'Bollocks' that men are oppressed!'Bollocks' that men are oppressed!
The latest edition of the University of Queensland student newspaper, Semper, has caused some controversy. With its tacky leopard skin cover, Semper's men's edition hit the campus under the title "Bollocks". Its aim, argue the editors, is "to explore the theme of masculinity and the experiences and issues affecting men".
In July, just before "Bollocks" went to print, the Network of Women Students Australia conference in Brisbane passed a motion reaffirming the importance of women's publications and condemning men's publications as reactionary and anti-feminist.
Women's editions of student newspapers were established as women-only publication space to redress the lack of positive representation of women in mainstream media and to provide a vehicle through which to educate and agitate around aspects of women's oppression. Men's publications serve an entirely different purpose.
Men's editions are excused by their supporters on the grounds that if women can discuss and challenge their gender roles, then so can men. This argument suggests that, like women, men are oppressed as a sex. Even more absurdly, it can lead to arguments that feminism — the struggle against women's oppression — itself oppresses men.
The editors of Semper, and others in the "men's movement", contribute to the backlash against feminism. Whether or not it is their stated intention, their activities obscure the fact that gender oppression is women's oppression in capitalist society. Men may be oppressed as workers, as homosexuals, as people of colour, but they are not oppressed as men.
The editors attempted to justify the publication of "Bollocks" by saying it is a "masculinity" edition, not a men's edition. This is a dubious distinction and ignores the context in which gender identity — "masculinity" and "femininity" — is created.
These sex role stereotypes distort human relationships and damage both men and women's ability to develop to their full potential as human beings. But the fact that many men are "victims" of the ideology of masculinity and have difficulty expressing their emotions or maintaining personal relationships, for example, is not a result of "men's oppression". It is a result of the gender identities created to justify women's oppression.
To view men's gender issues in isolation from the systematic inequality of women in relation to men does lead to anti-feminist conclusions.
One of the most concerning aspects of the "Bollocks" saga has been the lack of response from the student left and from feminists on campus. It reflects the decline of the women's liberation movement over the past 15 years and the consequent lower level of feminist consciousness and analysis.
The bollocky editorial maintains, "Feminism has provided women with the space and discourse which has allowed them to challenge and explore their gender roles". That's true.
But the more important truth is that this "space and discourse" have not delivered women equal pay or the right to choose to end a pregnancy; and "challenging and exploring gender roles" have not stopped domestic violence or the slave trade in south-east Asian women.
Women are still oppressed, and the women's movement still has a lot to fight for. It is only by staunchly defending and pushing forward with women-focused organising that a strong, dynamic movement for women's rights can be recreated. With such a movement — supported by men, but led by women — we can really make progress.
By Ruth Ratcliffe
[Ruth Ratcliffe is the RAGE candidate for Women's Equal Opportunity vice-president in the University of Queensland student union elections.]