I’ve been back in the US for about two weeks now and already I’m starting to grow weary from the constant battle against the guilt I’m supposed to feel just because I am a man. Ever since I’ve been a little kid I’ve been subjected to harsh propaganda about how evil men have been all throughout recorded history in their treatment of women. It is to the point where women sneer at you in the streets, and they jump on you for any offhand comment that could in any way be interpreted, or misconstrued, as being somehow patriarchal.
For example, in one recent situation I remarked that I enjoyed the company of South American women more than those of my native nation. The response was immediate: “I suppose you like them because they are more submissive!” Even though this is completely untrue, I still came away from the encounter looking like a jerk. What was lost in the mix was the fact that even by saying such a thing, my critic was proving herself as completely ethnocentric. It was impossible for her to even conceive that women of other nation might actually be kinder, stronger, or more intelligent than American women, and that it might be these qualities that I actually appreciated. No, to her perspective the only thing I, as an “evil” man, could possibly appreciate was a “submissive” woman. It was an extremely close-minded and offensive assertion that was just as unfair to South American women as it was to me.
In truth, I never knew what it was for a woman to be “strong” until I went to South America. The countries of that continent are significantly poorer than the US and the hardships that people encounter are more along the lines of basic survival than frustration over their inability to climb the corporate ladder. I’ve seen pregnant women climb onto moving buses while carrying two small infants. I’ve seen the same women chase after and catch petty thieves in the street and beat them with a hand-bag or high-heeled shoe. They do not waste their time fretting over hypothetical situations of impropriety because they are far too occupied with the daily tasks demanded by the quest to survive. When a man accompanies them, they appreciate the security he brings and the physical strength he can lend to help them with their burdens.
I’m not saying that this is the ideal situation, only that it changed my perspective on how I viewed history. After having existed in a more antiquated society and seen the actual situations that give birth to traditional gender rolls, I now understand that the people that were born to those societies are actually quite content to accept them. They live by the edicts of necessity, and they assume the tasks that they are the most suited for.
Now I’m not saying that these gender rolls are the one true path that all societies must follow, far from it. These rolls serve a purpose, and that is to ensure the survival of the species until it can grow to a community of greater luxury with less call for sacrifice. When that moment comes, the old rules should be cast aside and, human nature being what it is; this is certainly going to be met with resistance and fear of change. Women should be granted the privileges they deserve and have earned. But it is ridiculous for them to be resentful of the situations that came before, that actually provided the foundations for the world they live in, and which they themselves never had to partake of.
But there is another side to this argument that has been completely overlooked by our modern and supposedly “egalitarian” culture: how men in antiquated cultures are themselves oppressed. Why is it that in our eagerness to beg forgiveness from the women who have been prevented from being granted their chance to go out and obtain wealth or property, have we overlooked the burdens of the people who have been given this responsibility? Just as traditional gender rolls for women are actually more respected than we currently give credit for, traditional gender rolls for men are more stressful and contain the necessity for sacrifice. In our rose-colored glasses we make the assumption that, were women given the chance, they would all have been wealthy and successful, but this is of course not the case. There would have been many, as there were with men, who failed in the responsibility to provide for their wife and children. Imagine how crushed the head of the household must have felt to return to his home and confess that his business was in ruin. This fear must have been an ever-present worry that created untold effects upon the brow that had to bear it.
Our current perspective makes the error of blaming men for the situations that arose. However, this is a preposterous placement of guilt. There was no grand conspiracy, no fraternity with the goal of female domination. There was only a desperate situation in which both men and women came together and participated in a culture that provided the best chances for survival. Both genders contributed to this culture, the expectations of which existed independently of any human consciousness. It was a culture that provided a set of rules that grew out of necessity and convenience and stayed in place until they were consciously altered. It was the inanimate and ever present culture that was oppressive, not men or women, and since both men and women contributed to the creation of this culture it is unfair to blame one gender for its flaws.
I believe that we need to start reviewing history from this lens. It is inappropriate to concentrate on the suffering of women that occurred as a by-product of necessity and completely ignore the suffering of men. We do not mention the men who were granted the “privilege” of work and then were forced to toil in coal mines and die of black lung. We do not mention the ancient responsibility of men to die in defense of their village or nation. We never mention the old call from a sinking ship that pleaded for the salvation of “women and children first.” I think we should give account to the burdens and responsibilities of the men who have come before us and how they were oppressed just as much as women. I don’t mean to imply that this study should overshadow the undeniable hardships that women had to endure, but to provide context and balance to the argument in the pursuit of the true understanding of history and human nature. It should be a counter-argument so that blame goes in its appropriate place and not simply on the shoulders of men out of convenience.
In time, perhaps we could join both Feminism and Masculism under the heading of Equalism, but for now, while the idea is still new, I believe it might be advantageous to keep them separated and war so that neither one nor the other is allowed to run unchecked.
Balance and the ability to perceive both sides is the key to achieving true knowledge. Shouldn’t that be the goal?
The End