Setting up a dichotomy between male allies and other men 3/9

Men often feel defensive or blamed when violence against women is addressed. Thus one of the tensions in violence prevention work that engages men is to ensure that men in general do not feel blamed for the violence that is perpetrated by some men against women (Piccigallo et al. 2012). Attempts to broaden the problem of men’s violence to include the responsibility of all men invites defensive responses from many men. This is seen as a form of male bashing that blames all men for the violence of a few men. Men often make the argument that it is not all men who are responsible for men’s violence. Rather, it is just a small group of ‘bad’ men. These men are seen as having no connection to wider forms of dominant masculinity and male privilege. Thus, in approaching men as potential allies, helpers or bystanders, the aim of engaging men in violence prevention campaigns is often to pre-empt men’s potential defensive responses (Piccigallo et al. 2012).

Consequently, many violence prevention campaigns involving men use a dichotomy between ‘good men’ and other men. Strategies have been developed to enable men to feel that by standing up against violence they are the ‘good men’ and that they can demonstrate a healthy masculinity. Being engaged as bystanders, champions and advocates, men are able to distance themselves from the wider critique of patriarchy and dominant masculinity (Messner et al. 2015). Consequently, White Ribbon campaigns and other men’s anti-violence groups have endeavoured to avoid the defensive responses by men, who may feel put off by the process of focusing on men’s responsibility, by emphasising that not all men are violent.

Goldrick-Jones (2002) refers to these ‘good men’ as ‘white knights to the rescue’, where men take charge on the premise that they know how to ‘fix’ men’s violence against women. It is important for men’s programs to avoid perpetuating the conception of the good man because it fails to recognise the ways in which all men are implicated in male privilege and gender inequality (Linder and Johnson 2015). Such approaches do not encourage men to recognise how their own behaviour and attitudes are part of the wider systems of dominance and oppression. An expressed concern of many feminist critics is that violence prevention programs developed by men may reinforce chivalrous forms of masculinity that imply women need protection by good men (Castelino 2012; Linder and Johnson 2015). Campaigns that focus on ‘real men’ and chivalrous forms of masculinity reinforce men’s dominance and power. When men present themselves as the ‘good guys’, they exeptionalise themselves from the wider problem of men’s violence and gender inequality (Hess 2014). This means that they are likely to be less aware of, and accountable for, their complicity in men’s violence. Accountability in this context, means educating men about their own privilege and internalised dominance. This is an issue that will be addressed later in this paper.

https://www.whiteribbon.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/WhiteRibbonResearchPaper_LR.pdf