this type of human behaviour only belong to unsaviourly white males? Of course women could never stoop to such low ideals, because this kind of sin does not exist in a feminine world?
Is that what you are saying?
Tell me what you are saying Man!
Could it be that after a few decades of man bashing, the feminist agenda cannot possibly imagine that they are doing anything AT ALL that is harmfull to their male partners? Could they be doing that subconsciously? Is it so completely implausible?
“A waiter, without realizing it, might be ruder to a black customer.” (I notice you didn’t say waitress – for shame). So I guess that women, without realizing could also be ruder to a male????
Are men really to blame for every single one of women’s problems, while women are to blame for not one single problem of men’s, even though it is in both sexes detrement to for this to happen?
Is this what you are saying? That subconsciously this could be possible?
Well, after your 45 points, you’ve finally made a smidgen of sense!
Goodness! Smoke some pot or something – you seriously need to mellow out, dude.
Seriously, it seems like you’re getting angry. I’ve been very polite to you, Rob; if you’re not willing to return the favor, I’m going to have to stop having this exchange with you.
Your question, if I understand it correctly, is this: Do I think it’s possible, as a matter of theory, that radical feminists on average are subconsciously prejudiced against men?
My answer is: yes. Yes, it is surely possible. Logically, lacking any empirical evidence, I can’t dismiss the possibility.
However, the difference between radical feminists and car dealers is that there’s actual, empirical evidence that car dealers (on average – your parents may be exceptions, of course) discriminate against blacks and against women. In contrast, I don’t know of any empirical studies demonstrating that radical feminists, on average, discriminate against men.
In my (anecdotal) experience, some feminists are prejudiced against men, but the large majority are not. As a matter of ideology, I think conservatives are more likely to express anti-male beliefs than feminists are; for example, the popular line of conservative thought which says that men need to be tamed or civilized by marriage to women.
A Response to: The Male Privilege Checklist
1. My odds of being hired for a job, when competing against female applicants, are probably skewed in my favor. The more prestigious the job, the larger the odds are skewed.
– Except in countries like Canada, when say entering into the RCMP. In order to remain politically correct, many males with higher scores and who are better suited are excluded because the feminist lobby has insisted that a prescribed number of females represent the RCMP. So, often males are sent packing to allow for the government to employ females with lower scores and qualifications ““ to keep things politically correct.
————————————————————————————————————
2. I can be confident that my co-workers won’t think I got my job because of my sex – even though that might be true.
– Yet as a male, every time I meet someone new, within the first minute or two, I will be asked what I do for a living and the stereotypes of my job will automatically create images of the person that I am, whether founded or not. We are not all doctors and presidents ““ some of us are garbagemen!
————————————————————————————————————
3. If I am never promoted, it’s not because of my sex.
– If I am never promoted, it’s because I am a horrible failure, both to society and my family
————————————————————————————————————
4. If I fail in my job or career, I can feel sure this won’t be seen as a black mark against my entire sex’s capabilities.
– If I fail in my job or career, I can feel sure that all the blame and weight of the world will fall on my shoulders. For what other use is there for a man except to provide for his wife and his children? If I fail at my career, what good am I to the world?
————————————————————————————————————
5. The odds of my encountering sexual harassment on the job are so low as to be negligible.
– The odds of me actually being able to call someone of the opposite sex on sexual harassment are not so low as to be negligible ““ they are actually ZERO. I would likely be fired from my job, and humiliated by my wife and all females and males if I tried to do something like this. So I better just shut up!
————————————————————————————————————
6. If I do the same task as a woman, and if the measurement is at all subjective, chances are people will think I did a better job.
– Except when I when I petition the court for custody of my children. Obviously women are equally as qualified as me to be the CEO of General Electric, but because I’m a man, I am deemed to be too stupid to care for an infant. Therefore, I am not even allowed to do the most gratifying job in the world, raising children. Because I am not considered to be as qualified to do this job as woman. I have to be twice as good of a parent to be considered as valuable as one mother.
————————————————————————————————————
7. If I’m a teen or adult, and if I can stay out of prison, my odds of being raped are so low as to be negligible.
– Yes touché, however, my odds of being falsely accused as a rapist are significantly higher than a woman’s ““ think about that for a second before you blast off.
————————————————————————————————————
8. I am not taught to fear walking alone after dark in average public spaces.
– Yes, being 180lbs means that I fear not from that 240lb man over there. Men are so advantaged that male murders remain unsolved 3 times more than female murders.
————————————————————————————————————
9. If I choose not to have children, my masculinity will not be called into question.
– Really? No, I mean really? I am in mid 30’s and get asked a ridiculously amount of times why I’m not married, or why I don’t have children (and am not paying Child Support to Children I am permitted to see only on Saturdays)
————————————————————————————————————
10. If I have children but do not provide primary care for them, my masculinity will not be called into question.
– Yes, but if I am male, and no longer can financially afford to pay for food in my belly, and child care, I will be publicly humiliated by my ex, my friends, family & government. Even if I am injured, or fall sick to cancer, the court will not rescind the amount of my childcare payments and I will be labelled as a dead beat dad, the scourge of the earth! My masculinity will be the subject of wrath across the land! The government will take away my license and passport. 70% of parents (men and women) behind on child support earn less than US$10,000/year!
————————————————————————————————————
11. If I have children and provide primary care for them, I’ll be praised for extraordinary parenting if I’m even marginally competent.
– If I have children, and I’m allowed to provide primary care for them, I wouldn’t be concerned at all what people think. Where can I find a wife that would allow me to provide primary care for my children while she earns all the bread. NO REALLY!!! WHERE??? Where can I meet these women?
————————————————————————————————————
12. If I have children and pursue a career, no one will think I’m selfish for not staying at home.
– If I have children, and choose to stay at home and let my wife work and pursue a career, I will be branded a sissy and humiliated by both men and women. Even though I might really want to spend my life raising my children. Sounds a lot more rewarding than trying to climb the bloody corporate ladder, only to retire and find out that my wife and children hardly know who I am anymore.
————————————————————————————————————
13. If I seek political office, my relationship with my children, or who I hire to take care of them, will probably not be scrutinized by the press.
– If I were a woman running for political office, no one would care if I slapped my spouse across the face last week. Nor would they think me unfit to hold public office for doing so (case in point: Hilary Clinton)
————————————————————————————————————
14. Chances are my elected representatives are mostly people of my own sex. The more prestigious and powerful the elected position, the more likely this is to be true.
– I tried to vote for an elected representative who campaigned for Men’s Rights, but there was not one here, nor there, nor anywhere!
————————————————————————————————————
15. I can be somewhat sure that if I ask to see “the person in charge,” I will face a person of my own sex. The higher-up in the organization the person is, the surer I can be.
– I can be assured that while a female colleague may have the sexual advantage of undoing a top button on her blouse to throw the boss of base, my walking in to talk to him with my fly open will have not nearly have the same effect. I will have to impress him with only my merits as an employee to be heard. Playful flirting will not help me.
————————————————————————————————————
16. As a child, chances are I was encouraged to be more active and outgoing than my sisters.
– As a child I was told I was snails and tails and puppy dog tails, while girls were sugar and spice and all things nice. This kind of set a precedent, don’t you think?
————————————————————————————————————
17. As a child, I could choose from an almost infinite variety of children’s media featuring positive, active, non-stereotyped heroes of my own sex. I never had to look for it; male heroes were the default.
– Is Big Bird a female, or a male? Maybe you watched too much TV. I was only allowed to watch Mr Dressup and Sesame Street, and Walt Disney on Sunday Nights. Don’t blame me because your mom let you watch Batman. I wasn’t allowed!
————————————————————————————————————
18. As a child, chances are I got more teacher attention than girls who raised their hands just as often.
– I can’t believe that anyone believe such a ridiculous statement as this one. As a boy, I was treated as a trouble maker, girls were treated as innocent and pure. As a boy, I got the strap on my bare ass from the principle, while girls never got the strap at all. As a boy, my female teacher used to humiliate me in front of the class for my sloppy penmanship and make me stay after school to rewrite my work. To this day, I have the neatest penmanship you’ve ever seen, but I won’t tell you what I think of that woman, to this day, for humiliating me that way! The same teacher humiliated my friend Philip for his socks always falling down and half hanging off his feet, and once, when she caught me and my friend Billy having a sword fight with our rulers, got so mad at him that she grabbed him by the lobe of his ear and dragged him out into the hallway. Then he had to go to the hospital to get stitches in his ear. I didn’t like my grade 4 teacher!
————————————————————————————————————
19. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether or not it has sexist overtones.
– I don’t really understand this one, but if it is ever going bad for me, I always told to just suck it up and go on. I realize that no-one gives a crap about me.
————————————————————————————————————
20. I can turn on the television or glance at the front page of the newspaper and see people of my own sex widely represented, every day, without exception.
– Yes, as rapists, abusers, child molesters, inept parents, wife beaters… Basicly everything that is bad about the world is reported to be the fault of my sex. Every headline, news story or even blogs on the internet continually bombard me with the idea that I should be ashamed for being male, though I did nothing wrong except be born this way!
————————————————————————————————————
21. If I’m careless with my financial affairs it won’t be attributed to my sex.
– No, it will be attributed to me directly.
————————————————————————————————————
22. If I’m careless with my driving it won’t be attributed to my sex.
– I am always considered to be a reckless driver. At the scene of an accident, 90% of the fault will automatically be attributed to me.
————————————————————————————————————
23. I can speak in public to a large group without putting my sex on trial.
– I can speak in public and be publicly humiliated for all of my inadequacies! The fact that I a am male, does not give me a shred of consideration, rather, it fuels the media to excoriate me! Being male, I am a preconceived, acceptable villain!
————————————————————————————————————
24. If I have sex with a lot of people, it won’t make me an object of contempt or derision.
————————————————————————————————————
25. There are value-neutral clothing choices available to me; it is possible for me to choose clothing that doesn’t send any particular message to the world.
Umm, yeah ok! As men, we want to only be seen as a suit. This is what we think is sexy! Perhaps a woman will notice my neutral clothing and choose me as a suitable mate, of course, men have no desire to send messages to the world! We want to be viewed as wallets with legs! Yes, my Daddy told me to try and be this!
————————————————————————————————————
26. My wardrobe and grooming are relatively cheap and consume little time.
– Yes, true enough, isn’t it strange that after all of these thousands of years, women still think that the blouse she’s wearing is what attracted the man? You know, men don’t care as much as women think we care. Remember leg warmers? Do you really believe that a man in the 80’s would only date a woman if she wore leg warmers? Remember the 90’s and the 7 earings up the side of your ear? Do you really believe that the 7th earing was the one that made men finally get an erection?
I’m sorry, but, are you insane???
Men never cared about that crap, they wanted to that stuff OFF of you! It’s your own fault if falsely believed otherwise.
Here’s the deal. Men don’t like heavy make up. Men don’t like slutty clothes (except on certain special occasions) Very little make-up, nice natural non-dyed hair is beautiful, 135 to 145lb is by far the sexiest figure, a pair of jeans, running shoes and a sweater or T-shirt give me an erection! End of story. I am not responsible for Cosmopolitan. Women are, they are the ones who buy the damn magazine!
————————————————————————————————————
27. If I buy a new car, chances are I’ll be offered a better price than a woman buying the same car.
Yes, I think I’ve addressed this one already!
————————————————————————————————————
28. If I’m not conventionally attractive, the disadvantages are relatively small and easy to ignore.
– If I’m not wealthy, no woman will have anything to do with me
————————————————————————————————————
29. I can be loud with no fear of being called a shrew. I can be aggressive with no fear of being called a bitch.
– I can’t ever get angry for fear of being called an abuser. I must keep my feelings to myself or I will be ousted from society from women who don’t understand my feelings
————————————————————————————————————
30. I can ask for legal protection from violence that happens mostly to men without being seen as a selfish special interest, since that kind of violence is called “crime” and is a general social concern. (Violence that happens mostly to women is usually called “domestic violence” or “acquaintance rape,” and is seen as a special interest issue.)
– D’oh, all other violence is then perpetrated at males, we get nothing but encouragement to join a gym. I don’t really understand your lament here
————————————————————————————————————
31. I can be confident that the ordinary language of day-to-day existence will always include my sex. “All men are created equal,” mailman, chairman, freshman, he.
– As a man, I can realize that women hate my gender so much as to refer to themselves as womyn et al. I don’t know what I did wrong. I was born speaking English, like any normal boy or girl, but I’ve continually had to change my understanding of the language to not incur the wrath of feminists!
————————————————————————————————————
32. My ability to make important decisions and my capability in general will never be questioned depending on what time of the month it is.
– Nope, I never have an excuse! I’m expected to be 100% all of the time!
————————————————————————————————————
33. I will never be expected to change my name upon marriage or questioned if I don’t change my name.
– Touche! But you’re also never expected to have to buy flowers or gifts in order to keep yourself in the sexual favour of your spouse! And lets not forget that no-one asks you to fork out 3 months worth of labour to buy an impractible ring, just for the privilege of being betrothed. All you have to do is show off your ring to all the other women, who then will talk about who’s fiancé/husband spent the most, which really diminishes all the romanticism about the tradition…and why do we still have this stupid tradition, by the way? Sounds about as stupid to me as a woman changing her name, yet I don’t hear women complaining about getting engagement rings! Doesn’t an engagement ring set women up for legalized prostitution? As in, I am spending a lot of money to make you my girl…
Funny, how girls have still never opposed this senseless tradition, but treasure like a trophy to show off to their girlfriends!
————————————————————————————————————
34. The decision to hire me will never be based on assumptions about whether or not I might choose to have a family sometime soon.
– True, but, if you want to enter the professional world, you should realize that a good majority of it is not run by government programs, but rather by the free enterprise capitalist system. If it were your money, you too would be concerned about spending $10,000 to train someone who might leave you in 2 years to start a family (forcing you to spend another $10,000 to retrain someone else), or is it more financially responsible to train someone who possibly will be with you for 10 years. It’s simple economics, its not gender bias. You wanted equality in the workplace, now you can realize how worthless men are also viewed in the workplace, and why they must work such stupid hours and sacrifice so much to provide you with the life that you want, when you didn’t want to work! (And blamed them for working too much!)
————————————————————————————————————
35. Every major religion in the world is led primarily by people of my own sex. Even God, in most major religions, is usually pictured as being male.
– Yeah, OK, why leave God out of this? He’s a man too, and you should make him pay! He’s the one after all that made me an underprivileged male. I hope he hears your whining, because I’ve heard it for too long!
————————————————————————————————————
36. Most major religions argue that I should be the head of my household, while my wife and children should be subservient to me.
– Of course you ignore how the Bible tells men to honor and cherish their wives. Why do women only want the part of their responsibility removed from the Bible, but not the part about a husband’s responsibility to his wife?
————————————————————————————————————
37. If I have a wife or live-in girlfriend, chances are we’ll divide up household chores so that she does most of the labor, and in particular the most repetitive and unrewarding tasks.
– Yes, and when I piled lumber at the sawmill, that was such a joyous, happy job for me, I would have gladly piled more lumber than washed the dishes. If you’ve ever piled lumber at a sawmill, you’ll know what I mean! Why do you think Fred Flinstone so gladly slides down the brontosaurus’s back? Because he thinks he’s going home to get laid? Fred and Wilma sleep in different beds!
————————————————————————————————————
38. If I have children with a wife or girlfriend, chances are she’ll do most of the childrearing, and in particular the most dirty, repetitive and unrewarding parts of childrearing.
– Yes, and when she divorces me (75% of all divorces are initiated by the female), she will fight like a tigress to maintain this dirty, repetitive and unrewarding job of childrearing! I guess she does that because she doesn’t really want to be the main person in her children’s life?
————————————————————————————————————
39. If I have children with a wife or girlfriend, and it turns out that one of us needs to make career sacrifices to raise the kids, chances are we’ll both assume the career sacrificed should be hers.
– Um, generally, I think any rational family would choose the spouse who makes the most amount of money.
————————————————————————————————————
40. Magazines, billboards, television, movies, pornography, and virtually all of media is filled with images of scantily-clad women intended to appeal to me sexually. Such images of men exist, but are much rarer.
– Yes, but all romance novels, like the Bridges of Madison County, which glorify a woman cheating on her dutiful husband while he is out of town with the kids, are widely sold in our common grocery stores. Why can’t I pick up a copy of Penthouse Letters at my local grocery check out?
————————————————————————————————————
41. I am not expected to spend my entire life 20-40 pounds underweight.
– Actually, I find women most attractive at the 135 to 140lb weight. I always have. I also do not like make up, tattoos, piercings or slutty and revealing clothes. I have never made fun of women who are overweight, yet I notice that many women who are overweight make several comments about my appearance. These same overweight women think nothing to poke fun of me for my thinning hair ““ I am expected to be jovial about it. Do you think that a woman would be as jovial if after seeing her ass, I told her that she obviously winters well? All studies show that men are just as concerned about their appearance as women. Yet we are expected to be jovial about it when women degrade us for our physical appearance. Women apparently choose to conveniently ignore this about men.
————————————————————————————————————
42. If I am heterosexual, it’s incredibly unlikely that I’ll ever be beaten up by a spouse or lover.
– REALLY? After dating my highschool sweetheart for 4 years (we were in college by then), I walked in to our apartment to discover her topless on the couch, making out with my friend. When I walked in and discovered them, I got angry and grabbed my friend by the shirt. My girlfriend punched me in the back of the head several times, then clawed my cheeks from behind, leaving 8 big bleeding scratches on my face. My “Friend” ran out the door and I left right after, got in my car and left. A couple of days later, my girlfriend went to the Dean of the College to report me for assaulting her (that’s what she told everyone why had split up ““ I guess she didn’t have the courage to fess up). I nearly got kicked out of college, except that my friend ““ who had been fooling around with her, came in with tears in his eyes, telling that I never touched her.
Didn’t matter though, after that year, I went and travelled Europe for a year, when I got home, the ex was dating a 6’5″ 240lb guy. He punched me in the face right away without warning, while my ex stood there laughing at me. She dated him for 2 years, and we both lived in a relatively small town. Any time this guy or one of his friends saw me, they threatened to beat me up, on the street, in the pub, in the grocery store ““ it happened at least 2 or 3 times a month ““ for 2 years! Often with my ex standing there laughing at me! Once, after having knee surgery, while I was on crutches, one of her new “friends” came up to me and punched me in the nose while saying this was for beating her up.
Wow, and you have to gall to say that it is unlikely that I will ever be beaten up by a lover or a spouse? That woman brought 2 years of solid violence into my life ““ when I went to the police, they were unwilling to help me, but told me to come back and report it if I got beaten up really bad. Thanks!
– I guess it doesn’t matter much, because I am a male. It’s OK that a woman got guys who were 50 to 60 pounds heavier than me to be violent with me. ““ FOR YEARS!
————————————————————————————————————
43. Complete strangers generally do not walk up to me on the street and tell me to “smile.”
– Really? I don’t think that men are usually the ones to walk up to people and tell them to smile ““ that sounds more like a female thing.
————————————————————————————————————
44. On average, I am not interrupted by women as often as women are interrupted by men.
– What the hell kind of statement is that? Can that be backed up by anything of real value?
————————————————————————————————————
45. I have the privilege of being unaware of my male privilege.
– And women are equally not aware of their privileges. Come on now!
————————————————————————————————————
(Compiled by Barry Deutsch, aka “Ampersand.” Permission is granted to reproduce this list in any way, for any purpose, so long as the acknowledgment of Peggy McIntosh’s work is not removed. If possible, however, I’d appreciate it if folks who use it could tell me about how they used it; my email is barry-at-amptoons-dot-com.)
I’ve enjoyed reading this thread, but I see it dissolving into “women versus men” at a rapid rate. This isn’t conducive to solving problems, in my opinion.
There are a great many male feminists that do acknowledge the societal privilege of their gender, and there are a great many women that perpetuate that same privilege.
Ampersand is an example of the former, and women that say “she’s just on the rag”, “she’s a gold-digging slut”, and “I bet she got on her knees to get the promotion.” (By the way these are all comments heard by me and made by different women.)
The whole of society needs to wake up to the fact that predjudice is still rampant in the country we live in. Racism, feminism, and classism are still around and still need to be fought.
If it’s devolving into male versus female you can thank Rob, for just wanting to win.
And women are not aware of their privileges! Yeah, Rob, trade you. Walk a mile in my shoes for a few weeks.
28. If I’m not conventionally attractive, the disadvantages are relatively small and easy to ignore.
– If I’m not wealthy, no woman will have anything to do with me.
Rob, without money your attitude isn’t worth dealing with. You’ve done little but sneer at everyone in this thread, and you’ve got your opinions confused with facts. You dismiss everything if you haven’t seen it or don’t ‘think it happens.’
3. Complete strangers generally do not walk up to me on the street and tell me to “smile.”
– Really? I don’t think that men are usually the ones to walk up to people and tell them to smile ““ that sounds more like a female thing.
Yeah? Amp’s written about it. Women have talked about it. Every woman here has probably had it happen to her, including me. I bet if someone pressed you on it you’d get just as defensive about disagreeing about it as you have about the car thing.
44. On average, I am not interrupted by women as often as women are interrupted by men.
– What the hell kind of statement is that? Can that be backed up by anything of real value?
Deborah Tannen, etc., —–Have you bothered to read her? I doubt it. But everyhting you’re so skeptical about and ‘don’t think’ about on this list has happened to women.
28. If I’m not conventionally attractive, the disadvantages are relatively small and easy to ignore.
– If I’m not wealthy, no woman will have anything to do with me.
I must have missed the overwhelming trend of male executives dating and marrying their cleaning women. Or Harvard MBA’s marrying women who work at Wal-Mart. Just sayin’.
Again, I apologize for me a man.
Do you really expect men to sit back and acknowledge the countless thousands of stupid little triviances that women are accusing men of? Is there anything that women are responsible for? Have women done nothing themselves? Are they really just innocent victims, while males are bad?
This is entire blog is just bubbling with anti-male, just below the surface feminist anger at men for just being born. I didn’t bring this out into the open. I didn’t create a list of 45 points crying poor me!
If you’ll excuse me now, I must run. I’m late for the meeting in the back room where all of us big bad white boys get together to discuss how we can further enslave and oppress women! It is after all, what we were born to do!
You should hear about a bridge I know thats for sale!
Wha….? Sabrina? Pretty Woman? Maid in America? CINDERELLA?
Get your head out of all those books and go to the movies, girlfriend! (You reality-based people, honestly….)
Forget the Harvard Law Review; here’s a REAL test of disparate treatment. So, whacha wearin’? Some low-heeled strapless number? And Rob, what’s your shoe size? And what color accessories do you carry?
Amp, please, we’re trying to have a serious discussion here.
Er, Rob read Amp’s profile when he began reading this thread. You aren’t suggesting that Rob is stupid because he’s male, are you?
No way is Amp a white man.
I have pictures.
Yeah, Rob’s a troll. OMGand won’t listen to you and treat you with contempt and because I get all defensive when everything’s not about me.
46. And when I get confronted with the shit that I pull I’ll whine and cry and get defensive and accuse women of hating me just because I’m a man even though I dismiss out of hand any woman who does less than kiss my ass.
And I know it’s a minor thing, but he talks about himself in the third person, which is really creepy.
And before he asks, NO, I’m not just saying that because he’s a man.
—Myca
It’s you who’s being confronted with the stuff that you pull, and who’s getting all defensive. You are getting mad because men no longer want to be told kiss your ass because we are so bad. You are the one who has reduced yourself to name calling. Of course, if a man called you a name, you could scream that he’s trying to oppress you.
It’s frustrating, isn’t it, when someone doesn’t want to hear about your grievances, but rather only acknowledge their own. It’s frustrating when someone accuses your gender, isn’t it? Welcome to a man’s world.
For a guy who’s always talking about his weight, Amp sure hides it well.
Okay, 1) that’s the funniest picture I’ve seen in awhile. (2) For a corallary discussion on the White Male Privilege checklist, maybe we need to find the “male guilt” thread.
Of course a normative man will feel defensive when they read that list. It’s not like they live on a bed of roses (no one does) and do nothing but “deliberately” opress women, personally, nessecarily. Even for fairly progressive, “nice” men, that list feels likes it’s some kind of personal attack. No one likes to be slapped in the face with the idea that something that is inherently part of who they are, something they can’t change hurts and opresses other people. It makes one feel guilty, and when people feel guilty, they tend to get defensive and agressive very quickly.
How would we feel, personally, if we read a checklist of “1st world privilege” (potable water, innoculations, shelter, fuel, transportation, education, fire-fighters, policement, etc. etc.)? For those of you who are white, how do you feel reading the white privilege checklist?
Now of course, there are always those who take their defense to the extreme and become trolls. As nobody.really points out, this trolling really isn’t helpng anything, nor is FEEDING the trolls.