It’s crazy seeing interviews on TV as bounce between discussing female empowerment and “toxic masculinity”. On a program today the presenters were discussing the Ladies we need to talk podcast. There were 3 women discussing how hard it is for women to express rage (the context was venues that facilitate plate smashing), it raised a personal irk that this was conceived as a particularly gendered problem as opposed to a human problem that had a gendered lens (that is to say no space was afforded to how this problem could be experienced outside those who identify as women). The existance of domestic violance and partner agression should not delegitimise the emotional experience and wellbeing of those that do not commit these crimes; in fact the unhealthy expression of anger especially to violent acts shows how important it is for everyone to practice healthy expressions of anger (though my personal opinion is that plate smashing is needlessly destructive; where available breaking fallen sticks and branches fulfills a similar need without putting additional strain on the natural environment). I’m angry about the delegitimisation of the male experience, and that conversations that seek to promote female empowerment often do it at the exclusion of universal experiences.
Whilst the discussion of anger annoyed me, even more invalidating was the discussion about rejection. The empathy the presenters expressed to one another regarding rejection experienced by women, how it can come in waves and last years and how it can negatively shape lives was remarkably different to how the news-commentary discuss teh experience of male rejection, and in particular the desire to punish rather than rehabilitate those that feel lost to the incel identity (both in its destructive and its learned-helplessness forms).
I believe that in the main we should try to use the human condition as a unifying force, to share our commonalities, I find the reflective grab towards a gendered lens to be completely alienating (that overall it promotes a narrative of male=bad). A gendered lens or view is incredibly helpful when trying to understand structural disadvantage, however, when attempting to canvas the human condition it should be used invitingly and with great care. I understand the hypocritical nature of this post and my only defense is that this blog is an effort is self-reflection and introspection and does not carry the weight or expectations of broadcast media.
— LostLetterbox