I enjoy reading Andrew Sullivan’s blog; he’s a cogent writer, and while he’s made some catastrophic decisions during his career, he at the very least is willing to change his mind when events warrant. He’s been one of the strongest voices against the current crisis in the Catholic Church, and there aren’t many Bush-supporting, pro-Iraq War bloggers who became passionate anti-war, pro-Obama backers — I think that universe is limited to Sullivan and John Cole. Reading Sullivan gives some insight, and some hope.
That said, Sullivan is not exactly a feminist, by which I mean to say that Sullivan is not a feminist. And that means that from time to time, he’s capable of giving over space on his site to completely wrongheaded arguments, whether his own or those of others. And today he’s picked a doozy, a whining, bitter, anti-woman missive from a guy who regrets the choices he made in life, and therefore, women suck.
From the first, you know that this is going to be bad:
Call me a misogynist asshole….
You’re a misogynist asshole.
I firmly believe that when you say, “I’m not a racist,” it’s ipso facto proof that you’re a racist (or sexist, or homophobe, or what have you). Similarly, if you say, “Well, you’re going to call me a sexist for this,” it’s proof that you’re a sexist (or racist, or homophobe, or what have you). What’s more, it’s proof that you know damn well that what you’re saying, or are about to say, is sexist/racist/ableist/homophobic/anti-Semitic/whatever. You’re simply okay with that.
So when the first words out of your keyboard announce that we can call you a misogynist asshole, well, that’s enough proof for me; you’re a misogynist asshole, one who knows he’s a misogynist asshole, and you simply are okay with hating women and blaming them for your own failures.
We could stop here, but I want to demonstrate that there is significant evidence in my favor, in the form of the rest of what this yahoo wrote.
…but I have to agree with Warren Farrell [who argues that women make less money because they choose to] on this one. Four years ago, I made a decision to move to a new city in search of better employment. When I came to LA, I left behind a wonderful relationship with a woman who was much too good for me. In the intervening four years, I’ve gotten on a path towards a high-earning career. However, I have also felt more emotional pain than in the rest of my life combined. I’ve hardly even had a date since working 70-80 hours a week. I recently tried crawling back to my old girlfriend, but she wanted nothing to do with me.
Well, golly gee. You’re in a career that you appear to hate, though it pays a lot of money. It requires a huge time commitment, and it’s interfering with your personal life.
And this is women’s problem how?
I don’t want to address any specific person whose email you printed, because maybe some of them have encountered legitimate sexism – which does exist. But, while women have a lot of avenues to address potential earnings gaps, men like me have no means to seek recompense for the emotional toll taken out on us by the expected focus on our careers.
I am certainly not going to argue that men are not expected to go out and earn, nor will I argue that society has a long way to go to recognize that work/life balance is not just a women’s issue. But by the same token, the women who went out into the workforce in the ’60s and ’70s, who strode into hostile work environments and stared them down, who demanded representation in the workforce — those women weren’t being encouraged to do so. They weren’t coddled by society. They went out, one by one, and they seized their own destinies.
Nobody’s forcing any man to declare that his work is his worth. Oh, society sends that message loud and clear, but each of us is free to say, simply, no. Men can and should state forcefully that we should have an equal role at home, just as women have an equal role in the workforce. Indeed, there’s a philosophy and political movement that encourages just that. It’s called feminism.
Of course, even if tomorrow we woke up to a truly egalitarian society, that wouldn’t mean that all men and all women lived their lives in perfect balance and harmony. There would be men and women who chose to be full-time homemakers and those who chose to work 95 hours a week while they moved up the corporate ladder. They’d just be freer to make those choices. And yes, they’d have to deal with sacrifices along the way.
Note: those sacrifices are yours. Not anyone else’s. And here’s where our correspondent really goes off the rails.
Should my old girlfriend be legislated to take me back? Should women be required to date me? Of course not, we would all say. I guess I’m just expected to suffer in silence as all the attractive women my age date older guys with more money and nicer cars, and I have no opportunity for intimacy. And that’s actually okay with me. I’ve made the choices I’ve made, I am the person I am, and one day I’ll be on the winning end of this equation, assuming I’m mentally and emotionally capable of sustaining this pace for more years on end.
Dude, you are so not okay with this. You simply have bought into the patriarchy, hook, line, and sinker. You hate your job, hate your life, hate that what you really want to do is work a normal schedule and date a nice girl, settle down and raise a family.
Instead, you’ve convinced yourself that the patriarchy is right — that all you have to do is work hard and make money and then, when you’re fifty, all the hot twentysomethings will want to date you because you drive the right car. And sure you’ll have wasted thirty years of your life when you’d rather have been doing something else, but when your kids are graduating college when you’re eighty, it’ll all be worth it.
And women are the problem? Please. Women are fighting the battles that you’re too afraid to fight. Feminism has been fighting for work/life balance for decades. Moreover, feminism has been fighting for guys like you to have the right to live a life that makes sense to you. Maybe it pays a bit less. Maybe you drive a Hyundai instead of an Audi.
But then, maybe you see your wife by six every night. Maybe you get to coach your daughter’s soccer team, or go on wilderness retreats with your son. Maybe, just maybe, your worth isn’t defined by your bank account. Indeed, there are many, many, many women out there — women who have their own careers, their own goals — who would be happy to find a guy who really, more than anything, wanted to have a family.
These women, by and large, are feminists.
But fella, you’re too blind to see it. Too tied up, bitter and angry at women to understand that they’re not your enemy.
But, I get sick and tired of women who want to treat the workplace as somehow separate from other parts of life. There seems to be an attitude of: “I’m going to party all through my twenties while I’m young and hot, then have a family and be a mom and have a full-time career as well, and I’m owed a dollar for every dollar anyone else makes, regardless of the priorities each of us has set up until this point in our lives.” That ain’t life.
There are a hell of a lot of men who party through their twenties, too. And, call me crazy, but they aren’t criticized for that nearly so much as women.
As for what women want, all any feminists have argued is that if they do the job a man is doing, they should get paid the same as men do.
This whole discussion started with a Newsweek study that showed women — with or without children — make 77 percent what men make a decade out of school. Top end female M.B.A.s make $4600 less in their first job out of business school than male M.B.A.s. Is this a case of women “making choices?” It sure doesn’t seem like it. It seems like a case of sexism, pure and simple.
Buddy, here’s the deal: the women working 80 hours a week in your department? They’re doing the same work as you, for less money. They’re making the same sacrifices as you, for less money.
That’s the problem. That, and the fact that you’re blind to your own pain.
I wanted better career prospects, so I gave up love to get it. If I had made the opposite decision, nobody would say that I was owed anything. But if I do get successful, it is virtually certain that I will be regarded in some circles as just another beneficiary of a system (Hollywood, in my case) set up only to promote or benefit white men. Nobody will give a shit about the sacrifices I made.
Well, actually, I do care about your sacrifices, because they’re sacrifices you don’t want to make. It’s clear as day — you hate what you’re doing and you don’t want to do it.
That’s not women’s fault. It’s your own — your own fault for believing, deep down, that you are your paycheck. That’s why you’re threatened by women making as much as you — because when women make as much as you, those twentysomethings who should throw themselves at you when you’re fifty…won’t. Because they’ll have their own money, their own job prospects. They can make their money on their own. They don’t need you to do it for them.
That’s how I, as a man born in the mid-eighties – long after the high-water mark of sexual discrimination – perceive much of what passes for feminism these days. It’s an excuse that women have that men don’t. I’m forced into a box (the “earn lots of money” box) just as much as a woman is (the “have a family” box), but women are given tons of sympathy for the things they miss out on.
You know why we recognize that women being forced into the “have a family” box are missing out? Because women fought for us to see it. And they’re still fighting for things like, you know, equal pay.
Are you really going to tell me you’re upset that women aren’t fighting your battle as well? Get over yourself. For one thing, women have fought for men to be full partners in the home (and have been criticized for it; men cleaning? Quelle horreur!), fought for men to be seen as having emotions more complex than lust and anger.
But more to the point, women have focused on women’s battles, which are still legion. Rather than complain, why don’t you step forward and start fighting for the idea that men are valuable with or without a fat wallet? Why don’t you step forward and say, you know what? Feminists are right — we shouldn’t be put into our neat boxes. People should be free to pursue their own destinies.
Of course, that’s hard, that fight — feminists have been vilified for decades for daring to speak the truth, that women are as capable of rational thought and hard work as men. Much easier to sit in the box and stew, and blame women for your own complicity in being caged.
I’m not given any sympathy at all. Instead, to the extent that I can even bring myself to talk about my personal problems, I’m thought of as a loser for not having (or wanting to have) casual sex with multiple partners. I’m somehow inadequate. And you know what? I FEEL inadequate. I just don’t have anyone to officially blame for it.
Yes you do. You have the patriarchy — the same system that’s oppressing women. The same system that’s telling you that you should want sex with multiple partners, that you should want fat wads of cash, that your only hope for domesticity is to work in a job you hate long enough to attract a pretty enough woman who doesn’t mind that you’re comparatively old. You’re fighting against the exact same system that women have been battling for generations. You’re just too deep into it to see it.
I pity you. But I can’t free you, and neither can women. Only you can free yourself. And I misdoubt that you won’t. That you’ll just spend the next thirty years bitter at the world. And when you finally retire, you’ll look back on the years wasted and blame anyone but those responsible. Because to blame those truly responsible is to admit your own failure.
Bravo! I read the original post just before and starred it because I thought it needed a good dismantling, but this does it perfectly.
As you say, men’s work/life balance is a genuine issue – and one that needs addressing – but it’s hardly feminism’s fault. Nor is it true that all twentysomethings are after rich, older men (some are, but they are often superficial and not all that bright) – most women I know are into men their own age. If the letter writer is having trouble finding love, his attitudes towards the people he says he wants to find it with probably have something to do with it.
Christ, what an asshole.
His entire argument seems to be, “I got a totally raw deal that I hate! Why can’t everyone else just settle for that deal too?”
—Myca
The guy comes across as a passive-aggressive entitled whinebot who is boiling with anger that all those hot twentysomething women are being gold-diggers rather than fucking him, despite the fact that he has so earned pussy what with his 70-hour weeks and all.
There’s a reason he’s had to give up love, and it’s not his job. It’s that women avoid his toxic ass.
I’m not a feminist but I agree with Jeff.
You know I would have been significantly more onboard with this if you’d mentioned at least one way a person can seek fulfilment outside of work that doesn’t involve marriage and having kids.
I’m sure that’s not your actual opinion, but if I wasn’t sure of that I would probably come away from reading this piece with the impression that you feel that the only direction a man can/should go from his workplace is to a nuclear heterosexual family.
Jeff, thank you!
God, I really like Sullivan most of the time (not that I always or even mostly agree with him, but I do usually like him) so I was really pissed off that he gave so much space to this whiner without so much as a murmur of disagreement*.
That said, I was struck by two things in this guy’s screed, both of which you highlighted. Firstly, how much of his own damage he blames on Women In General, for reasons which aren’t very clear to me. Secondly, how obvious it is to me that the only significant political movement in America** genuinely trying to help him with every single problem of which he complains is feminism.
All his problems boil down to injustice between men and women. His anger comes from feeling, correctly, that sexism – like all injustice – harms its alleged beneficiaries, and concludes, wrongly, that if it hurts him as a man, it must not be sexism. This is the problem I think a lot of MRAs have: enough political awareness to realise that sexism hurts them, and not enough wisdom to realise what to do about that. They get things half-right, and pleon hemisu pantos.
*In fairness, apparently most of the posts on the blog that are just a block of quoted text or a link without significant writing or an opinion from Sullivan aren’t actually by him, they’re by his underbloggers – Patrick Appel and Chris Bodenner, who mostly trawl the Internet and Sullivan’s email for material. Not that Sullivan doesn’t deserve criticism – it’s still his blog – but it’s a point to keep in mind, I think.
**Socialism not being a significant political movement in America.
I’ve hardly even had a date since working 70-80 hours a week.
Wimp. I started a relationship while working 110+ hours per week. Ok, a long distance, mostly internet relationship (at that time), but still, hours worked alone does not make for a dateless state.
I’ll remind Sullivan that when women work 70-80 hours a week (or even 40 hours a week) and our relationships suffer, we are told that we “can’t have it all. ” That goes for men as well.
There are plenty of men who are married, have children and families–or otherwise fulfilling personal lives. (My family’s an example.) Maybe it’s because, while they prioritized their careers to a point, they didn’t put their lives on hold for the almighty buck.
Jeff, while I understand that you are really addressing this to an outside audience, you should not write in a negative way what a person will be like in the future. Nobody knows how a person will turn out or what they will be like with any accuracy at all, to predict the outcome will be bad is negative, defeatist, unhelpful, and plain wrong. As a side note, my biggest complaint with the blogosphere in general is that people write each other off too quickly, through there judgments, which are just a coin flip in accuracy. In general, nobody knows the true heart and soul of an individual.
The guy says “born in the mid-’80s” – as in, the writer is fresh out of college. No wonder he’s grumpy. He’s at an age where the women are in the highest sexual demand, and the men are in the lowest… and the current pop-culture of North America actually _encourages_ women to exploit this.
This isn’t about feminism. This is about quite the opposite – it’s about the patriarchal nature of the anti-feminist 20-somethings of today. The young folks today seem to have a nasty backlash against feminism, and that’s the society this guy is living in. The confusing part is that every woman today considers herself “feminist”… as in, pro-equal-rights. This leads to angry men looking at the gender roles and blaming feminists, who stand diametrically opposed to that kind of culture.
Ironically, his attitude actually is completely counter-productive. He’s on his way to being a good little misogynist who sneeringly looks at the women around him as having gotten a leg-up, and therefore discriminates against them. This, in turn, creates the need for stronger feminist movements to fight against his discrimination.
He should be on the same side of the feminists, but instead he’s quickly become their enemy.
Top end female M.B.A.s make $4600 less in their first job out of business school than male M.B.A.s
I wonder what this works out to as a percentage of salary? < 5%? I clicked through to the original citation but couldn’t find any breakdown as to where people got their jobs. If a significantly larger fraction of the women went to work at, say, a not-for-profit organization as opposed to a financial services corporation it could skew this. It says that both groups said they wanted to become CEOs, but CEO’s of what?
And before you all jump down my throat I’m perfectly willing to accept that there is a residual reservoir of sexism in the business world. I’ve seen it and heard it. But I’d also like to see a more complete picture of the facts. You can’t fix a problem if you don’t know the cause.
Pingback: links for 2010-03-31 « Embololalia
“He’s at an age where the women are in the highest sexual demand, and the men are in the lowest”
True. No one likes to fuck buff, good-looking college-aged guys.
@Mandolin
Yeah, that was hyperbole and a fair bit over the line, but my point stands: at his age, he’s not just competing with men his own age, but with every man on Earth. When you’re vying for the attention of a woman as a teenager or as a mature adult, you don’t have this problem as much. But in college-ages, it’s a different story…. and you’re living the life of a poor college-student.
Now, obviously I was being hyperbolic, like you pointed out. But the world of a young 20-something does seem like some hyper-competitive sport when it comes to romance. When I was in school in the ’90s there was at least the pretext that it wasn’t. They don’t seem to have that anymore.
Poor Guy
Appearance and personality being equal a 23-27 year old woman is like to be more attractive than her male counter part.
This is because the male range for youngish runs into the mid 30’s. So the 25 year old guy with a crappy job is competing with the 33 year old guy with cool stuff and more money.
The 33 year old woman isn’t in the competition because society has decided that she doesn’t look ‘young’ anymore. That stopped about 5 years ago for her.
Poor, poor 25 year old guy. Sexism has really worked against him in this one. If only society had higher standards for male appearance he’d be allllllll set.
Wups, sorry I changed my mind. The real problem is that women know all they have to offer a partner is their appearance and thus try to get the best deal they can. Since everyone knows women are avaricious gold digging wallet sniffers they try to ‘sell high’ by landing the man with the best earning potential. Men know this also and try to buy the youngest woman they can so as to get the best shelf life. This is why Hugh Hefner get’s 18 year old model types and normal guys have to settle for a lousy 7 year age gap. This poor guy just has to hang tight until he can afford to buy a premium model of woman.
I changed my mind again, the real problem here is that this poor guy just isn’t mature enough. Women like older guys because they are more mature than younger guys. Women are high minded like that and value things other than appearance. All women are kind of saintly in many ways.
No, wait women only like jerks nice hard working guys like this are too dull. Poor guy, he just can’t win.
Joe: Its a fact that all women refuse to date indecisive men.
Anyone who believes anything that comes out of Warren Farrell’s mouth or keyboard probably isn’t good company for women in the first place.
More hyperbole? Let’s set aside the fact that Mr. Collegebrat is not competing with starving ditchdiggers in Bangalore for same-age women in his geographical sphere. Not “every man on Earth” is interested in dating a twentysomething (no really), and of the ones who are, they’re not “competing” unless there’s a chance that the twentysomething is going to be interested back.
So very tired of the Bitches Have Half The Money And All The Pussy hypothesis.
I mean around women.
I’m sure he’s not good company for an angular woman too.
Mythago, I have very much enjoyed your comments in this thread, she chuckled delightedly. Manju, second place.
Joe, I am 52, and turned down a man’s request for a date just 2 days ago (since I am married). Really. I’ll bet you find that pretty shocking, since you think we’re all washed up after age 33.
The man appeared to be around my age, give or take. I suppose he could have asked a twenty-something instead, but since he’s into Doors/Zappa music and such, he obviously prefers women who shares this interest… and they aren’t usually in their 20s, or even 30s.
I know, amazing concept, some men might want to meet women who share their interests! (boggle)
Oh, how I wish that were true. I’m 40 and you all still haven’t shut up yet. I promise to ask out every one of you that interests me if you all promise to shut up and leave me alone if I haven’t.
Wonderful, wonderful post, Jeff.
Born in the mid-80s? He’s a baby still. I’m sure there is hope for him – recognising how silly his present outlook is, I mean, not achieving the ridiculous fantasy he sees as his life goals.
I love the flow of illogic in this dude’s whiny rant, I really do. Although Jeff’s rebuttal was great, it doesn’t even really need a rebuttal because it’s absurdity is obvious to anyone with half a brain.
This is an increasingly common thing though, this tendency for men to blame women even for stuff that there’s literally no way the women could be responsible for. My ex is doing it right now – not satisfied with just blaming me for his lack of career success due to, um, having changed his major 3 times in college and not being willing to put in the kind of hours that would be required to end up rich, he’s now blaming…his mother. For not somehow coming up with the money to give him a free ride through college as a single parent. Note – he’s not blaming his father, the deadbeat dad who did nothing to contribute to his education or general maintenance after his parents split. No, it’s all his Mom’s fault. It’s her fault that he’s not an architect now after having gone through first film school, then computer science, then industrial design. It’s her fault he had neither the artistic talent nor math skills to get into architecture, and that he didn’t even decide that was what he wanted till his mid 30s. Oh, and mine too, because I should have somehow inuited his true calling and encouraged him to pursue it (and presumably magically gifted him with the artistic talent he doesn’t have) while he was doing computer science because it was the trendy thing to do at the time.
Also LOL on the all women in their 20s want older men with fancy cars thing. I’m still not interested in men in their 50s and I’m 36. I’ve always been most interested in men right around my age. Um, dude, maybe if you wanted to avoid that particular problem moving to LA and going into the movie business wasn’t the brightest idea?
Pingback: The Missing Pieces of April: The Gender “Gap” (NoH) | Feminist Critics