feminism is a struggle for women against men, who maintain and benefit from women's class oppression. men are definitionally not our comrades in feminism. they may be allies if they put in the effort, but feminists are under no obligation to coddle them. when working things out gracefully and handholding are the gendered expectations for women, demanding they do that within their own liberation movement is fundamentally anti-feminist.
the original post about that "performative male" crap was true, and you are right that we shouldn't discourage men from being allies to the feminist cause; but no, we are under no obligation to "work through" issues with an oppressor causing problems in a liberation movement that is opposed to his class.
Strongly disagree about feminism being defined as "a struggle for women against men." That's a very simplistic understanding of what we're up against and I don't think it's actually helpful. This part of bell hooks' The Will to Change specifically speaks on this:
It is no accident that feminists began to use the word “patriarchy” to replace the more commonly used “male chauvanism” and “sexism.” These courageous voices wanted men and women to become more aware of the way patriarchy affects us all. In popular culture the word itself was hardly used during the heyday of contemporary feminism. Antimale activists were no more eager than their sexist male counterparts to emphasize the system of patriarchy and the way it works. For to do so would have automatically exposed the notion that men were all-powerful and women powerless, that all men were oppressive and women always and only victims. By placing the blame for the perpetuation of sexism solely on men, these women could maintain their own allegiance to patriarchy, their own lust for power. They masked their longing to be dominators by taking on the mantle of victimhood.
Like many visionary radical feminists I challenged the misguided notion, put forward by women who were simply fed up with male exploitation and oppression, that men were “the enemy.” As early as 1984 I included a chapter with the title “Men: Comrades in Struggle” in my book Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center urging advocates of feminist politics to challenge any rhetoric which placed the sole blame for perpetuating patriarchy and male domination onto men:
Separatist ideology encourages women to ignore the negative impact of sexism on male personhood. It stresses polarization between the sexes. According to Joy Justice, separatists believe that there are “two basic perspectives” on the issue of naming the victims of sexism: “There is the perspective that men oppress women. And there is the perspective that people are people, and we are all hurt by rigid sex roles.”…Both perspectives accurately describe our predicament. Men do oppress women. People are hurt by rigid sexist role patterns. These two realities coexist. Male oppression of women cannot be excused by the recognition that there are ways men are hurt by rigid sexist roles. Feminist activists should acknowledge that hurt, and work to change it—it exists. It does not erase or lessen male responsibility for supporting and perpetuating their power under patriarchy to exploit and oppress women in a manner far more grievous than the serious psychological stress and emotional pain caused by male conformity to rigid sexist role patterns.
Feminism is a movement. Feminists need to be able to engage with each other, critique each other, learn from each other, in order to accomplish our goals. Both men and women can and should be involved in feminism, and therefore men and women who are involved in feminism will have to engage with each other, critique each other, learn from each other. This doesn't mean "coddling," this doesn't mean "hand holding," this doesn't mean a one-sided dynamic where women save men from the patriarchy. We need to work together. There's no way around this.
With all due respect, we need to be a little less sensitive about this subject. Every time I talk about this, people put words in my mouth and immediately jump to the worst-case scenario of women having to "coddle" men. And I'm not saying that's not a risk. But you aren't actually engaging with the situation I'm actually describing. I am never going to say this is a simple or clear cut approach that will never involve cis men overreaching or expecting to be catered to unfairly. But it feels, to me, like this sort of concern about potentially recreating patriarchal gendered dynamics, rather than making people like you more invested in creating a strong feminist community dynamic with men, leads you to reject the notion outright as if it's already doomed. Just because it's hard and messy does not mean it's not important to do.
Especially given that already in feminism we must critique and combat white supremacy, transphobia, classism, ableism, sanism colonialism and imperialism, abusive and just generally poor behavior, even only considering women. Black women have been having to coddle white women in feminism for decades, as have trans people to cis women, and working-class women to middle-upper class women. We cannot throw in the towel on any of this, because we need each other. There is no other way.
To quote Diane di Prima: It's going to take all of us, pushing from all sides, to bring this thing down. And all that pushing will necessarily involve working with the other people doing the pushing. I sincerely recommend you read The Will to Change, as it is an extremely enlightening and compassionate book on men & feminism that does not shy away from either the extent of patriarchal violence and it's effects on women, OR the complex and important process of engaging with men and critically examining male/female dynamics in order to strengthen our feminist movements.
I guess, ultimately, my problem is that people like yourself hear "work with men as comrades in feminism," and conclude that this is advocating for or will inevitably lead to "coddling," and it's an extremely defeatist way of looking at things. Exhaustion and trauma from years of dealing with misogyny is understandable, but personally, I think feminism should not be easy. It should ask something of everyone who engages with it. It should ask that if men and it should ask that of women, of trans people, of everyone. "Men aren't our comrades" is just a ridiculous way of approaching things. They are 40-50% of the population. I think them being our comrades would be quite helpful, and many of them are already interested, and many more probably would be much more interested if there was more and better feminist outreach (not just to cis men but in general, we are not nearly as militant as we need to be). I would like feminism to accomplish things and create a fundamentally changed and better world, and not simply be a balm on cis women's societal wounds, as real and valid as those wound are.
