Hello comrades, it’s time for our FINAL discussion thread for The Will to Change, covering Chapters 10 (Reclaiming Male Integrity), 11 (Loving Men) and the book as a whole. Thanks to everyone who’s participated over the last couple months, I’m looking forward to hearing everyone’s thoughts again. And if you haven’t started the book yet but would like to, this thread will stay pinned for a while so you can share your thoughts as you read!

As we reflect on the book as a whole, there are a few questions I’m curious to hear everyone’s answers for:

  1. What was your biggest takeaway from reading The Will to Change?

  2. How has the book’s material and hooks’ insights affected your everyday life?

  3. How can we apply hooks’ lessons on healthy, non-patriarchal masculinity to improve the site culture of Hexbear?

If you haven’t read the book yet but would like to, its available free on the Internet Archive in text form, as well as an audiobook on Youtube with content warnings at the start of each chapter, courtesy of the Anarchist Audio Library, and as an audiobook on our very own TankieTube! (note: the YT version is missing the Preface but the Tankietube version has it)

After this I would like to host another book club, probably here on /c/menby but it depends on what exactly we read. Please share any suggestions you have for books below!

  • Murple_27@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    14 days ago

    I also loved Pleasure Activism which is talking about how cultivating pleasure and the erotic in your own life is a revolutionary act in our consumerist society.

    How are these things at odds with each other though?

    How does hedonism combat treat-brain? Those things seem complimentary & self-reinforcing, not in conflict with each other.

    • dumples
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      So I won’t be able to due the whole thing justice since its a whole series of essays but I will try to summarize it as best as possible. adrienne marree brown (the author of Pleasure Activitsm and who doesn’t capitalize her name) starts with Uses of the Erotic: The Erotic as Power which was her original inspiration which should help give an overview of the views of erotic as power which is a great starting point.

      Her definition of pleasure isn’t the same as a hedonism where avoiding all pain and taking all pleasure is the main goal. She talks more about how pleasure is something that someone needs to cultivate within their own life that is long lasting and meaningful. This is similar to eating only candy doesn’t give a lasting satisfaction but rather short term happiness with longer term pain. True pleasure isn’t a short term burst of happiness with a large drop or mindless low level entertainment but rather long lasting and sustainable.

      One of the key ideas is that pleasure isn’t something external that you can purchase, or be given to you but something you grow yourself daily. So you will need to find things that bring you joy based on your own internal desires and needs. A lot of her pleasure comes from human interactions, community and internal choices. There is a lot of talk about how art, fashion, dance, song, community, sex, conversation and meditation bring more long term pleasure than mindless entertainment. Also there is a large element about how finding what one truly wants is different from what society says you may want.

      adrienne marree brown also has a large section about how as a queer black woman being happy and joyful in a world that says all those things are wrong is a revolutionary act. Since I am neither of those things this wasn’t as important in my day to day life but beautiful to read and think about.

      Her blog has some essays that were in her book I think in case you want to take a look.

      • Murple_27@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        I don’t know; to address the topic of the thread in-general, rather than just the specific books you’ve offered. I have been independently reading Ms. hooks’ book off & on independently of the reading group; but I for one haven’t really been commenting on it, because aside from some insight into women’s perceptions & experiences of men, as well as acknowledgements of men’s own material & internal struggles under Capitalist Patriarchy, I just don’t get a lot out of the book personally. There’s not very much here that feels actionable to & applicable within my own life that I’m not already doing to the best of my ability; and the given that the book itself already feels more like Self-Help rather than solid political theory (although it contains kernels of that for certain), it just doesn’t seem like it’s for me.

        • dumples
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 days ago

          A lot of this book and other similar books have less direct day to day changes but are mostly focused on attitude and mental changes. The changes in attitude and mental pathways seem less actionable and applicable but can have great changes in your day to day life. This is basically what Cognitive Behavior Therapy does which is highly effective.

          • Murple_27@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 days ago

            Right, but I wouldn’t call that politics. Like I said, it’s more like Self-Help, or like you said therapy.

            The difference is explained in Marx’s “The German Ideology”, and his contrasting of “Philosophic” & “Real” liberation.

            Spoiler: Wall of Theory

            Feuerbach: Philosophic, and Real, Liberation

            It is also clear from these arguments how grossly Feuerbach is deceiving himself when (Wigand’s Vierteljahrsschrift, 1845, Band 2) by virtue of the qualification “common man” he declares himself a communist,[26] transforms the latter into a predicate of “man,” and thereby thinks it possible to change the word “communist,” which in the real world means the follower of a definite revolutionary party, into a mere category. Feuerbach’s whole deduction with regard to the relation of men to one another goes only so far as to prove that men need and always have needed each other. He wants to establish consciousness of this fact, that is to say, like the other theorists, merely to produce a correct consciousness about an existing fact; whereas for the real communist it is a question of overthrowing the existing state of things. We thoroughly appreciate, moreover, that Feuerbach, in endeavouring to produce consciousness of just this fact, is going as far as a theorist possibly can, without ceasing to be a theorist and philosopher…

            As an example of Feuerbach’s acceptance and at the same time misunderstanding of existing reality, which he still shares with our opponents, we recall the passage in the Philosophie der Zukunft where he develops the view that the existence of a thing or a man is at the same time its or his essence, that the conditions of existence, the mode of life and activity of an animal or human individual are those in which its “essence” feels itself satisfied. Here every exception is expressly conceived as an unhappy chance, as an abnormality which cannot be altered. Thus if millions of proletarians feel by no means contented with their living conditions, if their “existence” does not in the least correspond to their “essence,” then, according to the passage quoted, this is an unavoidable misfortune, which must be borne quietly. The millions of proletarians and communists, however, think differently and will prove this in time, when they bring their “existence” into harmony with their “essence” in a practical way, by means of a revolution. Feuerbach, therefore, never speaks of the world of man in such cases, but always takes refuge in external nature, and moreover in nature which has not yet been subdued by men. But every new invention, every advance made by industry, detaches another piece from this domain, so that the ground which produces examples illustrating such Feuerbachian propositions is steadily shrinking.

            The “essence” of the fish is its “being,” water – to go no further than this one proposition. The “essence” of the freshwater fish is the water of a river. But the latter ceases to be the “essence” of the fish and is no longer a suitable medium of existence as soon as the river is made to serve industry, as soon as it is polluted by dyes and other waste products and navigated by steamboats, or as soon as its water is diverted into canals where simple drainage can deprive the fish of its medium of existence. The explanation that all such contradictions are inevitable abnormalities does not essentially differ from the consolation which Saint Max Stirner offers to the discontented, saving that this contradiction is their own contradiction and this predicament their own predicament, whereupon then, should either set their minds at ease, keep their disgust to themselves, or revolt against it in some fantastic way. It differs just as little from Saint Bruno’s allegation that these unfortunate circumstances are due to the fact that those concerned are stuck in the muck of “substance,” have not advanced to “absolute self-consciousness" and do not realise that these adverse conditions are conditions of their spirit.

            II. 1. Preconditions of the Real Liberation of Man

            We shall, of course, not take the trouble to enlighten our wise philosophers by explaining to them that the “liberation” of man is not advanced a single step by reducing philosophy, theology, substance and all the trash to “self-consciousness” and by liberating man from the domination of these phrases, which have never held him in thrall. Nor will we explain to them that it is only possible to achieve real liberation in the real world and by employing real means, that slavery cannot be abolished without the steam-engine and the mule and spinning-jenny, serfdom cannot be abolished without improved agriculture, and that, in general, people cannot be liberated as long as they are unable to obtain food and drink, housing and clothing in adequate quality and quantity. “Liberation” is an historical and not a mental act, and it is brought about by historical conditions, the development of industry, commerce, agriculture, the conditions of intercourse…

            The rub here, is that while Self-Help & Therapy can be good at providing strategies (both practical, and mental) at aligning ones “essence”, with ones “existence” by shifting the former towards the latter; they are by definition not Revolutionary. Because the prosecution of a Revolution is precisely the opposite state of affairs, it is altering “existence” to suit one’s “essence”.