Heard something interesting on NPR today. A woman wrote a play about straight white males after getting feedback from queer and feminist academics at Brown University on what they would describe how the idealized straight white male would act. Apparently the feminists hated the ideal, privelege-checking character because he was too weak and a loser.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2014/11/17/364760889/in-straight-white-men-a-play-explores-the-reality-of-privilege?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social
Personally, one of my gender-role peeves is the way men are expected to act. That half the human race is so largely expected to pretend they don't have human emotions is not only shitty and destructive, but also, when you think about it, really just kind of bonkers.
But feminism is about helping marginalized men, too! Well... kinda of. It's on their to-do list.
Why "but," Dex?
Because challenging this gender role is the responsibility of men alone according to many feminists, even though women and men reinforce it.
So you were responding to "many feminists," not to me, then?
Yes. I know I have a history of making generalizations.
Well, next time, just remember I'm special.
Honestly, I think one of the productive things that can come not only from debates like this, but also from the original article quoted, is that it *can* make you question what assumptions you're making, what views you have, etc., and it can help you decide if you really want to be operating from that mental set.
The article and play highlight one of the many still-existing broadly-politically-correct crappy mental sets a lot of people carry around. The upshot is that if that play (or even the article about it) does help some people- feminist or not- reconsider their expectations of men and work towards being more fair and kind, that's a good thing. And yes- mindset does help, with things like that. Social norms are actually quite powerful.