The other day I was having a beer with a few guys--one of whom didn't know the other two very well--and they started talking about the Mets. Their newness seemed to fade away in a flurry of familiarity built around sports. And it got me thinking...almost every guy I know--whether they're hip hop heads, indy hipsters, computer science geeks, city kids, farm boys--seems at least mildly interested in sports.
I brought this up, and the three of us tried to come up with a female parallel, but quickly realized that there wasn't one. There are certainly interests that a lot of women share, but there's nothing as generalizable as sports. (Then we proceeded to have a feminist vs. sports trivia competition. Let's just say that I knew that the tie goes to the runner and they had no idea what intersectional feminism was).
While reading Michael Kimmel's new book, Guyland, I couldn't stop thinking about this moment, and so many others that I've shared over the years with my various, amazing, if not sometimes lost guy friends. It's a book that delves deep into the world of boys becoming men (for his purposes, ages 16 to 26, and predominantly white) in an attempt to describe just how limiting and inauthentic it can be. An important note: Kimmel is not talking about all guys. The majority of the dudes he's writing about are the ones that you probably steer clear of whenever possible--the jerky hockey player who posts up in your high school hallway and makes comments about girls' bodies, the guy who lived on your floor and insisted on hanging posters of half naked women outside his door, calling you a bitch when you suggested he keep his porn inside his own room, the ex-boyfriend you can't believe you ever dated. In Kimmels' view, those are the bonafide guys of Guyland, but there are traces to be found on most males.
There were two parts that resonated the most for me. The first was focused on young men's framing of adulthood, this notion that "freedom is equated with a lack of accountability--not having to answer to anyone--and so being irresponsible becomes a way of declaring your freedom and, hence, your adulthood." Though most of my guy friends are too enlightened to hang out in traditional Guyland with a straight face, they do seem pulled by the black hole force of no expectations. Far more than the women I know, the guys seem totally petrified of having others expect things of them--whether it's a phone call the next day, a solid yes or no on a party invite, or an on time arrival. As an extension, they are often fearful of "settling down" with one partner. Suddenly, it's like the girl who has been really fun to hang out with and really interesting to get to know becomes an expectation ogre, even if she doesn't change her tune one little bit.
The other part of Kimmel's analysis that I found riveting was his look at young men's twin emotions--entitlement and anger. He picks up this thread at various moments. When looking at white teenagers' obsession with hip hop music: "In some of their media consumption--rap music or some video games--they do it in blackface, symbolically appropriating the idiomatic expressions of the racialized 'other' to gain access to and express their own emotions." When critiquing rape culture: "...while psychologists and feminists and the entire legal system see male sexual aggression as the initiation of violence, guys describe it in a different way--not as initiation but as retaliation. What are the retaliating against? The power that women have over them." And the only way to counter these cultures of misappropriation and scapegoating: "The only way to transform Guyland is to break the culture of silence that sustains the Guy Code...the majority of guys are bystanders. And so it is the bystanders, the ones who know, and yet do nothing, whom we have to engage."
So why immerse yourself in this world of cowards and posers for 289 pages? Because it's such a huge part of all of our lives. As Kimmel puts it, "Girls have to contend with Guyland just as much as guys do. Just as Guyland is the social world in which boys become men, so too is Guyland the context in which girls become women. How they navigate those troubled waters will do a lot more than raise or lower her self-esteem. It can determine what sort of life she will have."
*Feministing bonus: my super smart friend Chloe Angyal, feministing newsletter editor, is quoted in the book. Check out her new blog here.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Not Oprah's Book Club: Guyland.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/9616
This looks so interesting, I really want to read this. Can you please stop publishing and recommending books? I have to get my homework done, and by suggesting material that is preferable to my text books, you're not helping :)
Hmm, almost all of my male friends hate sports.
Anyway, this seems like a good read and I'm adding it to my list.
I'm reminded of a day a couple weeks ago when I overheard my housemates (university freshmen) talking. Although they're quite conscious about issues like energy and the environment, they were discussing how feminism is "crap" and "against nature." Ironically, I was reading Feministing at the time. I feel like society definitely sends mixed messages about how guys should behave, and when you put a bunch of guys together who haven't sifted through all those messages, it can amplify the confusion.
"freedom is equated with a lack of accountability--not having to answer to anyone--and so being irresponsible becomes a way of declaring your freedom and, hence, your adulthood.
... the hell ...? I clearly live in a totally different reality, in which adulthood has meant holding a job, paying rent and bills, visiting family, and a million other obligations. The last time I didn't have to answer to anyone, I was 5. So adulthood is the new childhood. How about that.
My husband can't even fake an interest in sports . . . and really doesn't seem to have a desire to, either. And I can't tell you how very ridiculously happy it makes me, because I can't fucking stand sports.
The book does look interesting, though.
I'm not really interested in sports, but I've learned to talk a little sports (mostly from listening to my wife talk about basketball), because it's a reliable ice-breaker with men I don't know, and provides a safe outlet for good-natured rivalry.
In other words, it's socially useful, even if it's otherwise pointless.
the description of that privileged immature white man-boy strongly reminds me of John McCain and George W. Bush
mmhmm
I'll have to check this book out. It sounds awfully familiar.
One thing that often bothers me about my interactions with other men--even enlightened, liberal, intellectual men--is that for at least a very large majority of them every interaction with other men is about scoring points, on some level. The most benign conversation can rapidly become about being the most something, or the least something, or the loudest critic, etc. Even a debate turns into an attempt to run up the score rather than an attempt to convince the other party of the rightness of one's position. It's exhausting, and inauthentic, and requires these guys to put up a sort of wall between them and other men that makes intimacy impossible.
I have, over time, developed a circle of male friends that I can feel comfortable around, and occasionally find others. But as a rule, that constant edge of competition is present as a constant irritant. I have no problem with competition--I enjoy competitive games, I do like a solid debate, etc.--but the idea of it as a standard mode of interaction is something I've never been able to connect with.
Kimmel came to my college a few times during my matriculation there (all-male college, so it probably intrigued him), and many of his arguments are worth chewing over, and are also great debate material.
For instance, of personal interest is how he sees videogames offering a form of blackface in the terms of an other, since the avatars we typically see in videogames are still predominantly white and male. It gives the sense of an other in terms of roleplaying, but is that the same role as blackface?
Thanks for the head's up. Will definitely be reading this to review in terms of the videogame statement.
This book is excellent, and very useful when it comes to deconstructing the ways in which working the patriarchy is in the interests of men.
I agree with MikeT; from my own experience, I have a certain repertoire of sports-talk that I can spout, even though I have no genuine interest in it whatsoever. I more or less had it enforced upon it by my father, and find myself resenting it more and more as I grow older. Finding other males who don't try to break the ice with me by talking about sports is a rare joy.
To an extent I also agree with Nick; I think that social competitiveness is a big factor with most men, and an alienating one at that. I find that quite ridiculous, though, in its own way; it doesn't really put me off mixing with those males, as a refusal to compete often defuses the situation, and most men in my experience tend to realise how ridiculous they're being, at least in the fullness of time.
By the way, new commenter here - encouraged by Feministing's generally positive response to pro-feminist men. I'm still quite new to feminism and the theory thereof, so if I overstep any bounds then please let me know - I'm hoping that common sense and not being an asshole will generally see me through, but in the event that I do unwittingly cross a line, I can promise to be respectful of a gentle nudge in the right direction :)
Nick, I totally hear you on the competitiveness of men, even in a good-natured conversation it's like they are constantly trying to one-up each other. I've noticed that among the men I work with. Aside from that, they are all completely and totally obsessed with sports and that links them (to the point of preferential treatment, unfortunately). I feel very alienated, having grown up in a family of all women, being so very anti-sport (and anti-competitive in general) and having a father (my male role-model) who is more interested in gardening and art than sports.
I also have a boyfriend with whom I have an open relationship (i believe in free love). This book made me think of him. He's so different than most guys and we met talking positively about feminism. But he seems to be one of the guys who has a fear of committing - not to me, but it seems like the little things are even worse. I can see how this culture permiates even the different guys.
PS- I was just discussing this with a female co-worker who enjoys sports and she was very offended by this. How can I get this very valis point across to her without classifying all men as this way? I admitted that I know many many men who break the mold, and certainly she's a woman who does too, but she still got mad and walked away. :(
Amanda, there are certain folks I work with who probably think I'm passionate about sports as well. That's because sports is a safe topic with them. I can't talk politics with them, they don't care about how my daughter is doing in daycare, they don't know my wife, and they're not into building stuff.
I love sports in the abstract because it's safe competition. Aside from a few soccer fans in England, it's a great way for some of us to channel our aggression and competitiveness into something comparatively non-violent.
I don't watch sports, though, because it's time away from things I love more (see above). And I channel my aggression and competitiveness into playing cards. Specifically, Spades.
But I don't think that's a gender thing. My mom and niece are the two most cut-throat card players I know.
Tip for anyone interested in developing conversational knowledge of sports for social encounters: start reading a really good sports columnist. Sally Jenkins and Mike Wilbon at the Washington Post are both great places to start. They’re brilliant writers and draw on a wide range of references to discuss sports, competition, culture, history, everything. You read them and you start to figure out why people are interested in sports, what they look for in games and athletes, and it gives you a way to ask questions and participate – if not necessarily drive – a conversation with a bunch of sports nuts.
I’m a dude and didn’t care much for sports until I started working and saw how not having anything to say in those informal conversations with colleagues and bosses kinda holds you back. Now I can say I’m genuinely into pro basketball and college football – and yes, I have detailed reasons for why these two and not others. It definitely helps to have an introduction from knowledgeable and readable sources.
I've actually discussed with my boyfriend the utter ease with which guys who don't know each other can just strike up a conversation about sports - of course, this isn't true for all dudes, but most of the men I know can at least hold their own in a discussion of football/baseball/basketball. It's so fascinating to me, and you're right that there's really no female equivalent - I can't assume that the woman sitting next to me is interested in books, theatre, politics, music, or anything else.
Anyway, I'm def interested in checking out this book.
I think women *do* have shared baselines for discussion, they are just derided as "gossip" whereas when the menfolk chitchat, it of course isn't anything as silly or petty as "gossip." Society encourages/teaches women to know enough about fashion & celebrity culture and to hate enough about their bodies to bond in similar ways. (Not all women perhaps, but the female equivalent to the men in "guyland.") Again, these patterns can be destructive to self-image and contribute to a culture of consumerism, but they are the way that many women initially form bonds.
Welcome, Aosher! It's always great to hear a feminist man's perspective.
I don't think Kimmel is saying that all guys like sports and no women do; he's just pointing out that Super Macho Maleness relies heavily on being able to watch, play and discuss sports, and it's an environment in which women are usually regarded with suspicion or "allowed in" as a token ("Well, sure, SHE likes beer and basketball, but she's not like other girls"-- which I get a lot).
I'm really intrigued by the entitlement discussions presented here: feeling entitled to not have to do anything for others, to do whatever they feel like, even to force themselves on women. It's terrifying, and I can't wait to read this and become furious.
I had a mild interest in some sports growing up--even played on a couple of teams, though I was pretty much just a space-filler--and I do vaguely support the local pro sports team out of some misplaced jingoistic pride, so I have two hole cards in sports-heavy conversation.
1) I don't talk much anyway, so I can just sit and listen for a long time until I pick up the thread of a conversation.
2) I can play the role of the newb, allowing the others to take what I imagine is a professorial or even fatherly role in "educating" me on the modern state of affairs vis a vis Toronto vs. Montreal.
And I would add that yes, a lot of men treat conversation and debate like a sport. Myself included, if it's a topic I'm actually interested in. Men generally like things to be codified and enumerated. "Keeping score" for hits and misses is one way they can determine a "winner". This is silly in casual conversation, but in debate it makes some sense, even if it misses the point. I've heard so many sports metaphors used to describe the various candidates' strategies--rope-a-dope, running out the clock, first round...it probably doesn't help that one of the more accurate polling sites, fivethirtyeight.com, is run by a very respected baseball statistician.
Anyway, I do experience a sort of longing for freedom from responsibility, but that's no more than almost any person wants, I should think. "Dammit, I don't wanna go to work today..." sort of thing. I did have a nasty encounter with the real world in college, though, and it took me a few months to come to terms with the fact that my new freedom meant, paradoxically, new responsibility. Since then reality and I have reached a ceasefire: I can think as irresponsibly and as childishly as I want, but as long as I behave responsibly it won't smack me down.
I have noticed this about sports talk. I like baseball, myself, though on a novice level. I like to think of striking up sports conversations with other guys as a way of getting "in the club" with them, and then if they let slip some BS comment about another group of people, I can call them on it. Think of sports as a strategy not only to break the ice, but also to bust up some closely-held assumptions that men talking sports is a safe space to engage in sexist/racist/homophobic bullshit.
Nick--I hear you on the one-upmanship (sp?) among all too many men. I've found it to be true among many male creative types as well, which initially distressed me because I had held creativity/art/music/etc. on a pedestal. Now I know how to tell quickly which artists are worth my time socially, regardless of their talents and skill.
Michael Messner has some really good work on manhood and sports.
I remember one class in college critiqued Kimmel for something, but I can't recall... maybe for insinuating that having one aspect of your identity that experiences prejudice/bigotry allows one to sympathize with/recognize other forms of bigotry and prejudice. My memory could be failing me, though.
""freedom is equated with a lack of accountability--not having to answer to anyone--and so being irresponsible becomes a way of declaring your freedom and, hence, your adulthood.
... the hell ...? I clearly live in a totally different reality, in which adulthood has meant holding a job, paying rent and bills, visiting family, and a million other obligations. The last time I didn't have to answer to anyone, I was 5. So adulthood is the new childhood. How about that."
Actually, the part that you quoted really resonated with me. I think that this freedom and irresponsibility is very situational. Deep breath...
My ex-husband became one of these boy-men during the course of our marriage. Yes, he held a job. A good one that paid very well and had great benefits and blahblahblah. That was never a problem. He was friends with the police, so legal stuff wasn't an issue, either. Though, with his reluctance to obey "stupid" laws such as those concerning alcohol consumption and the use of a motor vehicle (sigh), if his race or class had been different, his ability to stay out of legal troubles would have been lessened. I digress.
Anyway. At home, he turned into one of those Judd Apatow heroes. He was unavailable. Period. And when he did bother to show up, the effort and enjoyment that he showed his family (interestingly, this is only to the family that we created together. His family of origin could do no fucking wrong...) was comparable to that given by my kids when I ask them to clean their rooms.
Hm. Long-winded way of saying that you can be "functional" and responsible, while still being what they consider free in the ways that matter.
We're using The Gendered Society, written by Kimmel, as a text in one of my classes. It's both informative and readable, as many text books struggle to be. I recommend it, and I'm excited about reading this new one.
Speaking as a guy, I have no interest in sports and no interest in faking interest.
Happily, most of my guy friends aren't sports fans either, but discussing SF/movies/anime covers a lot of the same ground (but the women in our group participate just as much) conversationally.
I REALLY like Kimmel's point about bystanders.
Because when I hear the argument "well not ALL men are rapists/abusers/etc" I think, sure, but a great deal of non-rapists in fact actively encourage, support, condone, and enable rape culture and misogyny. Guys (and girls) who don't stand up to this are collaborators and shouldn't be let off the hook.
Kimmel joins a lot of great male feminists out there, like Jonathan Katz and Robert Jensen. But I think these men stand out as exceptions. If you consider the grim statistics about how many women are sexually abused and battered, it doesn't make sense that only the same handful of sociopath jerks are at fault for the huge amounts of violence. It's an epidemic, a human rights crisis. Guyland. Not a few assholes.
On the other hand: regarding the culture of irresponsibility/slackerhood/refusing to grow up, I actually take a different view than Kimmel and many other feminists. Basically, I just wish WOMEN had more freedom to be carefree low maintenance stoners, instead of being expected to be the responsible, strict, uptight super productive ones. That's a burden. Girls need the ability to relax and chill out too. (I do believe there was a great article in Bitch about this a while ago, so I'm not totally alone).
Excellent review, Courtney. (You and I always read the same books, it seems.)
And if I may, I'm going to plug my three-part review of the book I wrote last month. Guyland is really wonderful, and I will surely be assigning it in class soon!
http://hugoschwyzer.net/category/michael-kimmel/
Hi, Aosher! I feel a little surge of relief every time I hear a guy identify as pro-feminist.
The Guy culture is one I don't see a whole lot in my close guy friends, but recently I've had a chance to hang out with some friends-of-friends who lead very different, and from how I see it, more "typical" guy-lifestyles. Even they are still on the fringe; they're a little less homophobic, they don't really talk about sports--but that one-up format of conversation just comes right to the surface. It's all about proving yourself. And a lot of it is even about violence. I observed this conversation that went kind of like:
"Man, I said something kinda nasty to that dude who owes me money, he thinks I was dissing his girlfriend. He said he was gonna come over here and fuck me up."
"I'm not gonna let that happen to you, dude. I'll fucking kill that motherfucker before he can lay a hand on you."
"No, c'mon, stay out of this...you don't know this guy, I don't want you to get involved."
"Seriously, I'm not kidding; you're my friend and I'll fuck this guy up for you if he tries any shit here tonight. You haven't seen me when I'm mad, I can fuck a guy up."
"No I'm serious, you don't know this guy, it's better if you just stay out of it--"
Etc.
FrumiousB commented at October 2, 2008 10:20 AM: "The last time I didn't have to answer to anyone, I was 5."
You didn't have to answer to anyone when you were 5? Wow! I did when I was 5, and all of the other kids I knew then did too. We had to answer to our parents, to our teachers, to our babysitters, etc.
alice-paul commented at October 2, 2008 3:12 PM: "Girls need the ability to relax and chill out too. (I do believe there was a great article in Bitch about this a while ago, so I'm not totally alone)."
Exactly!
As a junior at a women's college, I read Manhood in America by Kimmel. The analysis was useful, insightful, and real. I'm so glad conversations like these have become part of broader gender studies, so women aren't the only focus.
Although, I suspect that as a woman none of this is really news to me, it's maybe just introducing theory and language to talk about it. The aggression, hostility, resentment, cut-throat competitiveness is something I've had to be aware of my whole life for safety and survival. It was kind of like when I read the NY Times series on Class in America (2005) where they reveal that the biggest determinant of financial success is your class background and all these middle class people were really surprised. But all the poor and working class people I knew (including myself) were like, "duh." haha
Last thing: alice-paul, your comment that, "Kimmel joins a lot of great male feminists out there, like Jonathan Katz and Robert Jensen" totally made me cringe. While I haven't heard Kimmel's or Katz's perspective on sexuality/porn/sex work, but Jensen's books and talks make me want to throw things! He's painfully paternalizing and sex-negative and merely puts forth an updated version of the same old tired second wave critique.
This is honestly one of the greatest books I have read in a very long time. As a current college student his words have really helped me to better understand the majority of the men surrounding me. It is so well written and truly moving. I feel like every college student should be forced to read it, maybe it would make them better people (or at least less ridiculous).
One of my favorite quotes from the book is when he discusses feminism, he says, "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."
It truly is a great read. If you know a boy or have a boy child you should read it.
Thanks for posting about this book. I wasn't aware it existed but it looks really interesting and I will definitely be reading it.