10 October 2012

My own viewpoint, Michigan Daily reaction



Jeffrey McMahon begins by sharing his personal experiences with hook-up culture.  I think it’s really brave of him to share such personal experiences and perspectives via school-wide, internet-searchable newspaper. I think it’s wonderful that he shares his story, but that makes the next part of the article hurt more – he says “I know how it feels.”  He assumes that everybody else’s experiences are just like his.  He says it hurts him that women are “resigning to that lifestyle,” and he dismisses men who participate in hook-up culture as not “real men.”    He asks people to try to understand his experiences and then takes a 180 degree turn to let me as a reader know that he doesn't try to understand experiences that are different from his own.  Firstly, I don’t like it when people judge other women’s choices with regards to sexual choices.  If you can’t respect a woman who chooses to have sex, why would you respect my choice not to have sex?  I don’t want people to respect my choice because they agree with it, I want them to respect my choice because I am a human being and making choices about my sexuality is my right. Secondly, as a woman, I am very troubled when people try to define what makes someone a “real woman.”  I am a woman, and I don’t need you to tell me whether or not I’m real.  So his judgment on what a makes a "real man" irks me.  I think McMahon’s intention is to question people who use others and who dismiss commitment because they want instant gratification.  I don’t like the assumptions he uses to make that point.  Women should be able to wear what they want – even if it is “barely more than a bathing suit” – and behave how they want, without people thinking there’s something wrong with them.  Men should be able to make choices about their sex lives without being told they think women should be “possessed and used.”

Where I think McMahon really pushes his luck is when he says that women are “away from their homes and families and are now in our care,” implying that men on campus must take care of the women on campus.  I think this is an odd way of looking at it.   I backpacked Europe alone.  I flew to China alone.  I'm not saying nobody helped me.  But nobody was over my shoulder taking care of me the whole time, just as nobody is doing that now.  Men I have never met are not responsible for "taking care of me."      

McMahon’s following slippery slope assumes that men who participate in hook-up culture don’t respect or value women and that women who participate in hook-up culture do so because they have been abused or neglected by the male figures in their lives.  These assumptions sound like over-generalizations of the author’s personal experiences.  There are men who value women and have sex with them outside of committed relationships.  There are women who have sex outside of committed relationships whose parents were active and wonderful in their lives. 

McMahon then implies that if I don’t find “security, support, and comfort” in a man, I must search for it “here and there” and that I will be “ultimately left objectified and used.”  Well.  I guess he doesn't think I’m capable of holding down a secure job or getting support from my friends and family or finding comfort in my accomplishments.  Who doesn't value women now?

McMahon tells me I am “amazing and worthwhile” after that.  It’s nice of him to notice, but after what he just said, I don’t know if he really means it.  Especially because he calls me a “girl,” and follows it by telling what to do.  He tells me what to look for in a romantic partner, and what to wear.  I have never met McMahon before, but he assumes he knows what I want out of life AND that every woman on campus wants the same thing I do.  If McMahon actually cares about me, he can comment below and we can grab lunch and talk.  But if he isn't willing to get to know every woman on campus, his is in no position to give advice to them.  

1 comment:

  1. Amen. He doesn't recognize that it's possible to objectify women without sexualizing them. I am not a princess to protect, I am a person who may or may not appreciate your cookie cutter definition of 'protection.'

    ReplyDelete