Customer Reviews

Refusing to be a Man: Essays on Sex and Justice

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

I read Stoltenberg's book the same year I read Robert Bly's "Iron Yawn" (oops! I meant "Iron John"!) and frankly, I was shocked. Bly's book offended me by offering no real solutions to anything, whereas Stoltenberg not only provided creative and profound insights into the problem of gender ideology, he actually recognized and identified the real problem for what it is, something Bly seems incapable of doing. I was surprised, upon reading this book and seeing how strongly it resonated with my own experiences, to discover that I've been a "radical feminist" all my life. Like most men, I had used the "radical" label to demonize a straw man (or should that be "straw woman"?) version of feminism that no one anywhere actually espouses. It took reading this book for me to understand that I've been one of the radicals all along, and furthermore, that I shouldn't be ashamed of it. Stoltenberg's insightful, and often delightful, commentary on the idea of manhood and the social injustice required to meaningfully maintain it, forever altered my perceptions of the world around me. Goddess (or whoever) bless Stoltenberg! Find this book and read it as if your life depended on it, because it probably does.

This is excellent and critical analysis in gender studies and the only disappointing thing is that it was written over ten years ago but couldn't be more appropriate to current circumstances for women and men still today. I am so inspired and reheartened to read of a man doing such critical and crucial work in gender analysis. Too often it seems that women are doing the gender work, and when men are coming onto the scene it is in the form of movements and justifications which so offensively act to effectively maintain the power men have in a patriarchal world! Seldom have I come across a man publicising ideas which do actually serve to work with those ideas which promote the empowerment of women. The Lion must learn to eat straw like the Ox, not force the Ox to eat meat like the Lion. Equality is only achieved through the process whereby the ones who stand to lose: the abusers or perpetrators in a system of injustice, are actually prepared to lose - in order to gain. And this is what John Stoltenberg is doing and trying to explain to others in this book. A must read for everyone, most importantly for men engaging in movements in sexual politics for the equality of people on the basis of gender.

John Stoltenberg is a brave man. He shines a light into the murky waters of mens' unconscious fears and desires exposing the fragility of masculinity and the injustice that underpins it.
There is a black and white argument to this book which will discomfort many men; but I believe there are some fundamental truths, many of which form so much part of the fabric of our society, we can no longer see them critically.

At least (most) men.

I don't believe Stoltenberg is trying to deny or repress sexuality, quite the reverse, he is trying to expose the ways in which it is only mens' view of sexuality that is expressed through pornography and the media, and he is critical of it.
For it depicts a type of sexuality which is about domination and subordination and does not uphold any principles of justice or ethics;
'It is now assumed that by giving eroticised domination and subordination free expression, is the fullest flowering of sexual freedom'. Why should this be the norm?

If you are of the persuasion that men are 'naturally' this way, then you will despise this book.
But if you believe that sexuality is more of a spectrum, then you will take this book for what it is; an opportunity for men to critically look at their role in propagating a type of sexual injustice that objectifies and demeans women whilst stereotyping and patronising men.

This book is NOT about demonising men, this book is about highlighting, debating and freeing us from the above.

It is above all about the potential to change an outmoded, unjust, narrow and frankly dysfunctional perspective of sexuality, which does little to foster positive and healthy sexual attitudes between the sexes- if of course that should be of any interest to men!

Although Stoltenberg's affiliation with Andrea Dworkin and his views on pornography might turn off some readers, his essays on feminism and the ways sexism and masculinity negatively impact men's lives were tremendously important to my understanding of issues of gender, sex and sexuality. While you may not agree with every piece in the book, Stoltenberg's objective -- to formulate a theory of liberation for men that will also liberate women -- is a welcome radical exploration and excavation of men's lives.

This book is the singularly best book written by a man about sexism. It is a must read for both men and women. It is a very positive book, useful for men to examine both how sexism harms women and themselves. It is not abstract, but factual, straightforward, enlightening and smart, with very good examples and well constructed arguments, impossible to refute with any honesty and common sense. Highly REC

I am a straight man.

There is a whole lot of odd hate going on in these reviews. This book isn't about ignoring sexuality, it's about understanding that the base-level, "normal" male sexuality is hurtful and wrong. It explains that sexuality is something that is learned from our culture, and that men are able to leave behind this old sexuality for something better. The book never says "don't think about sex," it just tells men that there is a positive sexuality and it is worth having.

MY problem with the book is that John Stoltenberg is a homosexual. He was married, yes, but to a lesbian. Neither was bi. They were straight gay.

This to me seems like an electrician trying to tell me that my roof is leaky. Sure, he can see that my roof is messed up, but he has no idea how to fix it. This comes through in the text. Stoltenberg pretty much says "just be different than what is expected" and leaves it at that. He doesn't give specific hints, or otherwise explain HOW men are supposed to step back from porn and everything else. He just says to do it. That's because he doesn't know how. He was, from the beginning, NOT treating women wrong. I assume he never lusted after a woman. I, of course, don't know, but if he's gay all signs point to he didn't.

Of course, he's right, my roof is terribly leaky. But he can't tell me much besides that.

Anyway, good book, he's right. It just sucks that I'm left hanging like this.

John Stoltenberg is a courageous man. In his book, Refusing to be a Man: Essays on Sex and Justice (1989/2000), Stoltenberg takes a critical look at male sexual identity. He understands it as a social construction deeply rooted in patriarchy, pornography, and violence, and supported by the perpetual power of male privilege reflected in the cracked mirror of rapist ethics. There are not many men holding themselves and those of their sex-class accountable for the millennia of atrocities against women ... or to the atrocities from last night ... or from this afternoon. This series of thirteen essays is the result of Stoltenberg's observations, feelings, and questions about what it means to be a man who's identity seems violently polarized against everyone and everything that doesn't measure up to being a real-man. He believes that only in understanding the relationship between eroticism, ethics, and gender identity will men be able to take responsibility for their actions, their choice of actions, the effects of those actions, and do so without asserting some mythical right based on their genitals. Moreover, he doesn't place himself outside this inquiry, and in several of his essays relates his own conflicted emotions about being a member of the male community, constantly struggling for consciousness in an unconscious world. This questioning and examination - holding himself accountable - makes his realizations more striking for the reader. John Berger (author of Ways of Seeing) of wrote, "We only see what we look at. To look is an act of choice.". Stoltenberg is a courageous man because he not only looks, but he chooses to act. This book is his manifesto for change. It continues to resonate after fourteen years.

Albert Camus once wrote, "One can't get along without domineering or being served... The lowest man in the social scale still has his wife or child. If he's unmarried, a dog. The essential thing, after all, is being able to get angry with someone who has no right to talk back". I have read no pithier summary of the hierarchical, fractal nature of oppression. Those more optimistic than Camus seek ways to "get along" without domineering.

Stoltenberg appears to see the world through a polarising filter. Good or worthwhile acts by men disappear; evil or destructive acts by women disappear. (Try this exercise: when did you last read something humane a man wrote? Forget it, it doesn't exist. When were you last taunted by a female? Perhaps, if never else, in high school? Forget it, it didn't exist...) This leaves him carrying the monstrous, useless deadweight of masculinity, which he hopes to refuse - if "being a man" means choosing to get along by being domineering, why, then he will do something else.

The first thing you are told in assertiveness training is to make your criticism focussed, precise, and constructive - it's more likely to be effective put that way:

DO say, "Stoltenberg seems to assume that men all want penetrative sex exclusively, women want sexuality but NOT penetrative sex, and when I see a naked woman (in pornography, for instance) numerous horrifying intentions pop into my head. In my experience these statements are mostly wrong, or at least unhelpful, and I wouldn't want my 12-year-old son touching Stoltenberg (or Dworkin, or the Marquis de Sade) with a ten-foot pole".

DON'T say, "Stoltenberg is part of a clique of men-bashing, hatred-driven feminists who should rot and incinerate in hell". If you want people to behave like reasonable human beings, give them the option...

This is not a book to live by. Everyone needs to be able to see when those around them are being stupid, dangerous, or destructive - or compassionate, or brave, or ingenious, or whatever. Seeing the world in sharp, Manichean, black and white stops that from happening. That Stoltenberg believes he has switched sides from bad to good is scant consolation.

The essential thing is looking for ways to live without having to get angry with someone who has no right to talk back. Camus and Stoltenberg both feel like part of the problem.

It's becoming clearer, the further away we get from them, just how twisted the nineties actually were. I lived through them, & i remember this book coming out & swallowing it & its hateful misandry whole. The self-hating, self-harming counterpart of Valerie Solanas's genocidal SCUM Manifesto, even the title of this book represents all that will be reviled about our age in generations to come: the demonizing of men & masculinity; the bizarre belief that ones own biology (if male) is sinful & something you can - & should - choose to live contrary to; the blind adherence to Politically Correct values over scientific truths; Nurture vs Nature...& so forth & so on..

Twenty years later, & it feels like things are beginning to shift a little. There are stirrings, seeds of discontent. All the hard sciences the past two decades have shown us more & more how differences between the sexes are born not made, & there has been a slow waking up to what kind of 'equality' feminism as a movement has brought about. The boys from broken homes are growing into men. They know that they've been lied to & they're not afraid to say so anymore.

I look forward to the day this sorry excuse for a book is seen for what it is: vile pamphleteering for a hateful ideology.

It's not here yet, it might be a little while coming, but that day will arrive. I may not get there with you, but a change is gonna come.

This book is my bible. This is the best book I have ever known, and I carry it with me everywhere.

I also quote the author with complete citation as my signature quotations with e - mail. And every other opportunity given me to do so.

This author, his perceptions? Genius.

'Bout time, too, that there was a man so brilliant.

I have already put in, and am awaiting, an order for his Refusing to be a Man: Essays on SOCIAL Justice ... not yet out but soon!

Blue Maas bluemaas@truserve.com