I think this article has perfectly summarised my experiences over the last few years when it comes to how we talk about men. I've heard so many times "Men have had their time, it's time be silent and listen" or the flippant "male privilege" being used as short hand for either being the only group that has any form of privilege or that everyone man experiences this privilege equally.
I do feel like here is an Apex Fallacy happening in discourse around men. We look at the 1% of men - be that boardroom members, CEOs, or even murderers - and treat the remaining 99% of men with the same brush. As you've pointed out in the article; we are not a monolith.
Society seems to wonder why young men are being pulled into toxic influences like Tate... but we're not asking the (real) question: why are young men being "pushed" towards these? It starts with how openly we negatively talk about men today.
Thanks Sean - really appreciate the insighful comment here. You're absolutely bang on with the Apex Fallacy, we use the term "men" or "man" in such an overgeneralised way and miss the nuance of class, race, sexuality and everything else that makes us who we are. And you're also bang on about the Tate stuff, we're quick to criticise those who follow these messages, but not quick enough (if at all) to ask "what in our society has allowed this situation to happen?"
This doesn't absolve people's personal accountability and responsibility, but we're always quick to lay entire blame at the door of individual men, without also looking holistically at the environment and society around him.
Thanks again Sean - glad to know this piece resonated with you.
I think this article has perfectly summarised my experiences over the last few years when it comes to how we talk about men. I've heard so many times "Men have had their time, it's time be silent and listen" or the flippant "male privilege" being used as short hand for either being the only group that has any form of privilege or that everyone man experiences this privilege equally.
I do feel like here is an Apex Fallacy happening in discourse around men. We look at the 1% of men - be that boardroom members, CEOs, or even murderers - and treat the remaining 99% of men with the same brush. As you've pointed out in the article; we are not a monolith.
Society seems to wonder why young men are being pulled into toxic influences like Tate... but we're not asking the (real) question: why are young men being "pushed" towards these? It starts with how openly we negatively talk about men today.
Thanks Sean - really appreciate the insighful comment here. You're absolutely bang on with the Apex Fallacy, we use the term "men" or "man" in such an overgeneralised way and miss the nuance of class, race, sexuality and everything else that makes us who we are. And you're also bang on about the Tate stuff, we're quick to criticise those who follow these messages, but not quick enough (if at all) to ask "what in our society has allowed this situation to happen?"
This doesn't absolve people's personal accountability and responsibility, but we're always quick to lay entire blame at the door of individual men, without also looking holistically at the environment and society around him.
Thanks again Sean - glad to know this piece resonated with you.