Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by notallgemini
The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love by bell hooks
3.75
I had mixed feelings about this book, but ultimately it was a quick and interesting read, and it provides a perspective that is largely missing from feminist literature.
hooks writes with a clarity and simplicity that makes her work more enjoyable and accessible. She describes experiences that many people can relate to. I think men who are already committed to feminist principles and general change can benefit a lot from reading this book, especially if they haven't unpacked the ways that patriarchy has harmed them and shaped their own development. On the other hand, hooks tends to highlight examples of clear physical or emotional abuse, which are important, but I would've liked to see a little more analysis of the other ways that men's emotional disconnection manifests. There are plenty of examples of men that aren't physically violent or verbally abusive, but are closed off to love or mutual partnership in other ways (like probably most of the men that would be likely to read bell hooks.)
Further, I don't really see this book having the ability to influence or organize men that are already committed to patriarchy. That doesn't really seem to be the audience, and I guess that's okay. But I also would have liked to see more analysis of the ways that the white supremacist patriarchy particularly harms men of color through the prison industrial complex, military industrial complex, etc. She discusses a lot of individual harms but doesn't really go into as much depth about the material structural ways patriarchy creates violence against men.
I think everything hooks talks about is true on a higher level, but she makes a lot of bold claims that are unsubstantiated and maybe a little Freudian/outdated. It takes away from her credibility and sort of weakens the solutions she offers.
I struggle to conceptualize a masculinity outside of patriarchy that is distinct from femininity. hooks talks about the need to affirm the potential goodness of masculinity and malehood several times (as opposed to suggesting its destruction altogether), but doesn't necessarily provide a clear definition of what non-patriarchal masculinity would look like in practice or how we get there. I don't get the sense that she is trying to do that, but it brings up some interesting questions for me. It is probably a good thing since any specific characterization of a "positive masculinity" sort of necessitates a reinforcement of the gender binary and repression of selfhood, etc. The language is fairly cisheteronormative, which kindaa makes sense given the audience, but I feel like queer masculinity is such an interesting lens for imagining masculinity outside of patriarchy, so the lack of analysis there is disappointing for more reasons than one.
It's hard to do it all in less than 200 pages. I think I need some more time to sit with this book, but it definitely has me thinking about the ways that we can move forward towards lasting change.
hooks writes with a clarity and simplicity that makes her work more enjoyable and accessible. She describes experiences that many people can relate to. I think men who are already committed to feminist principles and general change can benefit a lot from reading this book, especially if they haven't unpacked the ways that patriarchy has harmed them and shaped their own development. On the other hand, hooks tends to highlight examples of clear physical or emotional abuse, which are important, but I would've liked to see a little more analysis of the other ways that men's emotional disconnection manifests. There are plenty of examples of men that aren't physically violent or verbally abusive, but are closed off to love or mutual partnership in other ways (like probably most of the men that would be likely to read bell hooks.)
Further, I don't really see this book having the ability to influence or organize men that are already committed to patriarchy. That doesn't really seem to be the audience, and I guess that's okay. But I also would have liked to see more analysis of the ways that the white supremacist patriarchy particularly harms men of color through the prison industrial complex, military industrial complex, etc. She discusses a lot of individual harms but doesn't really go into as much depth about the material structural ways patriarchy creates violence against men.
I think everything hooks talks about is true on a higher level, but she makes a lot of bold claims that are unsubstantiated and maybe a little Freudian/outdated. It takes away from her credibility and sort of weakens the solutions she offers.
I struggle to conceptualize a masculinity outside of patriarchy that is distinct from femininity. hooks talks about the need to affirm the potential goodness of masculinity and malehood several times (as opposed to suggesting its destruction altogether), but doesn't necessarily provide a clear definition of what non-patriarchal masculinity would look like in practice or how we get there. I don't get the sense that she is trying to do that, but it brings up some interesting questions for me. It is probably a good thing since any specific characterization of a "positive masculinity" sort of necessitates a reinforcement of the gender binary and repression of selfhood, etc. The language is fairly cisheteronormative, which kindaa makes sense given the audience, but I feel like queer masculinity is such an interesting lens for imagining masculinity outside of patriarchy, so the lack of analysis there is disappointing for more reasons than one.
It's hard to do it all in less than 200 pages. I think I need some more time to sit with this book, but it definitely has me thinking about the ways that we can move forward towards lasting change.