Cyberspace and MITM Continued
I had an interesting conversation yesterday about the post below, and the following question was raised:
What if men have these personal sites because they feel they have to sell themselves more to prove that they belong in the movement to end violence against women?
Very interesting question, and on the surface, I think it's a possibility. However, I then have to think that a man using that approach would be a little out of touch with the movement. For instance, if he's really trying to prove himself as a part of the movement, wouldn't he do that with a gesture that shows he puts the movement before himself? Rather than reinforcing a male dominated culture? Wouldn't he start an organization or align himself with an organization and take a back seat as a way of saying, "OK! I get it!"
Earl (see comment from previous post) also made a good point about men using these sites in lieu of a publicist. After all, they do have to make a living, and they do so by consulting, writing, speaking at events, etc. I would suggest that this might also be a consequence of what I mentioned about men not typically being very welcome in the organizations that focus on ending violence against women or serving victims of domestic and sexual violence. So, they become one-man organizations and take their work on the road. Fair enough. And good for them.
What that has done, however, is create prominent men in the movement that are countered to prominent female-run organizations in the movement. I can recall by name more men working on this issue on a national and international level than I can women, and I am steeped in this work pretty much 24/7. I can name many prominent women and men who do the work locally, but nationally and internationally is another story. And I wonder about how that message reinforces a patriarchal norm.
And on yet another hand, men are lucky to be able to do that. Why? Because then they are not beholden to the whims and fancies of funders. The money from foundations and government entities has done much to shape the direction of this movement, especially in the last 10-15 years. (More on this tomorrow.) Non-profits that rely on those funds then also must bow to the funders demands and make certain sacrifices in what they'll say and do. Men (and women if there are some) who do this work as individuals might have the luxury of doing the work in a way consistent with their own beliefs without worrying as much about meeting grant deliverables that may or may not be consistent with the work. Naturally, this approach would also bring it's own set of challenges, but I'm too tired to go down that road right now.
Maybe I'm thinking about this too much (really, who'd be surprised)... but it's important to exercise a critical eye lest I lose it one of these days.
(Earl also posted a comment about the V-Day link being broken in the original post, and I think I've fixed that, too. Thanks Earl!)
What if men have these personal sites because they feel they have to sell themselves more to prove that they belong in the movement to end violence against women?
Very interesting question, and on the surface, I think it's a possibility. However, I then have to think that a man using that approach would be a little out of touch with the movement. For instance, if he's really trying to prove himself as a part of the movement, wouldn't he do that with a gesture that shows he puts the movement before himself? Rather than reinforcing a male dominated culture? Wouldn't he start an organization or align himself with an organization and take a back seat as a way of saying, "OK! I get it!"
Earl (see comment from previous post) also made a good point about men using these sites in lieu of a publicist. After all, they do have to make a living, and they do so by consulting, writing, speaking at events, etc. I would suggest that this might also be a consequence of what I mentioned about men not typically being very welcome in the organizations that focus on ending violence against women or serving victims of domestic and sexual violence. So, they become one-man organizations and take their work on the road. Fair enough. And good for them.
What that has done, however, is create prominent men in the movement that are countered to prominent female-run organizations in the movement. I can recall by name more men working on this issue on a national and international level than I can women, and I am steeped in this work pretty much 24/7. I can name many prominent women and men who do the work locally, but nationally and internationally is another story. And I wonder about how that message reinforces a patriarchal norm.
And on yet another hand, men are lucky to be able to do that. Why? Because then they are not beholden to the whims and fancies of funders. The money from foundations and government entities has done much to shape the direction of this movement, especially in the last 10-15 years. (More on this tomorrow.) Non-profits that rely on those funds then also must bow to the funders demands and make certain sacrifices in what they'll say and do. Men (and women if there are some) who do this work as individuals might have the luxury of doing the work in a way consistent with their own beliefs without worrying as much about meeting grant deliverables that may or may not be consistent with the work. Naturally, this approach would also bring it's own set of challenges, but I'm too tired to go down that road right now.
Maybe I'm thinking about this too much (really, who'd be surprised)... but it's important to exercise a critical eye lest I lose it one of these days.
(Earl also posted a comment about the V-Day link being broken in the original post, and I think I've fixed that, too. Thanks Earl!)
technorati tags: takebackthetech
posted by Tiger on a Leash at 3:22 PM
2 comments
