Nothing annoys me more than when a discussion about feminism is derailed by the question “but what about men?”
Whoever poses this question never takes the time to extrapolate on any issues men actually face, aside from maybe his inability to find a date. The term for this systemic injustice is “the Friend Zone.”
That’s roughly the level of discourse we’re suddenly forced to work on. It’s infuriating! But it happens all the time.
But, for me, the most maddening thing is that this line of reasoning does exactly the opposite of that it claims to do.
This question almost never comes from a place of genuine concern about men who suffer systematic injustices. It’s almost always an assertion of privilege.
Even the so-called Men’s Rights Activists (MRAs) who claim to care about male rape victims and single-fathers have little else on their mind but misogyny.
I rarely see discussions about male rape survivors that aren’t started with the intent of undermining a discussion already underway about rape culture as it affects women. That’s a shame because these survivors do exist, and their cases should be explored.
Perhaps that’s the problem for MRAs though. When you do a little exploring you find that misogynist premises don’t get you very far as regards these cases. Most male survivors are raped by other men. Usually they belong to the LGBTQIA community.
Suddenly homophobia and transphobia become important. Soon we realize patriarchal structures that condemn femininity and treat it like a weakness, especially when present in men, might be involved.
All of this gets very uncomfortable for someone whose point is “feminism has gone too far.” In fact, feminism has a long way to go it seems, and it must be intersectional feminism at that.
To return to the original question: most, if not all, of the systemic and social problems men face can be more effectively explored through feminist discourse.