Book Clubs: Stereotyping Men Based on Football Commercials and Sexism

Reading Time

I don’t know why we still perpetuate the mythologies of maleness in this culture.  We know they’re mostly bullshit, in part because today’s society is drastically different from the one in which such myths were formed.  But we keep pushing them out there, repeating them in our heads, our news and TV shows, our blog posts, and so on.  Maybe it’s some kind of genetic nostalgia for the old days when we knew what men were like.  Or maybe there’s some kind of sick gene in our species that wants men to be non-feeling masculine bodybuilders who utter one-word sentences and grunt a lot.

Ugh.

Which brings me to this Book Group Buzz post about why men don’t participate in book clubs.  I’m not going to deny that most men don’t participate in book clubs.  To be honest, I’ve never been in an actual book club, so I can’t speak from experience about such things.  What I can say is that Ted Balcom’s nonsensical rambles about how men don’t like to share their feelings is a disgusting stereotype which verges on sexist (granted, it’s hard to say Ted is a sexist when you consider that Ted has never been a girl’s name).

Let’s start with the first offense:

Choose books to discuss that interest men. That means, broadly speaking, books about sports, politics, history, crime, and making money. Nonfiction seems to draw better than fiction. And for the most part, books written by men — although a title like Unbroken, by Laura Hillenbrand, might be the rare exception. The subtitle reveals the appeal: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience and Redemption. That could bring the boys in — even if it was penned by a female.

I know that the number of men who read fiction has declined in recent years, but I hope Ted realizes that men do read, you know, fiction.  And some of them read the same stuff that women do.  Really.  They do.  You know how I know?  Because I’m one of those men.  And all the men I know are similar kinds of men.  True, we all have different interests, but it’s really not that hard to find someone with a penis who likes to read all the stuff listed above and the kinds of books that are supposed to be in book clubs (what those are, I don’t know, because Ted never tells us what makes up for “traditional book club material”).  What I do know is that saying things like “men only read books with men being manly and politics, so we should pick some of those so we can include the menfolk” is sort of like saying “women only read romance novels and chicklit, so we should talk about that so they can feel like they’re part of the ‘in crowd.'”  Do some men only read the kinds of things listed above?  Yes, but I’d hazard a guess that they aren’t the majority.

Rather than perpetuating the myths about what we’re supposed to read by saying what we do read (which is really what all of the above is doing), you could instead find other methods for including men in the discussion.  You know, by asking them to take part, asking them what they like to read, asking them their opinions, and so on.  And then you can start working on getting rid of all this social B.S. that is set up to fashion us into the very kinds of stereotypical men Ted starts setting up in the above paragraph.

Ugha bugha…

But there’s more.  There has to be, right?

Here’s what I’ve learned, both from observation and from talking to other men: guys generally do not like to share their feelings in public, especially in the presence of a group composed mostly of members of the opposite sex; also, they aren’t greatly interested in minutely analyzing character and motivation, unless they happen to have a degree in psychology and have made this activity their life’s work; and finally, they aren’t comfortable in situations where they are outnumbered by ladies and where the leader of the group — that formidable person in charge — is (Gadzooks!) a woman.

Oh ho!  There it is.  The biggest stereotype of them all, and it comes from “observation and talking to other men.”  Presumably, this talking was done at a sports bar during the Superbowl, or Ted lives in the only town where the water is laced with testosterone and the TV stations are stuck on 24/7 FOX News Manly Hour programming (in which Glenn Beck cries…wait, that’s not right)…

But let’s get right to the meat:  men don’t like to talk about feelings stuff.  We’re anti-feelings.  Well, except we’re not (really).  Men can and often do talk about feelings, but we’re conditioned by culture to suppress overt demonstrations of emotional junk.  But we still talk about feelings.  I’ve never met a man who couldn’t express their outrage over a politician’s election or the failure of their sports team or…wait, I’m falling into the stereotypes again!  Back to books.

Since when did book clubs become the same thing as group therapy?  Maybe the problem isn’t men, but the way Ted’s book clubs have been run, which, if we’re being honest, would turn off most people, including women.  Most people don’t go to group therapy.  Most people don’t want to, even if they need it.  But the crux of the matter is the assertion that men can’t talk about their reactions to a book, even within a limited context.  That is a feeling, and we’re not supposed to express those feelings, or something like that.  I call bullshit.  Most men can talk about books just fine.  I don’t know why a lot of men don’t read, but it’s not because they’re anti-feelings…

If we’re going to boil all this ranting down to one thing, it’s this:  Ted keeps saying “men,” but in doing so he makes it clear he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.  I am a man.  I have dangling bits between my legs, which, last time I checked (in the dictionary, with my doctor, and with my mother, who should know such things), that makes me one of those men people.  And Ted’s imaginary man is not who I am.  That’s not who some of my friends are.  That’s not who most of my friends are.  I’m not saying that there aren’t men that fit the description Ted is providing.  There are.  Lots of them.  Conditioned menfolk, if you will.  But you can’t say “men” without reducing the male “species” to a stereotype.  We get enough of that B.S. from the society we live in, and we damn well don’t need it in this thing I would call “book culture.”

The first step to fixing the absence of men in book clubs is to change the way we talk about men and books.  Hell, we need to fix the way we talk about men (and women, who are just as susceptible to social gender programming) in general.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go read a book and talk about my feelings…

Ugha bugha ugh bug meh.

Email
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Digg
Reddit
LinkedIn

2 Responses

  1. Though I suppose *technically* it may not count as a book club, my father has been in a Shakespeare group for like 5 years and just GUESS what they do? Bump chests whenever someone says "perchance" (half the members are men and it's run by a man)? No, amazingly enough they analyze the text and share their feelings. I will notify my father immediately that his man card has been revoked and this Ted guy will be coming to collect his balls. Though, I'm pretty sure the only one, after that encounter, who will lose their ability to procreate will be Ted.

  2. I can just imagine what that encounter would look like…something tells me your father wouldn't be the one expressing his feelings…

Leave a Reply

Follow Me

Newsletter

Support Me

Recent Posts

A Reading List of Dystopian Fiction and Relevant Texts (Apropos of Nothing in Particular)

Why would someone make a list of important and interesting works of dystopian fiction? Or a suggested reading list of works that are relevant to those dystopian works? There is absolutely no reason other than raw interest. There’s nothing going on to compel this. There is nothing in particular one making such a list would hope you’d learn. The lists below are not an exhaustive list. There are bound to be texts I have forgotten or texts you think folks should read that are not listed. Feel free to make your own list and tell me about it OR leave a comment. I’ll add things I’ve missed! Anywhoodles. Here goes:

Read More »

Duke’s Best EDM Tracks of 2024

And so it came to pass that I finished up my annual Best of EDM [Insert Year Here] lists. I used to do these on Spotify before switching to Tidal, and I continued doing them on Tidal because I listen to an absurd amount of EDM and like keeping track of the tunes I love the most. Below, you will find a Tidal playlist that should be public. You can listen to the first 50 tracks right here, but the full playlist is available on Tidal proper (which has a free version just like Spotify does). For whatever reason, the embedded playlist breaks the page, and so I’ve opted to link to it here and at the bottom of this post. Embeds are weird. Or you can pull songs into your preferred listening app. It’s up to you. Some caveats before we begin:

Read More »

2025: The Year of Something

We’re nine days into 2025, and it’s already full of exhausting levels of controversy before we’ve even had a turnover in power in my home country of the United States. We’ve seen resignations of world leaders, wars continuing and getting worse and worse (you know where), the owner of Twitter continuing his tirade of lunacy and demonstrating why the billionaire class is not to be revered, California ablaze with a horrendous and large wildfire, right wing thinktanks developing plans to out and attack Wikipedia editors as any fascist-friendly organization would do, Meta rolling out and rolling back GenAI profiles on its platforms, and, just yesterday, the same Meta announcing sweeping changes to its moderation policies that, in a charitable reading, encourage hate-based harassment and abuse of vulnerable populations, promotion and support for disinformation, and other problems, all of which are so profound that people are talking about a mass exodus from the platform to…somewhere. It’s that last thing that brings me back to the blog today. Since the takeover at Twitter, social networks have been in a state of chaos. Platforms have risen and fallen — or only risen so much — and nothing I would call stability has formed. Years ago, I (and many others far more popular than me) remarked that we’ve ceded the territory of self-owned or small-scale third party spaces for massive third party platforms where we have minimal to no control or say and which can be stripped away in a tech-scale heartbeat. By putting all our ducks into a bin of unstable chaos, we’re also expending our time and energy on something that won’t last, requiring us to expend more time and energy finding alternatives, rebuilding communities, and then repeating the process again. In the present environment, that’s impossible to ignore.1 This is all rather reductive, but this post is not the place to talk about all the ways that social networks have impacted control over our own spaces and narratives. Another time, perhaps. I similarly don’t have space to talk about the fact that some of the platforms we currently have, however functional they may be, have placed many of us in a moral quagmire, as in the case of Meta’s recent moderation changes. Another time… ↩

Read More »