insideMAN

Is this Virgin Active ad an example of #EveryDaySexism against men?

by 2 Comments

Here’s a quick thought experiment, what would you think of a man who did the following?

He meets a woman for a first date then ditches her because she isn’t good looking enough by climbing out of a toilet window, leaving her sitting on her own at the restaurant.

He dodges a kiss from another woman by imagining her as an opponent in a boxing match.

He mocks a woman because he doesn’t like the present she gave him.

He spots an attractive woman running in the park, then turns around and chases after her.

He goes to the gym and gets sexually aroused by the vibrations of one of the gym machines.

You’d probably think he was a sexist, shallow, creepy and selfish arsehole, right?

Except that’s exactly what a woman does to a series of men in the Virgin Active advert below.

So why, when we would feel so differently about it if she were a man, does this advert present her behaviour as charming, sexy, and even something to aspire to?

Sure, the advert is harmless enough, but it’s an example of how so often when it comes to calling out #EveryDaySexism, sauce for the gander is rarely also sauce for the goose.

Children’s charity launches #SeriouslyAwkward campaign to raise awareness of sexual abuse of boys

by 1 Comment

Leading dad blogger and regular insideMAN contributor John Adams explains why he’s supporting a new campaign to highlight the specific issues faced by boys who have experienced sexual exploitation.

The Children’s Society is a charity that I’ve long admired. I’ve always liked the fact it works on campaigns and helps those marginalised by society; refugee children and sexually exploited kids being just two groups it helps out.

The charity recently launched a new campaign to assist older teens who are being sexually exploited or at risk of being so. The campaign is called #SeriouslyAwkward and it aims to highlight the fact that older teens aged 16 and 17 have little legal protection. Welfare and social services are also thin on the ground for youngsters in this age group.

Individuals of this age can consent to sexual activity. Vulnerable teens, those from unsupportive families or those in care, can find themselves being exploited.

‘Abused boys are left out of the discussion’

At this point I have a declaration of interest to make. I have been taken on board as a blogging ambassador by The Children’s Society to raise awareness of the #SeriouslyAwkward campaign (let me stress this is an unpaid role). It follows the publication of a report called Old enough to know better? Why sexually exploited older teens are being overlooked.

When there is discussion and debate about sexual exploitation and abuse, it often focuses on girls and women.

The charity is particularly keen to raise awareness of the fact this is also an issue for boys. It turns out that one on four of the young people supported by The Children’s Society’s sexual exploitation projects are boys.

In addition to this, young males face distinctive issues. They will frequently internalise harmful stereotypes of masculinity, thinking they need to be tough and defend themselves, refusing to talk about the abuse they endure. They worry about experiencing homophobia if people find out they are victims of abuse.

‘Boys less likely to report abuse’

Worryingly, boys are less likely to report abuse. Only 1 boy for every 10 girls aged 16 and 17 reported a sexual assault or rape to 25 police forces in England in the last year.

There’s also evidence that professionals are undertrained for dealing with male sexual exploitation. The Children’s Society says that referrals to specialist projects jump when training on how boys are affected by sexual exploitation is given to social care, education, health and law enforcement professionals.

No one is suggesting that boys’ needs are more important than those of girls. Exploitation is a massive issue for females too. It transpires that one in ten 16 and 17 year old girls claim to have experienced a sexual offence over the past year.

Unfortunately, boys’ issues are not as high profile. This is something that has to change.

Nothing can bring this issue to life more than a personal story. This one, on The Children’s Society website, tells the story of Luke.

It demonstrates how young people can fall through the cracks and end up at risk of abuse.

So what can you do? You can visit The Children’s Society’s website and join the #SeriouslyAwkward campaign that calls for greater legal protection for older teens. You can also donate and help The Children’s Society provide support services for those at risk or already being abused.

For those that do help out and get involved, thank you for your efforts.

John Adams is a married stay at home dad with two young daughters. He was previously a journalist and PR / communications professional but gave this up in 2010 to be a homemaker and look after the children.

In 2012 he launched a parenting blog focused on his experiences as a “man that holds the babies” called Dadbloguk.com  and he now writes for a variety of different publications in addition to his own blog.

Photo: Flickr/Jake Stimpson

The three reasons I don’t support feminist equality campaigns

by 45 Comments

This week I was challenged by the university lecturer Martin Robb to stop “touting” myself as a non-feminist and give my backing to feminist campaigns for gender equality instead, writes Glen Poole.

Martin’s challenge was a response to my article in the Daily Telegraph asserting that boys should have a right to choose whether to be feminist or not. So for the benefit of Martin and anyone else who is interested, I thought I’d outline the main three reasons I don’t support feminist campaigns for gender equality. Here they are:

  • I’m not a feminist
  • My definition of “gender equality” is different from most feminists
  • Many feminist initiatives designed to “engage men in gender equality” actively exclude non-feminists

That being the case, then why would I support feminist campaigns for gender equality when they don’t align with my own principles?

I’ll expand on these three points in this article but  before I do I’d like to address some of Martin’s comments about me. Firstly, Martin describes me as someone who is “simply playing games with labels” by “touting (myself) as a ‘non’ feminist.”

“Tout” is an interesting word to use. To me it means to sell things, often illicitly, for personal gain and a great cost to others! Wikipedia describes a tout as “a person who solicits…in a persistent and annoying manner”! It is neither a neutral nor a complimentary word.

Why is this important?

This is important to note because there is a subtle game of “othering” people who think differently here which reflects the feminist movement’s discomfort with intellectual diversity. Martin presents “feminism” and “male pro-feminism” as the only legitimate gender political views for a man to hold and describes people, like me, who hold other views as “touts”.

What does it mean to “stand outside” feminism he asks as if those who are NOT feminist or pro-feminist belong to a mysterious “other” tribe with strange beliefs and superstitions. There is a clearly an intellectual hierarchy in gender politics as far as Martin is concerned and feminists/pro-feminists sit on top of it and the “others” like me, are the unwelcome outliers at the bottom of the hierarchy.

Martin then accuses me of “tarring all feminists as intolerant” on the basis of an article in which I described the feminist whose work I was critiquing as being intelligent, compassionate and self aware. I used these words because I look for the greatness in all human beings and in the case of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie I didn’t have to look far—she is an extraordinary human being. Martin dismisses my acknowledgment as softening my criticsm, it was no such thing—it was a heartfelt, acknowledgement from one human being to another.

At the same time the title of her book—“we should all be feminists”—is a fundamentalist statement that has been embraced by feminists who hold that viewpoint. And my extensive lived experience of gender politics is that when feminists adopt a fundamentalist belief that everyone else should be feminist too, there is a very real risk that they will become intolerant of “others” who don’t share their worldview.

In describing the act of holding a non-feminist worldview as “touting”, Martin demonstrates both his intolerance of, and his difficulty having empathy for, men who don’t share his pro-feminist worldview. Martin says that “in many years of working as a man alongside feminists, I’ve never been made to apologise for anything”.

I don’t doubt that what Martin says about his lived experience of feminists is true, but why does he use his experience to invalidate my lived experience of feminism? Why does his lived experience have validity, but mine doesn’t?

This is a very common ploy used by pro-feminist men to dismiss the experiences of “other” non-feminist men.

When a non-feminist man points out that feminism has a problem with intellectual diversity, for example, and is intolerant of those with different worldviews, for a pro-feminist man to respond by saying  “I’ve never had a problem” misses the point. Rather like a straight man saying to a gay man “well I’ve never experienced any homophobic bullying from straight guys”!

The point is, that the movement Martin is part of has a problem with the way it treats “others”—and for a movement that prides itself in promoting “equality AND diversity” that is a core issue.

So even though Martin says he agrees with my assertion that we should “teach our boys to become free-thinkers who can choose for themselves whether they want to be feminist or not”—he still concludes by saying  that if you’re a man you should “get stuck in” and “lend your support” to feminist campaigns for gender equality, even if:

  1. You’re not a feminist
  2. Your definition of “gender equality” is different from most feminists
  3. Many feminist initiatives designed to “engage men in gender equality” actively exclude non-feminists

What does a non-feminist believe?

Martin provides three examples of campaigns that non-feminist men should support, which provides me with a useful opportunity to demonstrate how my view of gender equality is different from most feminists as the table below shows.

What I believe as a non-feminist What feminist equality campaigns believe
  • There are lots of areas in life where women and girls are unequal to men and boys (and vice versa)
  • There are lots of areas in life where women and girls are unequal to men and boys
  • When men and women experience inequality (and where it is appropriate) we should take collective action to address those inequalities
  • When women experience inequality we should take collective action to address those inequalities
  • Men’s primary job in the drive for gender equality is to address the issues faced by men and boys (and support initiatives focused on women and girls if they want to)
  • Men’s primary role in the drive for gender equality is to support feminist initiatives focused on women and girls and oppose non-feminist gender equality initiatives.
  • Equality of autonomy is a far more important measure of gender equality than equality of outcome (though equality of outcome is still an important measure)
  • Equality of outcome is by the far the most important measure of gender equality but only when it relates to women and girls.

To prove this point, here’s what the three organisations that Martin says “ensure equal chances for all”, have to say about gender equality.

#HeForShe

This is a UN Women campaign that asks men to take the following pledge:

“I commit to take action against all forms of violence and discrimination faced by women and girls.”

Note there’s no commitment to take action against violence and discrimination faced by men and boys, even though around 80% of victims of violent death in the world every year are male.

MenEngage

MenEngage says: “We believe that men should be engaged in advancing the rights, health and well-being of women and girls. We are committed to working as allies with women and women’s rights organisations to achieve equality for women and girls.”

Note there’s no concern for the rights, health and well-being of men and boys and no commitment to work with men’s organisations to achieve equality for men and boys.

White Ribbon

White Ribbon asks men to make the following pledge: “I promise never to commit, condone or remain silent about violence towards women”.

Not only does this pledge ignore violence against men, this is also a deeply misleading pledge. In reality, the White Ribbon campaign only wants men to say feminist-approved things about violence towards women, as the Psychiatrist Dr Tanveer Ahmed found out earlier this year when White Ribbon took action to silence him for daring to voice a “non-feminist” view.

Why would someone who is committed to promoting gender equality for all, support initiatives that are about promoting gender equality for women and girls, but not men and boys?

Why would I make the White Ribbon pledge to “never remain silent” about violence against women when I know that if I speak out about this issue, that White Ribbon will want to silence me because I don’t hold a feminist view on the subject?

Feminists who are fundamentalists don’t welcome the simple idea that a diversity of worldviews is needed if we are to tackle major world problems like violence. As such, fundamentalist feminists are actively (and at times abusively) intolerant of people who hold different worldviews. Here’s the feminist CEO of domestic violence charity, Karen Ingala Smith, responding to my article in The Telegraph on twitter :

“Hahaha, bollocks of the highest order”

This response is not, in my experience, untypical of the level of contempt that high profile feminists in positions of power have for non-feminist thinkers like me.

As a younger man I used to call myself a feminist because I was concerned with the issues that affected women and girls. As I became aware of the issues that men and boys also face, I consistently found feminists and feminism to be not only dismissive of these concerns, but also actively hostile towards men and women who were working to address these issues.

I’ve been experiencing this feminist hostility for nearly 20 years now. It comes in many forms and needs to be addressed if we are to make sustainable progress in the global drive for gender equality.

To highlight just one strand of my work, for the past six years I’ve been promoting and co-ordinating the celebration of International Men’s Day in the UK. It’s an inclusive platform that invites anyone and everyone to put on an event, no matter what their gender politics.

Supporters of the day included charities that help male victims of rape and sexual abuse and campaigners working to address the fact that in the UK, 13 men die from suicide every day. Over the years a small number of feminist groups have also got behind the day, but some high profile feminists like the founders of MenEngage and White Ribbon advise their global networks to “stay away from the day“.

The reason? My view is they stay away from International Men’s Day because it isn’t controlled by feminists—and fundamentalist feminists can’t cope with inclusive approaches that require them to share a gender political platform with non-feminists.

“Fuck off and leave us the fuck alone!”

Then there’s Kate Smurthwaite, a feminist campaigner named by the BBC as one of their “100 women” who responded to an International Men’s Day press release in 2014, by sending me a foul-mouthed email saying:

“Would you please tell whoever wrote this utter shit to go fuck themselves? Feminism is the same thing as gender equality. Those who say it is not are lying assholes trying to divide and destroy the movement. Please let them know they are misogynist dickwads and that feminism doesn’t want their help. Feminism wants them to fuck off and leave us the fuck alone”.

Then there’s the Labour MP and former domestic violence charity worker, Jess Phillips, who tied herself in gender political knots over International Men’s Day this year, first sniggering at it; then offering an apology of sorts for her reaction to it; then saying she was for men’s issues; then deriding International Men’s Day’s track record; then comparing International Men’s Day (with it’s focus on helping male victims of rape and preventing male suicide, amongst other things) to “white history month or able body action day”.

More pertinently, she also publicly declared her hatred for people with a different gender political view to her saying: “I hate fools who think men don’t have equality”.

I’m one of those fools that Jess hates. My non-feminist view of gender equality is that there are clearly areas where women and girls experience inequality and there are areas when men and boys face inequality too. Both of these things are true and both need addressing—it’s not a zero sum game, helping men AND women does not require us to choose between men OR women.

This simple viewpoint is one that feminists and feminism struggles to contend with and this is  deeply problematic for a movement that too often claims to be synonymous with “gender equality”. How can any movement claim to be all about gender equality and struggle so profoundly to respond to the many gender inequalities that men and boys face?

Take the case of the University of York, where the Equality and Diversity Committee decided to support International Men’s Day. The response by feminists within the institution was not “Great how can we help?” but “Shit, how can we close this down?”

In total, 200 academics, students and alumni signed an open letter opposing the day and the institution responded by abandoning its plans. This episode was covered in several places including The Telegraph, insideMAN and The Independent. The silver lining on this story was provided by a wonderful York student, Ruth Morris,  starting a petition FOR International Men’s Day that garnered over 4,000 signatures.

Contrary to what Martin claims, I am not in the business “tarring all feminists as intolerant”. When I see tolerant and inclusive feminism, I celebrate it and so here’s Ruth demonstrating what tolerant, inclusive feminism looks like:

“True feminists should be fighting for gender equality for both men and women. To cancel men’s day is simply hypocritical. Equality is not just for women and should concern all genders. All feminists are being wrongly portrayed here which is simply unfair. We are not man-haters and the university should go ahead with plans to celebrate all diversity, not just one gender.”

These incidents demonstrate the vital importance of creating non-feminist and non-feminist-inclusive spaces to discuss gender issues—particularly those affecting men and boys. One reason is simply that such initiatives bring to light the fundamentalist opposition to intellectual diversity that seems to be endemic in the feminist movement.

Another reason is that if feminism really is about gender equality and yet struggles to address the gender equality issues that men and boys face (which it clearly does), then embracing and supporting “others” who are committed to and focused on addressing the equality issues facing men and boys is surely something to be welcomed?

If feminism is really about gender equality for all, then why is it so hostile to those who are concerned with highlighting and addressing the equality issues that men and boys face?

These fundamentalist tendencies within feminism go to the very top. In 2014 I was privileged to be invited by UN Women to attend a workshop about the #HeForShe campaign with Emma Watson and a select gathering of experts. There was a magical moment before the event started when I asked one of the organisers why they’d invited me to speak. He told me there were lots of female academics talking about men and gender but not many men and they wanted a male academic to contribute—albeit a pro-feminist one.

Then I dropped the bombshell “but I’m not an academic and I’m not a feminist”!

The look of absolute horror on the guy’s face was priceless, like a caterer at a Bar Mitzvah suddenly discovering the chef has put ham in the soup that has just been served to all the guests.

You see, had they realised I was a non-feminist in advance, they would never have invited me, because #HeForShe and UN Women are feminist campaigns for gender equality for women—-not non-feminist-inclusive campaigns for gender equality for all.

Then there’s the European Union.

In the 2012 the EU agency EIGE (European Institute for Gender Equality) created a network of approved NGOs that work with men on gender equality issues. The feminist team behind the project went through an extensive process of defining how men should (or shouldn’t) be allowed to engage in gender equality work across Europe (including the UK).

The report promotes pro-feminist work involving men and gender equality policies across Europe and rejects non-feminist approaches and theories that highlight discrimination against men—which includes anti-feminist, men’s rights and fathers’ rights approaches.

At the same time, the European Institute of Gender Equality (EIGE) compiled a database of approved men’s organisations across Europe who were considered to be suitable for inclusion in gender equality work.

Any organisation or individual considered “to have rejected the study’s understanding of gender equality” was excluded. And therein lies the fundamentalism of feminism writ large across publicly funded gender political thinking in Europe.

The team behind this project identified five types of gender politics that men engage in:

  • Men’s liberation
  • Anti-sexist or pro-feminist
  • Spiritual and mythopoetic
  • Christian
  • Men’s rights and fathers’ rights.

The hierarchy of gender politics 

What this list represents is a hierarchy of approved gender political viewpoints. The top groups are considered to be superior and are included in an approved list of stakeholders working for gender equality. The bottom three groups are considered to be inferior and excluded from the list (though may be let in if vetted and approved).

I don’t fit neatly into any of those boxes and there are groups that are completely overlooked—for example charities and campaigns working to end male circumcision don’t fit into any of those categories (though men from each category may support their aims).

What this incomplete list confirms is that there are many forms of “non-feminism”. My own personal version of non-feminism includes aspects of all five groups and more besides (though I am neither Christian nor pro-feminist). More broadly, beyond my own specific viewpoints, I believe that approaches to addressing gender equality should include ALL of those groups and more besides.

And this is where I find myself at odds with the fundamentalist approach to gender equality that feminists and pro-feminists promote.

Essentially, what feminism does is to create a closed club that excludes people with particular worldviews—like myself—and then when we criticise feminism for attempting to exclude us from the world of gender equality, we are attacked for not supporting feminism.

It’s like not inviting people to a party, putting bouncers on the door to prevent us from getting in and then when we complain, attacking us for being rude and not showing up at to the party.

We need diversity in gender politics 

The fact is that gender politics is a diverse field and I happen to believe that we should work to embrace that diversity, rather than seek to create hierarchies of gender political thought that actively exclude particular worldviews.

In this respect I tend to find myself at odds with both feminists AND anti-feminists because while anti-feminism is one form of non-feminism (and while I agree that many of the issues highlighted by anti-feminists are not being addressed by feminism), my experience of anti-feminists is that they also find inclusivity and diversity in gender politics confronting.

However as anti-feminists tend to have very little (if any) power in the world of gender equality, this is mere trivia when compared to the damage that feminists and feminism is doing with its fundamentalist resistance to intellectual diversity in gender politics.

Nor do I think that the report’s analysis of anti-feminists “seeking to undermine gender equality” is a fair or reasonable analysis. Most (though not all) anti-feminists that I have encountered simply see themselves as having a different view of what gender equality is to most feminists.

From my own perspective, the reason I am a non-feminist is that I care deeply and passionately about every girl and boy on this planet being given every opportunity to flourish and thrive and fulfil their potential.

I believe that deepening our understanding of men, masculinity and manhood is central to that. But unlike the feminists and pro-feminists I don’t view “men and masculinities as socially constructed and produced, rather than ‘natural’“.

As an integral non-feminist thinker, I believe that gender is a product of both nature (i.e. biology and evolved  psychology) and nurture (social and cultural conditioning).

There are lots of different ways to define people’s gender politics (and we all have gender politics) and one way is to consider if you think being a man is a product of nature; a product of nurture; or a combination of nature and nurture.

As the majority of feminist thinking emanates from the social sciences, other valuable perspectives from disciplines such as biology, psychology and neuro-science are often excluded from our approach to gender equality. This is another manifestation of the fundamentalist tendency within feminism to exclude worldviews that are not readily aligned to feminist thinking.

When feminists are absolutely brilliant 

But if we want to live in a world that works for everyone—and I do—we can’t do this by trying to force everyone to think the same, we can only do it by learning to integrate the very best of the many different worldviews that are found around the globe.

The feminist approach to gender equality does not do this. It excludes people like me—and many wonderful men and women around the world who don’t tick the “feminist” or “pro-feminist” box. The reason I don’t support feminism is that I support equality and diversity and I support the inclusion of worldviews that I don’t agree with, in the world of gender politics.

Feminists are absolutely brilliant at trying to promote all manner of sexual diversity and gender diversity in the world and while I don’t always agree with the methods, I do 100% support the intention—-and all I ask of feminists and feminism is that you extend that brilliant thinking to embrace intellectual diversity, which means welcoming and including those who hold views that are non-feminist into the worlds of gender politics, gender issues and gender equality.

I know that this is a big ask. It’s difficult for people in power to let go.

But while as an individual it is perfectly acceptable to think “we should all be feminists”, once you become a collective force that holds power, authority and influence, you have a responsibility to be inclusive of a diverse range of gender political viewpoints—and feminism is shirking that responsibility big time.

And that for now is why I don’t support feminist campaigns for gender equality, because:

  • I’m not a feminist
  • My definition of “gender equality” is different from most feminists
  • Too many feminist initiatives designed to “engage men in gender equality” actively exclude non-feminists

And most importantly of all I believe the way to resolve the world’s problems is not to enforce a singular worldview on any issue, but to develop our ability to integrate and include a diversity of ways of thinking about problems, rather than excluding people who dare to think differently.

As the freethinker Claire Lehmann argues: “almost every advance in human history first came from a person willing to look at the world, or the status quo, from a different angle”.

—Photo courtesy of Flickr

Glen Poole is the news editor of online magazine insideMAN, author of the book Equality For Men and UK coordinator for International Men’s Day.

 

Dozens of charities, campaigners and academics sign joint letter calling on all parties to support International Men’s Day

by 4 Comments

InsideMAN joins dozens of charities, campaigners and academics in signing a joint letter to cross-party equalities representatives calling on ministers to make a public statement in support of International Men’s Day and to consider what action they can take to address issues that affect the well being of men and boys.

Addressed to: Government Ministers, Shadow Ministers and Equalities Spokespeople

  1. Caroline Dinenage MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Women, Equalities and Family Justice
  2. The Rt. Hon Nicky Morgan, Education Secretary and Minister for Women and Equalities
  3. Kate Green OBE MP, Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities
  4. Angela Crawley MP, Shadow SNP Spokesperson (Equalities, Women and Children)
  5. Baroness Hussein-Ece OBE, Liberal Democrat Spokesperson forWomen and Equalities
  6. Liz Saville Roberts MP , Spokesperson (Women and Equalities), Plaid Cymru
  7. Jim Shannon MP, Spokesperson (Equality), Democratic Unionist Party
  8. Mr Benali Hamdache, Equalities Spokesperson, The Green Party
  9. Louise Bours MEP, Health Spokesman, UKIP

Subject: Recognition of International Men’s Day (19 November 2015)

As supporters of International Men’s Day in the UK, we invite politicians of all parties to join us in celebrating men and boys in all their diversity each year on 19 November. Many organisations led by men and women across the country are already doing so.

International Men’s Day is a day for highlighting the positive contribution that men and boys make to their families, their communities and the world.

At a time when the role of men in our society is changing and evolving, it is also an opportunity to consider whether the way we talk about men and masculinity in politics, the media and elsewhere is helping or hindering boys to make a healthy transition into manhood.

International Men’s Day provides a platform for politicians to consider what action we can take to address the many social issues that impact men and boys in our country. These include:

  • The high male suicide rate
  • Men’s health and shorter life expectancy
  • The challenges faced by men who are fathers
  • The challenges faced by boys at all stages of education
  • All forms of crime, violence and abuse involving men and boys
  • The challenges faced by the most marginalised men and boys in society (for instance, those sleeping rough and boys in care)
  • The issues of concern to all men and boys with a “protected characteristic” under the Equality Act 2010

We acknowledge that the majority of politicians in the UK are men, but there are very few politicians, male or female, who take time to discuss the men’s issues listed above and put forward political solutions to these problems.

We invite men and women of all political parties to join us in making a public statement of their support for International Men’s Day on 19th November in 2015 and each year thereafter.

Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to receiving a positive reply.

Yours sincerely,

 

Glen Poole, UK Coordinator of International Men’s Day

Mark Brooks, Chair, The ManKind Initiative

Duncan Craig, CEO, Survivors Manchester

Martin Daubney, Journalist, broadcaster and committee member, Being A Man Festival

Ally Fogg, Writer and journalist

Martin Seager, Consultant Clinical Psychologist

Jack Broadley, Founder/Chairman, Baggy Trousers charity

Nick Smithers, National Development Officer, Abused Men in Scotland

Bob Balfour, Founder, Survivors West Yorkshire

Duncan Fisher, former CEO of the Fatherhood Institute

John Adams, Author, Dadbloguk.com

Paul Apreda, National Manager, FNF Both Parents Matter Cymru

Duncan Alldridge, Founder, Deep Diving Men

Kenny D’Cruz, Personal Development Consultant, The Man Whisperer

Dan Bell, Features Editor, insideMan magazine

Dr Nicola Graham-Kevan, Reader in the Psychology of Aggression at UCLAN

Belinda Brown, Research Director at Men for Tomorrow

Gijsbert Stoet, Reader in Psychology, University of Glasgow

Dr Elizabeth A. Bates, Senior Lecturer in Applied Psychology, University of Cumbria

Dr Jessica McCarrick, Chartered Psychologist, Teesside University

Richard Duncker, Founder, Men Do Complain

Peter Morris, Chairman, Men’s Aid (Northern Ireland)

John Barry, Chartered Psychologist and Research Associate at UCL Medical School

Sara Westle, Honorary Patron, The ManKind Initiative

Ian Young, domestic abuse survivor

Paul Chivers, domestic abuse survivor

Gerald Cash, Founder and Chairman, Men Have Rights Too

Kathy Jones joint CEO, The Fatherhood Institute

Adrienne Burgess, joint CEO, The Fatherhood Institute

How I went from a mid-twenties crisis to working as a men’s coach

by Leave a Comment

Whenever I tell my story of how I became a men’s coach it always begins with the words, “…well it began when I had my mid-twenties crisis…” and then I move swiftly on.

But recently a friend asked me “Clive, what exactly is a mid-twenties crisis?” As I shared my story, I reconnected with feelings from back then and realised how they’d shaped me today. Since relaying my story I’ve felt a strong desire to share it more widely and help support others who may be experiencing something similar in their lives. For me it was a very confusing and depressing part of my life. So here goes.

By 25 I felt like I’d ticked all the boxes – I was cruising through life, unconsciously striding British society’s well-lit path. I’d exceeded expectations at school, swanned through sixth form and loved my university days – all I needed was a job that paid a half-decent wage and I’d just landed it! It really was as simple as that.

However, once the initial excitement of my employment and a pay cheque or two wore off, I began to feel that something wasn’t right. “It was something that would pass,” I told myself. I had everything a mid-twenties young professional could desire right?  As the months passed, my feeling of uncertainty didn’t. On the rare occasion that I was on my own alone (I didn’t like being alone!), these thoughts of frustration would appear. Relentless voices in my head saying “you’re not fulfilled, something isn’t right”.

‘My world was turned upside down’

On reflection, perhaps I didn’t give these voices any space to be heard. Old “survival” habits I’d carried over from university were seeing to that – dance floors, a heavy social drinking habit, and a sports watching obsession. Distractions enough to keep those voices down and out of the way, safely in the depths of my shadows. Little did I know the gold that lay beneath.

Things suddenly shifted. In a matter of weeks I broke up with my girlfriend, moved out from home and received news my younger sister was to be facing life-threatening cancer. My world was turned upside down. I’d been confronted with the realities of life, of the mortality that is our human experience. I’d no longer ever take tomorrow for granted.

Spending more time alone in self-reflection, my inner voices where finally heard. As the truth surfaced from the darkness I could see I wasn’t getting quality or fulfilment at the deepest levels of my life. I didn’t have my “Why?”

Confusion naturally followed. On one hand, I had all I’d thought I’d ever wanted, though here now, I realised that was all on the surface and underneath I was in the opposite state, I was lost! I craved change, I was hungry for inner exploration and external action to understand what was happening to me so I could get clear on where the hell I was going – and why.

To read more inspiring stories about men buy our book here!

Being an analyst by trade I was going to start collecting data for a very personal piece of work, my own self-diagnosis. To begin I set up a folder on my laptop called the “life project”.

The internal work would be done in the external form of Journaling. This was the qualitative data set I would utilise to review, analyse and identify patterns. Incorporating structure I would self-stage regular monthly reviews, then in time full year reviews. Within these sessions I’d list key successes, note patterns (e.g. an inability to say “no”, leading to tiredness) and areas I wished to change/improve.

I studied goal setting. Setting myself regular goals, underpinned by self-accountability to weekly and daily tasks. This process generated quantitive data which when coupled with the qualitative  results from my journal gave me a rich picture of where I stood and where I was consciously heading. Working holistically, inside and out, I slowly began to unpack and rebuild my life, making changes for a new version of myself, connected with who I was at the core and who I wanted to become.

My “life project” had identified a desire to teach and with focus I realised a secondment working as a youth team leader, supporting 16 to 24-year-olds for The Prince’s Trust charity. The charity supports young adults to re-engage in either full time employment or eduction. Completing this work uncovered a natural aptitude for coaching and motivating groups in a classroom environment. Another identified desire was a deep need to travel, which with hard graft and a goal mindset, became a dream come true – backpacking around the world for a year.

‘Don’t drown the pain or ignore the questions’

On my return from my global adventures, I realised I needed the support of other men and found it in the form of Kenny Mammarella D’Cruz’s MenSpeak men’s groups. This inspired me to continue my work with groups incorporating coaching – this time with men in the form of the growing meetup that is the Men’s Action Project (The MAP). Today I have my challenges, but I am fulfilled. I’ve found my “why” in the form of coaching men to “walk their talk” as piece-by-piece I build my practice.

For anyone who may be experiencing this time in life, my advice is don’t drown out the pain or ignore the questions. Keep asking, keep testing and maybe start a “life project” of your own. For a long period I chose to go it alone, but in hindsight engagement with others at an earlier stage would have helped me to realise what was happening within me and make some required changes sooner.

If you need to take action, join us at the Men’s Action Project (The MAP) to start “walking your talk” with like-minded others. For a safe place to talk, groups such as Kenny’s enlightening MenSpeak groups are well worth a try.

My mid-twenties crisis was a challenging, confusing and very lonely time in my life. I now consider it my great teacher, a gift in terms of giving me insight into my purpose, passions and personal potential. Next step – live from my “Why” and become the best coach I can possibly be.

By Clive Maxheath

Clive is the leader of a group coaching initiative called the Men’s Action Project (The MAP).

To find out more visit the MAP website, find MAP on Facebook or follow him on twitter @CliveMaxheath to find out more about the service he provides.

Dads, what would you do if your son pushed a bully?

by 4 Comments

My youngest son, Jack, has always been a passionate young man; keen to see fairness, ensure everyone is safe and protect others from injustice with a strong voice and righteous energy – and I love him for it.

A few years ago, when he was just 6 years old, he was in the playground at break time and used this knightly energy to protect his friend, Tom, also 6 – and unhappily the wearer of a stomach mounted insulin pump, from another child’s violence. Jack and Tom, being active type boys, were playing a tig type game within a group when Tom was kicked violently in the stomach by another boy who was enraged by an unfairness.

Jack immediately and instinctively, whilst dodging further blows, shoved the angry boy away hard and shouted clearly and strongly that kicking Tom was not ok. He then comforted his mate and took him sobbing and in some discomfort to the playground supervisor, for adult help.

Zero tolerance gone mad?

What followed was a really good illustration of how confused some institutions and their staff have become around the whole area of behaviour, the nature of being a boy, violence – and the dreaded zero tolerance policy. Now, the boy who had violently kicked out had some diagnosed behavioural issues – so was appropriately talked to along the lines of agreed and planned responses to his anti-social behaviours – so far so good and to be applauded.

The victim, Tom, was taken to see the school office to check his pump and he were ok, was helped to calm down and given sympathy – also good, and what we would all, I feel sure, want for our youngster. My son, who remember was only 6, and had protected another vulnerable little boy, in the best way he knew how, was taken to the Head and given a warning.

Apparently he had breached the schools ‘zero tolerance’ policy towards violence by aggressively pushing and shouting at the perpetrator. He was given a clear understanding that any such repeat would result in an exclusion, despite his corroborated explanations of what had taken place and his clear and reasoned assertions that Tom needed his protection; that his punishment was simply not a ‘normal’ response and most definitely not fair!

When is it right to be a knight?

You see, despite him being only 6, this policy was not flexible for him; because he did not have a diagnosis of ADHD, that allowed for flexibility and recognition of individuality.

My lovely, loving and brave son came home in tears of injustice, upset and hurt. We talked and I held him and praised him for protecting his friend. I told him it was all of our jobs to protect the vulnerable, that sometimes this needed us to be physical against the aggressor – and that if possible it was better to not use violence; I also let him know that I was pleased he had pushed rather than hit.

That night I made sure that the bedtime story was one that both acknowledged his actions, validated caring for others – and at the same time the ability to recognise that sometimes even the strong and powerful (read school staff – Kings in the story) can get things wrong – and that is ok to forgive them because of their many good deeds along the way, and in looking after and caring for their subjects and their kingdom.

Let common sense prevail

The next day when I dropped Jack at school I reaffirmed the messages I had given him, that I was proud of him and together we walked across the school yard to greet Tom – who gave Jack a spontaneous all enveloping hug. I exchanged eye contact, a smile and a morning greeting with the Head and registered her discomfort – clearly she had also been reflecting; which as an ex residential teacher myself I could both understand and empathise with.

You see in the moment we often have to follow policies and guidelines from ‘on high’ and are left in the wee small hours contemplating what we have done and all too often wishing we had the ability to wind back the clock just a few hours and deal differently with conflicting feelings, emotions and requirements.

To beat it all the school topic at that time was the first world war, and , apparently our shooting, bombing and killing was good – because we were ‘the goodies’ and our righteousness meant we were the victors; but the enemies similar acts were all too often war crimes – because they were ‘the baddies’ and so lost. At least in this playground moment only one vulnerable young knightly spirit was momentarily dented, and I was proud to be able to be there, salve the wounds, put him back on his horse, show my pride and set my son back on his wondrous journey on life’s quest.

 —Photo: Flickr/Walt Stone Burner

Paul Mills lives on the West coast of Scotland. He is is a parent, a trainer in the education and care sectors, an ex foster carer and therapeutic teacher who cares passionately about and working with young people, especially boys, as they start their life’s journey.

In the run up to launch of the film Down Dog on 14 February, insideMAN is running a series of articles about fatherhood and we’d love you to get involved. You can join the conversation on twitter by using the hashtag #MenBehavingDADly; leave a comment in the section below or email us with your thoughts and ideas for articles to insideMANeditor@gmail.com.

For more information about the film see www.downdogfilm.com

I wanted to be a different father to my dad

by Leave a Comment

We asked the poet, Shaky Shergill, to think about what he means to him to be a father in the 21st Century. Here he shares his own experiences of the father-son relationship. He explains that didn’t want to be the father that his dad was, but wasn’t sure what the alternatives were.

 

 

Fatherhood, what they don’t tell you….

Perhaps that should be fatherhood, they didn’t tell me anything….

In the 21st Century there are so many ways that I can use to define myself as a man; my age, my race, my career, who I love, where I live, etc. and if I look there will be somewhere I can learn about it and how it relates to me.

For me one of the most significant times in my life was when I added the title of father or dad to the others I have collected. Then and at other times since I’ve felt as if there is a significant shortage of material to teach everything I’ve wanted to learn about being the father of a wonderful boy who is becoming a young man. Ever since he came into my life 12 years ago with a look and grasp of my finger it feels as if he’s taken over completely.

By doing so he’s made me not only question who I am but also my abilities. A part of me believed that I shouldn’t need education to do or be something so natural and fundamental. After all this is something that men have been doing throughout the ages. Looking back at my childhood I realised that there are things that I wish had happened differently.

Being a father has changed 

I’m aware that just as being a child has changed over the years so has being a father. I realised that I didn’t want to be the father that my dad was but wasn’t sure what the alternatives were. Looking back through the generations and back to the land of my birth. I didn’t feel as if I have anything in common with the father who would have taught his son to work the earth and even less so with those who came before him, the father who taught his son to hunt. Nonetheless, I can imagine similarities.

As I watched my son grow (and unknown to myself) grew with him I realised that those similarities are as true as they’ve ever been. In some ways a father wants just what a son wants; someone to love him, someone to listen, someone to laugh with and someone to hold him.

So over the years we’ve laughed, talked, shared and held each other. In some ways he made it so easy. As he grew older he’d walk over and say ‘hug’ be hugged and walked off. Some of the irrational moments were challenging at first and over the years the amount one of us tells the other to calm down is evening out more.

So, fatherhood, what they don’t tell you…

  • They don’t tell you that whatever you do to prepare your child will come with a challenge that is personal to you.
  • They don’t tell you that all of those things that you are lead to believe will make them happier or more content won’t work as well as a hug or an ‘I love you’.
  • They don’t tell you that the love in your child’s eyes can be more enslaving and healing than anything else you’ll ever experience.
  • And they definitely won’t tell you that there will be times when your child will in all seriousness tell you to ‘calm down’ and expect you to do so.

There are a lot of other things they don’t tell you but I haven’t experienced them yet and if I do perhaps I’ll tell you.

—Photo: flickr/Roland

Shaky Shergill’s writings can be found at the his website, The Warrior Poet.

In the run up to launch of the film Down Dog on 14 February, insideMAN is running a series of articles about fatherhood and we’d love you to get involved. You can join the conversation on twitter by using the hashtag #MenBehavingDADly; leave a comment in the section below or email us with your thoughts and ideas for articles to insideMANeditor@gmail.com.

For more information about the film see www.downdogfilm.com

 

This year’s Super Bowl adverts are the most dad positive ever

by Leave a Comment

America’s 49th Super Bowl, to be held this weekend, will bombard over 100 million televisions viewers with positive messages about fatherhood.

Super Bowl Sunday consistently produces the largest TV audience of the year in America and the competition amongst advertisers to create the most memorable commercial has become part of the annual tradition.

This year, for the first time, advertisers are not just fighting to create the best ad, but also to create the most father-friendly campaign. For an insight into the rapidly changing nature of advertising to dads in America. According to Jack Neff of Ad Age, adverts have often ignored dads or portrayed them as “a dolt, but not at this year’s Super Bowl.

During Super Bowl XLIX (that’s 49 if you don’t read Roman numerals), at least three major advertisers will run adverts promoting positive portrayals of fatherhood. They are:

Nissan #WithDad Campaign

Nissan’s #WithDad campaign features a series of seven teaser videos from popular YouTube broadcasters ahead of its main advert which will be revealed during the game. The teasers include this “crazy plastic ball prank” from Roman Antwood:

http://youtu.be/8yEgN3yj6xY

Nissan says: “We recognise the difficult task of balancing work and family life. That’s why of #WithDad campaign brings this very real struggle to life. #WithDad is a celebration of and inspiration for dads who find innovative and exciting ways to make life better for their kids and families.”

Toyota #OneBoldChoice Campaign

Toyota’s “One Bold Choice Leads to Another” campaign will feature both famous dads and everyday fathers who they say have made “bold, lasting contributions to the their families”. This trailer for the #OneBoldChoice campaign, called “To Be A Dad”, stars a number of American football players:

http://youtu.be/PZ-Yiuc9sOQ

Dove Men+Care #RealStrength

Dove’s #RealStrength advert shows kids of all ages calling on their father in a montage of emotional moments that capture some of the key stages n the fatherhood journey:

Dove says: “Ninety per cent of men around the world say that their caring side is part of their masculinity and strength. Let’s acknowledge the caring side of men and celebrate their #RealStrength as a true sign of masculinity.”

—Photo: Flickr/Jeepers Media

In the run up to launch of the film Down Dog on 14 February, insideMAN is running a series of articles about fatherhood and we’d love you to get involved. You can join the conversation on twitter by using the hashtag #MenBehavingDADly; leave a comment in the section below or email us with your thoughts and ideas for articles to insideMANeditor@gmail.com.

For more information about the film see www.downdogfilm.com

See also:

Are male students from Mars and female students from Venus?

by 4 Comments

Does it matter that men and women are making different choices about what to study at university asks insideMAN’s news editor, Glen Poole.

The current generation of teenagers is probably the most gender equal our country has ever known.

A university education is becoming progressively more accessible to larger numbers of boys and girls; the full time gender pay gap for men and women under forty is around zero and the introduction of shared parental leave will make it easier than ever before for mums and dads to balance work and family life more equally.

So why, when they go to university, are young men and women making such stereotypically gendered choices?

According to the latest figures from UCAS, women are still dominating courses like teaching, nursing and social work while men dominate engineering, building and computer sciences.

Have none of these students read the Guardian recently?

Don’t the girls know that “pink stinks” and “girls do science too”? Haven’t the boys heard that they can wear dresses and play with dolls now?

It seems that no matter how many women’s studies graduates or neuro-feminists universities produce to tell us that gender is all about nurture not nature, the sector is still incapable of creating an education system that nurtures more boys into nursing and more girls into engineering.

This isn’t a uniquely British phenomenon.

Even in Scandanavian countries where gender equality is a national obsession, there are key career paths which remain stubbornly dominated by either men or women. As the groundbreaking Norwegian documentary, Brainwashed, revealed in 2010, even in the most gender equal countries, there are certain sections of the labour market, like nursing and engineering, than remain “men’s work” and “women’s work”.

The standard feminist take on gender segregation in the world of careers, is that it’s all down to the way we’re conditioned. If only boys were allowed to play with dolls and Lego wasn’t so sexist, there would be equal numbers of 18 year olds signing up for nursing and engineering courses.

Spot the difference 

As things stand, 90.9% of nursing students are female and 84.7% of young people studying engineering are male. Other courses dominated by women include education (88% female); social work (87.6%); animal science (84.3%) and Psychology (80.6%). Men, meanwhile, dominate building (84.7% male); computer science (84.3%) and technology (80.9%).

For those progressive liberals who believe that gender is created by social engineering, the persistent dominance of men in “proper” engineering is evidence of society’s deep-rooted sexism against women.

Ask these same people if the even greater dominance of women in nursing, teaching and social work is evidence of sexism against men and they’ll jump through hoops to claim these statistics as more evidence of sexism against women.

They’ll argue that the caring, nurturing professions are seen as “feminine” and therefore rejected by men, because men are misogynistic bastards who have been taught from birth that the worst thing you can be, is a big sissy girl.

Ask if this logic also means that women don’t go into engineering because of women’s sexism against men and you’ll end up back where you started. In the general worldview of left-leaning liberals, when women are under-represented it’s evidence of sexism against women and when men are under-represented, it’s even more evidence that the world is sexist against women.

At the other end of the nature versus nurture debate, you’ll find the types of social conservatives who dream of a less complicated world where 100% of nurses are women and 100% of engineers are men.

Somewhere inbetween these polarities, common sense seems to break out.

According to Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, author of The Essential Difference, the typical male brain is more systemising, while the typical female brain is more empathising and there are plenty of men and women along this spectrum who deviate from the norm.

Baron-Cohen’s work is often quoted by the traditionalist camp as proof that men are men and women are women and never the twain shall meet. This isn’t the professor’s view. He says:

“My own position is that biology and culture interact to create this sex difference. There are some people who would argue that its just biology or just culture but I think the moderate position is both are at work.”

Nature it seems, can help explain why most engineers are still from Mars and the majority of nurses are from Venus. And while we continue to waste time focusing on these polarities, we are ignoring the  middle ground where there has been a huge influx of women into academic fields, previously dominated by men. According to UCAS, while more men and women are going to university than ever before, the gender gap in favour of female entrants has doubled from around 29,000 to 58,000 since 2006.

Mind the gap

At the same time, women have overtaken men in areas of study that were previously male dominated including law (64.9% female students); dentistry (64.1%); and medicine (55.7%). Women are also closing the gap in areas like business studies (45.2% female students); management studies (44.2%) and accounting (43%).

What does this mean for gender equality? Nobody knows because nobody has really bothered to ask. The latest figures reveal the female students entering university in 2014, outnumber men in two thirds of university courses.

Despite this fact, there remains a huge focus on promoting greater gender equality for women in higher education, without an equal and opposite push for equality for men, who are now in the minority. Of course we can also do more to make life better for Venus, but when it comes to education, we really need more focus on improving life for Mars.

—Photo:flickr/Amanda

Article by Glen Poole author of the book Equality For Men

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

 

The joys of being an adoptive dad

by Leave a Comment

What’s it like being a dad to someone else’s child? Nick Thorpe shares his personal experience of becoming father through the process of adoption.

Months before we met our son for the first time, I knew in my gut that I wanted to be his dad. The description from the social worker chimed for both of us: “A lively, sociable three-year-old with a sunny personality and a streak of mischief, C loves to talk about his feelings and listen to story books…” My wife and I put in our application, made a DVD to introduce ourselves, and decked out a new bedroom in Bob the Builder bedding.

But driving over to the west coast for our first meeting, our excitement was mingled with anxiety. Would we all get on together? Could we really meet this little boy’s emotional needs? Would we be good enough parents for him? It all suddenly felt like a colossal gamble.

We were five minutes from his foster carer’s house when a call came through on my mobile. “Hello? Are you there, Mummy Ali and Daddy Nick?” breathed a little Scottish voice. “Where are you? I’m waaaaiitiiiing …!” A few minutes later, he opened the door in his Scooby Doo T-shirt and grinned at us from behind his foster mum’s legs – and deep inside me the last ramparts of anxiety collapsed into love.

Be my parent

Six years later,  I’m trying to think how to distil everything that has happened since that momentous day, and weave in some useful advice for anyone thinking of becoming adoptive parents to the thousands of children waiting for a home.

In some ways, all the clues we needed were encoded in that first day. Within minutes C had introduced us to his much-loved toy dog called Woof (now very dog-eared but still his most treasured possession); given us a sticky-fingered tour through the photo albums of his various families (still consulted regularly as we help our 9-year-old to make sense of his past); and played together as if our life depended on it – which in the very deepest sense, it still does.

Adoption is not simply another way to become a parent. Once you’ve got through the often lengthy vetting and introductions procedure – and it’s not uncommon for this to take a couple of years – it demands a more intensive “therapeutic parenting” to restore unmet development needs and heal trauma. Traditional parenting techniques are often ineffective or even harmful: imagine how frightening ‘time out’ could be for a child who had experienced neglect.

As Adoption UK puts it: “Adopted children’s early experiences often cause deep-set confusion, fear and anger and so they can struggle with relationships and day-to-day life. This can lead to behaviour which is, initially, difficult to understand. Love alone cannot always heal the hurt.”

What is also required is a deep well of patience and understanding as these children slowly recover from searing experiences of separation, loss and trauma – and ultimately find the strength and self-acceptance to lead confident, happy lives.

Tears and laughter

As you might imagine, this is often very challenging – but it’s also hugely rewarding as healing slowly comes. There are some days when it all feels as blessed and natural as if this lively, funny child has lived with us for ever. There are others when I’m so tired and frustrated I could crawl into bed and sleep for years.

And I wouldn’t change being C’s dad for anything.

I love him so much it aches. We are woven together by commitment, by shared experience, by tears and struggles as well as joy and uproarious laughter. He’s reminded me how to play, how much we all need that magic glue, as natural as breathing – ceaseless, serious, funny, boisterous, tender play. I’ve also learned my about my own limitations, and how to ask for help more quickly.

Like all parenting, it’s an intricate, intuitive dance. There’s no simple way to do it other than to relax and forgive yourself when you fluff your steps, and stay open to the changing rhythm of the music. C has a natural yen for it, this dance of attachment. Sometimes he needs holding close in the certainty that he is loved, whatever happens. And yet there are other times when he needs me to relax and step back, trust the dance.

Being an adoptive dad is both the most challenging and fulfilling thing I’ve ever done – and it has changed my life for good.

Nick is national development officer for Fathers Network Scotland. For more information about adoption in the UK see the BAAF website. Nick includes a more detailed personal account of the adoption process (among other things), in his book URBAN WORRIER: Adventures in the Lost Art of Letting Go.

 

—photo/flickr/Niki Odophie

In the run up to the launch of a new film on Fatherhood called DOWN DOG, insideMAN will be publishing a series of articles about fatherhood and we’d love you to get involved. You can join the conversation on twitter by using the hashtag #MenBehavingDADly; leave a comment in the section below or email us with your thoughts and ideas for articles to insideMANeditor@gmail.com.  

Down Dog is released in selected cinemas on 14 February 2015. For more information see www.downdogfilm.com

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook.