Speaking Up Part 2: In the Workplace

My last post (“Speaking Up: When, Where, Why?”) called attention to the issue of males calling out hostile males when surrounded only by other men. I mentioned a recent lunch I was having with a friend who had a few choice words regarding a female friend of mine when I decided to speak up. While I do feel confident in my actions regarding the incident with my friend, I realize that it was a conversation among friends and in private. However, I have recently been a part of several situations in which I have seen male-perpetrated harassment of women taking place in an entirely different setting: at work and among people I do not know very well.

My summer job involves a great deal of interaction with new students at the university I attend. My fellow undergraduate colleagues and I often find ourselves in situations in which we are working 1 on 1 with students. Recently, I and a few other members of my staff have noticed some elements of the behavior of James (not his real name) that we do not feel entirely comfortable with. James has a habit of working with three or four of the female students each day in a much greater capacity than with any other incoming student. Often, his behavior crosses the line: sharing seats with women that did not invite him to do so, giving certain female students massages (again, without being asked to do so), and persistently asking for numbers (and not resting until he gets at least what could be the phone number of whoever he is asking).

Personally, James’ behavior infuriates me. I have brought it up a few times with my peers and most have similar feelings. However, we never do anything about it. Admitting that I have done nothing to stop behavior that is clearly demeaning, inappropriate, and offensive makes me feel horrible. Only now do I realize how silly it is to let James’ actions persist. The students we work with daily are already in a stressful position: the start of their college careers. The last thing they need is an aggressor like James stressing them out even more. I would greatly appreciate knowing what you all would do if in a similar position. Is it best to confront James? To inform his supervisor? What have been your experiences with workplace aggression?

Ryan Derry

Flat Tires, Rape, and Why You Should Care



Recently, I was loading up the car for summer family vacation, and as I was checking my tires in preparation to hit the road, it reminded me of some unfortunate comments from a couple of months ago.


This is not going to be a blog post about partisan politics, religion or abortion - honest! No, it's a blog about the antiquated and harmful attitudes and insensitivities expressed recently by a member of the Kansas House of Representatives that perpetuate the idea that victims of sexual abuse are somehow responsible or to blame for what happens to them.


Last May, during a Kansas House discussion of a bill that will ban insurance companies from covering abortion insurance under general healthcare plans, Kansas State Representative Pete DeGraaf from Mulvane basically said women needed to "plan ahead" for being raped and possibly impregnated against their will; that being raped is like getting a flat tire. I remember thinking after hearing his comments, "Did he really just say that?!" You can read this report, in its entirety, from the Associated Press article posted on May 13, 2011.


Mr. DeGraaf, you are off base with these remarks and have demonstrated a complete lack of sensitivity to the violation and loss of dignity experienced by a victim of sexual assault. This point was well illustrated in the attached Venn Diagram showing some of the notable differences between having a flat tire and being raped: in one instance, you call AAA and have them replace the flat tire with your spare tire, and you are quickly on your way; however, in the other situation, you may have to face contracting HIV/STDs, an on-going and often overwhelming sense of shame and of violation, and/or unwanted pregnancy. I am not of the opinion that the two events have anything in common, and I am not willing to accept that rape is an eventuality of being a woman in today's society or that anyone should ever have to plan ahead to be raped.


I respectfully suggest that Mr. DeGraaf issue an apology to all the women and men of Kansas (and thanks to the internet, the rest of the Country), for his insensitive remarks. While these comments were prominent in the media a few months ago, they are no less relevant today and we need to continue to address the insensitivity behind them. There are several petition efforts currently underway (even one on Facebook), as well as a "send a tire" campaign, and of course, feel free to drop him a line at his office. Check out your options and act appropriately!

By Mike Eggleston

An Interesting (but not so fun) Thought Experiment

Can you imagine the first paragraph of this news article reporting this instead?:

“Paula Nelson was at a Kansas City park with relatives Wednesday night when three young women walked over a grassy hill and opened fire without saying a word.”

While it is certainly in the realm of possibility that three young women would savagely murder another female in pubic, it is not the norm. And it comes as no surprise that we find young men committing acts of horrific violence. While I’m not advocating an increase in female violence (I’m guessing that is not what people mean when they speak of gender equality), I was taken aback by how shocked I was when I switched the sex of those involved in the story.

What does it say about men that violence is so normal, acceptable, and even encouraged among us? What are we doing do change this overwhelming problem? What are you doing about violence dominating masculinity?

Try switching the sexes in this story.

Men’s Body Wash: Liquid Masculinity in the Shower…or is it?

I remember when men’s body washes did not even exist. Men used to use bar soap (because they were “manly” men, and they did not want to smell “girly”).

Now, there are entire ad campaigns for men’s body washes that seek to make it socially acceptable and even desirable for men to use these products.


In another Dove commercial, they discuss “man-hide” and the toughness of men's skin in relation to cow hide or leather. What is interesting is Dove’s argument that its product is actually made to soften the man-hide. Does this mean that American culture has actually shifted so as to allow men to have moisturized, soft skin like their female counterparts? Perhaps, as long as there is there is first an allusion to the toughness of such hide… Are gender roles shifting gradually, or are they equally present but masked by effective marketing? Hmmm…

Old Spice, on the other hand, tells men to “be comfortable in your own skin”. Its commercials allude to one man’s “muscle body” and his “striking brown eyes” while a man in another ad encourages men to use Old Spice instead of lady-scented body washes. The marketing this company employs appears to also appeal to women to a certain degree. In placing attractive male models in their commercials, these companies are not only trying to appeal to men who use the products but to women who will (in the minds of the marketers) shop for the products and smell the products their partners use when they bathe. Are these men’s or women’s products?? Again, does it matter? It’s just soap…

I still remember the original Old Spice that my grandfather wore when I was younger, and I will never forget that smell…. I knew that I probably did not want to smell like that when I grew up, but he, my other grandfather, and my father encouraged my interest in body care and cologne. This connection we make with the male figures in our lives can result in our long-term commitment (or lack thereof) to body care and maintenance of our appearance and bodies.

It is fascinating that as we get older we often keep similar if not better hygiene routines that we learned from such figures in our lives. The focus on hygiene, however, becomes less of a connection with male figures in our lives but how appealing or masculine men are when they use such products.

What do you consider when you purchase masculine hygiene products (aka “soap”)?


Mark Halastik

Update: Sesame Street takes a jab at Old Spice with "Smell Like A Monster" and makes you think how ridiculous this approach to stereotyping men through hygiene products really is:

A Good Day for Sports and Masculinity

It is no secret that the professional sports world often portrays some of the worst of what it means to be a man in today’s world. Former and current athletes being accused and convicted of sexual violence, super star athletes celebrating their hubris on national television, and athletes using their money and power for sexual conquests, the examples are sadly easy to come by.

But how about this for a positive spin on today’s athletes?! While I know nothing about Rory McIlroy’s personal life, it seems that many in the sporting world have been drawn to the young man’s humility, poise, and character. After breaking several records, and dominating the U.S Open, it is his positive, humble personality making headlines. A prime example mentioned in the article is that following the Master’s Tournament, in which Mr. McIlroy fell short, some might say “choked”, he used his post-game interview to mention that it would help build his character rather than belittling sports fans.

I don’t know about you but this is was much needed breath of fresh air for both professional sports and masculinity.

Keith Bradley

Speaking Up: When, Where, Why?

Recently, I was at lunch with a good friend of mine. Let’s call this friend Jack. Jack and I were enjoying each other’s company and conversation until he brought up a girl we both know (we’ll call her Susie). Jack went on to describe how much he did not like Susie. “She’s cold,” he said, “honestly, I have never felt an ounce of warmth from Susie,” Jack went on. Now, I may not have gotten my feathers all ruffled if it wasn’t for the fact that I happen to like Susie! I told Jack that perhaps all his built up frustration with Susie is stemming from the fact that he doesn’t know her all that well. “I, on the other hand, have spent a lot of time with Susie,” I told him. “She really is pretty awesome,” I continued. “No man,” Jack said, “she’s cold, she’s a b****.”

And there’s the rub. I was perfectly respectful of Jack’s thoughts on Susie until the final above-mentioned comment of his. Sure, I thought his opinions were unwarranted. I had concluded that Jack just didn’t know her and that he just didn’t know what he was saying. However, that all changed when he employed the use of a single word: a word so derogatory, chauvinistic, and offensive that I simply could not listen to my good friend Jack any longer. I stopped him right in his tracks. I interrupted him and told him he had crossed the line. Jack looked confused, surprised at how irritated I had become. I explained to him that that word was exceptionally hateful and that he had no idea what he was talking about. Jack laughed it off and insisted he did not mean to be hateful. I believed him. In fact, I felt bad I had gotten so hostile towards him. I even apologized!

Now, as I reflect on my scuffle with Jack I only feel worse. I should have held my ground. I should have defended Susie with more passion. I definitely should not have apologized. So I ask, readers, am I analyzing this too closely? Was I out of line in confronting my good friend and perhaps, if the discussion was prolonged, putting our relationship in jeopardy? In a more general sense, what are your thoughts on speaking up? When is it appropriate and when is it best to just let it slide?


Ryan Derry

Trauma Informed Allies

I recently joined an agency whose mission relates to the stabilization, care and healing of kids in crisis. The agency’s culture and model of care revolves around an idea called trauma informed care. At the center of this model lives the realization that some kind of trauma happened to these kids. With this realization, we do not ask “What’s wrong with you?”, rather “What happened to you?”

As allies in the fight against sexual assault, we need to lead a similar paradigm shift when we support victims of sexual assault. Just accepting and understanding that a trauma has occurred and taking this view to our communities would be a good first step. But then a trauma informed model pushes us to accept that we must help stabilize, care for, and heal victims - without judgment. Some (perhaps not readers of this blog post) have a difficult time with the “without judgment” part of the trauma informed model. How do we lead this paradigm shift in our community?

The idea of Historical Contingency (future events are caused by a unique past) can inform our interaction and relationship with victims of sexual assault and bring the same to the larger community. If we can agree that events share a cause and effect structure then we can view a sexual assault as an event caused by other specific events in a certain context. This cause and effect structure is actually at the root of victim blaming so prevalent in our culture. But, this cause and effect structure can also be at the root of our counter argument if framed by the ideas of Historical Contingency.

We have all heard the insane chorus; “if she was not wearing this or that”, “if she would have not been drinking, or if she had planned ahead the attack would not have happened”. Historical Contingency asks, “How do you know?” How do you know what would or would not have caused the attack to happen? How do you know if it was what she was wearing, or where she was, or what plan she had would have changed the outcome? How do you know?

Historical Contingency makes a distinction between events with necessary causes and events with contingent causes. Put another way, for the outcome that did happen, could only one thing cause it or could many causes still have resulted in the same outcome? Were the events that lead up to the attack necessary (could the causes have not lead to any other outcome) or were the events contingent (could many causes have still lead to the same outcome)?

If the causes were necessary or contingent, it does not matter. No matter what the circumstances are or how many times we run through a scenario the only person that is responsible for sexual assault is the offender. The victim is never at fault no matter what she/he does. And all that matters is that the trauma occurred and forever impacts the victim. The critical point; the necessary cause of a sexual assault is always the attacker. The surrounding circumstances, the other causes, should not be part of our conversation.


Jim Doyle – Founder, Self-Protection.org

“When I Learned that Bullets were Frozen Tears”

Eve Ensler (activist, author, and playwright most known for The Vagina Monologues) used the above title for a chapter in her book Insecure at Last. Since the first time I read this chapter I have been moved by the accuracy of her description of one part of the complexity of violence, particularly men’s violence in our world. I call it emotional amputation, and it's what a lot of us experience as boys who are taught to sever ties with any emotion outside of anger and rage. Our training takes place about the time we learn to walk and is instructed by any number of nurturers in our lives. We get this lesson on playgrounds, in backyards, locker rooms, on the ball field, in the band hall, the classroom, and various other common spaces that boys find themselves throughout childhood and adolescence. It sounds a bit like this:

“Get up! You ain’t hurt.”
“Quit crying or I’m going to give you something to cry about.”
“Suck it up!”
“If someone hurts you, you hurt them back!”
“Never back down!”
“Win at all costs!”

And the list goes on….

Ensler talks about two types of power in the aforementioned chapter, a power that comes from feeling and adequately processing emotions, and a power that comes with denying and suppressing emotions. She says:

"There is a power that comes out of surrendering to grief and a power that results in refusing it. I think they are two different types of power. The one that emerges through allowing grief feels clean, purged, and inclusive. You have experienced pain and grief so you would not want to inflict it on someone else. The kind of power that emerges through the denial of grief is aggressive power. It is trying to conquer something, annihilate something, and over come something. It emerges out of fear and a need to protect oneself from feeling, which then becomes a country, a people, etc. It is inauthentic power. It is not shamanic; one has not passed through something in order to arrive there. It is manufactured power in order to manipulate, bully or deny.”

In the midst of this tragic reality there is good news. We can choose to reclaim our full emotional lives and as Ensler describes above, surrender to moving through our hurts in ways that don't harm others but instead heal us and others. If more men would open themselves up to the full range of emotions, and process and express them in respectful ways, the world would be a much safer place. And if more men and women would stop emotionally amputating young boys and instead nurture them to experience, process, and respectfully express all emotions, the world could be transformed…because all at once the power to heal would replace the need for the power to harm.

John Tramel

Join us for Kansas Dad's Summit: Saturday June 4th 10am-2pm

Sponsored by: Healthy Families of Johnson and Wyandotte Counties

Saturday, June 4th 10a.m.- 2p.m. Cabela's 10300 Cabela's Drive, Kansas City, Kansas in Legends Shopping Center

Featured speakers: "Coaching Boys Into Men" Brian Porch & Andre Tyler former Tampa Bay Buccaneer
-AND- "Man Up!" David Belt, with MOCSA

For Dads Attending this Free Event: Free Gift Card, Door Prizes, and BBQ Lunch Provided

Pre-registration required by June 2nd: Call Terri at 913-371-2220ext1254 OR Patty at 913-621-2016ext1205.

Organized by: Kansas Children's Service League and Circle of Parents

“What’s in Your Cup?”: Masculinity in Drink Form

Have you ever lost your “man card”?



Apparently I did and didn’t even realize it….

As many of you probably know, men strive to be “real men” via a variety of behaviors. This results from years of conditioning of them as boys and men by a variety of sources. Of course, this is not true of all circumstances but is an idea that appears to be prevalent among many groups of individuals. Men and boys who deviate from normal masculinity are considered to be societal deviants, to be abnormal or weird, and are still (even in 2011) often considered to be gay or “effeminate”. This relates to the “man card” in a sense that “losing it” is the equivalent to being gay or to being abnormal. This appears to be true of bar culture specifically, with which I have quite a bit of experience given I am employed by a restaurant/bar.

When I order a drink at a bar or restaurant, I generally don’t decide what I want based on what is “manly” but on what sounds good. One time, I ordered a cosmopolitan at a bar. An acquaintance of mine was nearby (though not really hanging out with me), and interjected, “Those pink drinks are for b-----s. Why the hell would you order that s---, man?” I was appalled, as I would not have thought he would talk to me like that, nor did I see a problem with the drink I chose.

Another time, I ordered a dirty martini, for which I was chastised by a coworker. He poked fun at my “marteenee” and continued to drink his beer. In a sense, he implied it was a delicate, light drink for wimps. Unfortunately, this type of commentary is common in the bar context, and continues to be present when men do not interrogate the social norms that dictate what beverages they “should” order. This is true of their behavior as well, as they should be willing to contradict social expectations of normativity but are often unable to do so due to peer pressure.



On askmen.com, there is currently a list of the “Top 10 manly summer drinks”. The caption reads, “You’re a man, so sipping on a drink that’s garnished with an umbrella or a small tropical forest is not an option.” What does that mean? How does a drink with a miniature paper umbrella connote femininity?!? Furthermore, why does it matter? When we have expectations of men to behave in certain ways, we tell them that other behaviors are wrong or inappropriate. This causes them to view such behaviors as weak and less than equal to their own.

In regards to the list of drinks, what about them is “manly”? Sure, there are “strong drinks” including whiskey sour and Moscow Mule. Among them, though, is the vodka martini. Perhaps the culture allows drinks of this sort to be considered “manly” once an “expert” like askmen.com claims they are.

At present, who decides that such behaviors (and drinks) are manly? The answer: We do! “Snips and snails and puppy dog tails” and “Boys will be boys” are two common expressions that relate to gender, with the latter being more relevant to this post. Why do we as a society consistently adhere to the ideals that gender is a “natural” concept? Likewise, why do we not allow individuals to deviate from such “natural” behaviors? I'm still not sure. Maybe because it is just easier that way.

So, if I order a martini, does that make me lose my man card? I don’t think so—James Bond drinks martinis, and is in some ways the epitome of masculinity. And yes, I consistently prefer mine shaken, not stirred.



Mark Halastik

Reality Check: The Power of Language

If you were the star of your own reality show, how would your character tell its story? Cinéma vérité is a style of documentary film making that blends reality with staged set-ups for maximum effect. It was the predecessor of today’s reality television genre. Provocative language is common, even encouraged. It escalates conflict, which heightens drama, which trounces Matlock reruns any day. But cinéma vérité does not have a lock on the power of language.

Rewind: “Dad, you made that Grace your bitch.” On its own, that quote from Talladega Nights (a Will Ferrell comedy) may seem like a harmless “kids say the darnedest things” candidate. I used to quote it, as an obtuse compliment to friends when they accomplished something particularly challenging: finishing a tough home improvement project, winning a weekend softball game, beating the IRS etc. I considered it a harmless “guy thing” -- only now I know it is not harmless and may – singularly or as part of a cumulative effect – be quite harmful. How?

Fast forward: MOCSA volunteer training 2011. The Man Up facilitators walked us through a “how bad is it?” analysis exercise where we considered various phrases or actions and ranked them low-to-high in context of how damaging we perceived them to be to women. Initially, I would have ranked the movie quote low. It’s a quote! From a comedy! Said by child actor! Our group’s discussion, though, led me down a different path: the casualization of derogatory language is just one way that men ( and society in general) can demean or degrade women, even unintentionally.

Pause: Having grown up with three sisters and plenty of female friends, I do not consider myself abusive or even chauvinistic. So how does a sensitive (I work at Hallmark for crown’s sake!) guy like me get his foundation shaken? Fatherhood. Now when I listen to the radio, watch TV, read books and blogs and interact with others, I do so with a keen ear toward defamatory words: alone or as part of a social cycle of verbal degradation. My slow evolution from “tool” to a more thoughtful dad and citizen has been a timely and necessary change. Fatherhood, and working at a company with a strong female leadership presence will do that to a guy. And I’m grateful. And I’m beginning to realize more and more the true power of language, beyond that which is just sexist. ANYTHING that minimizes another person is not OK. Here are a few observations; I encourage you to reflect on your own, too:

1) Sarcasm has a weak exchange rate in the emotional economy. I used to love the stuff, tossing out barbs here and there to keep the conversation going, interesting, stimulating…at least to me. Now I have my own live-in reality check, my daughter, who is a mirror and a megaphone. When I grimace, she grimaces. If I ask her, “Did you CLEAN your room?” I can pretty much expect a “Yes, I CLEANED it.” Touche!

2) Ke$ha kannot be kontained. I’ve tried changing the radio station, downplaying her relevance to contemporary society, explained the difference between creative and trashy…and yet “…brush my teeth with a bottle of Jack” seems to seep its way into our car radio play. Teaching moment: I asked my daughter if she knew what that lyric meant; she said she did not. I explained that Jack is short for Jack Daniels, and brushing your teeth with it makes no sense, and “I got it, Dad” was served up swiftly.

3) Overhearing doesn’t justify over-reacting. I’m all about diversity, and don’t shy away from a range of cultural events ranging from the downtown symphony to Santa Caligon Days in Independence, from tuxedo dinners to Taco Bell. With my family as company, we hear a lot that is not meant for the common ear, and often its an interchange between males about female passers-by. My shoulders tense when I hear a wolf-whistle being directed toward a woman, or my all-time-most-degrading-least-favorite overheard comment: “I’d like to tap that.” SERIOUSLY?!? Do guys (or any human being) think it’s OK to use that language? Dreadful.

4) Repetition risks affirmation. The Talladega Nights movie quote is an example; I used to repeat it so often that the word “bitch” lost its meaning. But taken to its truest, earliest meaning – am I OK with anything being compared to a female dog? No I am not, and by NOT repeating that language – as well as addressing (in safe environments) those who do, I can help stop the cycle of verbal abuse. Whether it’s said to a woman or not is immaterial; that which is said ABOUT women is just as offensive.

5) It’s OK to substitute, with creativity. Instead of saying “bitch and moan” I can use the word “complain.” Instead of quoting that line from Talladega nights, I can offer up a heartfelt but demonstrative high-five accompanied by a “YESSSSSS!”

Play:
For one week, take the language challenge. Be aware of what you say, read, hear or observe; how rampant is sexist/derogatory language in your social/work circle? Are you part of the problem? Have you perpetuated sexist language unintentionally? If you answer “Ye$” to any of these questions, you have room for improvement. And on behalf of MOCSA’s Man Up movement and dads and daughters everywhere, I hope you’ll use the power of language for good. Trust me. It’s a lot better than my mom’s method: dirty mouth = bar of soap.

Derek McCracken

Should Colleges Ban Fraternities?

The New York Times website hosts a rather interesting op-ed page titled “Room for Debate.” Every so often they pose a timely, thought provoking, controversial question to a host of panelists that have some sort of firsthand knowledge directly pertaining to the issue at hand. The most recent such question was whether or not colleges should ban fraternities. The issue is then supplemented by an acknowledgement of recent studies that have shown that fraternity members tend to both abuse alcohol and behave inappropriately towards women more so than their non-Greek peers.

While the question of whether or not banning fraternities from American campuses would have any real effect in cutting down on alcohol abuse and incidents of sexual violence elicited a whole host of insightful responses, the two most interesting were those of Nicholas Syrett and Charles Eberly, both professors at major public universities. Syrett of the Univeristy of Northern Colorado, puts forth an argument of which the crux is that universities are ultimately responsible for the negative actions of the fraternities they host and that when it comes to the chicken or egg-reminiscent question of whether misogyny among college men is brought on by fraternities or if fraternities simply attract already misogynistic men, he believes that both are true. However, Syrett also believes that while people will naturally join groups whose ideals and agendas equate to their own, that the situation is compounded and exaggerated as “fraternities pressure men to change in order to earn membership and status with them.” Needless to say, Nicholas Syrett is clearly a proponent of eliminating fraternities from college campuses.

On the other side of the fence rests Charles Eberly, a professor and faculty advisor to a fraternity at Eastern Illinois Univeristy. Eberly writes that fraternities are “unfairly singled out” when it comes to sexual aggression and other lewd behaviors. Eberly goes on to mention the incredibly positive efforts of some of the fraternity members he advises in terms of community service and civic engagement. He mentions three brothers he personally knows and the admirable accomplishments they have all made: one spearheaded the development of a healthy men’s program that is presented to every incoming pledge class, one created a charity for children’s advocacy programs, and yet another brother is in the process of running 50 marathons in 50 states to raise awareness for suicide prevention. Eberly goes on to write that fraternities only attract media attention when something goes wrong, yet hardly ever when things go right, an occurrence which he believes to be more common than the opposite.

As a college student myself, I feel that I too have at least a bit of expertise on the subject debated so fiercely. While Syrett and Eberly make some excellent points, they are both too absolute in their arguments. I am not here to come to the defense of fraternities nor am I here to call for their complete elimination. I have never been a part of a fraternity myself but have known countless students who are. My firsthand experience with fraternity brothers has led me to a notion that I am totally confident in: it is impossible to generalize an entire extracurricular activity that hosts literally thousands of men at my university alone.

That being said, it is also important to note that fraternities and their members have been responsible for some extremely disturbing, disgusting, and entirely misogynistic behaviors that in no way should ever be condoned by a public university. Extreme alcohol abuse happens. The objectification of women happens. Moreover, I am absolutely certain that sexual violence brought on by men and perpetrated against women happens as well, all within the boundaries of college fraternities. While chapters are often responsible for some rather amazing programs and initiatives, they are also culpable for some rather unsettling happenings.

All this is too say that the expulsion of fraternities from campuses will do little if anything at all to combat the bigger problem: sexual violence against women. While I wholeheartedly agree with the notion that the hyper-masculine environment of American fraternities does nothing to challenge negative behavior towards women, I also believe that their elimination will only force the worst members of Greek life to seek outlets in other forums. As an RA at one of the largest residence halls on campus, I work directly and daily with college men; I can assure you that it’s not just the frat boys who are guilty of taking advantage of women.

While there is simply no easy answer to the problem of sexual violence that most of our universities are facing, I believe that a good starting point would be young men stepping up and facilitating some conversations confronting our age group’s ideas of masculinity. To be frank, these sorts of conversations just haven’t been happening. While there are certainly some violent fringe members of society that happen to be in fraternities, there are also a great deal of more or less rational fraternity members that would not have made some of the mistakes they have in terms of sexual aggression if they were not pressured into doing so by their “brothers.” When it comes down to it, the voices of responsible college men have simply not been as prominent as the voices of the aggressors. If we want to start making some progress, we need to start making some noise.

Ryan Derry

Introducing Our New Volunteer Writers

Dear Readers,

You may have noticed that we are posting more frequently and have some new names tagged on our by lines. We wanted to let you know that we have invited six male volunteers to help bolster our efforts in developing thought- provoking and action- producing blog entries. We would like to take a moment to properly introduce them to you and thank them for their time. We are very excited about their participation in this project and hopeful that they can help generate further discussions as well as deepen awareness to the issues of sexual violence and men's role as part of the solution. If you have interest in volunteering in this way please contact us at our parent site MOCSA.org.

* Ryan Derry is a junior at the University of Kansas pursuing a degree in English with a minor in Political Science. Ryan has been volunteering with MOCSA over the past two years helping with Strength Clubs at Cristo Rey High School. Ryan became involved with MOCSA out of respect for the organizations mission, desire to work with young men, and interest in public service.

*Jim Doyle is currently Director of Business Operations at Marillac Children’s Psychiatric Hospital. He founded Self-Protection.org in 2009 to help empower individuals to protect themselves from threats, connect these individuals to others, and to help create safer communities. The mission and vision of Self-Protection.org dramatically state that everyone has the right NOT to be a victim, and that everyone can take simple actions to keep themselves safer. Jim is proud to volunteer with the Man Up! program at MOCSA to bring needed attention to what men and boys can and should do to stop sexual violence.

* Mike Eggleston and his wife have lived in the Kansas City area for almost 30 years, and have two daughters. A graduate of the University of Kansas School of Law, Mike has worked for Yellow Freight (now YRC), Ferrellgas, and currently Burr & Temkin, a commercial real estate firm, as their Vice President - Business Manager. Mike became involved with MOCSA in the Spring of 2010, following attendance at a Community Luncheon. He has gone through the Volunteer Training course and has taken part in several Man-up! workshops and various other events and activities. As a husband, a father, and a son, he recognizes now more than ever the critical importance of MOCSA’s mission!

* Mark Halastik is currently a graduate student in the Social Work (MSW) program at University of Missouri, Kansas City. His interest in volunteering with MOCSA coincides with 1) research interests in gender, sexuality, women's and men's studies; 2) advocating for violence prevention; and 3) commitment to education and outreach regarding violence and sexual assault. In May 2011, Mark will begin an internship with Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri. In August, he will work as an intern at the Women's Center at UMKC. He hopes to continue to foster strong relationships between MOCSA and the various programs at the Women's Center and potentially with Planned Parenthood. Upon completion of the MSW program in the spring of 2012, he plans to pursue a career in macro-level social work.

* Derek McCracken has been volunteering with MOCSA since 1996, the same year he started working at Hallmark Cards as a greeting card editor. Some of his volunteer roles have included co-facilitating a co-ed survivors' discussion group, serving on the speakers' bureau, helping out with various SURE special events, and facilitating the male survivors' discussion group. He's still at Hallmark, working as a Creative Director and diversity advocate. He is glad to be part of the MOCSA volunteer team.

* John Tramel has worked for several years with organizations dedicated to addressing social justice issues related to race, gender, socio-economics, and sexuality. Before moving to Kansas City two years ago, John worked with Men Stopping Violence in Atlanta, GA as a trainer and program coordinator engaging and educating men to join the work of ending violence against women.

Thanks and please feel free to comment on any of their great posts!

MOCSA Staff

Why should all men be involved?

I remember the scene like it happened yesterday. A group of approximately fifteen middle-school boys were bantering each other in the front yard of a classmate’s house as the party began. Out of nowhere came two well-respected high school males confidently strolling towards the group of younger boys. As they approached, the young guys in the yard, of which I was a part, froze and gazed towards them with a sense of pride and delight in the fact that these older males would join the party.

The two teenage guys wasted no time in getting to the point, “Where’s all the girls?” With nervous smiles and laughter, each of us said in a jumbled chorus, “In the house…waiting for us!” Then they raised the question and moment of reckoning, “Who’s gonna get some?!” We all paused, not real sure what “getting some” meant, but sure that if these older guys thought we should, we better all resound an assured, “Yea… I am!” They laughed and followed with, “Ya’ll better!” and headed on their way. Here we were a group of middle school boys fifteen or so strong, on a mission to “get some” as we ventured in the house to join the girls.

As you can imagine, the goal for us was clear, emulating and impressing our older and wiser “heroes” by compelling the girls to engage in sexual activities. The environment was established. Our encounters, however they would end up, were not about a mutually desired intimate connection, but about girls being a means to the end goal of older male approval. This extremely dangerous atmosphere that encompassed the young girls that evening is dreadfully common at social gatherings all across America.

This common danger is one reason all men should be involved. All men are implicitly and/or explicitly educated and given tools to be sexually aggressive.

What do I mean by that? (I can imagine that this idea could be a little alarming). Do I believe that all men act in sexually aggressive ways? No. Do I believe all men have the education, tools, and ability to make sexually aggressive choices? Yes.

I will make sense of this by explaining the way Men Stopping Violence, an Atlanta-based social change organization dedicating to ending men’s violence against women, defines male sexual violence. Male sexual violence is male expectation of sexual acts combined with tactics to compel submission.

Here are some of the expectations that countless men have described from their own experiences:

Men should have lots of sex
Men should have access to sex on demand
Sex should be a trade-off for dinner, nice evening, etc.
Women’s bodies are available for men’s gratification
There is a point-of-no-return during sexual encounters

All men get these messages and ascribe to them in various degrees. Many men are very uncomfortable with these messages, but don’t know what to do with these feelings. Some men loyally follow these expectations and use tactics to fulfill them in relationships with women.

Some of the tactics are:

Name calling and whistling
Looks and gestures
Coercion
Emotional and psychological manipulation
Sulking and guilt
Drugs and/or alcohol
Physical manipulation and/or aggression
Isolation
Threats

When we combine the expectation with the tactics, sexual violence occurs. As I mentioned many men are very uncomfortable with the expectations and the tactics and never choose to internalize or act on them, but they also don’t challenge them in other men. Society normalizes this equation and in many ways makes a case for its acceptability.

Because of this reality, men need to hear from each other that this is not acceptable, it’s not part of the game, and it is not normal or natural. Men need not only to find this uncomfortable but despicable and intolerable. This is a lie that destroys the lives of women and children in our lives and communities and dehumanizes men.

For this reason, all men should be involved because there is no possibility for neutrality. If we as men are not challenging this belief system, we allow it to be perpetuated through the many messengers delivering it.

Working to change the messages men are getting will take the majority of men speaking a new narrative. If more voices are not raised in contradiction to the sexually aggressive narrative explained above, then more and more young men will adopt and adhere to it.

I talk to men all the time that say, “I would never sexually assault, rape, or violate a woman and your request doesn’t apply to me.” I then respond with something a college professor once said, “Once you are aware of the problem, you cannot be neutral, you are either part of the solution or you’re part of the problem.”

Men shouldn’t join the efforts to end men’s violence against women for charitable reasons, because of special talents, or to become heroes. We should join because it is our, all of our, responsibility.

In Letters from a Birmingham Jail, Dr. King is responding to white clergy’s critique of his direct action against racism. In their critique, they said that, if Dr. King and the SCLC would have given the new Mayor of Birmingham time, changes would have been made. Dr. King responded, “Time itself is neutral, it can be used constructively or destructively. More and more I feel that the people of ill-will have used time much more effectively than have the people of good will. We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people.”

Men’s silence will only allow more perpetrations against women and children by men who continue to operate from the sexually aggressive narrative that powerfully instructs beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. We know that most men would not want that to happen to someone they love. Therefore, it is in men’s self-interest to be part of the solution because we all have women and children in our lives for whom we deeply love and care.

Most men can identify women in their lives that they would never want to see suffer the unimaginable horror of sexual violence. If men can begin to empathize by considering how they themselves would be affected by knowing a women they care for has been violated, maybe they could get to a place where they would not want to imagine any women going through this nightmare.

Not all men will be directly impacted by sexual violence, but as long as any woman is in danger, all women are in danger, including the women men know and love. Our mothers, sister, daughters, cousins, friends, co-workers, and lovers will never be truly safe until all women are safe.

John Tramel, friend of MOCSA and formally of Men Stopping Violence

SAAM: A plea for active male bystanders

From Sexual Assault Awareness Month - Home
April is Sexual Assault Awareness Month

"The month of April has been designated Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM) in the United States. The goal of SAAM is to raise public awareness about sexual violence and to educate communities and individuals on how to prevent sexual violence. Each day, people witness a continuum of behaviors that range from being respectful and safe, to sexually abusive and violent."

If you are reading this blog, I am assuming you are not a bully, abuser or violent criminal. Maybe you are, like me, a loving husband, protective father, or proud son; a man angry that others who share our gender are violent. We have a responsibility to stop sexual violence perhaps even greater than those bad ones. But, don’t be frightened away here; a law of nature dictates that small actions can have a big effect. So, what can we do? I have two ideas.

First, understand the Bystander Effect. If you are not a bad guy or a victim, you are a bystander; the audience, those present at or near the scene of violence. They are those who support or deny support to the bad guys. Bystanders create the back-drop for sexual assault. The behavior bystanders take or do not take determines how far bad guys can go. A harsh reality I know, but WE allow sexual assault to happen. But again, what can we do? A simple example: When you tolerate degrading speech (even innocent seeming words) about women, you are tolerating these statements towards YOUR wife, YOUR daughter, or YOUR mother, and encouraging the devaluation that leads to escalating violence. Stop participating with these words and stop tolerating it. In this way, we contain and restrain bad behavior and become active bystanders rather than bystanders colluding with bad guys.

Second, as men, we can help empower the women and girls in our lives. Empowerment results in more power and control over events; in this case, more power and control over the contexts of sexual assault. An empowerment process created by Self-Protection.org consists of:
• Rationally understand threats
• See where you can impact those threats
• Take action to mitigate threats, and take action against threats
• Connect with others who face similar threats (and allies)

By rationally understanding the threat of sexual assault, women and girls can become more aware of the contexts and realities of sexual assault. By seeing where they can impact, each individual can begin to explore where they can impact this threat. From these first two steps, individuals can learn to take action to mitigate sexual assault and take action to protect themselves from this threat. And, by connecting with other women and girls as well as the men and boys who choose to be allies, a safer community begins to establish itself around and in us all. Finally, by developing more power and control, women and girls in our society can be safer from violence.

Together, we can create a community where a new generation of boys grow up interacting with protective dads and empowered girls. We can create a community where boys learn to be respectful and safe rather than sexually abusive and violent. Man Up! and help create this community.

Man Up! Volunteer Jim Doyle –Founder, Self-Protection.org

MOCSA IS FOR MEN, TOO!

For over 35 years, MOCSA has been providing therapy, support and advocacy for victims of rape and sexual assault, whether children or adult, regardless of their gender. So why does it still feel like this is a “women’s only” issue? Take a look at the public persona of this vibrant, wonderful organization, as it relates to male sexual abuse:

• Rare (but growing) instances of male sexual abuse are reported through the MOCSA hotline at (816) 531-0233 or (913) 642-0233, and fewer still through the robust hospital advocacy program offered by trained MOCSA staff and volunteers;
• There was one male participant in a group of 30 women during a recent volunteer training session;
• One adult group therapy session currently exists for male victims of abuse; and,
• Only a smattering of men participate in the organization’s Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM) events annually.

Now granted, there are more girls than boys who are sexually abused in childhood (estimates are 1 in 4 for girls vs. 1 in 6 for boys), and clearly, not everyone who volunteers or supports MOCSA is themselves a victim of abuse. However, applying this statistic of male sexual abuse, I would expect the face of MOCSA to look something like this:

• 37% of all MOCSA hotline and hospital advocacy requests would be for males;
• In a volunteer training class of 30, I would expect about 11 of the attendees to be men;
• There would be multiple male victim support groups happening on different days of the week, at a variety of times; and,
• Nearly half of SAAM attendees would be men.

So, what keeps men so quiet? Maybe what keeps men away from MOCSA (and other sexual abuse support services) is the increased stigma and shame that we place on boys and young men not to ask for help, not to admit victimization, and not to feel their feelings. Maybe it’s fear that they are the only one who has had this happen, and that no one else can possibly understand what they have experienced or what they continue to face every day of life since the abuse happened. In short, I suspect what silences our boys and men is the fear of being alone!

Over the past several years, many celebrities have stepped out and bravely shared their painful secrets of childhood sexual abuse – from NFL player Laveranues Coles in 2005; to actor, director, producer and writer Tyler Perry in 2010 (incidentally it was his sharing that led to a subsequent and historic Oprah Winfrey 2-part show dedicated to this subject, featuring 200 adult male survivors in the audience); to the recent book and interview on “60 Minutes” by Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown this past February. Interestingly, regarding the recent 2-part Oprah show that aired in November of 2010, there were initial concerns that they wouldn’t be able to find 200 men who would be willing to come on national television and be identified as victims of sexual abuse – they were surprised to receive thousands of applications!

Closer to home, beyond the rich and famous who have courageously come forward to tell their stories, there are unfortunately thousands of men right here in our own community who share membership in this ugly brotherhood – and they may be your husband, your boyfriend, your father, your brother, your boss, your co-worker, your friend, your teacher, your teammate, or YOU! Sadly, chances are excellent that you know at least one man who has suffered sexual abuse and who may right now be suffering alone; desperately needing to know that they are not the only one, while being equipped with the tools and resources to help them heal and get well.

For whatever reason, it seems to me that far fewer men than women seek the help that MOCSA is ready and qualified to provide. If you (or someone you know) were sexually abused as a child, regardless of your gender, check out MOCSA and the individual and group therapy services that are available – at no charge to the client. Beyond MOCSA, other places for men who have been sexually abused to go for help include:

• http://www.rainn.org/get-information/types-of-sexual-assault/male-sexual-assault
• http://www.malesurvivor.org
• http://www.1in6.org

At a future MOCSA Community Luncheon, the big annual party celebrating all the good that an organization such as this one does in the lives of so many people in our community, I’d love to see groups of men sitting at tables with signs that say, “MOCSA is for men, too”!

By Mike Eggleston, MOCSA Volunteer

Sexual Assault Awareness Month ..... MOCSA Events April 6-15

April 6th
Kansas City Kansas Community College: "Open Mike"
1pm at the Intercultural Center

April 7th
Kansas City Kansas Community College: "T.A.K.E Self-Defense Training"
2-4pm

MOCSA Volunteer Happy Hour
5:30pm at McCoy's in Westport

April 10th-16th National Crime Victim's Rights Week

April 11th
Teal Ribbon Campaign with Law Enforcement

Gladstone declares April Sexual Assault Awareness Month at 7:30pm

Rockhurst University displays Clothesline Project

April 12th
Precious screening and discussion

April 13th
Victim's Rights Display
10am-2pm at Johnson County Courthouse

Victim Awareness Fair
10am at Johnson County Courthouse

UMKC Sexual Assault Awareness Table 11am-1pm

April 14th
Health Fair
8:30am-11:30am at Kansas City Kansas Community College

VictimeNet Closeline Display and Survivor Speakers
12-1:30pm

Kansas City, Missouri declares April Sexual Assault Awareness Month

April 15th
CAPA Awareness Display
7:10pm at Royals game

Annual Kansas City Kansas Community College Poetry Slam and Reading
12pm at Jewell Student Center Deli Area

Lathrop and Gage, LLP Denim Day

Guilty Until Proven Innocent

While our legal system is centered on the premise of the common phrase “Innocent until proven guilty”, that is sadly not the reality for victims of sexual assault. A recent article in The Huffington Post brings to mind the reoccurring fact in our society that victims of sexual assault are blamed for their experience, or were “asking for it”, another phrase known all too well.

For victims of sexual violence, even as horrific as the gang rape of an 11-year old girl by 18 young men and boys (if they can even be called that), it is “guilty until proven innocent”. Somehow blaming a girl for sexual assault, in a state where the age of consent for sexual activity, any type of sexual activity, is 17, makes more sense to members of our communities and even the mainstream media than loudly and confidently condemning the inhumane act of rape and blaming the perpetrators.

And in a similar way that society treats individuals who were accused of a crime but later found “not guilty”, victims of rape are still often treated as “guilty” even while their perpetrators are convicted and behind bars.

Keith Bradley

Take this scholarship and shove it!

I have been feeling uneasy about sports lately, so when I sat down to read the morning sports page and came across an article entitled "College Basketball's Latest Move: Quit" I wasn't surprised to notice my blood pressure rise. The article takes a hard look at a number of college student athletes (specifically, male basketball players) who have chosen to forfeit their scholarships and a year of eligibility to transfer to another school due to a variety of reasons. Upon finishing the article I found myself more frustrated as the writer did not answer the key question the article raised: "what is going on in sports culture that's causing this migration?" But none the less, I would recommend the read as it provides some insight into a growing trend not only men's college basketball but in sports, in general.

The article reports that over 400 student athletes transferred in 2008 and while there may be various reasons for those transfers, since this article is highlighting the disenfranchised male student athletes, it does beg the question of how many of those 400 were men. Which leads to a follow-up question of "what's going on in the subculture of male athletics that is creating this trend that allows them to quit when the going gets tough?" As the article reports, most of these guys transfer because they lost their starting position to someone BETTER. Instead of "man-ing up" by taking responsibility for it, these guys are developing a complex that they are more important than their teammates and are rallying behind an old mantra with a twist: "take this scholarship and SHOVE IT!"

As I alluded to earlier, over past several years I have had a love-hate relationship as a fan and participant with sports. I have even considered stop watching or participating in sports for good. However, at the very core I believe sports are intrinsically good as they provide both a healthy outlet for many to work off stress and a safe space to gain insight about life experience as there is as much to learn in the success of winning as there is in the failure of loosing. In America, sports over the past 50 years has taken on a life of its own and has developed its own culture filled with varieties of heroes, villains, jokers, and plagues. Lately, I feel like I have been observing more of the villains and plagues as they are getting far more run in media and it has me concerned that we have strayed too far away from the good of sports.

My biggest concern is that these trends in sports culture will start to trickle down to high school and younger athletics. I would like to believe there is more purity in the value of sports for these ages but I have become more aware of the exploitation of youth sports and it sickens me. Earlier this week I was listening to a high school player that was fed up with losing and was calling out the attitude/ work ethic of his fellow players. Not once did he take any responsibility for his own part in the team's problems. His coach benched him for a game for yelling at fellow players during a practice and showing disrespect to the coach. This young man reported that he didn't plan to travel to the next game and was considering quiting the team all together. I don't know what to do about the problems (villains & plagues) I'm seeing in college and professional sports, but I'm certain there is something we can do with young men like this in high school sports to curb this attitude before it grows into something worse.

As always, I'm curious what you think... Is this a failure of coaches, parents, fans or the players themselves? And what can we learn from it so that we don't continue to make this mistake?

Talking trash

I like trash talking as much as the next sports fan but with technology today, how do you know when it's gone too far? Whether it's emails, texts, twitter, facebook, or ESPN's "Conversation Section140" there are a lot more outlets today to chide your friends over rivalries or critique your own players/teams performance. Many video games, also, allow online players to talk trash to one another. Trash talk, or talking smack, is not limited to just sports as we see it in politics and other arenas as well but it's my assumption that it has become socially acceptable because of sports. It's well known that Michael Jordan did it a lot and was good at it and some fans believe there is even an art to it. Maybe Jim Rome should get the most credit (or blame) for this becoming an art form with the development and annual event of his radio show's "Smackoff" in which caller's compete for "Best Caller of the Year" honors by degrading rival teams and fans alike. But I believe trash talk is older than Jim and Michael and believe it may go back to the days when fans' “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” signaled life or death for a beaten down gladiator.

And while that's all fine and good - and sometimes quite entertaining - there is a line that gets crossed when you strike a nerve with someone by getting too personal. Moreover, there seems to be less of a filter when people post their smack through technology then what they would say face to face to another in bars or other establishments where rival fans come together. I mean, you say the wrong thing to the wrong person at a bar and you might literally get smacked. The lack of the prospect of this happening through technology allows people the "freedom" to say whatever they want to others.

Fortunately, many sites have policies to govern inappropriateness between fans. But what happens when the reader is not a fan at all, rather the athlete that made a bad play that everyone is trashing?

Recently, two such players have taken a lot of flack from their fans for their crunch time short-comings in Boise State kicker Kyle Brotzman and Missouri basketball player Kim English. Brotzman missed two field goals leading to a loss to Nevada that will keep them out of a national championship game. English saved a ball going out of bounds to the other team allowing them to hit a game tying three point basket with no time left in regulation that eventually lead to Missouri's unraveling in over time. Both players received a lot of disapproval the following days and Brotzman even received death threats, including some aimed at his family members.

When you boil it down, smack talk is all about proving oneself to others over something you take (often entirely too much) pride in by degrading something or someone else. Certainly women talk smack, but it seems like they are imitating a very masculine past time and that trash talk is often linked to calling out one's manhood by degrading feminine characteristics. Scenes like the one from The Sandlot come to mind concluding with the ultimate dis in boyhood, "you play like a girl".

I have heard fans argue about how athletes at any level can turn it off by not listening or reading all the comments and, ultimately, someone always says, "sticks and stones can break my bones but words will never hurt me". But are these type of comments really the responsibility of the athlete? Do fans really have the freedom to say and do whatever they want? Are personal verbal attacks about someone's on field performance not only OK but something worth rewarding if it leads to others taking another step by leaving death threatening messages? Do boys value girls less in environments where fans and coaches regularly talk smack with put downs like "you throw like a girl" or worse? It's well documented that cyber bullying has lead to death in the forms of suicide and murder - is that what it will take for us to seriously consider when we have taken smack talk too far?