What do you think?
Rate this book
Refusing to be a Man: Essays on Sex and Justice
Since its original publication in 1989, Refusing to be a Man has been acclaimed as a classic and widely cited in gender studies literature. In 13 eloquent essays, Stoltenberg articulates the first fully argued liberation theory for men that will also liberate women. He argues that male sexual identity is entirely a political and ethical construction whose advantages grow out of injustice. His thesis is, however, ultimately one of hope - that precisely because masculinity is so constructed, it is possible to refuse it, to act against it and to change. A new introduction by the author discusses the roots of his work in the American civil rights and radical feminist movements and distinguishes it from the anti-feminist philosophies underlying the recent tide of reactionary mens movements.
232 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1989
36 people are currently reading
1741 people want to read
About the author
John Stoltenberg
14 books26 followersJohn Stoltenberg is the radical feminist author of Refusing to Be a Man: Essays on Sex and Justice (rev. edn, London and New York: UCL Press, 2000), The End of Manhood: Parables on Sex and Selfhood (rev. edn, London and New York: UCL Press, 2000), and What Makes Pornography “Sexy” ?(Minneapolis, Minnesota: Milkweed Editions, 1994). He is cofounder of Men Against Pornography (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1139) and a frequent speaker and workshop leader at colleges and conferences (www.speakerspca.com). Born in Minneapolis, Minnesota, he graduated cum laude from St Olaf College majoring in philosophy and English, then received a master of divinity degree in theology and literature from Union Theological Seminary and an M.F.A. in theater arts from Columbia University School of the Arts. From 1981 to 1991 he was managing editor of three U.S. women’s magazines— Essence, Working Woman, and Lear’s. He has completed a young adult novel, Goners, and is at work on a book about the culture of sexual orientation. In collaboration with the composer Adam Sherburne, of the band Consolidated, he has written book and lyrics for a rock/hip-hop opera titled Cocklash. He has lived with the writer Andrea Dworkin since 1974. Their home is in New York City.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews
September 2, 2011
Essential reading for all humans-with-a-penis.
March 9, 2016
This book profoundly changed me for the better.
August 30, 2016
While Stoltenberg's rhetoric can occasionally be a strong deterrent to reading, and some of his essays exhibit this much more prominently than others, I think the book is definitely worth the read and that there are some very important insights to be gleaned from it. His proposition that sexual justice is incompatible with the contemporary conception of sexual liberation is strong and one everybody should have to address.
February 9, 2017
This is one of the best books I have ever read. Not only explains many things I couldn't understand about how men behave to me in my early years but also helped me understand that no matter what there is an perpetual undertone of male supremacy in our social interactions. The author is not at all apologetic or trying to inspire pity and avoids to fall into premises such as 'but men are also oppressed'. On the contrary, the author proposes men to become responsible of their actions and what they do to others. It also raises awareness that emotional reactions are actions that can be evaluated in ethical terms, and argues that staying neutral or not actively fighting against male supremacy makes you part of this dominant regimen. All in all, I highly recommend this book.
October 4, 2013
The first feminist text I have read that's written by a male author. I thought that there was a lot of focus on the problem and not a lot on what the solution may look like. A lot of the section on pornography made me feel really bad, like I wanted to read a children's story afterwards to try to reclaim my innocence. Interesting read if a little depressing and definitely still relevant despite its age, sadly.
June 30, 2016
This is another text (in addition to Intercourse), that should be in the library of every high school and be read by every male-identified student before they can call themselves properly educated and prepared for the modern world. Every chapter and paragraph of this book is important to forming a healthy modern psyche that deconstructs the unfortunately male supremacist ideology that surrounds us in the most common push media sources. A fresh, fully realized vision, important questions are raised and solutions are attempted, but the reader's awakening is the most valuable take-away. Like Dworkin, Stoltenberg has an excellent way with words and descriptors that verges on the poetic at times (but Dworkin is still the more potent wordsmith).
The most important part: if one identifies as male, read it, read it, read it.
The most important part: if one identifies as male, read it, read it, read it.
January 19, 2015
After the first 2/3 of the book, I was kind of ready to write it off as a loss. The author starts off with some very interesting premises for his essays, but almost uniformly ends of supporting his arguments with so many phallic examples it would do Freud proud (I'm probably more Jungian in outlook, so that may be why I had a harder time with that approach). If I was going to give a review strictly on the first 2/3's, it would get only 1 or 2 stars.
However, in the final third (and for me particularly the essay Confronting Pornography as a Civil-Rights Issue), he moves away from penile motivations and instead presents a well thought out examination and critique of not only the Civil Rights Anti-Pornography Ordinances that were introduced in the 1980s, but also the backgrounds of those ordinances, the opposition they faced, and comparisons to existing obscenity laws that did nothing to try and protect women. I found these pages very insightful and interesting and would readily recommend that portion, even if I found the rest of the book less worthy.
However, in the final third (and for me particularly the essay Confronting Pornography as a Civil-Rights Issue), he moves away from penile motivations and instead presents a well thought out examination and critique of not only the Civil Rights Anti-Pornography Ordinances that were introduced in the 1980s, but also the backgrounds of those ordinances, the opposition they faced, and comparisons to existing obscenity laws that did nothing to try and protect women. I found these pages very insightful and interesting and would readily recommend that portion, even if I found the rest of the book less worthy.
February 11, 2013
I'm surprised this book isn't more widely read. Sure, there's a little woo factor, but it's definitely still relevant today.
November 20, 2017
well... the first thing is just that i wish i'd found this book when it came out in 1989. in 1989 i was reading Stoltenberg's life-partner Andrea Dworkin's book 'Intercourse'... a book that i later described to friends as having just about made my penis fall off... with shame, with angst... but as is really common with Men, i really didn't change my behavior much i don't think...
Stoltenberg's first book is a must-read for any male that's open to a way past being trapped in the hyper-exploitative identity of "Man".
what you will read here will reach right down into your darkest part, the part you think no one can see, the part you try to hide from even yourself. the part where you use pornography. the part where you have a head full of pornographic images while you're "making love" with a Woman. the part where you will instantly sacrifice your Sisters in order to curry favor with some bull-sexist Man who you need to flatter for your own interests, both material and social. the part where you finally understand just how completely your sexuality is tangled up with domination, violence, dehumanization, objectification...
this is a time of transition in the whole world. the 10,000 year long HIStory of patriarchy is coming to an end. Men can and must learn and change. so must Women...
in Stoltenberg's work, one can follow the tenuous and difficult trail away from the basic element of patriarchal society: the identification of ourselves and each other according to our genital composition... it seems so "natural" doesn't it? we ARE all "males" and "females", right?
but it becomes clear in this book that we make these identifiers paramount simply for the purpose of establishing dominance and maintaining the male-dominated power structure.
this book comes from a future when our species will have re-learned how to be simply Human Beings, all of us... together, cooperating, loving and sharing, with respect to each other and all of life... and no need to elevate our sexual differences to the level of division, to the point where it is possible to treat each other like things to be used and exploited, the end of Man/Woman-male/female as signifiers that keep us from our true and integrated selves.
thank you John.
<3 birdy (bronwen finnerty burke)
Stoltenberg's first book is a must-read for any male that's open to a way past being trapped in the hyper-exploitative identity of "Man".
what you will read here will reach right down into your darkest part, the part you think no one can see, the part you try to hide from even yourself. the part where you use pornography. the part where you have a head full of pornographic images while you're "making love" with a Woman. the part where you will instantly sacrifice your Sisters in order to curry favor with some bull-sexist Man who you need to flatter for your own interests, both material and social. the part where you finally understand just how completely your sexuality is tangled up with domination, violence, dehumanization, objectification...
this is a time of transition in the whole world. the 10,000 year long HIStory of patriarchy is coming to an end. Men can and must learn and change. so must Women...
in Stoltenberg's work, one can follow the tenuous and difficult trail away from the basic element of patriarchal society: the identification of ourselves and each other according to our genital composition... it seems so "natural" doesn't it? we ARE all "males" and "females", right?
but it becomes clear in this book that we make these identifiers paramount simply for the purpose of establishing dominance and maintaining the male-dominated power structure.
this book comes from a future when our species will have re-learned how to be simply Human Beings, all of us... together, cooperating, loving and sharing, with respect to each other and all of life... and no need to elevate our sexual differences to the level of division, to the point where it is possible to treat each other like things to be used and exploited, the end of Man/Woman-male/female as signifiers that keep us from our true and integrated selves.
thank you John.
<3 birdy (bronwen finnerty burke)
March 13, 2008
Although Stoltenberg's affiliation with Andrea Dworkin and his views on pornography might turn off some readers, his essays on feminism and the ways sexism and masculinity negatively impact men's lives were tremendously important to my understanding of issues of gender, sex and sexuality. While you may not agree with every piece in the book, Stoltenberg's objective -- to formulate a theory of liberation for men that will also liberate women -- is a welcome radical exploration and excavation of men's lives.
June 10, 2014
Refusing to be a Man is an assortment of stark, fascinating essays wrapped in a blanket of self-conscious angst. Stoltenberg provides great insights into the mechanics of male domination, which I found extremely helpful in my ongoing quest to love justice more than manhood (his words). However, this is not a book for a man new to feminist ideas. Shocking imagery is employed unnecessarily, and confusion between the concepts of biological sex and gender makes some passages seem needlessly nonsensical.
Perhaps this work's greatest flaw is that it fails to clear a pathway through the pain; it fails to inspire. It is possible to do so without compromising on the principles of feminism, as The Will to Change by bell hooks so wonderfully illustrates. Instead, Stoltenberg summarises feminist ideas competently, but in an overwrought, fumbling manner. He brilliantly attacks patriarchal masculinity, yet only touches on the methods with which to escape from it. His despair may be justified, but it is neither helpful nor hopeful.
Perhaps this work's greatest flaw is that it fails to clear a pathway through the pain; it fails to inspire. It is possible to do so without compromising on the principles of feminism, as The Will to Change by bell hooks so wonderfully illustrates. Instead, Stoltenberg summarises feminist ideas competently, but in an overwrought, fumbling manner. He brilliantly attacks patriarchal masculinity, yet only touches on the methods with which to escape from it. His despair may be justified, but it is neither helpful nor hopeful.
December 20, 2014
I first read this about 1990, in a highly politicized history department. I was coming to terms with feminist critiques of a variety of social relationships, and needed some mental fodder for juxtaposition. As I remember them, the essays in "Refusing to Be a Man" were personal and polemical, and helpful in providing a strong point of view from which I could triangulate into my own thoughts. It's worth a read if you are interested in the concept of masculinity, and understand the value of a polemic essay.
October 12, 2011
This book is should read by any men who live in the world. John has been really honest with the chosen words... great book.
Read
July 19, 2025Insightful and frustrating. The first essays are eye-opening, and terrifyingly articulate about masculinity and male sexuality. The chapters on pornography are amazing. Toward the second half it then becomes much clearer that this is a collection of 'essays' which are actually repurposed talks, and Stoltenberg repeats himself to the point where whole segments are skippable. The bad organisation is a real shame, getting in the way of the otherwise convincing progression of problem-analysis-solution which closes unsatisfactorily. To spend so long complaining about the uselessness of 'intellectual and emotional dithering,' only to forsake articulate prose for impressionist poetry about the horrors done to women is quite frankly embarrassing.
December 4, 2013
I'm not sure what to think about this book. I found some essays very well argued and supported with sufficient evidence, making anyone who wants to argue against them faced with a difficult task. John Stoltenberg, for instance, argues that women's rights are not respected in practice, providing plenty of evidence that U.S. courts have historically deemed porn to fall under the First Amendment even when it involves the sexual assault and rape of women.
On the other hand, however, I found some of his other essays very wanting. Even when I agree with their hypotheses, I thought that many of his arguments lack the necessary support. In some ways, this book seems to be a draft that needs plenty of expanding.
On the other hand, however, I found some of his other essays very wanting. Even when I agree with their hypotheses, I thought that many of his arguments lack the necessary support. In some ways, this book seems to be a draft that needs plenty of expanding.
December 20, 2012
I picked this book up because I thought it would provide a frank assessment of the often-overlooked harm that prescribed gender roles do to boys.
Instead I found an author who not only fails to cite sources when necessary, but doesn't even acknowledge the difference between sex and gender. Throughout the book he refers to sexual identity as "socially constructed". Then, at the end, came an explanation for this unbelievable oversight when he (finally) cited the following sentence by Andrea Dworkin: "Reality is social; reality is whatever people at a given time believe it to be."
Thus it appears that the fault was mine in not taking the title literally enough - his actual intent is to dream his penis away.
Instead I found an author who not only fails to cite sources when necessary, but doesn't even acknowledge the difference between sex and gender. Throughout the book he refers to sexual identity as "socially constructed". Then, at the end, came an explanation for this unbelievable oversight when he (finally) cited the following sentence by Andrea Dworkin: "Reality is social; reality is whatever people at a given time believe it to be."
Thus it appears that the fault was mine in not taking the title literally enough - his actual intent is to dream his penis away.
September 24, 2015
Toi, tu m'as bien eue, avec ton titre et ta couverture violette : j'ai cru que tu serais un livre sur l'objectification sexiste d'un point de vue masculin. Grand bien m'en a fait, c'était bien plus intéressant que prévu.
Sur les chemins du féminisme radical, John Stoltenberg questionne l'identité masculine comme conditionnée à l'humiliation et au viol (métaphorique ou non) féminin.
La dernière partie de l'ouvrage, prenant position contre la pornographie dans la lignée de Dworkin, fait évidemment couler beaucoup d'encre - la démonstration me semble valoir la lecture à elle seule. Appuyée de statistiques, d'anecdotes et de témoignages, elle bouleverse les idées reçues quant à libération sexuelle et le droit de fantasmer.
Une découverte, une argumentation passionnante.
Sur les chemins du féminisme radical, John Stoltenberg questionne l'identité masculine comme conditionnée à l'humiliation et au viol (métaphorique ou non) féminin.
La dernière partie de l'ouvrage, prenant position contre la pornographie dans la lignée de Dworkin, fait évidemment couler beaucoup d'encre - la démonstration me semble valoir la lecture à elle seule. Appuyée de statistiques, d'anecdotes et de témoignages, elle bouleverse les idées reçues quant à libération sexuelle et le droit de fantasmer.
Une découverte, une argumentation passionnante.
January 31, 2016
Ouch. When I first read this book several years ago I was utterly enthralled. I guess I hadn't read many good books. Most of these are essays from the '80s, and reading it back today they haven't aged well. At all. Stoltenberg & Dworkin mean well, of course, but perhaps see the world in black and white.
June 4, 2013
Excellent. In such a clearly defined masculine/feminine, male/female gender role society, this book turns those stereotypes of how men are essentially raised to act and behave completely on their heads. Stoltenberg tackles topics of the masculine man to the rape culture that exists and challenges everything that is stereotypical of what society has come to expect a man to be.
December 25, 2013
un bouquin que tout individu avec un pénis devrait lire...
December 14, 2017
Andrea Dworkin geared toward men, basically. It's also a work of its time. But there's reason to read & talk about it, if you are man. It presents some convincing arguments about pornography.
May 22, 2025
This book was most likely revolutionary during the period it was published. Buuuuut in todays world it is a bit inadequate. I wish he mentioned the lingual aspect of our sexist world. What I mean by that is how most of our curse words around the globe are sexist, and how the way one speaks or is spoken to can affect their thoughts. SHOUTOUT to him for mentioning how lonely it can get as an anti-sexist male tho, having to end friendships because of ones political stance is saddening but much needed at the same time since problematic men solely take critism from their peers (only male ones at that). I am satisfied yäni I just expected more.
I agree with the vast majority of his arguments. I do however not agree on the theory that there are no sexes. There are definitely sexes, sexes definitely exist tf; we are not gonna defeat sexism or reach equality by ignoring this fact. Genders and sexes are not the problem, it is the stigmas built around them that are harmful. Touching on this topic from this false perspective does in fact not help the cause, it just creates confusion imo.
Def a great guy, he gives safe space energy. Not a boring read, some pages are NSFW but overall an outstanding book that more humans (especially those who are born with penises) should read and recommend each other.
I agree with the vast majority of his arguments. I do however not agree on the theory that there are no sexes. There are definitely sexes, sexes definitely exist tf; we are not gonna defeat sexism or reach equality by ignoring this fact. Genders and sexes are not the problem, it is the stigmas built around them that are harmful. Touching on this topic from this false perspective does in fact not help the cause, it just creates confusion imo.
Def a great guy, he gives safe space energy. Not a boring read, some pages are NSFW but overall an outstanding book that more humans (especially those who are born with penises) should read and recommend each other.
January 25, 2019
Assez impressionné par cet ouvrage qui recoupe majoritairement des conférences des années 70 et qui soulève des problèmes toujours autant d'actualité concernant la virilité. Même si oui, le texte a vieilli sur certains sujets (le porno surtout, qui a évolué depuis l'écriture du livre), certaines manières de conceptualiser le genre peuvent faire tiquer (parler de "personnes nées avec un pénis" pour ne pas dire "homme" sans questionner si cela inclue ou non les trans par exemple), la majorité des textes sur la masculinité sont très intéressants.
Quelques points faibles : c'est une collection de conférences, le texte manque clairement de ligne conductrice, en plus d'être redondant par moment. L'auteur se concentre beaucoup sur la sexualité et la pornographie, et en comparaison, survole les questions du rapport au père, de l'amitié entre hommes, qui me semblaient pourtant tout aussi fascinantes. Très peu de mentions sur la charge mentale, la répartition des tâches, qui me semblent aussi inhérents à la masculinité.
Ça reste un bon ouvrage, à mettre dans les mains de tous les hommes.
Quelques points faibles : c'est une collection de conférences, le texte manque clairement de ligne conductrice, en plus d'être redondant par moment. L'auteur se concentre beaucoup sur la sexualité et la pornographie, et en comparaison, survole les questions du rapport au père, de l'amitié entre hommes, qui me semblaient pourtant tout aussi fascinantes. Très peu de mentions sur la charge mentale, la répartition des tâches, qui me semblent aussi inhérents à la masculinité.
Ça reste un bon ouvrage, à mettre dans les mains de tous les hommes.
November 7, 2024
i want every man i've ever met to read this book
(insightful even decades after publication)
(insightful even decades after publication)
November 28, 2018
TOUS LES HOMMES DEVRAIENT LIRE CE LIVRE
Ce livre m'a complétement ouvert les yeux. Pourtant, militante féministe depuis un moment déjà, j'avais déjà bien commencé mon travail de deconstruction...
J'ai mis beaucoup de temps à le lire, il est très difficile. Il n'est pas difficile à comprendre du tout, au contraire, mais ce n'est pas simple de se prendre autant de dures réalités dans la figure. Je conseille donc aux personnes ayant dejà subi des violences sexuelles ou aux survivantes de la prostitution, de prendre leur temps, car cette lecture peut être douloureuse.
Sinon, le livre a beau être écrit par un homme, il s'agit d'un vrai profeministe, pas le genre à vouloir se desolidariser à tout prix pour montrer à quel point lui, vaut mieux que le reste du monde. Disons qu'il sait parler d'une oppression qu'il ne subit pas.
Le chapitre qui m'a le plus appris est celui où on analyse les rapports relationnels entre le père et le fils, et entre le père et la mère, et comment ces schémas "fabriquent" l'homme chez le petit garçon.
La deconstruction des schemas dans la pornographie est vraiment percutante et déroutante, et pousse à chercher le plus d'alternatives possibles. Et c'est là qu'on se rend compte que le libre a beau ne pas être récent, la situation n'a fait qu'empirer, sans chercher à créer des alternatives réelles (si vous considérez que les films d'Ovidie présentent une alternative au porno mainstream, franchement vous vous trompez).
Le dernier chapitre est vraiment defaitiste; il fait une sorte de conclusion de tous les points abordés dans le livre et imagine que chaque homme qui l'a lu culpabilisera "vite fait" puis passera à autre chose en se cherchant des excuses, ou tentera de faire bouger les choses à son echelle et souffrira de voir qu'il en est incapable.
Dans tous les cas, le livre est particulièrement déprimant. C'est la raison pour laquelle j'ai du repousser sa lecture sur des semaines entières. Je pense que même si on parle de sujet aussi sérieux et aussi durs, il reste possible de proposer quelques ouvertures positives. Cela dit, j'ai quand même mis 5. C'est le genre de livre qu'absolument tout homme devrait lire.
Ce livre m'a complétement ouvert les yeux. Pourtant, militante féministe depuis un moment déjà, j'avais déjà bien commencé mon travail de deconstruction...
J'ai mis beaucoup de temps à le lire, il est très difficile. Il n'est pas difficile à comprendre du tout, au contraire, mais ce n'est pas simple de se prendre autant de dures réalités dans la figure. Je conseille donc aux personnes ayant dejà subi des violences sexuelles ou aux survivantes de la prostitution, de prendre leur temps, car cette lecture peut être douloureuse.
Sinon, le livre a beau être écrit par un homme, il s'agit d'un vrai profeministe, pas le genre à vouloir se desolidariser à tout prix pour montrer à quel point lui, vaut mieux que le reste du monde. Disons qu'il sait parler d'une oppression qu'il ne subit pas.
Le chapitre qui m'a le plus appris est celui où on analyse les rapports relationnels entre le père et le fils, et entre le père et la mère, et comment ces schémas "fabriquent" l'homme chez le petit garçon.
La deconstruction des schemas dans la pornographie est vraiment percutante et déroutante, et pousse à chercher le plus d'alternatives possibles. Et c'est là qu'on se rend compte que le libre a beau ne pas être récent, la situation n'a fait qu'empirer, sans chercher à créer des alternatives réelles (si vous considérez que les films d'Ovidie présentent une alternative au porno mainstream, franchement vous vous trompez).
Le dernier chapitre est vraiment defaitiste; il fait une sorte de conclusion de tous les points abordés dans le livre et imagine que chaque homme qui l'a lu culpabilisera "vite fait" puis passera à autre chose en se cherchant des excuses, ou tentera de faire bouger les choses à son echelle et souffrira de voir qu'il en est incapable.
Dans tous les cas, le livre est particulièrement déprimant. C'est la raison pour laquelle j'ai du repousser sa lecture sur des semaines entières. Je pense que même si on parle de sujet aussi sérieux et aussi durs, il reste possible de proposer quelques ouvertures positives. Cela dit, j'ai quand même mis 5. C'est le genre de livre qu'absolument tout homme devrait lire.
April 22, 2023
Read this years ago, but thought I’d read it again as I hadn’t been able to afford to actually buy it back then … Some quotes and notes ...
Talking about how men typically behave, he says they “[disregard] completely the reality of anyone who is not fawning and flattering and full of awe for our masculine prerogative …” (p24).
Well-put.
“… [M]en experience combat as the ultimate test of their masculinity … If we did not hold on so desperately to masculinity, might we not also then be able to let go of warfare?” (p77).
“Though they [men in the antiwar movement] espoused nonviolent, equitable, and nonhierarchical forms of social organization, they continued to act toward women in male-supremacist ways. it became clear that they were interested only in rearrangements of men’s power over other men, not in any fundamental change in men’s relationships with women” (p79).
“Without the absolute right to true reproductive self-determination, women as a class will continue to be exploited and manipulated in service to the economic, sexual, and psychological priorities of men” (p81).
So well-put.
“Men, it is said, do not express their feelings—or if men do, they do so only with great difficulty. Both women and men believe that men are unemotive and unemotional, that inside men’s tender psyches is a wellspring of feelings, stonewalled and speechless. Men respect and fear other men whose feelings are undisclosed and well defended. women also respect and fear such men whose feelings lie dormant beneath a permafrost of mastery. And women who live with them implore them privately to emote just a little, begging them to say what they are feeling, beging them to warm. But men odo not express their feelings. Or so the story goes.
“In fact, throughout history, men as a class have always expressed their feelings, eloquently and extensively: Men have expressed their feelings about women, death, and absent fathers and turned those feeling into religions. Men have expressed their feelings about women, wealth, possession, and territory and turned those feelings into laws and nation-states. men have expressed their feelings about women, murder, and the masculinity of other men and from those feelings forged batttalions and detonable devices. Men have expressed their feelings aobut women, fucking, and female rage against subjection and formed those feelings into psychiatry. men have institutionalized their feelings, so that whether or not a particular man is feeling the feeling at a particular time, the feeling is being expressed through the institutions men have made” (p91-2).
“Given the current frequency of abortions in the United States, it can be predicted that over the course of all American women’s lifetimes, two out of three will have an abortion. And the rate of involvement for men is the same: Over the course of their lifetimes, two out of three men will have been responsible for impregnating a woman who subsequently decides to abort.”
Of course! For almost every abortion there is a nonconsensual impregnation, a whachamacallit, a … rape. If men didn’t rape, women wouldn’t need an abortion. So men, those of you who are so against abortion, stop impregnating women who are not enthusiastically consenting to having a child! Duh!!
“The history of men’s ideas is the history of what men feel and the history of what men feel to be real. As a class, men never feel more real than when their penises are erect and penetrating—and never feel less real than when their penises are flaccid. As a result, men’s ideas about what is real, what is objectively as real as themselves, tend to be utterly self-referential and almost entirely phallocentric” (para 97).
Wow. Just— Wow. That explains sooooooooooo much. An argument against men in power if there ever was one.
“…men don’t like the feeling of not feeling like having sex. … It’s as if men don’t really feel their male identity unless they’re experiencing their own body in a way that is explicitly, culturally, sexually phallic” (p110-111).
Aha. I’ve never really understood viagra etc.: here’s a tube of poison ivy sap; go ahead and spread it all over your body. Why would you want to create an itch, a desire to scratch? Don’t you have enough to do with meeting the itches and desires you already … just have?
“Sexual freedom has never really meant that individuals should have sexual self-determination … it has been about maintaining men’s superior status, men’s power over women; and it has been about sexualizing women’s inferior status, men’s subordination of women” (p127).
“Pornography institutionalizes the sexuality that both embodies and enacts male supremacy. … Pornography keeps sexism sexy” (p129-130)
“Homophobia keeps men doing to women what they would not want done to themselves. There’s not the same sexual harassment of men that there is of women on the street or in the workplace or in the university; there’s not nearly the same extent of rape … And that’s thanks to homophobia …”
“We’ve got to be telling our sons that if a man gets off by putting women down, it’s not okay.
“We’ve got to be telling merchants tha tif they peddle women’s bodies and lives for men’s consumption and entertainment, it’s not okay.
“We’ve got to be telling other men that if you let th epornographers lead you by the nose (or any other body part) into believing that women exist to be tied up and hung up and beaten and raped, it’s not okay” (p135).
And keep in mind that he wrote this thirty years ago.
Lastly, “If it’s true that men are the doers, the agents of history, the performers, the active ones, how come men are so passive [when it comes to women’s rights]? (p183).
Talking about how men typically behave, he says they “[disregard] completely the reality of anyone who is not fawning and flattering and full of awe for our masculine prerogative …” (p24).
Well-put.
“… [M]en experience combat as the ultimate test of their masculinity … If we did not hold on so desperately to masculinity, might we not also then be able to let go of warfare?” (p77).
“Though they [men in the antiwar movement] espoused nonviolent, equitable, and nonhierarchical forms of social organization, they continued to act toward women in male-supremacist ways. it became clear that they were interested only in rearrangements of men’s power over other men, not in any fundamental change in men’s relationships with women” (p79).
“Without the absolute right to true reproductive self-determination, women as a class will continue to be exploited and manipulated in service to the economic, sexual, and psychological priorities of men” (p81).
So well-put.
“Men, it is said, do not express their feelings—or if men do, they do so only with great difficulty. Both women and men believe that men are unemotive and unemotional, that inside men’s tender psyches is a wellspring of feelings, stonewalled and speechless. Men respect and fear other men whose feelings are undisclosed and well defended. women also respect and fear such men whose feelings lie dormant beneath a permafrost of mastery. And women who live with them implore them privately to emote just a little, begging them to say what they are feeling, beging them to warm. But men odo not express their feelings. Or so the story goes.
“In fact, throughout history, men as a class have always expressed their feelings, eloquently and extensively: Men have expressed their feelings about women, death, and absent fathers and turned those feeling into religions. Men have expressed their feelings about women, wealth, possession, and territory and turned those feelings into laws and nation-states. men have expressed their feelings about women, murder, and the masculinity of other men and from those feelings forged batttalions and detonable devices. Men have expressed their feelings aobut women, fucking, and female rage against subjection and formed those feelings into psychiatry. men have institutionalized their feelings, so that whether or not a particular man is feeling the feeling at a particular time, the feeling is being expressed through the institutions men have made” (p91-2).
“Given the current frequency of abortions in the United States, it can be predicted that over the course of all American women’s lifetimes, two out of three will have an abortion. And the rate of involvement for men is the same: Over the course of their lifetimes, two out of three men will have been responsible for impregnating a woman who subsequently decides to abort.”
Of course! For almost every abortion there is a nonconsensual impregnation, a whachamacallit, a … rape. If men didn’t rape, women wouldn’t need an abortion. So men, those of you who are so against abortion, stop impregnating women who are not enthusiastically consenting to having a child! Duh!!
“The history of men’s ideas is the history of what men feel and the history of what men feel to be real. As a class, men never feel more real than when their penises are erect and penetrating—and never feel less real than when their penises are flaccid. As a result, men’s ideas about what is real, what is objectively as real as themselves, tend to be utterly self-referential and almost entirely phallocentric” (para 97).
Wow. Just— Wow. That explains sooooooooooo much. An argument against men in power if there ever was one.
“…men don’t like the feeling of not feeling like having sex. … It’s as if men don’t really feel their male identity unless they’re experiencing their own body in a way that is explicitly, culturally, sexually phallic” (p110-111).
Aha. I’ve never really understood viagra etc.: here’s a tube of poison ivy sap; go ahead and spread it all over your body. Why would you want to create an itch, a desire to scratch? Don’t you have enough to do with meeting the itches and desires you already … just have?
“Sexual freedom has never really meant that individuals should have sexual self-determination … it has been about maintaining men’s superior status, men’s power over women; and it has been about sexualizing women’s inferior status, men’s subordination of women” (p127).
“Pornography institutionalizes the sexuality that both embodies and enacts male supremacy. … Pornography keeps sexism sexy” (p129-130)
“Homophobia keeps men doing to women what they would not want done to themselves. There’s not the same sexual harassment of men that there is of women on the street or in the workplace or in the university; there’s not nearly the same extent of rape … And that’s thanks to homophobia …”
“We’ve got to be telling our sons that if a man gets off by putting women down, it’s not okay.
“We’ve got to be telling merchants tha tif they peddle women’s bodies and lives for men’s consumption and entertainment, it’s not okay.
“We’ve got to be telling other men that if you let th epornographers lead you by the nose (or any other body part) into believing that women exist to be tied up and hung up and beaten and raped, it’s not okay” (p135).
And keep in mind that he wrote this thirty years ago.
Lastly, “If it’s true that men are the doers, the agents of history, the performers, the active ones, how come men are so passive [when it comes to women’s rights]? (p183).
Read
February 22, 2016Very heavy reading. These essays are hard hitting and is sort of the "gotta hear both sides" of masculinity. Delves into patriarchy in ways I'd have never thought, but still in an easy to follow manner that even the simplest meninist can follow (or not)
November 4, 2010
looking back I really likes it at the time but now I feel like its kind of overwrought. worth another skim if not read
February 3, 2019
If you have a penis, read this.
August 29, 2024
Pro-féministe radical, matérialiste et universaliste, John Stoltenberg propose sa dissection à l'os de la société patriarcale, geôle des femmes depuis des millénaires, objectifiant leur corps, en faisant la propriété privée des vieux pères, premières esclaves, leur corps fut le premier capital, ceci du point de vue d'un homme, ce qui est intéressant. Lui-même ne correspond pas au sacro-saint standard de la masculinité, car il est gay dans une société hétérosexuelle de fer, il a donc forcément subi les menaces et injonctions masculines à montrer tous les signes d'appartenance à la classe sociale des hommes, maîtres et possesseurs.
John Stoltenberg est dramaturge : la plupart de ses textes ont été écrits pour être dits sous formes de conférences, d'adresses, à des publics d'hommes. Un peu à la manière d'Andrea Dworkin, s'estimant elle écrivaine, mais qui, ne trouvant pas d'éditeur, devait en faire des conférences devant des publics d'étudiantes. Un entier chapitre documentaire est consacré à l'élaboration de l'ordonnance de Minneapolis, puis à l'amendement antipornographie sur lesquels avaient travaillé Andrea Dworkin et Katharine MacKinnon, juriste féministe, qui l'ont soutenu en 1982 devant la Cour Suprême des USA. Sans résultat. La trivialisation, la dégradation, la torture de corps de femmes dans la pornographie a été défendu au nom du Premier amendement 'Free speech'.
Egalement manuel à usage des hommes, l'ouvrage comporte des passages de conseils. Très douloureux à lire, comme sont les ouvrages de Dworkin, il est indispensable dans toute bonne bibliothèque féministe. L'ouvrage traduit en français et publié en 2013 est épuisé chez les éditeurs ; espérons qu'il sera réédité rapidement. En attendant, on le trouve dans les bonnes bibliothèques publiques.
John Stoltenberg est dramaturge : la plupart de ses textes ont été écrits pour être dits sous formes de conférences, d'adresses, à des publics d'hommes. Un peu à la manière d'Andrea Dworkin, s'estimant elle écrivaine, mais qui, ne trouvant pas d'éditeur, devait en faire des conférences devant des publics d'étudiantes. Un entier chapitre documentaire est consacré à l'élaboration de l'ordonnance de Minneapolis, puis à l'amendement antipornographie sur lesquels avaient travaillé Andrea Dworkin et Katharine MacKinnon, juriste féministe, qui l'ont soutenu en 1982 devant la Cour Suprême des USA. Sans résultat. La trivialisation, la dégradation, la torture de corps de femmes dans la pornographie a été défendu au nom du Premier amendement 'Free speech'.
Egalement manuel à usage des hommes, l'ouvrage comporte des passages de conseils. Très douloureux à lire, comme sont les ouvrages de Dworkin, il est indispensable dans toute bonne bibliothèque féministe. L'ouvrage traduit en français et publié en 2013 est épuisé chez les éditeurs ; espérons qu'il sera réédité rapidement. En attendant, on le trouve dans les bonnes bibliothèques publiques.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews