Dr. Michael Kimmel is touted as a leading authority on men and their masculinity, so I was a bit taken aback when Feminisiting.com published an interview with him. Then, as I read his interview, I had to ask myself what sort of masculinity Kimmel’s expertise addresses.
In the interview, Kimmel talks about his younger days when his female “partner” worked at a women’s shelter. She couldn’t drive a stick-shift car, which happened to be their only mode of transportation, so Kimmel occasionally drove domestic violence victims to the shelter to help out.
During those trips, he says he learned a bit about abusive males. I find that commendable about any man who will reach out to assist women in a time of trial and learn from their experiences, as Kimmel apparently did.
But somewhere between the abused females and the 2009 interview, Kimmel’s perception of real men went awry.
When asked who his heroines are, Kimmel names Gloria Steinem, “because she's been the figurehead for American feminism for 50 years. But also because of her unbelievable grace in the kind of vilification that she's gotten from the right and from anti-feminists over those 50 years. She's an amazingly gracious and emotionally available person, and she's deeply respectful of women, so I've always admired her.”
A bit later in the interview, Kimmel added what I believe is the crux of his male thinking: “It is sort of weird and a bit discomforting for me to offer advice to feminists as a group, being a man, but what I would say is that the group that feels that it has nothing to gain from feminism, and that feminism has nothing to do with them, is men.
“And I think that that's the reason that women are faced with such draconian choices between opting out and balancing work and family, because men haven't stepped up and aren't doing as much housework and childcare as women need them to do in order for women to be able to balance work and family.
“And my argument here is that the group that has to be embraced by feminism is men — although, I hasten to add that it's not your job. That should be our job. We should be doing that.
“The biggest mistake we make is to assume — and men often think this — that gender equality is a zero-sum game. That if women win, then men are going to lose. And I think what we have to do is to show people that feminism is a win-win. I think we can do that at the personal level in terms of the quality of our relationships with our children, our partners and our friends, and also in terms of public policy.”
Perhaps Mr. Kimmel needs to step back for a time and study his views in light of what Gloria Steinem and her ilk really believe about men.
The history of Steinem’s involvement in advancing the contraceptive mentality versus the ability of real men to step up and do the very things that he claims men don’t do enough of may deep-six his defense of the feminist male.
He may find that his perspective on what it takes to be a “real man” is slightly askew, especially since his heroine likes the idea that the feminist movement has literally feminized the male.
As a grandmother, I have had experience with three amazing men in my life: my husband, my son and my son-in-law. Each of them is what I would call a man’s man. Each is a wonderful, caring husband and an excellent father. All three of these men have characteristics in common that Kimmel may have overlooked in his pursuit of male feminism.
These three men are devoted to being father figures in the home and have made it possible for their wives to feel secure in their roles as wives and mothers.
They represent three very human, imperfect-but-genuine examples of how men can and do respond to God’s call to the vocation of husband and father, and the responsibilities attendant to that task. Kimmel never mentions men like these.
There are a lot of things Kimmel overlooks. For example, his heroine Gloria Steinem once said, “A liberated woman is one who has sex before marriage and a job after.” Comments like this are degrading to women and certainly do not enhance the once-respected female characteristic of femininity.
In response to a question asked of her in 1996 about her position on such things as abortion, Steinem opined “I do think ‘pro-abortion’ was the wrong term--since everyone would like to reduce the necessity of abortion. I prefer reproductive freedom--the freedom to have as well as not to have children.
“I appreciate the openness of spirit in your question. I hope that you would support my choice, as well as your own. And in any case, we could work together for contraception and sex education that would diminish the necessity of abortion.”
The point in bringing up a couple of Steinem’s comments is that such views play directly into the stereotypical feminist ideology that Kimmel apparently believes men need to embrace. To me, such thinking is not only destructive to the true male identity, but contradictory to the male images that many Christians hold dear and, in fact, a move backward toward the caveman mentality.
But there I go again, right? Talking about God when the audience that would listen to a Steinem or a Kimmel might not be interested in what God has to say.
Regardless, here are some facts that even those who prefer agnosticism to Christianity might find worthy of further thought and study.
Contrary to Kimmel, writer/researcher Mark Wegierski commented in “The decline of the gentleman in late modernity”:
“Current-day, hypermodern societies, such as the U.S., Canada, Britain, and northwestern Europe — countries which were formerly among the world's bastions of gentility — now have a hostile outlook and inherent bias against the traditional gentleman, or the man of manners and genuine cultivation. As a result, the general moral tenor, as well as the stability of family life in those societies, has been further undermined.
This decline in gentility [respectful, moral conduct] among members of the male gender contributes to disrespect toward women and their femininity. Any time a man can take advantage of a woman and be “protected” from fatherhood, sociological damage to the human family is going to occur. Everything, including sexual relations, has to be tempered with moderation and respect.
As we know from government-generated statistical reports, the increase in popularity of contraception, compounded by surgical abortion as a backup, has contributed not only to the dehumanization of the preborn child but to the mothers carrying those children in an “incorrect hierarchy of values.”
Dr. E. L. Billings, the world’s foremost authority on natural family planning, appears to truly understand the meaning of being a “real man” when he writes, ironically, on “Womanhood”:
“Physically a woman is specially endowed to conceive, to give birth and nurture a child. …These physical components of her femininity are fused undeniably with her feminine nature which instinctively accepts the child and the protective role. In order to fulfill this role she seeks security, fidelity, protection and harmony in her male partner, requiring and demanding his selfless love.
“To be wanted, loved and challenged by a woman whose needs for herself and child are great, challenges and enhances his masculinity. This enables him to exercise his male role and express his male strength and tender love. Her demands are essential for him to realize his maleness.”
While some might choose to overlook the negatives created culturally, sociologically and medically by overemphasis on contraception and abortion (Kimmel certainly avoided them), the facts are building every day in the case for a return to gentility.
As registered nurse Jenn Giroux pointed out in the Cincinnati Enquirer: “I have seen the physical, mental, psychological, and spiritual damage done to women from abortion and contraception.”
She attributes the rise in divorce rates, STDs and sterility to the practice of contraception and suggests, rightfully so, that women deserve the truth. I would add that men interested in becoming feminists also need to study the facts.
In case Kimmel is searching for additional evidence, we have learned that contraceptives may be polluting our water systems and contributing to male fertility problems. Not only that, but horror of horrors, scientists are now saying that hormones in birth control pills suppress a woman’s interest in masculine men and actually make “boyish men” more attractive.”
Could this mean that Kimmel’s wishes are coming true? Will men devolve into some type of androgynous creature that can appear either male or female so as to placate the desires of a particular female on steroids?
As outlandish as this may sound, we don’t manufacture the news, we just make sure people are aware so that they don’t make life-changing decisions in a vacuum.
Kimmel has a 10-year-old son who was described in Feministing’s interview as a “budding male feminist.” Since he’s only 10 now, perhaps Kimmel should do a little more research before he finalizes his opinions about what it takes to be a “real man.”
In the interview, Kimmel talks about his younger days when his female “partner” worked at a women’s shelter. She couldn’t drive a stick-shift car, which happened to be their only mode of transportation, so Kimmel occasionally drove domestic violence victims to the shelter to help out.
During those trips, he says he learned a bit about abusive males. I find that commendable about any man who will reach out to assist women in a time of trial and learn from their experiences, as Kimmel apparently did.
But somewhere between the abused females and the 2009 interview, Kimmel’s perception of real men went awry.
When asked who his heroines are, Kimmel names Gloria Steinem, “because she's been the figurehead for American feminism for 50 years. But also because of her unbelievable grace in the kind of vilification that she's gotten from the right and from anti-feminists over those 50 years. She's an amazingly gracious and emotionally available person, and she's deeply respectful of women, so I've always admired her.”
A bit later in the interview, Kimmel added what I believe is the crux of his male thinking: “It is sort of weird and a bit discomforting for me to offer advice to feminists as a group, being a man, but what I would say is that the group that feels that it has nothing to gain from feminism, and that feminism has nothing to do with them, is men.
“And I think that that's the reason that women are faced with such draconian choices between opting out and balancing work and family, because men haven't stepped up and aren't doing as much housework and childcare as women need them to do in order for women to be able to balance work and family.
“And my argument here is that the group that has to be embraced by feminism is men — although, I hasten to add that it's not your job. That should be our job. We should be doing that.
“The biggest mistake we make is to assume — and men often think this — that gender equality is a zero-sum game. That if women win, then men are going to lose. And I think what we have to do is to show people that feminism is a win-win. I think we can do that at the personal level in terms of the quality of our relationships with our children, our partners and our friends, and also in terms of public policy.”
Perhaps Mr. Kimmel needs to step back for a time and study his views in light of what Gloria Steinem and her ilk really believe about men.
The history of Steinem’s involvement in advancing the contraceptive mentality versus the ability of real men to step up and do the very things that he claims men don’t do enough of may deep-six his defense of the feminist male.
He may find that his perspective on what it takes to be a “real man” is slightly askew, especially since his heroine likes the idea that the feminist movement has literally feminized the male.
As a grandmother, I have had experience with three amazing men in my life: my husband, my son and my son-in-law. Each of them is what I would call a man’s man. Each is a wonderful, caring husband and an excellent father. All three of these men have characteristics in common that Kimmel may have overlooked in his pursuit of male feminism.
These three men are devoted to being father figures in the home and have made it possible for their wives to feel secure in their roles as wives and mothers.
They represent three very human, imperfect-but-genuine examples of how men can and do respond to God’s call to the vocation of husband and father, and the responsibilities attendant to that task. Kimmel never mentions men like these.
There are a lot of things Kimmel overlooks. For example, his heroine Gloria Steinem once said, “A liberated woman is one who has sex before marriage and a job after.” Comments like this are degrading to women and certainly do not enhance the once-respected female characteristic of femininity.
In response to a question asked of her in 1996 about her position on such things as abortion, Steinem opined “I do think ‘pro-abortion’ was the wrong term--since everyone would like to reduce the necessity of abortion. I prefer reproductive freedom--the freedom to have as well as not to have children.
“I appreciate the openness of spirit in your question. I hope that you would support my choice, as well as your own. And in any case, we could work together for contraception and sex education that would diminish the necessity of abortion.”
The point in bringing up a couple of Steinem’s comments is that such views play directly into the stereotypical feminist ideology that Kimmel apparently believes men need to embrace. To me, such thinking is not only destructive to the true male identity, but contradictory to the male images that many Christians hold dear and, in fact, a move backward toward the caveman mentality.
But there I go again, right? Talking about God when the audience that would listen to a Steinem or a Kimmel might not be interested in what God has to say.
Regardless, here are some facts that even those who prefer agnosticism to Christianity might find worthy of further thought and study.
Contrary to Kimmel, writer/researcher Mark Wegierski commented in “The decline of the gentleman in late modernity”:
“Current-day, hypermodern societies, such as the U.S., Canada, Britain, and northwestern Europe — countries which were formerly among the world's bastions of gentility — now have a hostile outlook and inherent bias against the traditional gentleman, or the man of manners and genuine cultivation. As a result, the general moral tenor, as well as the stability of family life in those societies, has been further undermined.
This decline in gentility [respectful, moral conduct] among members of the male gender contributes to disrespect toward women and their femininity. Any time a man can take advantage of a woman and be “protected” from fatherhood, sociological damage to the human family is going to occur. Everything, including sexual relations, has to be tempered with moderation and respect.
As we know from government-generated statistical reports, the increase in popularity of contraception, compounded by surgical abortion as a backup, has contributed not only to the dehumanization of the preborn child but to the mothers carrying those children in an “incorrect hierarchy of values.”
Dr. E. L. Billings, the world’s foremost authority on natural family planning, appears to truly understand the meaning of being a “real man” when he writes, ironically, on “Womanhood”:
“Physically a woman is specially endowed to conceive, to give birth and nurture a child. …These physical components of her femininity are fused undeniably with her feminine nature which instinctively accepts the child and the protective role. In order to fulfill this role she seeks security, fidelity, protection and harmony in her male partner, requiring and demanding his selfless love.
“To be wanted, loved and challenged by a woman whose needs for herself and child are great, challenges and enhances his masculinity. This enables him to exercise his male role and express his male strength and tender love. Her demands are essential for him to realize his maleness.”
While some might choose to overlook the negatives created culturally, sociologically and medically by overemphasis on contraception and abortion (Kimmel certainly avoided them), the facts are building every day in the case for a return to gentility.
As registered nurse Jenn Giroux pointed out in the Cincinnati Enquirer: “I have seen the physical, mental, psychological, and spiritual damage done to women from abortion and contraception.”
She attributes the rise in divorce rates, STDs and sterility to the practice of contraception and suggests, rightfully so, that women deserve the truth. I would add that men interested in becoming feminists also need to study the facts.
In case Kimmel is searching for additional evidence, we have learned that contraceptives may be polluting our water systems and contributing to male fertility problems. Not only that, but horror of horrors, scientists are now saying that hormones in birth control pills suppress a woman’s interest in masculine men and actually make “boyish men” more attractive.”
Could this mean that Kimmel’s wishes are coming true? Will men devolve into some type of androgynous creature that can appear either male or female so as to placate the desires of a particular female on steroids?
As outlandish as this may sound, we don’t manufacture the news, we just make sure people are aware so that they don’t make life-changing decisions in a vacuum.
Kimmel has a 10-year-old son who was described in Feministing’s interview as a “budding male feminist.” Since he’s only 10 now, perhaps Kimmel should do a little more research before he finalizes his opinions about what it takes to be a “real man.”