MEN'S ISSUES LIBRARY
Back to Index

SPONSOR

Syndicated careers columnist Dr. Marty Nemko offers open public access to his archive of career advise:

How Do I Become  a Sponsor?

Aaron Kipnis, Ph.D.
During the last twenty years, Dr. Kipnis has taught many courses in male psychology for universities and clinical training institutes, including Harvard Medical School. He has facilitated numerous trainings for gender reconciliation between women and men, as well as advised a number of organizations, ranging from the U.S. Forest Service to the government of Colombia. He is in high demand as a keynote presenter for professional conferences and as a consultant for E.A.P., H.R.D. and other programs concerned with gender issues in the workplace. Dr. Kipnis is a contributing editor to various journals, author of numerous articles, book chapters and the critically aclaimed book, Knights Without Armor: A Practical Guide for Men in Quest of Masculine Soul. (Jeremy Tarcher, 1991, Putnam, 1992).

Elizabeth Herron, M.A.
Ms. Herron is a trainer and educator with over 15 years experience in the areas of gender reconciliation and women's empowerment. She has taught gender diplomacy for training institutes, business, government organizations and universities. Ms. Herron regularly presents at national conferences and is an ongoing consultant and gender conflict mediator to a number of organizations. She is the author of numerous articles on gender justice and women's issues, and has contributed to several anthologies, including Goodwill Towards Men and The Shadow In America.

Have you noticed that the war between the sexes seems to be getting worse? Polarized superpowers have buried the hatchet, but the war between American women and men continues unabated. On every television talk show, women and men are increasingly bitter in their accusations toward one another. We feel the tension in the universities, in our homes and in our workplaces.

The social contracts between women and men are rapidly changing. Often, however, these changes are being enacted on behalf of one sex or the other. Thus, there is a growing mistrust between the sexes in many sectors of our culture. Most men and women seem unable to tolerate the paradoxical idea that they can have differing, but equally valid, perspectives on many issues. Thomas-Hill and Tailhook brought harassment issues to the foreground. In their wake, however, instead of a productive social dialogue that enhances understanding between the sexes, more resentment seems to have grown.

In an attempt to address some of the discord between the sexes, we have been conducting gender councils around the country. We invite groups of men and women spend some time apart to talk about their issues with the opposite sex. Then we bring them into an encounter with one another. In one of our groups this spring, Susan, a thirty-five year old advertising executive, told the men, "Most men these days are insensitive jerks. When are men going to get it that we are coming to work to make a living, not to get laid. Anita Hill was obviously telling the truth. Most of the women I work with have been harassed as well."

Michael, her co- worker replied, "Then why didn't she tell him ten years ago that what he was doing was offensive? How are we supposed to know where your boundaries are if you laugh at our jokes, smile when you're angry and never confront us in the direct way a man would. How am I supposed to learn what's not OK with you, if the first time I hear about it is at a grievance hearing?"

Most of us heard permutations of this same conversation. Similar conflicts abound:

Gina, a 32 year old school teacher in Washington DC. asks "Why don't men ever take no for an answer?"

Arthur, a 40 year old construction foreman, replies that in his experience, "Some women do in fact say no when they mean yes. Women seem to believe that men should do all the pursuing in the mating dance. But then if we don't read her silent signals right, we're the bad guys. If we get it right, though, then we're heroes."

Double Trouble
Many men agree that they are in a double bind. They are labeled aggressive jerks if they come on strong, but are rejected as wimps if they don't. Women feel a similar double bind. They are accused of being teases if they make themselves attractive but don't want to be approached by men. Paradoxically, however, as Donna, an attractive, fortyish divorcee reports, "When I am up front about my desires, men often head for the hills."

As Deborah Tannen has observed men and women often have entirely different styles of communication. How many of us have jokingly speculated that men and women actually come from different planets? But miscommunications alone are not the source of all our sorrow.

Men have an ancient history of enmity toward women. For centuries, many believed women to be the cause of our legendary fall from God's grace. "How can he be clean that is born of a woman" asks the Bible. Martin Luther proposed that "God created Adam Lord of all living things, but Eve spoiled it all." The "enlightened" sixties brought us Abbie Hoffman who said, "The only alliance I would make with the Women's Liberation Movement is in bed." And from the religious right, Jerry Falwell still characterizes feminism as a "satanic attack" on the American family.

The women's movement as well, both historically and currently, significantly devalues men. Marilyn French, author of the Women's Room said, "All men are rapists and that's all they are." In Pure Lust, Mary Daly characterizes male sexuality as "ontologically evil." In response to the emerging men's movement, Betty Friedan says, "Oh God, sick . . . I'd hoped by now men were strong enough to accept their vulnerability and to be authentic without aping Neanderthal cavemen." Susan Faludi denounces the "undeclared war against women," yet in the same breath initiates a feminist "backlash" of her own against the men's movement. Paradoxically, those who are intimately involved with the men's movement report that it is primarily dedicated to ending war and racism, healing men's lives and reducing violence, responsible fatherhood, environmentalism, and creating equal partnerships with women-all things feminism appears to be ideologically aligned with.

Instead of creating astute gender diplomats and mediators, the women's and men's movements seem to be breeding increasingly aggressive gender warriors. Polarization is growing more rapidly than reconciliation. Many women and men now express their growing empowerment by firing bigger and more articulate missiles across the gender gap, at one another. There's a dearth of compassion, on both sides, for the predicaments of the other sex.

In the mixed-gender gatherings we host around the country, we hear many common themes:

• Men say women are too emotional; women say men don't feel enough.
• Men fear women's power to wound them emotionally; women fear men's power to wound them physically.
• Women feel sexually harassed; men feel their courting behavior is often misunderstood.
• Women feel men don't do their fair share of housework and child care; men feel that women don't do an equal share of providing income and home maintenance.
• Many women feel morally superior to men; many men feel that they are more logical and just.
• Women say men have destroyed the environment; men say the women's movement has destroyed the family.
• Men are often afraid to speak about their own victimization; women frequently deny their real power.
• Women feel that men don't listen, men feel women talk too much.
• Women are concerned about lesser pay; men are concerned about job safety and shorter life spans.
• Women are concerned about men's sexual abuse, men are concerned about women's physical violence and neglect toward children.
• Women are concerned about unfairness in child support payments, men are concerned about unfairness in custody and visitation rights.

It is very difficult to listen to these conflicting perspectives and consider each one of them to have intrinsic value. Many of us fear that if we listen to the story of another, it will diminish our capacity to have our own voice. The fear of losing our own initiative and identity is one of the factors that prevents us from hearing the other. It keeps us locked in polarized thinking and patterns of blame and alienation. In the absence of empathy, devaluation of the other sex grows.

A prominent woman attorney tells us, "I've been waiting twenty years for men to hear our message. Now instead of joining us at last, they're starting their own movement. And now they want us to hear that they're wounded too. It makes me sick."

A leader of the men's movement says, "I was a feminist for fifteen years. Recently, I realized that all the men I know are struggling just as much as women. Also, I'm tired of all the male-bashing. I just can't listen to women's issues anymore while passively watching so many men go down the tubes."

Changing Roles in Changing Times
Some of our gender conflict is an inevitable by-product of the positive growth that has occurred in our society in the last generation. The traditional gender roles of previous generations imprisoned many men and women in soul-killing routines. Women felt dependent and disenfranchised from power, men were divorced from feelings, family and their capacity for self-care.

With almost 70% of women now in the work force, "traditionalist" calls from Barbara Bush and Marilyn Quayle for women to return to the home full-time seem ludicrous. And increasing numbers of men now want to downshift from full-time work in order to spend more time at home. We can't go back to the old heroic model of masculinity and domestic ideal of femininity. How then do we reweave a new social fabric out of the broken strands of worn out sexual stereotypes?

Numerous participants in the well-established women's movements, as well as numbers of men in the emerging men's movements, have been discovering that the developmental needs of each sex require the strength, healing and security that comes from affiliation with a bonded, same-sex culture group. Women and men have different social, psychological, and biological realities. Boys and girls receive very different behavioral training, from infancy through adulthood. Genetically, we also have several million years of uncommon evolution as female gatherers and male hunters.

In most pre-technological societies, both women and men regularly participated in same-sex social and ceremonial groups. This process of gender affiliation usually began with some form of ritual initiation. At the onset of puberty, young men and women were introduced to the men's and women's lodge. In these lodges, they experienced a deep form of mirroring from their same sex group.

In the faces of the older men, the young man sees his possibility for his own mature masculinity. An initiated man does not seek manhood through perpetrating violence on others, but rather through serving his community. In the women's lodge, in the presence of women of all ages, sizes and shapes, the young girl discovers the mysterious, multi-faceted nature of femininity. An initiated woman learns that her true beauty and real power is something much deeper and more lasting than her sex-appeal. In these rites of passage, the elders of the same sex group also transmit information to the young men and women about their emerging roles as adult men and women, co-existing in community.

Even in our own culture, women and men have traditionally had a deeply ingrained tendency to meet apart from one another. For generations, women have gathered over coffee or quilts; men have bonded in bars and raised barns. But in our modern society, we lack viable forms of initiation which deepen our sense of self, within the context of our gender. Most young people are not taught how to respect and honor the cultural differences of the other gender. They arrive at adulthood both mystified and distrustful about the other sex's power to affect them. In fact, most of our gender conflicts are essentially conflicts between different cultures. Looking at the gender war from this perspective may help us develop better solutions to our dilemmas.

In recent decades, cultural anthropologists have discovered that people with differing cultural origins are more productive members of society when their cultural identity remains intact, within the framework of the larger culture. As a consequence, the old American "melting pot" theory of cultural assimilation has evolved into a modern theory of diversity, more of a "tossed salad." In this model, each sub-culture retains its essential identity, while co-existing within the same social container.

Applying this idea to men and women in community, we can see that the trend of the last several decades has largely been moving towards the mixing, blending and assimilating of male and female culture specific behaviors; a sex-role melting pot. In our quest for equality through sameness, however, we are losing both the beauty of our diversity and our tolerance for differences. Androgyny, for many of us, does not seem to offer a satisfying answer.

Different but Equal
In the past, perceived differences have been used to promote discrimination, devaluation and subjugation. As a result, many people ranging from New Age trancendentalists to humanistic social theorists, are justifiably suspicious of dialogues which seek to restore awareness of difference. But pretending that differences do not exist is not the way to end discrimination toward either sex.

Our present challenge is to acknowledge the value of our differing experiences as men and women, and find ways to reap this harvest in the spirit of true equality. Carol Tavris, in her book, The Mismeasure of Women, suggests that instead of "regarding cultural and reproductive differences as problems to be eliminated, we should aim to eliminate the unequal consequences that follow from them."

Some habits are hard to change, even with an egalitarian awareness. Who can discern what is social conditioning and what is a habit of nature itself? It's hard to figure out what is truly natural. It may not be possible or even desirable at all. What seems more important is that women and men start understanding each other's different cultures and granting one another greater freedom to experiment with whatever roles or lifestyles beckon them.

Lisa, a 29 year old social worker in NY tells us, "Both Joel, [her husband] and I work full-time. But it always seems to be me who ends up having to change my schedule when Gabe, our son, has a doctor's appointment, a teacher conference, is sick at home or has to be picked up after school. It's simply taken for granted that in most cases my time is less important than his. I know Joel tries really hard to be an engaged father. But the truth is that I feel I'm always on the front line when it comes to the responsibilities of parenting and keeping the home together. It's just not fair."

Joel responds by acknowledging that Lisa's complaint is accurate but on the other hand he says, "I handle all the home maintenance, fix the cars, do all the banking and bookkeeping and all the yard work as well. These things aren't hobbies. I also work more overtime than Lisa. Where am I supposed to find the time to equally co-parent too? Is Lisa going to start mowing the lawn or help me build the new bathroom? Not likely."

We believe, that as with Lisa and Joel, there are usually two, equally valid, differing points of view toward all our gender conflicts. In contemporary writings, the media, and in women's and men's groups, however, we only hear about most issues from a woman's point of view or from a man's. How then do we get to gender peace?

True equality cannot be legislated or created by merely changing the character of our social institutions. The task is also connected with re-discovering a "deep" gender identity that is not solely based upon our social, political, or economic roles. It seems that deep masculinity and femininity are most effectively experienced through men and women meeting regularly in same sex groups. How then can we ever have meaningful encounters between women and men?

From Separation to Unification
Through meeting in same sex groups, many men form intimate friendships. In addition to supporting their health and well being, these connections can take some of the pressure off their relationships with women. Men with bonded friendships no longer expect women to satisfy all their emotional needs. When women meet in groups they also support one another's need for connection and empowerment in the world as well. Women then no longer expect men to create their sense of self worth. So these same sex groups can be enormously valuable, not only to the participants, but to their relationships with members of the other sex as well.

If we remain separated, however, then we risk succumbing to our narcissism, losing perspective, and fomenting the habitual domination or scapegoating of the other sex. Male bashing from women's groups is now rampant. At a recent lecture we gave at a major university, a young male psychology student said, "This is the first time in three years on campus that I have heard anyone say a single positive thing about men or masculinity."

Many women voice the same complaint about their experiences in male dominated workplaces. Gail, a middle management executive says, "When I make proposals to the all male board of directors, I catch the little condescending smirks and glances the men give one another. They don't pull that shit when my male colleagues speak. If they're that rude in front of me, I can only imagine how degrading their comments are when they meet in private."

There are few, if any arenas today, in which women and men can safely come together, on a common ground, to discuss our rapidly changing social contracts. Instead of more sniping from the sidelines, what is needed is for groups of women and men to begin directly communicating with one another. When we take this next step and make a commitment to meeting with each other, then and only then can we begin to mutually support a true social, political, and spiritual equality. Through regularly meeting with groups of the other sex, we also gain greater appreciation for the unique gifts each sex holds.

Peace talks give us an opportunity to really hear one another and hopefully discover that many of our disagreements have equally valid, if different points of view. What many women regard as intimacy, feels suffocating and invasive to men. What many men regard as strength feels isolating and distant to women. Through blame and condemnation, women and men shame one another. Through compassionate communication, however, we can mutually empower one another.

Mutual empowerment is in the best interests of each sex. Wherever one sex suffers, the other also inevitably suffers. Our society needs to enhance the abilities of women and men to be in dialogue with one another while encouraging the security and strength that comes from affiliation with a same sex group.

Since we can only confront issues which are brought to our awareness, the "other" can provoke growth that is difficult, if not impossible, for an individual to achieve alone. John Welwood observes that "intimate relationships have become the new wilderness that brings us face to face with all our gods and daemons." The other sex pushes buttons that may never be activated in our same sex associations.

Toward the end of our councils, men and women inevitably become more accountable for the ways in which they contribute to the problem. Gina said, "I've never really heard the men's point of view on all this before. I must admit that I rarely give men clear signals when they say or do something that offends me. It's scary. But in the future now I'll try to be more up front."

Arthur then said, "All my life I've been trained that my job as a man is to keep pursuing until 'no' is changed to 'yes, yes, yes.' But I hear it that when a women says no, they want me to respect it. And I will. I get it now that what I thought was just a normal part of the dance is experienced as harrassment by some women. But you know, it seems that if we're ever going to get together now, more women are going to have to start making the first moves."

After getting support from their same sex groups and then listening to feedback from the whole council, Joel and Lisa realize that they need to take in an au pair or join a parenting cooperative. They are clearly already doing as much as humanly possible, something that never occurred to them before hearing similar stories from other working couples. They realize that if they are both going to work full time they need outside help, rather than continuing to blame and shame one another for not doing more.

Gender partnerships, based on strong, interactive, separate but equal, gender grounds, can be supportive of the developmental needs of both sexes. Becoming more affirming or supportive of our same sex does not have to lead us into opposition with the other sex. Regular separation from one another need not be the ground for antagonism. It can actually create a solid ground upon which more harmonious relationships between women and men can be built.

Through gender diplomacy, both sexes can come together from a position of strength in order to create more compassionate communities that support each other, instead of blaming one sex for not meeting the other's expectations. We have the capacity to both move away from the polarized, gender-war rhetoric that is dividing us. We can dare to create more forums for communication between the sexes that have the potential to unite and heal us.

Can we negotiate a gender peace treaty as a foundation for a new, cocreated social agenda that is equitable and just for both sexes? We're calling for a open dialogue between the leaders of the women's movement and the men's movement to attempt just that. If the Arabs and Jews can talk peace, shouldn't we at least try? This means that discussions of women's wage equity must also include men's job safety. Discussions about reproductive rights, custody rights or parental leave must include the rights of both mothers and fathers, and the needs of their children. Affirmative action to balance the male dominated political and economic leadership must also bring balance to the female dominated primary educational and social welfare systems.

We call for both sexes to come to the negotiating table from a new position of increased strength and self-esteem. We do not need to become more like one another, merely more deeply ourselves. These skills which we aspire to, and the basic attitudes that they embody, are the necessary foundation for a society capable of responding to the pressing needs of our time with committed social, political and environmental action.

About Aaron Kipnis, Ph.D. and Elizabeth Herron, M.A.
Co-Directors of the Gender Relations Institute

Dr. Kipnis and Ms. Herron work together as a team because they believe that the most effective way to teach gender diplomacy is through creating an atmosphere that feels safe and balanced to both sexes. They are the co-authors of What Women and Men Really Want: Creating Deeper Understanding and Love in Our Relationships (Nataraj Publishing Co., Fall '95). They are frequent guests on national radio and TV talk shows such as the Today Show, Donahue, Montel, Leeza, News Talk Television, Jerry Springer, Rolanda, and CNN's Sonya Live.

For correspondence write:
The Gender Relations Institute
P. O. Box 4782,
Santa Barbara, CA. 93140 U.S.A.
 
Phone/fax

MENSIGHT       TMC Home

E-mail: , Webmaster 

Copyright © 1998-2001 by The Men's Resource Network, Inc./TheMensCenter.com/MENSIGHT Magazine.  All rights reserved.
Revised:10 Dec 2004