Not good enough
By Bert Hetebry
What is the problem with men?
As I sat down to write this I flicked on the news, and it seems Bruce Lehrmann wants to appeal the defamation decision in his case against Channel 10. The judge summarised his (Lehrmann’s) position eloquently, something like, ‘having escaped the lion’s den, he went back for his hat.’ What is he hoping to retrieve this time? His handkerchief perhaps, to wipe away his tears should the decision go against him… again?
Lehrmann’s issue seems to be that because he is the man he is, he is absolutely entitled to do whatever he wants with whomever he wants. His sense of entitlement does not allow for him to ever be or do wrong. At least that how it looks to me. A bit Trumpian really. The hyper masculine victim. Men such as these never feel ‘not good enough’ and will defend themselves no matter how bad it gets or looks. The victim badge will just get bigger and bigger. The closing line from 1959 pop song, Charlie Brown by The Coasters comes to mind: ‘why is everybody always picking on me?’
I was going to write about the problems many men face, the sense of being not good enough, to face rejection, nagging, bullying, judgement for somehow not living up to expectations or unable to meet the aspirational goals other in the workplace or in their home life, marriages, relationships, parenting. That women are murdered at a rate of one every four days is not just a women’s problem, it is very much a men’s problem, and that desperately needs to be addressed.
In discussing this earlier today with my doctor, I mentioned the ‘shit life syndrome’, where in many postindustrial regions the good jobs have gone, probably to China or some other cheap labour market where new factories with the latest automated production facilities see the latest goods produced with a fraction of the labour input and at reduced wages so we who can still afford to by stuff can get it super cheap. The people left in the postindustrial regions struggle to find the most menial of work and the levels of drug and alcohol abuse, suicide rates and domestic violence incidences are high. Property values have dropped, and any sense of self-worth has left town along with the jobs. Men who used to be able to provide for their families are reduced to emotional shells.
Mentioned also was the difficulty for family life for Fly in-Fly out workers. Two weeks of 12-hour days on a remote mine site and back home for a week of family fun. The need to reconnect with partners and children, and with the sizeable income, a bit of spoiling with great outings, the latest toys and a catch up with mates, often at the local over a meal and a few too many drinks. As one FIFO partner who worked on her own career once put it, ‘home for a night or two of honeymooning, catchup with mates and back to work’ leaving the issues of household management to her, except of course then came the questions on how the money is spent, prioritised. That marriage floundered, he felt he was rejected, somehow not good enough despite bringing home big pay-packets, and could not understand what went wrong.
Coercive control is part of the problem too. Technology allows the very effective tracking of people through mobile phone apps, and while there may be very good reason to have a tracking device linking partners’ phones, there are time when it is not a good idea. A better idea may be to call if the partner is not where you thought they may be, ‘Hey, where are you? All good?’ is a non-threatening way of checking in.
As well the installation of security cameras, while a good idea for gathering evidence should the home be broken into, burgled, it can also be a means of checking out who’s visiting a partner while the other is away, possibly working. Even the front doorbell can be monitored remotely. As well checking bank and credit card expenditure remotely, is just watching money without any context of why is being spent. Coercive control is insidious, it’s like there is constant surveillance and smacks of a lack of trust and is based on a sense of insecurity, that desire to be in absolute control no matter where we may be, on a remote mine site, travelling or even sitting side by side on a sofa.
And then there are the expectations that a partner will always be there for the head of the household; subservient, cooking meals, looking after the kids and contributing to the family budget through paid employment and despite the best efforts, complains that the poor harried man is not pulling his weight, so off to the pub or some other boys club meeting place to whinge with his mates of how shit his life is, how long since he’s had sex, how unreasonable the demands of his partner, so let’s do another line, inhale another load of that shit, have another beer, and crash home to a mouthful of complaints. ‘How much can a man take for goodness sakes, and now she wants to leave me after all I have done for her? I’ll show her...’
Financial pressures lead to the frustration of seemingly never having enough, never being ‘good enough’ is depressing and the tendency to seek solace in drugs and alcohol is often an easy escape route. In saying that, it is not only men who seek solace there, women too look for comfort through chemical solutions. Unfortunately, such solutions are short-lived, tempers are more easily frayed, voices rise to a crescendo and the pile on of frustration too often leads to physical responses.
Headlines telling us that a woman is killed every four days through domestic violence is shocking, but there is no easy fix. Just throwing money at it will not solve the issues. Having refuge centres is good, but always a short-term fix. It is important that a safe refuge is available at times of crisis, and that money is accessible to ensure needs can be met. But to address the fears women have, and those fears are real, we need to also address the ‘not good enough-ness’ that many men face. The frustrations of ‘being a man’ in the traditional sense, that of being the chief breadwinner, the provider, seems to be an unattainable goal in Australia today, and the team work required to make relationships work, where there is no dominant voice but an agreed voice, an agreed means of negotiating through the issues, the shared role of home making, financial commitments and intimacy, and a walk away from seeking solace through drugs and alcohol so that negotiation is a two way street, where there is active listening and a commitment to conflict resolution.
Cultural diversity sees different rules governing the relationship between men and women, but essentially, men need to understand that women are not chattels, are not a man’s property. In many religious circles the headship, leadership, authority of the man in a relationship is preached, but that places the woman in a weaker position, in that position of subservience. Again, we have an orthodoxy where there is discrimination, again we see the religious leaders seek to have the right to discriminate in law through the religious discrimination act. While that orthodoxy is promoted, whether it is through the wearing of certain clothes or the acceptance of leadership, authority, men will have a sense of power over women, and when that power is exercised in anger, many women face injury, even death.
It is not just in religious circles where male superiority is condoned, the internet is full of misogyny through pornography and influencers such as Andrew Tate, the bullying in schools, and as reported recently where boy students insult female teacher with misogynistic call outs like ‘make me a sandwich’. Freedom of speech is bullshit when it is used to denigrate or bully and normalise misogyny and denigration, to dehumanise through name calling and one-line putdowns.
So what are the answers… I wish I knew, but it has to be more than promising a squillion dollars to throw at it. We need to establish a means where men are not embarrassed to face counselling, to face their vulnerabilities, to have access to men’s groups which will guide thinking away from the sense of entitlement, the sense of ownership over women, particularly in male dominated workplaces such as FIFO sites where men are encouraged to talk through their relationship issues with trained counselors such as chaplains (and there are chaplains who are not affiliated with churches, so there will not be the fear of having some dogma or other reinforced) who will encourage the development of listening skills and empathy in negotiating domestic life.
I don’t know the answers, I really don’t think anyone has all the answers, and possibly, probably, the answer is different in each situation, for each person, but somehow, we need to work with men to make us understand that women should not need to fear us, that we will do everything we can to be good enough.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
23 comments
Login here Register here-
Phil Pryor -
paul walter -
Lyndal -
Steve Davis -
Bert Hetebry -
Nicole Livar -
Canguro -
JulianP -
Andrew Smith -
Steve Davis -
Steve Davis -
Canguro -
John C -
Arnd -
Lyndal -
Arnd -
Arnd -
Clakka -
Andyfiftysix -
leefe -
Lyndal -
Lyndal -
Centrelink customer
Return to home pageThe “left and centre” of political action will be laughed at, scorned, for even trying here, while the right wing ratbaggery, boofhead loudmouths, radio ravers and T V non-experts will front for profiteering incrowd owners of massive media muck machines. Lies and posturing by knowall social media posers will polish the turdery up. Life is now controlled by a post-capitalist consumerism, fed by fantasy, recreation, semislavery, endless and mindless consumerism. We are electronic slaves, phone phonies, password pricks. It is a depressing concept and now, I am pessimistic as never before. The planet is threatened because we are wilfully stupid denialists.
It is right to consider these things. Goes well with a John Quiggin article in the Guardian on neo lib failures across the economy and it comes back to the “Post Truth”mentality that leads the rblindfolded disciples falingr the edge of a rooftop, because post-rtruth said, there is no fall off a roof.
Thanks for your expression of the frustrations experienced by many families nowadays. It seems to me that with all the money and concern suddenly being thrown at the issue, there has been little attempt to try to understand the struggles behind the tragic outbreaks of violence. As a female living with a very troubled male (adult son), I despair at the solutions being put forward which are all about more counselling and refuges for women fleeing violence. Not every woman wants to leave her home or see her male person criminalised. Just the sniff of an AVO against a man can lead to unintended consequences such as homelessness and limits on his relationships with other members of his family.
Putting it bluntly, neither apprehended violence orders nor domestic violence counsellors are helpful in all cases. I don’t want to be accused of making excuses for men who resort to violence but I believe that mental illness, and alcoholism have to be addressed much more strongly.
In my own case, I would particularly like to see a change in the rules about consenting to treatment for mental illness. Twice this year, i have called the Police and they have called an ambulance for my son, but he has refused to agree to be taken to hospital. The lack of psychiatric help to diagnose the level of mental illness, the lack of mental health workers and social workers on the ground, and the lack of beds and accommodation to help angry men work through their alcoholism and mental problems, leaves people like myself, an elderly mother, with no where to turn for real help.
“I don’t know the answers, I really don’t think anyone has all the answers, …”
A great article Bert, but the answer is staring us in the face.
We’ve allowed our society to make wealth the greatest good, and from that have allowed ourselves to be sucked into the US way of wealth creation; that is, by militarising our economy and culture.
Defence budget papers show spending for 2023-24 will reach $52.558 billion.
That’s right, a billion per week. $143 million per day.
For a nation that has no enemies, now or in the foreseeable future.
For a nation that because of its isolation would be a logistical nightmare for a would-be invader.
If a quarter of that was spent on infrastructure, that is, spent on the social good, many social problems would disappear and our security would not be affected in the least.
Steve, thank you for your response and yes, money, money money is an issue, but I think the issue is a little deeper for some men.
This morning on my daily walk on the beach I met up with Bob. Bob is an angry man, divorced for quite a few years now but still bitter about his ‘bitch of an ex, nagging bitch she was, so one time I strangled her, watched her face change colours….. but I wasn’t going to jail for her.’
I see Bob fairly often at the beach and never has he had a good word to say, especially about his ex, and in conversation the problem becomes quite apparent, Bob does not listen. And that is a problem for many men, they hear the noise, the criticism but not the words being spoken, not the appeal for a listening, empathetic ear.
I see that in a fast failing relationship close to me. It is sad, the woman is bullied into silence, He is a FIFO worker and fits the mould well, home for a couple of days of family fun, a catch up with mates over a beer or two and back to the remote work place. He does not hear her, or is it does not want to hear what his partner is asking for. Needing to face up to his own vulnerabilities is very difficult for this large, very fit man, he does all he can, brings in a shit load of money to satisfy every whim and fancy, but is emotionally ‘not good enough’, seemingly unable to grasp that love is not counted in dollar bills.
Very good article and comments.
Also our society is not a community anymore and all our social services have been privatised. we don’t care about each other, and we have to change that. I think we have to start with the education system. A public system with all the resource they need, where girls and boys are treated the same and have equal opportunities, and ban all the private religious schools, especially the boys schools who perpetuate all that is wrong in our society, like militarism, denial of climate change, poverty, loneliness, neoliberalism etc. etc..
Nina Simone’s cover of George Harrison’s Isn’t it a Pity. Such a poignant lament on the lack of love, lack of care, along with the materialism, selfishness and greed that seems to be somewhat of a default condition amongst certain sections of the human tribe.
@Steve Davis.
I think you are correct Steve to say the answer has always been obvious.
When you say: “We’ve allowed our society to make wealth the greatest good…”, I reckon you’re on the right track to correctly identify the root-cause of most of our problems, and given the current level of social problems, perhaps it’s not too harsh to say that our society is failing.
Where is our sense of community? Where is our sense of unity-of-purpose? Where is our sense of the value of the common good? Where is our appreciation and caring for our frail and elderly?
Why has dental care not long been part of Medicare?
Why for example do we accept disdainful comments such as “lifters and leaners” from the likes of Joe Hockey and others of his ilk and tolerate increasing levels of corporate welfare** and ignore long-standing agrarian socialism? Where has common courtesy and respect gone – and with it the ability to have a discussion without trading barbs and insults?
**[ https://michaelwest.com.au/fossil-fuel-juggernauts-call-for-more-subsidies-to-keep-coal-clunkers-going/ ]
Over the last few decades the bear pit of Parliamentary Question Time admirably demonstrates the low level at which it seems we are prepared to deal with each other.
We can read and hear about the level of dysfunction apparent in American society but fail to look closer to home and recognize the same symptoms and thus fail to understand that similar circumstances have produced similar outcomes in our own country.
As you correctly identify Steve, it all comes down to what a society identifies as being most valuable – in which human values for example, society is prepared to invest time and energy. If the dollar is to be paramount. all else becomes secondary and of increasing less importance.
Some have pointed to education, especially early education as being perhaps the most fertile ground in which to plant the seeds of responsible civic behaviour. For that to be done properly it would take a unified commitment and a level of resources far beyond the present desultory approach to early education and the partiality given to “private” education.
Choice is all very well, but look rather to what it produces, be that intellectually, commercially or socially.
Suppose a generation’s ideology since Howard i.e. US style 19thC white Christian nationalism, designed by and for men, then RW MSM and influencers find opportunities to create stunts for content, claiming victimhood for men; rinse and repeat.
Julian, thanks for your interest.
You ask “Where is our sense of the value of the common good? ”
That disappeared with the rise of liberal ideology which grabbed onto the belief that came from Adam Smith I think, that people pursuing selfish ends will, with no oversight or coordination or regard for others, produce good outcomes for society.
That nonsense was beautifully refuted by John Maynard Keynes with this; “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wicked of men will do the most wicked of things for the greatest good of everyone.”
Yet that belief still drives liberal policy today.
When I was verifying the wording of the Keynes quote I came across this, also from Keynes, and on the topic under discussion.
“When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues. We shall be able to afford to dare to assess the money-motive at its true value. The love of money as a possession — as distinguished from the love of money as a means to the enjoyments and realities of life — will be recognized for what it is, a somewhat disgusting morbidity, one of those semi-criminal, semi-pathological propensities which one hands over with a shudder to the specialists in mental disease.”
A great quote, but I think he understated the problem.
With respect to JulianP’s series of questions, “Where is our sense of community? Where is our sense of unity-of-purpose? Where is our sense of the value of the common good? Where is our appreciation and caring for our frail and elderly?”, I offer the following observation: at odds with the general observation that the multicultural nature of post-war Australia is generally seen as a force for good and an overall benefit for Australian society – a view that I do not demur from – it also stands to reason that the multi-faceted nature of contemporary Australian society in all its kaleidoscopic fragmentation utterly and absolutely prohibits any enduring sense of social cohesion, thus… sense of community disappears, unity of purpose too, as does sense of value of common good, along with a fractured relationship to the question of appreciation and caring for the frail and elderly.
I would argue that these positions were unforeseen by the social scientists and architects of modern Australia, that despite their genuine wish and willingness to make this country a contemporary model of social cohesion in a world begging for such a model, there has been a failure in the sense of anticipating the natural wish of social groups to atomise and coalesce into their peer preferences.
This should not be taken as a criticism but rather a mere failure of vision and anticipation. Pauline Hanson’s vulgar admonition to ‘just piss off back to where you came from’ deserves to be condemned as do all such similar attitudes and opinions.
I lost interest in reading this article after the first sentence: “What is the problem with men”. If it said ‘What is the problem with SOME men” I would have continued reading. I don’t like being included in a generalisation of the bad behaviour of many males of our species. I could say, and will, what is the problem with women, because they have many problems too, NOT caused by men and of their own doing. They can be extremely difficult to live with at times too and many are very good at antagonising their menfolk to see how far they can push them and what they can get away with. I have seen this over and over again and get very upset that men are always the ones blamed for domestic violence. I also know women that can, (and do), beat up their men. May sound unbelievable to the feminists but there are many men living in fear of their female partners. In the media it is never the woman’s fault, which is not only untruthful but also an unbelievable stretch of the imagination. Both of the sexes have good and bad in their ranks so generalising is not only untrue but also unacceptable. I do not condone violence in any form or against anyone but as a man who has never raised a finger to any woman in 60 years of life I resent being bundled in with the bad amongst us.
Steve Davis,
Thanks for that J.M.Keynes quote, and I agree with your assessment that it understates its case.
John C: as one of only two females commenting on this item, can I say that I agree with you, and that there are plenty of females who antagonise their menfolk for much the same reason as men resort to violent reactions, which is probably that power imbalances and resentments build in relationships over time. You might look at my response above to see my personal belief that much more support needs to be given to help men who are struggling with a range of difficulties. I should have said couples and families. When difficulties arise in relationships, there are many “support” groups and organisations that are keen to guide people into separations, and nothing much to help people deal with the root causes that range from different standards, tensions arising with children, mortgage/rental stress (poverty / low income / unemployment) alcohol and other drug use, isolation and mental illness.
John C:
I agree! Neither I nor any of the man in my circle of friends and acquaintances “do” domestic violence or coercive control. We mostly maintain mutually supportive relationships, and we mostly manage our inevitable and at times outright exasperating ups and downs without dropping below fairly high standards of respect and restraint. One of my mates’ marriage went pear-shape very badly and ended in great acrimony and visceral contempt but even they managed to keep their behaviour towards each other within basic bounds of acceptability.
Some time ago, it occurred to me that holding “all men” accountable may actually have the unintended consequence of leaving those men with a tendency towards controlling and violent behaviour with the mistaken impression that such behaviour is actually more widespread and acceptable than it actually is, that despite some p.c. lamentations to the contrary it is the hallmark of a true red-blooded man, and that they should go ahead with even greater self-assurance, just to show them pussy-whipped wusses what being a real man is all about.
There was an article, in The Guardian, I believe (can’t find it just now) that quoted women pleading to go easy with the screening of anti-violence tv ads, because it invariably set off their menfolk even worse.
Looking at these matters from my anarchist vantage point, the other thing that bothers me about this whole thing is that coercive control is such a widely accepted everyday reality for all of us, affecting just about every daily pursuit, be it work, or driving down the road, going shopping, surfing the net … , that singling out domestic violence as especially contemptible almost borders hypocrisy. Certainly the whole operation of the bourgeois legal system is nothing more than an elaborate and complicated application of the principles of coercive control – and punitive measures to contain and minimise individual incidences of coercive control are a simple case of “Do as I say, or else I will do to you what I forbid you to do to others!”
Not the most promising approach, I would have thought?
I meant to include a link to this Guardian article:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/25/parentsnext-was-meant-to-help-single-mothers-go-back-to-work-instead-it-feels-like-a-new-abusive-relationship
The peddling of notions of supremacy, whether by man or woman, have led to conquest and conflict since the year dot.
But for survival quests of many indigenous societies, in so called ‘western’ civilized societies, misogyny may be the outcome of original discriminations, fear of the sexuality and child bearing and rearing powers of woman and entrapment through the ‘beauty myth’. It’s writ by (male monkish) scholars in the bible, book of Genesis, the stories of Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden, and in the Quoran, even though there are other provisions that pay lip service to equality.
And, regardless, before biblical times and in many other cultures seeking supremacy, the ritual sacrifice of female virgins and children. And connotations of the evils of menstruation.
And what about the added paradox of the phenomena of Elektra and Oedipus?
Notions of supremacy and its aspirations seem to resort to ‘othering’ and blaming as barriers the most convenient at hand. And of course, the ubiquitous con is that supremacy equates to safety, security and wellbeing for the majority.
There may have been times when societies obtained a balance during good times, that on the surface seemed to satisfy both man and woman, but good times usually don’t last.
Since the corporatization of everything, there’s been a mandate for competitive supremacy which has led to a concentration of power, and increasingly a loss of power, and of self-determination for individuals. Corporations seeking to get the most for the least, will exercise divide and conquer at any level, right through to man and woman, who are either in the program at lowest cost, or out. Feminism and misogyny manipulated. Our society is now saturated with it, and in such circumstances, especially in insecure times, the victims unable to cope will find the nearest available real or perceived antagonist, and lash out.
Other than immediate actions through social and mainstream media, policing, restraint and penalty, it is not likely to be set to peace without substantial restructure of the corporate and political mandate.
if only it was that simple. Yes domestic violence has been analysed and many recommendations and reasons are given.
Personally i have been through the emotional roller coaster of social change. Yet I never hit anyone. I never even inferred any violence on any women, ever.
I am a bit with Waleed Ali on this. Short of locking up all men, i don’t see a simple solution. Its as complex as any personal profile.
I would say we should do all we can and live with the x factor we have no control over.
Changes in society have made things even more difficult to negotiate. If we are not prepared to support peoples needs, wtf do we need a society for? The agenda we have all followed has collapsed under its own narrow minded focus. We need some people to lead us out, emotionally stunted people like dutton keep getting the nod……..we make things more difficult than necessary.
All men benefit from the behaviour of the worst.
Leefe: A brave point and true. Up here with Men are afraid a woman might laugh at them; women are afraid that a man might kill them.
Truly, women feel secure with their own loving partner to watch out for them in a trusting relationship, but the knowledge that there are unsafe situations out there, where women can be hurt by some male, keeps women dependent on their own man particularly when the alternative is being alone, in a strange place on her own.
One change that I think would be helpful would be, at the issue of an AVO, it be mandatory that that the recipient of the order have a mental health assessment and anger management assistance
For ACOSS CEO
Dear Cassandra Goldie,
I urge you to publicly acknowledge 2 illegal debt schemes administered by Services Australia.
Scheme #1. Fake Review scheme. Instead of a formal review decision, Services Australia sent me an objection decision by an anonymous “delegate or authorised officer”. This is illegal. I provided your office with plenty of documents from different public officials supporting this scheme.
Scheme #2. Family Assistance Office automatically issue debts for the whole Rent Assistance, if a parent was ineligible for FTB. This is illegal. Instead of a debt for around 15% of Rent assistance (dependent on FTB), FAO request to return the rest 85% of Rent Assistance as well.
ACOSS refused to answer simple questions regarding legality of the schemes or debt notices I received.
Cassandra Goldie, you have to explain your inaction in relation to both of the schemes.