Parole des Jahres: Kein akademisches Männerzentrum ohne feministische Kontrolle!

The thrilling news was announced just a couple of weeks ago: the State University of New York at Stony Brook is starting a brand-new Women’s Studies Center. Among the distinguished members of its Advisory Board will be iconic Hustler publisher Larry Flynt, renowned stand-up comic Andrew “Dice” Clay, gridiron legend and screen actor extraordinaire O. J. Simpson, former President Bill Clinton…

Ein Zentrum für Frauenforschung, das Leute wie O.J. Simpson und Larry Flynt in seinem Beirat hat, wäre völlig absurd? Das ist es auch, wie der liberale, schwule Journalist Bruce Bawer in seinem aktuellen Artikel einräumt.

Oh, sorry. My mistake. The real story is this: according to a May 20 press release, Stony Brook, which happens to be my (cough) alma mater (cough), has received a hefty grant from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation to start a "Center for the Study of Men and Masculinities." The Center, which will open this fall and which will also get additional funding from the university and from other (unnamed) donors, plans to offer an M.A. in Masculinity Studies, to host “the first international conference on Men and Masculinities in 2015,” and to hold seminars, forums, and all kinds of other activities on a regular basis.

But the real kicker (and what follows, unlike my first-paragraph attempt at whimsy, is no joke whatsoever) is the list of Advisory Board members. I’ll quote the press release in full – and keep in mind, please, that this is a Center supposedly devoted to the study of men, not women: "Members of the Center’s advisory board include Gloria Steinem, Martin Duberman, Jane Fonda, Eve Ensler, Carol Gilligan, James Gilligan, Frank Ochberg, Gov. Madeleine Kunin (Vermont), Catharine Stimpson and Hampden-Sydney College President Chris Howard."

Buaaaahahaha, diese Amis sind so kreuzdämlich! Machen ein Zentrum für die Erforschung von Männern und Männlichkeit auf und rümpeln es dann mit Leuten aus dem radikalen Feminismus voll! *kicher* Nur mal zum Vergleich: Das wäre ungefähr so, wie wenn man hier in Deutschland, ich weiß nicht, irgendein "Forum für Männer" oder so ähnlich gründen würde und sein Personal dann aus feministisch gekaderten Schnarchsäcken zusammen... öh ... Moment ...

Anyway, Bruce Bawer ist alles andere als angetan davon, wer sich hier ernsthaft als ExpertInnen für Männlichkeit aufzustellen traut:

The real news, however, is that list of women. And what a list! Again, keep in mind that these people are going to preside over a Center whose purported purpose is to deepen our understanding of male identity. Gloria Steinem, longtime editor of Ms.? Vagina Monologues playwright Eve Ensler? Carol Gilligan, who in her 1982 book In a Different Voice attempted to identify a distinctively female way of thinking? Catherine Stimpson, founder of Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society and author of Where the Meanings Are: Feminism and Cultural Spaces? Madeleine Kunin, who in addition to being Governor of Vermont has written books entitled The New Feminist Agenda: Defining the Next Revolution for Women, Work, and Family and Pearls, Politics, and Power: How Women Can Win and Lead?

Mit anderen Worten: Es wäre so, als bekämen wir in Deutschland ein Zentrum für Männerforschung, das von Alice Schwarzer, Simone Schmollack, Anne Wizorek, Sybille Berg und irgendeiner Femen-Tussi besetzt wäre. Bawer führt weiter aus:

Every single one of these women has evinced, over the course of her career (and most of these careers have been long ones indeed), a virtually undivided preoccupation with the study of women – not men, who appear in their work only marginally, and then almost exclusively as bullies, oppressors, impediments, encumbrances, annoyances, predators, and, at best, unnecessary appendages, the human equivalent of the vermiform appendix in the sense that they have no known useful function. (Steinem apparently wasn’t the first person to say that "a woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle," but she repeated it enough to make people think she’d made it up herself.)

(...) For with very few – and very controversial – exceptions, the academy today peers at maleness through the narrow and highly distorted lens of PC academic feminism, the extent of whose understanding of the male of the species is pretty fairly summed up in the sentiment, drilled every year into the minds of countless college freshmen, that every man is a potential rapist.

Und wer ist der Vorsitzende dieses merkwürdigen Vereins? Natürlich der O.J. Simpson der pseudowissenschaftlichen "Männerforschung" – Michael Kimmel:

To be sure, Stony Brook’s Center for the Study of Men and Masculinities will be run by a man – namely, Michael Kimmel, who’s already a “Distinguished Professor of Sociology” there. But the Women’s Studies commissars need not worry: Kimmel is a loyal protégé of Robert W. Connell, the founding father of Men’s Studies – a discipline that heterodox California professor David Clemens has succinctly defined as “a camouflage version of Women’s Studies” in which the “operative question” is “Why are men so awful?” It was Connell who coined the term “hegemonic masculinity” – and who was so fond of being a man that (again, this is no joke) he ended up getting sex-reassignment surgery and becoming a woman named Raewyn Connell.

Like his mentor, Kimmel is a reliable practitioner of the feminist approach to the subject of men, focusing obsessively on patriarchal oppression and female victimhood. Co-author of The Guy’s Guide to Feminism (which sounds like the last book you’d ever want to be left alone with on a desert island) and co-editor of an anthology entitled Against the Tide: Pro-Feminist Men in the United States, 1776-1990, Kimmel is frank in Stony Brook’s press release about his utter devotion to “the prisms of feminist theory, multiculturalism and queer theory” (to which he refers as if they were fresh and exciting new ideas rather than stale academic clichés) and his intention to foster dialogue “between academics and activists,” which he says is “too rare on both sides of that divide” (an assertion that could hardly be less true: identity studies is all about mixing academic activity with political activism, to the point that it becomes impossible to tell one from the other).

Miles Groth, a professor at Wagner College who actually takes the study of maleness seriously and whose own determinedly non-feminist version of Men’s Studies, called Male Studies, deals not in activism and grievance-mongering but in objective scholarship, is – to put it mildly – less than thrilled by Stony Brook’s big plans. (...) In addition to pointing out that – contrary to the press release’s grand claims – neither the vaunted M.A. program nor the "international conference" will be the first of its kind, Groth has a few things to say about Kimmel, calling him "a prolific anthologizer of pro-feminist apologetics for undergraduate consumption" and describing his book Guyland as having been "discredited on the basis of faulty research methodology."

Man sollte hier am Rande erwähnen, dass die Propaganda von Michael Kimmel auch prägend für die deutsche Debatte über Männlichkeit war, insbesondere was die Zusammensetzung des "Bundesforums Männer" angeht (und die grüne Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung sowieso).

Was würde eigentlich passieren, wenn man im akademischen Bereich ein Männerzentrum zu etablieren versuchte, das nicht von Speichelleckern des Feminismus geprägt ist? Derartige Versuche gibt es ja aktuell vor allem in Kanada. Die Journalistin Robyn Urback berichtet über einen davon:

The student union at Simon Fraser University in B.C. has made the apparently contentious decision to finance the creation of a Men’s Centre on campus. Motivated, surely, by deep-seated patriarchal values, the union approved a budget of $30,000 to launch the project — the exact same amount conferred on the university’s Women’s Centre, which was established back in 1974. The idea for the Men’s Centre was proposed by fifth-year accounting student Keenan Midgley, who told SFU’s student newspaper that he believes men, too, are entitled to safe space on campus.

Unsurprisingly, however, not everyone at SFU is thrilled with the decision. The Women’s Centre, for one, coolly brushed off the idea of a stand-alone Men’s Centre on its website, simply stating that, "the men’s centre is everywhere else." They did say they would welcome a men’s centre that focused on "challenging popular conceptions about masculinity, confronting homophobia, sexism, racism, classism, and ability issues." In contrast, they would oppose a men’s centre that "focussed on maintaining the old boys club … that promotes the status quo, encourages sexual assault, or fosters an atmosphere of competition and violence." Oh. OK, then. Good to know.

Several other students have taken a more direct approach, compiling their objections to the Men’s Centre in widely-circulated five-minute YouTube video. Deeming the project "not financially responsible," students take turns expressing their grievances. One woman with seemingly impeccable foresight declares that, "The Men’s Centre will end up being a place to celebrate hegemonic masculinity." She later attacks the credibility of the Centre’s proponents, scoffing that they have, "no experience being in a gender-studies class."

Men, too, join in the criticism of the proposed Centre, one curiously warning that it may "become a highly masculinized space." Another cautions that the project risks creating a "heteronormative space," while yet another critical male dismisses the Men’s Centre as simply, "a room with a PS3 and a bunch of douchebags playing games."

Zu deutsch: Gebt Männern, die nicht durch die ideologische Schulung der "Gender Studies" gegangen sind, ein Männerzentrum, und sie werden dort sowieso nur herumgammeln und sexuellen Übergriffen den Weg bereiten. Solche Sprüche kommen aus genau jenem feministischen Lager, das kein Problem damit hat, nur einen Augenblick später zu erklären, die Behauptung, Feministinnen seien mit Männerhass erfüllt, wäre eine soooo gemeine und unfaire Unterstellung.

Robyn Urback kommentiert:

Bravo, students. In your attempt to decry the proposed Men’s Centre on all of its supposed merits, you have effectively demonstrated why such a space is so very necessary. At present, there is only one other Canadian campus with an official support centre for men — the Men’s Resource Centre at the University of Manitoba. Judging by the crass sociology catch phrases in the aforementioned video, the consensus is that young men don’t need community resources or support. That is a myth.

While statistics show that comparatively, far fewer university-aged men are diagnosed with depression than women, the rate of suicide among men is four times as great. It’s not hard to connect the dots: men are suffering in silence. And it’s not hard, either, to see why. If the assumption on campus is that men have no use for a resource centre other than meeting up with new PlayStation buddies, it becomes that much more difficult for them to break down the barrier of bravado.

Men, like women, struggle with issues of victimization, anxiety, and depression, but they must battle in addition with a societal expectation of stoicism. In short — it’s not manly to talk about your feelings. And it’s precisely for that reason that a Men’s Centre on campus is such a necessary initiative.

If brought to fruition, the Men’s Centre at SFU might also come with additional boons; namely, the latent effect of debunking some of the prejudicial, discriminatory, and misandrous views (see kids? I can play too) so blatantly expressed in the YouTube video.

Of course, I don’t have a gender studies degree, so consider it mere speculation.