This diagram is to show how the ‘homosociality’ of men excludes my mum. You can find out more about ‘Guyland’ in this tag. My brother is represented as ‘P’ here, and he will be called PB-Pete in the upcoming book. This is obviously a very simplified drawing. There are supposedly ‘feminine’ traits that my brother and I have picked up from our mum. She has taught us to care about people, and not to leave the down-trodden behind. I’m only just starting to unpick the way patriarchal socialisation has caused me to overlook my mother’s extremely high and yet invisible contribution to my psyche. Confused? The ask box is open. (Note: the lack of Photoshop on this laptop means I have to use MS Paint hahah, it kinda gives these diagrams a ~retro feel~).
View Separately

This diagram is to show how the ‘homosociality’ of men excludes my mum.

You can find out more about ‘Guyland’ in this tag.

My brother is represented as ‘P’ here, and he will be called PB-Pete in the upcoming book.

This is obviously a very simplified drawing. There are supposedly ‘feminine’ traits that my brother and I have picked up from our mum. She has taught us to care about people, and not to leave the down-trodden behind.

I’m only just starting to unpick the way patriarchal socialisation has caused me to overlook my mother’s extremely high and yet invisible contribution to my psyche.

Confused?

The ask box is open.

(Note: the lack of Photoshop on this laptop means I have to use MS Paint hahah, it kinda gives these diagrams a ~retro feel~).

Watershed - The Importance of Crying in Depression 07/03/12

**Trigger warning for depression, self-harm, social anxiety, childhood verbal abuse, discussion of triggers**

I wasn’t sure whether to write about this, but I realised that this is just part of men’s emotionless gender stereotype. I think it’s certainly resulted in a watershed, in more ways than one, and I hope it has touched upon issues people can relate with. It details how I’ve always cried to externalise psychological stress and stop verbal abuse from continuing.

It is the story of how doctors and opticians told me my eyes could barely produce tears, and how I felt depression robbed me of my ability to cry.

When revolution brings freedom, old prejudices can trample equality… if given the chance

theendofempire:

A bit from George Orwell’s Homage to Catalonia. He is describing the situation upon first arriving at the barracks to fight for the revolutionary militia against the Fascist during the Spanish Revolution. It’s sad how quickly old prejudices and social structures of power embedded in our minds set in and continue to oppress even just after a new space of freedom has opened up:

There were perhaps a thousand men at the barracks, and a score or so of women, apart from the militiamen’s wives who did the cooking. There were still women serving in the militias, though not very many. In the early battles they had fought side by side with the men as a matter of course. It is a thing that seems natural in time of revolution. Ideas were changing already, however. The militiamen had to be kept out of the riding-school while the women were drilling there because they laughed at the women and put them off. A few months earlier no one would have seen anything comic in a woman handling a gun.

This is why it’s so important to educate people about the hierarchies that previously existed, and train them to root out oppressive behaviours in their lives. Laughing at women should have been as abominable as accumulating wealth and laughing at the poor.

Class oppression seems to be invariably favoured over others in times of revolution. It is NOT the only oppression, and no revolution is complete without total hierarchical upheaval.

This is an important message for how the revolution in its early stages embodies the ideal society, and how these values MUST be kept strong in times of relative stability.

No one is free when others are oppressed.

Freedom to be reinforce patriarchy is not freedom.

Do not write about women’s bodies or their sexuality until you’ve been writing and reading feminism long enough to understand that women will never care what you have to say in this area, apart from drawing their attention to the informed writings on this subject by other women. So said Garland Grey, one of the many people who called my old blog out. For those of you who are unaware, I ran a ‘male feminism’ blog for a period of about a year. Now I have come to tell you not only that I am not a male feminist, but that no one is. That’s right I said it, from the mouth of the former Lighthouse himself: there is no such thing as a male feminist. When I learnt about patriarchy, and my complicity in its continuation, I wanted to help solve it. I hated it so much I took on the voice of oppressed genders, deciding that my frustration at the injustice mattered equally to theirs. Perhaps most tellingly, I felt this was my struggle. I thought our struggle was the same, because everything that angered feminists angered me too. But it was not and is not my struggle. To struggle is to be on the defensive against an onslaught of heartfelt oppression. One of my privileges as a man is the ability to step back and stop thinking about it, because oppression isn’t my daily routine. I am not constantly reminded of unavoidable characteristics that hold me back in this terrible society. In the words of this Michael Kimmel quote, I am invisible. Perhaps the most important post on this subject is “can we stop using the term ally?” by Radical Masculinity’s Gauge. Much of my objections to the term Male Feminism are contained therein. The point I seek to make is that Male Feminism builds an identity on the oppression of others. Rather than being a reaction to experienced oppression, it is a decision to cease oppressing others. In essence, it is based upon the supposedly praiseworthy quality of being a decent human being. I continue to be involved in the movement. I was even elected Campaigns Officer of my university’s Gender Equality Society for next year. The difference between my former identification as a male feminist and my current activism is that now I am merely helping feminists out. Our president will be a woman, as will almost all of the committee. The society is led by women, run by women, and controlled by women. I bring only my enthusiasm, knowledge and IT skills to the job. Oppressed experience I do not. I am just a man helping the feminists achieve their righteous goals. Though I agree wholeheartedly with everything they do, and though my thoughts and ideals may be considered feminist, this is not my identity. My identity is as a privileged person who seeks desperately to mitigate that privilege, and sometimes that means refusing to take credit for the hard work of others. I am no special snowflake, I am no shining beacon, and I am no male feminist. Listen to the genders I oppress, read that essential post about allies, and see that though my realisation of the horrors of patriarchy can be considered useful, it is not in itself worthy of any support or reward. Two UK women are killed every week by a former or current partner. Now tell me who you think should be centred in this discussion.
View Separately

Do not write about women’s bodies or their sexuality until you’ve been writing and reading feminism long enough to understand that women will never care what you have to say in this area, apart from drawing their attention to the informed writings on this subject by other women.

So said Garland Grey, one of the many people who called my old blog out. For those of you who are unaware, I ran a ‘male feminism’ blog for a period of about a year. Now I have come to tell you not only that I am not a male feminist, but that no one is. That’s right I said it, from the mouth of the former Lighthouse himself: there is no such thing as a male feminist.

When I learnt about patriarchy, and my complicity in its continuation, I wanted to help solve it. I hated it so much I took on the voice of oppressed genders, deciding that my frustration at the injustice mattered equally to theirs. Perhaps most tellingly, I felt this was my struggle. I thought our struggle was the same, because everything that angered feminists angered me too.

But it was not and is not my struggle. To struggle is to be on the defensive against an onslaught of heartfelt oppression. One of my privileges as a man is the ability to step back and stop thinking about it, because oppression isn’t my daily routine. I am not constantly reminded of unavoidable characteristics that hold me back in this terrible society. In the words of this Michael Kimmel quote, I am invisible.

Perhaps the most important post on this subject is “can we stop using the term ally?” by Radical Masculinity’s Gauge. Much of my objections to the term Male Feminism are contained therein. The point I seek to make is that Male Feminism builds an identity on the oppression of others. Rather than being a reaction to experienced oppression, it is a decision to cease oppressing others.

In essence, it is based upon the supposedly praiseworthy quality of being a decent human being.

I continue to be involved in the movement. I was even elected Campaigns Officer of my university’s Gender Equality Society for next year. The difference between my former identification as a male feminist and my current activism is that now I am merely helping feminists out. Our president will be a woman, as will almost all of the committee. The society is led by women, run by women, and controlled by women. I bring only my enthusiasm, knowledge and IT skills to the job.

Oppressed experience I do not.

I am just a man helping the feminists achieve their righteous goals. Though I agree wholeheartedly with everything they do, and though my thoughts and ideals may be considered feminist, this is not my identity. My identity is as a privileged person who seeks desperately to mitigate that privilege, and sometimes that means refusing to take credit for the hard work of others. I am no special snowflake, I am no shining beacon, and I am no male feminist.

Listen to the genders I oppress, read that essential post about allies, and see that though my realisation of the horrors of patriarchy can be considered useful, it is not in itself worthy of any support or reward.

Two UK women are killed every week by a former or current partner.

Now tell me who you think should be centred in this discussion.

I recently interviewed the anonymous blogger of The Anti-Lad and Watered Down Wardrobe on his thoughts regarding ‘lad culture’. He has some experiences of within and outside of the culture, so I thought this would be interesting. Here were his responses. TTE: How would you describe the characteristics of a lad? A: Gender is a bit of an issue. The lad-ish behaviour is often attributed to men, but women have started showing some “symptoms” of lad behaviour as well. TTE: What does that entail? A: Well to work with a stereotype, a 15 to 25-year-old male who behaves in an unruly way, whether it be drinking excessive amounts, being aggressive and causing serious injury on a night out in the town, or a bunch of mates who have gone down the pub to watch the football on a Saturday afternoon with a pint and who shout a bit at the TV. As with most things, there are extremes of the behaviour; I find myself stuck in the middle. Doing things that I enjoy may often be seen as lad behaviour, such as the previous example of watching the football at the pub with friends, or playing football in a Sunday league. What I dislike is the feeling that can come with not being one of the lads, the sense of exclusion. I have just recently decided to comment on my feelings on this culture; I enjoy certain things, being seen as a lad but not wanting to be one. That’s where my blog comes in; I just confess my feelings and everyday experiences of lad behaviour. It’s quite strange, I’m stuck half and half between being a lad and not being a lad. TTE: To what extent do you identify with that culture? A: I would say I would identify with the everyday average lad activities, and possibly the mindset. I enjoy sport, I have quite a chauvinistic sense of humour, but strictly sarcastic. TTE: Which bits don’t you identify with? A: Well that’s probably an easier question to answer. I identify with the things that all young men enjoy, and that can often be labelled as lad behaviour, it’s just boys being boys. I don’t identify however with the stupidity of some behaviour, the clan-like behaviour, that can lead to members of a friend group being ridiculed, partly because this happened to me when I attended secondary school. The violence, drugs and alcohol that are related with the extremes of the culture, I don’t think I will ever identify with them. We are all aggressive at heart; some of us choose to go to the gym, hit a punch bag, play a controlled sport, some go out on a Saturday night, and look for a fight fuelled on Carlsberg and lad-ish bravado with a need to show their mates they are the biggest man, and that never ends well. I have interests in fashion music and culture, and I have a blog about them. When my “lad” mates find out about this they often ridicule me. Some of my friends who aren’t ‘lads’ do this as well so it cannot be completely attributed to lad culture 100%, but the ridicule is more serious from the “lads”. I would say I’m 60% lad, but that 60% is the portion you will find in a majority of young men my age. The other 40% is something that you will find in a minority of my demographic, and I guess that’s the portion that sets all people apart. The people who are engrossed in music, clothes, fashion, academia or anything, that part is what makes up the rest of our identity. The strange part for me is that my constitution is so contrasting that they clash. I often feel I have a personality clash, and it makes me question who I really am. However since leaving my “oppressive” secondary school, finding supportive friends at college, I have become my own person at University. TTE: Do you think lad culture is predominantly positive or negative? A: I’d say predominately positive. It must be understood that the extremes of the culture create the stereotype that most identify with when they think lad, and so it is perceived as negative. The origins, just being a young man, or “lad”, are a normal trend across the population between 15 and 25, its nothing bad about that. TTE: How does lad culture portray women? A: Now we move onto your area. There is a lot of objectification of women, though I often get the feelings it’s out of affection. Page 3 is the worst example of this. You can still move down through the levels of extremes of lad culture, from where at the top, women are treated the same as they were 50 years ago, it isn’t as bad. I saw a young woman on the bus the other day with her boyfriend and his mate. She has two black eyes, but was still chatting along with them. It’s wrong to assume that it was her boyfriend or the mate that did it, but from initial impressions I was quite sure. This then boils down to my level, where me and “the lads” may pass comment on girls in and around our lives who we find attractive, often out of affection rather than to be derogatory. We place certain women on pedestals, not a bad thing I would argue, but it can easily become perverted in the simplest sense of the word, where often friends will joke about how they would “fuck her proper”, or “split her in half”. I’m not going to say I haven’t passed this sort of comment, because I have, and I still do. TTE: Are you tempted to focus on physical appearance more because it’s more acceptable to “the lads”? A: Of course, a girl’s physical appearance is where the initial impression is drawn from. This may seem a simplistic fact, but because of this, guys focus on it, because often they are too scared to talk to girls to find out about the rest of them, their personality etc. You could argue that cowardice is the cause of that objectification, but I think it’s simpler than that. If you find something attractive, you feel an urge to share. There’s nothing wrong with that, but when it’s derogatory then it should stop. When you wouldn’t want the girl to hear what you are saying it’s too far, and again I will admit to saying things that this rule does not apply to. TTE: How do you want the vision of lads to change, for them to move away from that extreme end perhaps? A: I think that as with all things, the minority ruin it for majority, and a negative image is projected onto millions of young men by those who don’t fight the stereotype. It’s not a major problem, but I wouldn’t like it if my parents or their friends thought of me as a young man who is rowdy and looks for trouble on a night out. When I go out, I’m there to see friends, not to make enemies. There will always be an extreme. Nothing that can be changed, as humans have free will and the right to become inebriated, and even though it’s a crime, you cannot stop one man hitting another. I think the negative image can be adjusted. It’s already moving I think, possibly as I grow up I realise it’s not such a big issue. Our culture is becoming more diversified, the lads aren’t alone, there are the indie kids, hipsters et al who all are gaining more recognition and strength with the increasing improvements of social networking mediums. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the lad culture decrease in power and shrink back into only the lower income, less educated in society. This is a stereotype again though; not every inner city 19-year-old born in a low income household is a violent, aggressive and rude lad. The lad culture has been glorified, often by TV and film, Danny Dyer being a prime example, and prime idiot as well. The lad is dying breed, it’s less acceptable. People want to be debonair and suave, not have a bloody nose and a spilt pint.
View Separately

I recently interviewed the anonymous blogger of The Anti-Lad and Watered Down Wardrobe on his thoughts regarding ‘lad culture’. He has some experiences of within and outside of the culture, so I thought this would be interesting. Here were his responses.

TTE: How would you describe the characteristics of a lad?

A: Gender is a bit of an issue. The lad-ish behaviour is often attributed to men, but women have started showing some “symptoms” of lad behaviour as well.

TTE: What does that entail?

A: Well to work with a stereotype, a 15 to 25-year-old male who behaves in an unruly way, whether it be drinking excessive amounts, being aggressive and causing serious injury on a night out in the town, or a bunch of mates who have gone down the pub to watch the football on a Saturday afternoon with a pint and who shout a bit at the TV. As with most things, there are extremes of the behaviour; I find myself stuck in the middle. Doing things that I enjoy may often be seen as lad behaviour, such as the previous example of watching the football at the pub with friends, or playing football in a Sunday league.

What I dislike is the feeling that can come with not being one of the lads, the sense of exclusion. I have just recently decided to comment on my feelings on this culture; I enjoy certain things, being seen as a lad but not wanting to be one. That’s where my blog comes in; I just confess my feelings and everyday experiences of lad behaviour. It’s quite strange, I’m stuck half and half between being a lad and not being a lad.

TTE: To what extent do you identify with that culture?

A: I would say I would identify with the everyday average lad activities, and possibly the mindset. I enjoy sport, I have quite a chauvinistic sense of humour, but strictly sarcastic.

TTE: Which bits don’t you identify with?

A: Well that’s probably an easier question to answer. I identify with the things that all young men enjoy, and that can often be labelled as lad behaviour, it’s just boys being boys. I don’t identify however with the stupidity of some behaviour, the clan-like behaviour, that can lead to members of a friend group being ridiculed, partly because this happened to me when I attended secondary school. The violence, drugs and alcohol that are related with the extremes of the culture, I don’t think I will ever identify with them.

We are all aggressive at heart; some of us choose to go to the gym, hit a punch bag, play a controlled sport, some go out on a Saturday night, and look for a fight fuelled on Carlsberg and lad-ish bravado with a need to show their mates they are the biggest man, and that never ends well. I have interests in fashion music and culture, and I have a blog about them. When my “lad” mates find out about this they often ridicule me. Some of my friends who aren’t ‘lads’ do this as well so it cannot be completely attributed to lad culture 100%, but the ridicule is more serious from the “lads”.

I would say I’m 60% lad, but that 60% is the portion you will find in a majority of young men my age. The other 40% is something that you will find in a minority of my demographic, and I guess that’s the portion that sets all people apart. The people who are engrossed in music, clothes, fashion, academia or anything, that part is what makes up the rest of our identity.

The strange part for me is that my constitution is so contrasting that they clash. I often feel I have a personality clash, and it makes me question who I really am. However since leaving my “oppressive” secondary school, finding supportive friends at college, I have become my own person at University.

TTE: Do you think lad culture is predominantly positive or negative?

A: I’d say predominately positive. It must be understood that the extremes of the culture create the stereotype that most identify with when they think lad, and so it is perceived as negative. The origins, just being a young man, or “lad”, are a normal trend across the population between 15 and 25, its nothing bad about that.

TTE: How does lad culture portray women?

A: Now we move onto your area. There is a lot of objectification of women, though I often get the feelings it’s out of affection. Page 3 is the worst example of this. You can still move down through the levels of extremes of lad culture, from where at the top, women are treated the same as they were 50 years ago, it isn’t as bad. I saw a young woman on the bus the other day with her boyfriend and his mate. She has two black eyes, but was still chatting along with them. It’s wrong to assume that it was her boyfriend or the mate that did it, but from initial impressions I was quite sure.

This then boils down to my level, where me and “the lads” may pass comment on girls in and around our lives who we find attractive, often out of affection rather than to be derogatory. We place certain women on pedestals, not a bad thing I would argue, but it can easily become perverted in the simplest sense of the word, where often friends will joke about how they would “fuck her proper”, or “split her in half”. I’m not going to say I haven’t passed this sort of comment, because I have, and I still do.

TTE: Are you tempted to focus on physical appearance more because it’s more acceptable to “the lads”?

A: Of course, a girl’s physical appearance is where the initial impression is drawn from. This may seem a simplistic fact, but because of this, guys focus on it, because often they are too scared to talk to girls to find out about the rest of them, their personality etc. You could argue that cowardice is the cause of that objectification, but I think it’s simpler than that. If you find something attractive, you feel an urge to share. There’s nothing wrong with that, but when it’s derogatory then it should stop. When you wouldn’t want the girl to hear what you are saying it’s too far, and again I will admit to saying things that this rule does not apply to.

TTE: How do you want the vision of lads to change, for them to move away from that extreme end perhaps?

A: I think that as with all things, the minority ruin it for majority, and a negative image is projected onto millions of young men by those who don’t fight the stereotype. It’s not a major problem, but I wouldn’t like it if my parents or their friends thought of me as a young man who is rowdy and looks for trouble on a night out. When I go out, I’m there to see friends, not to make enemies.

There will always be an extreme. Nothing that can be changed, as humans have free will and the right to become inebriated, and even though it’s a crime, you cannot stop one man hitting another. I think the negative image can be adjusted. It’s already moving I think, possibly as I grow up I realise it’s not such a big issue. Our culture is becoming more diversified, the lads aren’t alone, there are the indie kids, hipsters et al who all are gaining more recognition and strength with the increasing improvements of social networking mediums.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the lad culture decrease in power and shrink back into only the lower income, less educated in society. This is a stereotype again though; not every inner city 19-year-old born in a low income household is a violent, aggressive and rude lad. The lad culture has been glorified, often by TV and film, Danny Dyer being a prime example, and prime idiot as well. The lad is dying breed, it’s less acceptable. People want to be debonair and suave, not have a bloody nose and a spilt pint.

And although my focus is American guys, Guyland is not exclusively American terrain. Both Britain and Australia have begun to examine “Laddism” - the anomic, free-floating, unattached and often boorish behaviour of young males. “Lads” are Guys with British accents - consuming the same media, engaging in the same sorts of behaviours, and lbricating their activities with the same alcohol. In Italy, they’re called bamboccini, or “mammoni” or Mama’s boys. Half of all Italian men between 25 and 34 live with their parents. In France, they’re called “Tanguys” after the French film with that title about their lifestyle.

Michael Kimmel’s

“Guyland: The Perilous World Where Boys Become Men”

**PREVIOUSLY I-AM-THE-LIGHTHOUSE** Working from the points made by garlandgrey here (correct me if the source is wrong), it is important that I understand two things first of all. I understand if you don’t want to give me any more chances. I’ve had too many as it is. I realise that the feminist community on Tumblr would sometimes rather I left altogether, because I never seemed to get what I was doing wrong. They reserve the right to stay angry at me forever which, while not ideal for me, is perfectly justified considering what I based a year of blogging on. I want this blog to speak for itself. I cannot convince you that I won’t mansplain, talk over oppressed people or appropriate their struggles for myself. I can’t convince you that I won’t co-opt feminism. I have abused your trust, and so I don’t expect you to believe that I’ve changed. I want to demonstrate that I’ve changed, and chief among these changes will be ceasing to comment on feminism or treat myself as an authority. I will no longer write any opinions on women’s bodies or sexuality. I will instead draw attention to the informed writings of women on the subject. My opinion on women’s issues is no longer valid, and all questions of that nature will be redirected to women. I must become much more open to criticism, especially by those that I oppress. I understand that even if I am criticised by a minority voice within an oppressed group, that I must take this seriously and allow the debate of my role to be decided by that group. This will not be a blog on feminism. The reason I have changed the name and layout is because I have come to the realisation of how wrong I was before. It got to the point where I was regarded as the expert, and people came to me to explain what women go through. This is and always was WRONG. The reason I have deleted some posts is not because I am trying to censor my mistakes, what I wrote was screencapped and is still freely available. I deleted posts because I no longer endorse the message I had before. I cannot guarantee that anything I wrote under the name of The Lighthouse was justified. I am only able to hear right and wrong from the groups I oppress. I am not the expert on what role I or other men deserve to have in feminism. I am not the expert on feminism, women’s experiences or the experiences of POCs, nor can I be from my privileged position. I am not an authority. I am not the ‘lighthouse’ on these subjects, nor was I ever. Some topics that I may focus on in future are those which I have studied (unrelated to oppression) or those that I have experienced (relevant to oppression). I will not speak about oppression that is not my own, and many would be right in saying I am highly privileged and barely marginalised if at all. The topics I am interested in are left-wing politics, the tabloids and media (which I studied at GCSE and A level), Psychology (the subject of my degree), men and masculinity (the subject of a book I am about to read and my own experience), and asexuality (my own experience and research). Thanks to everyone who had the patience to call me out and give me chance after chance to show I could learn. My sincerest apologies to everyone I misgendered, talked over, appropriated the struggle of, and mansplained the problems of. I know nothing I can say will undo what I was doing before. But I promise I can be better.
Pop-upView Separately

**PREVIOUSLY I-AM-THE-LIGHTHOUSE**

Working from the points made by garlandgrey here (correct me if the source is wrong), it is important that I understand two things first of all. I understand if you don’t want to give me any more chances. I’ve had too many as it is. I realise that the feminist community on Tumblr would sometimes rather I left altogether, because I never seemed to get what I was doing wrong. They reserve the right to stay angry at me forever which, while not ideal for me, is perfectly justified considering what I based a year of blogging on.

I want this blog to speak for itself. I cannot convince you that I won’t mansplain, talk over oppressed people or appropriate their struggles for myself. I can’t convince you that I won’t co-opt feminism. I have abused your trust, and so I don’t expect you to believe that I’ve changed. I want to demonstrate that I’ve changed, and chief among these changes will be ceasing to comment on feminism or treat myself as an authority.

I will no longer write any opinions on women’s bodies or sexuality. I will instead draw attention to the informed writings of women on the subject. My opinion on women’s issues is no longer valid, and all questions of that nature will be redirected to women. I must become much more open to criticism, especially by those that I oppress. I understand that even if I am criticised by a minority voice within an oppressed group, that I must take this seriously and allow the debate of my role to be decided by that group.

This will not be a blog on feminism. The reason I have changed the name and layout is because I have come to the realisation of how wrong I was before. It got to the point where I was regarded as the expert, and people came to me to explain what women go through. This is and always was WRONG. The reason I have deleted some posts is not because I am trying to censor my mistakes, what I wrote was screencapped and is still freely available.

I deleted posts because I no longer endorse the message I had before.

I cannot guarantee that anything I wrote under the name of The Lighthouse was justified. I am only able to hear right and wrong from the groups I oppress. I am not the expert on what role I or other men deserve to have in feminism. I am not the expert on feminism, women’s experiences or the experiences of POCs, nor can I be from my privileged position. I am not an authority. I am not the ‘lighthouse’ on these subjects, nor was I ever.

Some topics that I may focus on in future are those which I have studied (unrelated to oppression) or those that I have experienced (relevant to oppression). I will not speak about oppression that is not my own, and many would be right in saying I am highly privileged and barely marginalised if at all. The topics I am interested in are left-wing politics, the tabloids and media (which I studied at GCSE and A level), Psychology (the subject of my degree), men and masculinity (the subject of a book I am about to read and my own experience), and asexuality (my own experience and research).

Thanks to everyone who had the patience to call me out and give me chance after chance to show I could learn.

My sincerest apologies to everyone I misgendered, talked over, appropriated the struggle of, and mansplained the problems of.

I know nothing I can say will undo what I was doing before.

But I promise I can be better.

Feminism expects a man to be ethical, emotionally present, and accountable to his values in his actions with women — as well as with other men. Feminism loves men enough to expect them to act more honorably and actually believes them capable of doing so. -Michael S. Kimmel Men generally don’t identify as feminists. It isn’t cool to think about the patriarchy, to realise our male privilege, or to admit that women are nowhere near the liberation they set out to attain. Lads’ holidays are not the place to talk about the empowerment of women, the cruelty they suffer as the result of sexual harassment, or the stereotypes that holds them back in politics, the workplace and the home. There is no feminist news update on Page 3 of The Sun. In fact, Page 3 makes a joke of women’s intelligence. There is no defence of women’s issues by men in the media. In fact, journalists like Michael Buerk argue that feminism has gone to the point of oppressing men. Women’s rights are suspiciously absent from lad’s mags FHM, Nuts and Zoo. In fact, these magazines are often openly misogynistic. It isn’t a surprise, then, that men generally don’t identify as feminists. Despite apathy to the concept of feminism, many men believe in equality. They believe that women deserve equal rights to men, even when they’re unaware how much has been achieved so far. In our ignorance however, it is easy for us to speak without thinking, to think without listening, to listen without hearing. It is our habit to assume equality has been reached because we have not looked analytically at our society, considered the statistics that confirm feminist theory, or heard the experiences and injustices faced by women. And analysis is exactly what we should do. The feminist Andrea Dworkin once said “feminism is hated because women are hated.” Think about this for a moment. If inequality exists, but benefits the privileged party, would it not be said party’s ultimate corruption to cover up the inequality? To vilify feminism as something only for ‘man-hating lesbians’ is exactly what injustice needs: to turn us all away from the philosophy that can save us, bring us together, and ultimately connect us with our identities and passions. I have blogged on the topic for over a year now, and I am certainly far from understanding all the ways the genders need to be redefined. However, I confirmed that Feminism is Still Relevant in a video animation, I confirmed that Patriarchy is Not Behind Us in an infographic, and I continue to unearth the disastrous injustices through reading books such as Kat Banyard’s “The Equality Illusion” and Cordelia Fine’s “Delusions of Gender.” Stop accepting the status quo and start questioning yourself. What are your attitudes toward others? Have you ever experienced discrimination on the basis of gender? How do your male friends talk about gender? Do they recognise that patriarchy has always existed, and therefore see the present as the time to act against it? Or do they believe that inequality no longer exists, despite the evidence? I will always be here to support male feminists. I will always be here for the unconvinced, the skeptical and the plain ignorant. Everyone has to start somewhere, and as George Bernard Shaw once said, the one thing more dangerous than ignorance is false knowledge. Don’t fill your heads with the lies of feminism as an extremist group designed to create matriarchal rule, to ‘feminize’ men, or to steal away their children. That’s what the patriarchy WANTS YOU TO THINK. THINK FOR YOURSELVES. QUESTION PATRIARCHY. And to quote the feminist Gloria Steinem: “The truth will set you free. But first, it will piss you off.” Click for more Lighthouse Feminism posts.
Pop-upView Separately
Feminism expects a man to be ethical, emotionally present, and accountable to his values in his actions with women — as well as with other men. Feminism loves men enough to expect them to act more honorably and actually believes them capable of doing so.

-Michael S. Kimmel

Men generally don’t identify as feminists. It isn’t cool to think about the patriarchy, to realise our male privilege, or to admit that women are nowhere near the liberation they set out to attain. Lads’ holidays are not the place to talk about the empowerment of women, the cruelty they suffer as the result of sexual harassment, or the stereotypes that holds them back in politics, the workplace and the home.

There is no feminist news update on Page 3 of The Sun. In fact, Page 3 makes a joke of women’s intelligence. There is no defence of women’s issues by men in the media. In fact, journalists like Michael Buerk argue that feminism has gone to the point of oppressing men. Women’s rights are suspiciously absent from lad’s mags FHM, Nuts and Zoo. In fact, these magazines are often openly misogynistic.

It isn’t a surprise, then, that men generally don’t identify as feminists.

Despite apathy to the concept of feminism, many men believe in equality. They believe that women deserve equal rights to men, even when they’re unaware how much has been achieved so far. In our ignorance however, it is easy for us to speak without thinking, to think without listening, to listen without hearing. It is our habit to assume equality has been reached because we have not looked analytically at our society, considered the statistics that confirm feminist theory, or heard the experiences and injustices faced by women.

And analysis is exactly what we should do.

The feminist Andrea Dworkin once said “feminism is hated because women are hated.” Think about this for a moment. If inequality exists, but benefits the privileged party, would it not be said party’s ultimate corruption to cover up the inequality? To vilify feminism as something only for ‘man-hating lesbians’ is exactly what injustice needs: to turn us all away from the philosophy that can save us, bring us together, and ultimately connect us with our identities and passions.

I have blogged on the topic for over a year now, and I am certainly far from understanding all the ways the genders need to be redefined. However, I confirmed that Feminism is Still Relevant in a video animation, I confirmed that Patriarchy is Not Behind Us in an infographic, and I continue to unearth the disastrous injustices through reading books such as Kat Banyard’s “The Equality Illusion” and Cordelia Fine’s “Delusions of Gender.”

Stop accepting the status quo and start questioning yourself. What are your attitudes toward others? Have you ever experienced discrimination on the basis of gender? How do your male friends talk about gender? Do they recognise that patriarchy has always existed, and therefore see the present as the time to act against it? Or do they believe that inequality no longer exists, despite the evidence?

I will always be here to support male feminists. I will always be here for the unconvinced, the skeptical and the plain ignorant. Everyone has to start somewhere, and as George Bernard Shaw once said, the one thing more dangerous than ignorance is false knowledge. Don’t fill your heads with the lies of feminism as an extremist group designed to create matriarchal rule, to ‘feminize’ men, or to steal away their children. That’s what the patriarchy WANTS YOU TO THINK.

THINK FOR YOURSELVES.

QUESTION PATRIARCHY.

And to quote the feminist Gloria Steinem:

“The truth will set you free. But first, it will piss you off.”

Click for more Lighthouse Feminism posts.

Mansplaining is when a dude tells you, a woman, how to do something you already know how to do, or how you are wrong about something you are actually right about, or miscellaneous and inaccurate “facts” about something you know a hell of a lot more about than he does. This definition, which is taken from this article, is a fairly succinct view of the term ‘mainsplaining’. The article goes on to cite four ways in which the reader could be a mansplainer, including derailing, privilege-denying, othering and accusing others of misandry. The mansplainer is always right about women. Their disagreement with him is proof of their delusion, their hyper-sensitivity to sexism, and their inability to grasp the facts. It is possible for anyone to be ignorant and bigoted, of course. I have met women on the internet that genuinely despise the aims of feminism, and believe that it is harming men rather than creating an equal society. My reaction, perhaps wrongly, has been to try and educate them on their own experience, and why their experience is not one of individual choice but one of an overall culture of female passivity and subjugation. But only men can put their ignorance forward as fact in such a way that derails the oppression of women. What I should have done is to introduce them to the women who know. I have been guilty of all these things in the past. As I learn about male privilege, I learn that my approach in the past may have been mansplaining at times, often misunderstanding the significance of that privilege. Checking myself is an important task, but it cannot be done alone. I need to be called up, I need to be corrected, and most important of all, I need to listen. The worst mansplainery I have come across is that of friends who are not feminists. “My problem with feminism,” they say, “is that I believe in choice.” Of course, feminism is not about restricting what women do, forcing them to abandon conventional beauty and become androgynous and hairy. True mansplaining, it seems, is the act of telling women and feminists what feminism is about and why it is wrong. Ignorance about the nature of patriarchy is not something I wish to possess. I will continue to learn as much as I can, and pass that knowledge on in what I write. However, I will not claim to be an absolute source of knowledge. After all, I do not speak for women. I cannot claim to represent women. I represent only myself, my experiences are only my own, and I will continue to receive criticism with better knowledge of its source. I will also produce a manifesto to ensure that what I’m achieving here does not silence the voices of women, while helping to deconstruct patriarchy from my own perspective and experiences. I do not want to mansplain the issues women face, I do not want to derail the experiences of real oppressed people, and I want to be constantly reminded of the privilege I hold and how it prevents me from understanding the way it affects others. Click for more Lighthouse Feminism posts.
Pop-upView Separately

Mansplaining is when a dude tells you, a woman, how to do something you already know how to do, or how you are wrong about something you are actually right about, or miscellaneous and inaccurate “facts” about something you know a hell of a lot more about than he does.

This definition, which is taken from this article, is a fairly succinct view of the term ‘mainsplaining’. The article goes on to cite four ways in which the reader could be a mansplainer, including derailing, privilege-denying, othering and accusing others of misandry. The mansplainer is always right about women. Their disagreement with him is proof of their delusion, their hyper-sensitivity to sexism, and their inability to grasp the facts.

It is possible for anyone to be ignorant and bigoted, of course. I have met women on the internet that genuinely despise the aims of feminism, and believe that it is harming men rather than creating an equal society. My reaction, perhaps wrongly, has been to try and educate them on their own experience, and why their experience is not one of individual choice but one of an overall culture of female passivity and subjugation. But only men can put their ignorance forward as fact in such a way that derails the oppression of women.

What I should have done is to introduce them to the women who know.

I have been guilty of all these things in the past. As I learn about male privilege, I learn that my approach in the past may have been mansplaining at times, often misunderstanding the significance of that privilege. Checking myself is an important task, but it cannot be done alone. I need to be called up, I need to be corrected, and most important of all, I need to listen.

The worst mansplainery I have come across is that of friends who are not feminists. “My problem with feminism,” they say, “is that I believe in choice.” Of course, feminism is not about restricting what women do, forcing them to abandon conventional beauty and become androgynous and hairy. True mansplaining, it seems, is the act of telling women and feminists what feminism is about and why it is wrong.

Ignorance about the nature of patriarchy is not something I wish to possess.

I will continue to learn as much as I can, and pass that knowledge on in what I write. However, I will not claim to be an absolute source of knowledge. After all, I do not speak for women. I cannot claim to represent women. I represent only myself, my experiences are only my own, and I will continue to receive criticism with better knowledge of its source.

I will also produce a manifesto to ensure that what I’m achieving here does not silence the voices of women, while helping to deconstruct patriarchy from my own perspective and experiences. I do not want to mansplain the issues women face, I do not want to derail the experiences of real oppressed people, and I want to be constantly reminded of the privilege I hold and how it prevents me from understanding the way it affects others.

Click for more Lighthouse Feminism posts.