Love, Venn Diagrams, and the Private/Secret Distinction

It’s not as complicated as the title suggests.

In a reversal of how it usually works, I wrote a piece for the Frisky that then got picked up at the Good Men Project: What’s the Difference Between Privacy and Secrecy? (Here’s the identical piece, but with a different formatting and comments section, at GMP). Excerpt:

Guarding the other’s solitude is about allowing your partner the right to a private, not a secret life. It’s a recognition that even the most sexually exclusive relationship functions a bit like a Venn diagram, in which the largest portion is a shared intimacy, but in which each partner is left with something that is theirs alone. It means having the trust to expect the truth, but also the respect not to ask questions that invite dishonest responses.

I’ve never asked my wife how many people she slept with before me. I don’t know how often she masturbates, or what she thinks about when she does. I trust her to manage her private sexual life in such a way that it doesn’t rob our shared intimacy of passion and power. And I trust her to be faithful as she trusts me.

We don’t have the right to a hidden life that contradicts our public commitments. But we have the right to a private world – and a private sexuality – that is ours alone.

Read the whole thing.

Note: Obviously, this is not a distinction I invented, though it’s one that doesn’t get discussed often enough. My cousin Tom Bishop gets credit for reminding me to write about it, and Charlie Glickman gets the hat-tip for reminding me that Marty Klein does a nice job of distinguishing privacy and secrecy in his now out-of-print 1989 classic, Your Sexual Secrets.

Don’t Call Them Cougars: Women Dating “Slightly Younger” Men

I did a piece for Jezebel that runs today: The Dating Paradigm Shifts for Women in their 30s. It begins:

This is so weird,” my friend Nicole -– a successful 33 year-old entertainment executive — tells me. “Ever since I started dating, I went for older guys, sometimes much older. But now I’m head over heels for a 29 year-old. It’s crazy, but right now, it just makes sense.”

While the “cougar” (the older woman who pursues significantly younger men) is at least partly an overhyped media creation, there’s some evidence that for one age group in particular, this is a real emerging trend. More than a few women in their late 20s to mid 30s who generally dated older men are now switching to going out with younger guys. While the stereotypical cougar is a woman in her 40s with a boyfriend little more than half her age, these women are still in their 30s going out with guys just a few short years younger than themselves…

Read the whole thing.

Thursday Short Poem: Pollard’s “Thirtieth”

This Clare Pollard poem ran in the Guardian a couple of weeks ago. And as I have many younger friends who are hitting their 30th birthdays (with mothers who worry that they’re “running out of time”), this seemed as good a piece on “how we live now” as I’ve seen in a while. The last line is perfection.

Thirtieth

Sandy Denny’s singing: “who knows where the time goes?”
and it isn’t us, still partying on a Sunday afternoon,
slumped on a garden patio beneath a greasy sun,
after a night of pale, crooked lines;
after improvised cocktails of gin and raspberry vodka.

“She died at thirty one”, someone says, plucking
an olive from an ashy slick.
“Fell down the stairs.”

And I’m aware I’m wearing grim, glittery rags; yesterday’s knickers.
My back to honeysuckled brick, I flick tongue over gums
that taste like a gun in the mouth.

A mobile flashes MUM. No one picks up.
We know how mothers fret over the ticking clocks:
our one-bed flats,
our ovaries.

Instead we fill our plastics up with cider,
and watch wasps as they circle spikes of lavender;
the big sky’s cirrus scraps –
a Brimstone butterfly flaps, then settles
on a blackened bone.

My friends, we are so lucky and disgusting,
and will pay for this tomorrow.

Quick update

For a Good Men Project piece, I’m interviewing Warren Farrell today. We’re polar opposites in terms of our approach to men’s issues, but I’m looking forward to a good discussion about his proposed White House Council on Men and Boys.

Lots of writing coming that will appear elsewhere first.

White Knight Syndrome, Amy Winehouse, and Damsels in Distress

This week’s column at the Good Men Project looks at Amy Winehouse, Damsels in Distress, and the under-discussed prevalence of White Knight Syndrome. Excerpt:

Guys with WKS have a variety of motivations. Some grew up in families with self-destructive mothers, aunts, or sisters whom they were unable to save from addiction. Now that they themselves are adults, White Knights hope that romantic devotion will be the “missing piece” that will turn them from ineffectual, heartbroken bystanders into heroes.

Other White Knights are guys who adopt rescuing as a kind of competition strategy. As one of my students once told me, “I knew I’d never be the best-looking or the most athletic. But I figured I could love harder and stronger than any other man out there.” This becomes less about the rescue of a flesh-and-blood woman and more about proving that the White Knight is “not like the other guys.” Men with WKS like to think of themselves as rare exceptions in a world filled with abusive or emotionally toxic men.

But the biggest emotional payoff of WKS isn’t the fantasy of being the one to rescue the self-destructive damsel. Rather, by devoting single-minded attention to those whom they imagine to be so much worse off than themselves, White Knights get to avoid taking a hard look inwards. Whether it’s focusing on a drunk and addicted pop star or a suicidal girlfriend, rescuers dodge the often painful and challenging inner work that they need to do so badly.

Many men tried to rescue Amy Winehouse from her disease; in the end, they failed. These guys – and the millions of men who imagine they would have done better in their place – need reminding that chemical dependency is often stronger than love. Without losing all compassion for the victims of addictions, White Knights need to stop falling in love with vulnerability and weakness. And they need to start falling in love with strength, stability, and the will to live.

Read the whole thing.

“Find out what it means to me”: r-e-s-p-e-c-t, Rodney Atkins, Aretha Franklin, and sexual justice

A revised version of this post appeared in 2007.

In the various workshops I’ve put on for young men (and not so-young-men), I’ve talked a lot about the real meaning of one of my favorite words, “respect.” (And if you’re thinking of the Aretha Franklin song now, hold on, I’ll get to it.)

I often start by writing the word “respect” on a flip chart or chalkboard, and then ask the folks I’m working with to play the word association game with me. Everyone gets to throw out the first thing that comes into their head when they hear or see the word. As you might expect, I get a lot of different definitions. Some people do think of chivalry; almost always, someone will say that “opening the door for a woman” is the first thing that he thinks of when he hear the word. Others will offer a negative definition, suggesting that “respect” is more about what you don’t do than what you do: “It’s like watching your language around a girl”; “It’s about not grabbing her just ’cause you want to”; (I remember that definition vividly from one high school group), “It’s treating her as a girl and not like a guy.” I write as many of the definitions and word associations on the board as I can. <

I then tell them the meaning of the word. Spectare means “to look”; re means “again.” So respect is “to look again.” I then ask the audience what they think “to look again” might mean when it comes to how we treat each other. (Usually, some wiseacre will say something like “That means when you see a girl who’s lookin’ fine, you look at her twice!” Everyone laughs indulgently.) But most of them start to get it: “looking again” means looking beyond a superficial exterior. Another way of thinking about “respect” is to suggest that it’s moving beyond “looking at” to “seeing”. To be looked at is to be perceived as an object; to be seen is to be recognized as a unique and valuable human being. Most young people can instantly think of times when they’ve felt the difference between “being looked at” and being truly “seen.”

Respect isn’t chivalry, if what we mean by chivalry is a fairly rigid, antiquated code of prescribed ways of treating men and women differently. Indeed, respect and chivalry can be in considerable opposition. If a code of chivalry conditions me to treat a woman in a certain way merely because she’s a woman, then by definition I’m not respecting her — because I’m not seeing her as a person, only as a female. Think of the epic battles that happen over the issue of holding doors open. I can think of countless men who’ve complained that, to put it vulgarly, they’ve been “bitched out” by women for whom they held open a door or performed some other act of traditional “courtesy.” Respect, however, is deliberately refraining from imposing your own particular views on how the sexes ought to relate onto others. Respect is paying enough attention to those around you that you begin to see as unique human beings; respect is adapting your own behavior to the different needs of different people. Chivalry is a “two-size fits all” approach.

Everyone knows the Aretha Franklin R-E-S-P-E-C-T song. One of the best lines in it is the refrain “R-E-S-P-E-C-T, find out what it means to me.” It’s not a throw-away lyric! Find out what it means to me. That “to me” is vital, and it’s right on. Respect may mean one thing to Aretha, and another thing to Joanne, still another to Maria, still another to Jill, still another to Ralph or Harry or Ted. Respect involves making a unique connection with one other human being; it is inherently incompatible with any rigid code of gender-based conduct. Holding a door open for someone who doesn’t want the door held isn’t respect.

Aretha’s magnificent song has a very different definition of respect than one that did very well on country radio a couple of years ago: “Cleaning my Gun”, by Rodney Atkins. A song about a protective father, it includes these wince-inducing lines:

Well now that I’m a father
I’m scared to death one day my daughter’s gonna find
That teenage boy I used to be
Who seems to have just one thing on his mind
She’s growing up so fast it won’t be long
‘fore I’ll have to put the fear of god
Into some kid at the door

Come on in boy, sit on down
And tell me ’bout yourself
So you like my daughter, do you now
Yeah we think she’s something else
She’s her daddy’s girl, her momma’s world
She deserves respect, thats what she’ll get
Ain’t it son, ya’ll run on and have some fun
I’ll see you when you get back
Probably be up all night
Still cleaning this gun

It’s an old and ugly trope: Daddy uses the threat of violence to guard his daughter’s sexual innocence. “Respect”, in the Atkins song, offers no possibility for agency on the daughter’s part. Rather, “respect” is defined as “keep your hands off my little girl”. The beau is invited to find out what “respect” means to Dad, and it doesn’t matter one bit what it means to his daughter. And the end result will be the same: keeping your hands off your date just because you’re scared of her papa’s gun is no more a sign of respect than pawing at her in self-centered lust. In either scenario, there’s a complete failure to look again, to see what the woman involved might actually want.

Many feminists are rightly suspicious of the language of “respect” because they hear the word the way the likes of Rodney Atkins use it. But the word is a useful one, particularly when we reclaim its original meaning. When we use it the way Aretha used it, with its exuberant insistence that we “find out” the unique desires of the people with whom we interact, it’s a positive concept indeed. In the struggle against rape, harassment, and sexualized violence, clarifying the authentic meaning of “respect” is vital. And once properly understood, it’s something we can insist upon.

Anders Breivik, anti-feminist MRA?

I was asked to write a short piece on Norway for the Good Men Project. Here’s Anders Breivik, Anti-Feminist MRA?

The last two paragraphs:

The mass murder of so many young people (of both sexes) may well have been his way of cutting down not only the best and the brightest of the future Norwegian progressive elite, but of killing off those who were personally and ideologically committed to the idea that men and women are radically equal.

Those who died at Utoya were not chosen at random. They were killed because of who they were and who they were going to become. Judging by the values of their parents and their party, these martyred young people were radically committed to pluralism, to progress, and to sexual justice. Those were the causes they gathered for on that little island, and those commitments were the reason they died.

Please comment at the Good Men Project, not here.

Saturday Short Poem: Lopate’s “We Who Are Your Closest Friends”

Taking a weekend breather from blogging and writing and commenting. I appreciate the continued discussion below some of the recent posts; thanks, everyone.

My sister Elizabeth sent me a link to this Phillip Lopate poem, which appeared on Garrison Keillor’s website yesterday. Lopate, a distinguished critic and professor as well as poet, captures the idle paranoia that more than a few of us have known. It’s very fine.

We Who Are Your Closest Friends

we who are
your closest friends
feel the time
has come to tell you
that every Thursday
we have been meeting
as a group
to devise ways
to keep you
in perpetual uncertainty
frustration
discontent and
torture
by neither loving you
as much as you want
nor cutting you adrift

your analyst is
in on it
plus your boyfriend
and your ex-husband
and we have pledged
to disappoint you
as long as you need us

in announcing our
association
we realize we have
placed in your hands
a possible antidote
against uncertainty
indeed against ourselves
but since our Thursday nights
have brought us
to a community of purpose
rare in itself
with you as
the natural center
we feel hopeful you
will continue to make
unreasonable
demands for affection
if not as a consequence
of your
disastrous personality

then for the good of the collective

The “completely insane castrati sings”

I am a Dan Savage fan, America’s favorite sex columnist, but would rather he hadn’t chosen to call me a “castrati” in his response today to my Jezebel/GMP piece. In To Tell The Truth, Dan writes that my post at Jezebel was “completely insane”.

Joe Perez offers a kinder and more nuanced take here: Why Hugo Schwyzer and Dan Savage don’t see eye to eye about porn.

In eight years of blogging, I’ve never been on the receiving end of quite so much invective as I have been these past ten days since my “spermgate” post hit. It’s quite an experience. Good thing I’m a rather happy-go-lucky ENFP Gemini.

And shouldn’t I be a castrato, anyway?

Booty shorts and body image: sexualization in high school sports

My Thursday column at Healthy is the New Skinny looks at the problem of creeping sexualization in high school girls’ sports:

Take a look through an old high school yearbook from the 1970s. You’ll see the volleyball players with some fairly short shorts – and the guys on the basketball team with shorts that may well be even shorter. The tops are mostly loose fitting; the outfits are comfortable and practical.

But take a look at what high school volleyball players are wearing today – and at what the boys on the basketball team have on! Over the past two decades, boys’ shorts have gotten dramatically longer and their uniforms much more concealing, all without any sacrifice of athletic performance. But even as more and more opportunities are emerging for girls to play sports, the uniforms that they’re required to wear (particularly in sports like track and volleyball) have become tighter and more revealing.

The issue isn’t improved performance. In high school volleyball, it’s hard to argue that French-cut briefs lead to a dramatic step up in anything other than attendance at games. (Many women I interviewed for this piece report that the number of people showing up for volleyball matches or track events rise when schools begin to require skimpier uniforms). The issue is how these uniforms and the expectations that come with them affect young women’s self-esteem.

Read the whole thing.