I Refuse
Illustrations by Dale Langford
“I am a man”…the quintessential definition that seeks to describe the essence of my sexual orientation and definition, and yet what does that actually mean? What does it mean to be a “man” or “male”? This is not some concrete, value-free, precise definition or a rigid binary of which a polar opposite is to the other side. Nor is this a definition that may be easily passed off, and have no consequences whatsoever. This is not a given, this is not something that is matter of examination and biology. This is not a procedural explanation of ones life.
This is a definition that exists within a specific system.
This is a definition that holds power, that is placed on a pedestal of humyn relations, that is placed as the pinnacle of all categorizations. This is something that dictates a social status, and place, mindset and range of “acceptable” behavioural traits. This definition is both a framework and a set of requirements for all those that are inherently with its category. This is a value-laden framework that has a specific history and historical narrative. This is something that informs norms, and actions of all that it touches and influences.
The definition of male carries a certain Weight, one that oft denotes superiority, strength, “manliness”, leadership, a lack of emotion and a degree of physical confrontation. “Male” implies that I must act within a specified realm, and that to break from the realm is to forfeit the definition and its privileges and convert to an inferior characterization. It means that I am the patriarch, the protector and proprietor and breadwinner. That I am the one who decides and who dictates and who has the ultimate and final say. It means I am the norm of society, that I quietly accept the position that I have been granted, that I look to history to inform my place. That…I am the perpetrator of a systemic form of oppression.
If the above is what it means to be “male” then where are those of us who seek to work for social justice permitted an entrance? For, as soon as I break from the above dictated mould I am deemed inferior, attacked, marginalized, but still I carry a degree of privilege above those who are “othered” because they are not “male” at all and are relegated to never being so. Even at the worst, I am still above many others. Even a vague association to “male” is enough to continue privilege and a position within a privileged system. This is my reality, and if I choose to not act, to ally complicity with the system that grants me my privilege, then I will be a force that maintains the oppression of others.
The other option is refusal. Refusal to perpetuate, to maintain and to comply. It is my refusal to bend to the mould of society that can break the system of oppression. It is my refusal to step outside of the stereotyped patterns of “required” masculinity. Refusal to adopt sexist modes of interaction and relations. Refusal to simply accept, while turning away from a critical gaze.
If we are actually interested in creating a society of equality, mutual aid and community, this refusal must be a starting point. Breaking from the cages of gendered conformity is a starting point, from where we may move forward to engage the culture and society we live in. We must engage. To do else is to comply and persist in the injustice that affects the majority of society. My place in the power hierarchy cannot, and will never be justified.
I refuse to be a “man”.
It’s time to be an equal.
Sure, you can refuse to acknowledge your manhood. I can get behind that.
I’m a pretty happy man. I’m a manly man. Although not the manliest, I’ve never lost an arm wrestle to a woman, and I’m unlikely to (although I’m SURE there are statistical outliers out there). I feel like you’re trying to give me a bad rep. Why all the grief? No wonder you’re attacked and marginalized. You started it.
There are two sexes, and some more statistical outliers to fill every genetic possibility between the two. Outliers deserve their own conversation. Let’s keep this one to men and women: can’t have one without the other. The characteristic of ‘strength’ attributed to men is only relativistic strength, compared to women. And it’s true, in my experience. Let’s tackle some other simple ones: men are generally taller. Also true. It’s easy to acknowledge physical inequalities. Let’s move inward now. “Men lack emotion.” I sure don’t. Are men actually less emotional – compared to women? Very likely. There are differences; wonderful, divine, natural differences between men and women.
Now, as far as balances of power go, I’m all for heading towards a world populated with people who are able-minded and enlightened enough to listen to all voices and know the truth when they hear it, irregardless of who was voicing it. That’s what freedom from oppression looks like. Bringing sex-based politicking into play is important to a degree – until a more equitable balance of power exists – but shouldn’t continue infinitely. Sex-based politicking IS oppression, but often a necessary evil in this period of readjusting the balance of power.
All of the “I am the patriarch/breadwinner” nonsense is 50 years old now, mostly, as a societal norm. Were you raised that way? I wasn’t, and my dad is 80 now. Him and my mom worked that shit out in the 70s. Good riddance. But gendered conformity exists, in a large part, because of VERY REAL and IMPORTANT differences between men and women, that should be embraced and celebrated.
Man up.
Name me one “important” difference between men and women.
Men are not less emotional naturally – men are taught to be less outwardly emotional. That is not a difference between men and women, that is a difference between how men and women are raised and how they behave as a result.
So, yes, we end up with very “real” differences, in the end, between men and women, as a result of socialization and so on. And these differences have implications. But, for the most part, they are not natural, they are not given, and, as they often lead to sexism, oppression, violence against women, etc etc etc, they are NOT to be celebrated.
The only people who benefit from an attitude like that are men who happen to be traditionally masculine (and white). Everybody else suffers from it.
sigh….point proven Adam
oh good! I’m glad I checked back in.
Alright. Here is an important difference between men and women: women give birth. Men don’t. No amount of dissatisfaction on anybody’s behalf will alter that. That is part of the wonderful and amazing riddle of sexual reproduction. It takes two, and they are different. The beauty – and life itself – comes from resolving these differences. Yeah, celebrate it, love it. I do. It’s amazing.
I believe that emotions are related to chemistry, and that the chemistry of men and women are also fundamentally different. The chemical difference comes right back to the fundamental difference listed above. There is no inherent power structure implied in this presumption. We’re just built for different things. Again, most people can carry the logic this far.
Here’s where I get myself into shit: I also believe that the longer cycling of women’s chemical state predisposes them to a wider variety of emotional states, and therefore also intuitive knowledge, as I believe that the universe is intelligent and predisposed to infusing intuition into processes that fluctuate and cycle. That’s not found in any literature, and is simply the product of my observation and reflection. Men have short cycles – small bursts of testosterone every ten to fifteen minutes – and are therefore more chemically static. This particular view is also a generalization, and even less true than ‘men are generally taller’ or ‘men are generally stronger’. Body chemistry has a lot to do with activity levels, diet, etc. and allows for wider variation of personal genetics. But with those factors held equal, generally… women have longer, deeper chemical cycles. Whether or not you believe that also makes them generally more emotional or intuitive is dependent on your worldview; I have given mine and I stand by it.
I have no intention of telling somebody that they should or must conform to my generalizations, and I don’t believe that there is anything inherently oppressive or violence-inducing in either my worldview or my sexual generalizations. I also believe that my attitude ultimately leads to less suffering, and not more. Celebrate and love the differences. They are natural and have no inherently ordained hierarchy. Come be a good pagan, like me!
First of all, not all women can or do give birth, and not all men can’t.
That aside, that kind of physical difference is not the kind of difference relevant to this article. Adam is saying that the cultural definition of “manhood” or “masculinity” that says that men should be dominant and strong and powerful and in charge and exert their dominance and strength and power over others is harmful.
If your argument is that the real, physical differences between men and women don’t make this power imbalance natural or inherent, then GREAT, because we all agree!
But telling someone who is saying they don’t wish to use traditional masculinity to oppress others to “man up” is very strongly reinforcing said traditional masculinity.
[...] wonderful guest post by a man I admire very much, Adam F. Lewis. The original article was written for BluePrint Magazine which is a small alternative zine based out of [...]