This was originally going to be a reply to @maggiek in the snuggle thread, but I realized I was just going off an a tangent and figured it would make a better new topic.
One thing I always tell people is that “men being men” often manifests as “men being shits to women.” This has been my big problem with campaigns that go with the whole “You’re not a man if you hit a woman.” Or even when in some discussions where some men are being douchebags and feminists talk about those men’s “fee-fees”. I’ve never though it was helpful for feminists and feminist-activists to use the language of the patriarchy to achieve their aims. Mainly because the patriarchy is so much better at the patriarchy thing. All it does is reenforce the idea of stoic men, being all stoic and manly. “Don’t you take shit from anybody”. “Boys don’t cry” is something you hear when early on when you’re a kid, and it never goes away.
That why when I see feminists essentially use the same trope I want to tear my hair out. It doesn’t work that way. Men are largely inured to that attitude, and coming from a feminist it just sounds weird and dumb. They speak the language of patriarchy with a foreign accent and bad grammar. I feel it does more harm than good. They shouldn’t be doing it at all. It’s actually a good time to bring up an upcoming movie I’m interested in:
Essentially, never tell a man in a discussion about feminism that he’s not being “a real man” or is “being too emotional and sensitive”. It’s not effective and just comes across as incredibly tone-deaf. I think it’s far more effective in campaigns to focus on how it’s okay not to worry so much about “being a man” at all.
