‘Women have the power.’ Readers debate ‘ugh-men’ feminism, sexism and the laws of attraction

Open this photo in gallery:

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter.

From the Comments is designed to highlight interesting and thoughtful contributions from our readers. Some comments have been edited for clarity. Everyone can read the comments but only subscribers will be able to contribute. Thank you to everyone furthering debate across our site.

Readers respond: The laws of attraction

I’m happy married to a woman who is the anchor of my life. We share all of the labours of a family, kind of divided along those archaic and offensive “traditional” lines – she doesn’t like shovelling or using our snow blower, and I don’t descale the kettle. We are happy and harmonious and these types of articles come across as foreign to us when they outline sins we didn’t know we were committing.

Reading articles like this remind me of a quote from a friend back in our youth: Ninety per cent of the population is entirely undateable. –EB41

The term toxic masculinity is incredibly sexist. Men are men. We can’t be anyone else. –Richard Wright

Consider to what extent men are the way they are because women made them that way. In evolution, where women had a choice about who to breed with, they rewarded “strong” men. Willful men. Men who could exert power over the world around them and protect them and their children. Qualities that are no longer needed in a peaceful society? Still, women (acting on their own impulses shaped by evolution) continue, at least in their younger years, to favour the bad boy, thus ensuring a continuing supply of bad men. Women have the power. In time, men will remake themselves into whatever will make them attractive to women … into whatever women want, when women start signalling clearly what that is. –staringfish

I had to look up more than a few of the terms and phrases just so I could understand the gist of some of the sentences. I must be really out of it because I don’t even know 90 per cent of these groups and/or expressions. I consider myself well-read.

I can’t tell if this is in support of feminism, men-bashing, men in general, men that treat women properly or Casanovas or spousal abusers or whatever. Is there some kind of class I can take so I can catch up on all this? Whatever happened to simple dating and finding a connection with someone that you are attracted to and have similar interests with and like to spend time together?

Please help. –Mountain Mojo

I tried reading the article, got a few paragraphs in and found my head spinning. Didn’t realize how complicated it is for some folk. I’m too old for this stuff. Electrical theory, physics, chemistry was never a problem, but this, phew. Going out for a walk to enjoy some fresh air, sunshine and birds singing. –rollin hand1

‘Sadly separation is looking like the only logical and clean choice.’ Readers react to Alberta’s separation survey and a possible sales tax

‘Thank goodness Elizabeth Warren persisted.’ Readers debate sexism and the U.S. Democratic race, plus other letters to the editor

‘Alberta seems locked in the past, with neither care nor vision for the future.’ Readers react to Alberta’s oil-friendly budget, plus other letters to the editor

Open this photo in gallery:

Odd; I understood it quite well. Clearly different readers have different reading skills and varying abilities to grasp ideas. If we extend this variation in ability further, we get to the point or points at which people who have reached their limits simply say: “I don’t want to, I don’t care who’s making what point, or trying to, it’s just a slog to try and make sense of what [blank] means.” They no longer care about what they can’t (or don’t want to) understand. They fall back on what they have always done (or have been told to do) in the past. To them what they are reading is so strange that it is incomprehensible. It seems to be “some kind of a sermon in a foreign language … I recognize the words, but put together, they don’t make any sense.” In fact, the words “put together” do make sense, but not to those who lack the patience or ability or imagination to come to terms with what they are reading. Instead of considering that the fault may be their own, they blame the author: “I’d much rather read an author who takes the time and care to make his/her points legible and meaningful.” Yet people who can’t or won’t understand unfamiliar ideas have the vote. –midas1

As a 60-year-old male, I’m more concerned that there are age 50-plus readers out there who are still unfamiliar with the terms you refer to as problematic. That speaks much more to their deficiencies than it does to the issue of the author not using “plain-speak.”

Opinion pieces can and should also be used to educate. It’s up to the reader to take advantage. If they don’t, it’s their choice, but it speaks volumes. –John T.

As an independent female I will do a step further and say it: I love men.

I love my son, my father, my brother, my boyfriends and my friends.

I love the things that men do for our society that most females are not willing or unable to do; dangerous, hard, messy and labour-intensive work. Construction, garbage pickup, riggers, drivers, etc. I love that they are what we as women are not; men.

I also acknowledge there are people in the world, men and women, who abuse, control and exploit others.

It is intellectually lazy to judge people based on gender rather than a person’s character. –willi-jo

Open this photo in gallery:

My mother was a Rosie the Riveter during the Second World War, and at least the equal to my father throughout their lives together. It’s not what you are, it’s who you are that counts. –whengoodmendonothing

So I’m going to go out on a limb and say that I think this article was written for women, because a lot of the male commenters here didn’t seem to get it.

Guys, she wasn’t bashing men. She’s saying heterosexual women are just going to make themselves unhappy if they buy into man-hating feminism. Also that pushing man-hating feminism on heterosexual women is its own kind of sexist oppression. Geez.

Anyway, I enjoyed and read the whole article, no problem. I also thought the “Let’s Generalize About Men” video was hilarious. –Freshycat

I thought this was pretty good also. Reading some of the responses, it might be that some people haven’t been paying enough attention to the online zeitgeist to understand what the writer Phoebe Maltz Bovy is talking about. –K McIntyre

This article requires careful and patient reading. Here's one key paragraph which most of the online commentators here seem to have missed. It is the gist of the piece.

If you didn't understand this, then you missed the main point of the article:

“If Ban Men feminism puts me off, it’s because I like men. Not all men (heh), but man-liking has been a consistent feature of my life and the source of much happiness. The tendency has persisted despite encounters with male awfulness, but has not made my life awful. Like all feminists, I’d like to see sexism disappear. Sexism, but not men.” –proscenium

Open this photo in gallery:

One of the most interesting things about reading The Globe and articles like this is a glimpse of what life might be like in some circles in Toronto. Living in small-town Canada feels like being from another planet most of the time. Fascinating. –jbv1

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.