‘…long before I’d put any words on the page I had a handful of ideas about what I wanted it to be. It was never going to be a dry, academic text and work its way into medical reference libraries because I'm not, by my nature, and academic (‘No shit’, I hear you say). More importantly, academic books are rarely read by anyone other than academics, and I wanted something ordinary people would be tempted to pick up.’
Well, there, right there, is exactly the problem about this book! The problem indeed when you set on a path to write about a whole topic without bothering to study the academic literature about it in the first place is that, ultimately, you end up sprouting clichés and prejudice. This is, mostly, nothing but clichés and prejudice; while, as the saying goes, ‘you’re entitled to an educated opinion, not ignorance’.
It’s not that Jack Urwin has nothing compelling to say. There is indeed something toxic with traditional view of masculinity, which has been feeding, consciously or not, from misogyny to homophobia and a blunting of emotion which has never ceased to backfire against men themselves. ‘The Patriarchy hurt men too’ indeed.
The problem is that, because he clearly didn’t do his homework (sorry, but reading academics is kind of compulsory before embarking on writing essays…) he falls prey to all the toxic prejudices being themselves part of the problem -preventing genders to all come together to solve issues affecting us all. The gender pay gap, for example, has nothing to do with sexism, but with women not allowed to work as much as men for a multitude of reasons, starting by the motherhood penalty. Had he done his research, he would know that the problem is the bigger difference in wages between women who are mothers and women who are not than between men and women. If one wants to address such issue, then, one must empower men into their household by campaigning for shared parenting and father’s rights so as to tackle the motherhood penalty. This goes completely way beyond his head, since he reduces the Men’s Right Movement to caricatural women haters! Also, he fully buys into the false view that domestic violence is gender based, according to which men are the majority of perpetrators and women the majority of victims. Here again, he is being the useful idiot of a radical trend of feminism, purposefully disempowering women so as to serve their own agenda. As a British man, maybe he ought to read the work and familiarise himself with the biography of Erin Pizzey (the woman who opened the first shelter ever for battered women yet is now hated by the ideologues running them) besides actually read the feminist literature (whereas such views are being challenged and debunked, not least because they don’t serve women at all). But, here again, it flies above his head since he perceives feminism as a unified block all for equality in rights, whereas it’s in fact a multitude of factions including some engaging in misandry and victimhood, with catastrophic consequences upon women themselves!
There are a few other issues, although minor. For example, I expected a focus on Britain -after all, here’s a book born out of an 2014 article he originally wrote for VICE (‘A Stiff Upper Lip is Killing British Men’). Yet, for whatever reason, he digresses towards the USA and the violence plaguing such country (guns, school shootings, glorification of the military…) which are useful reflections when tackling toxic masculinity in general, but how relevant are they to the UK specifically?
All in all, then, there’s, no doubt, a few good points in ‘Man Up’. Sadly, they are lost within a piling up of preconceived ideas, prejudices, and stereotypes. I am sure it will please the radical feminist still believing in an oppressive patriarchy and blaming men for all society’s problems, but to the rest of us (men and women not buying into gender divide) this will be nothing but a retelling of harmful views. If you want to make a point, READ ACADEMIC WORKS!