As we celebrate International Women’s Day, a recurring refrain may be heard: “What about men?”
Behind this testy question is an impression that focusing on women and girls is squeezing out attention to the needs of men and boys, with destructive consequences. Some of the most strident calls to concentrate on men – especially young, socially isolated men – come from within the humanitarian sector, where long overdue reforms have sought to address women and girls’ vulnerability to sexual violence, and their need for safe spaces and employment, even in displacement and flight.
Since the late 1980s, feminists – both male and female – have recognised the need to involve men in the struggle for equality, and to combat notions of masculinity built on the domination of women and gender violence. At the same time, it has been understood that, because of historical and deep-rooted discrimination against women, female empowerment has to be at the heart of these efforts.
Yet there is no doubt that men and boys have many needs and face potential threats and discrimination because of their gender and age. And these threats increase during displacement. The most salient relate to the shock of losing things that they see as defining their gender role – jobs, wives – and the typecasting of single young men, particularly Muslim men, as “violent troublemakers”. This can be profoundly destabilising and have a devastating impact in terms of addiction, self-harm, and harm to others.
Yet while men receiving assistance may feel as if they are “last in line” due to changing gender roles, the facts simply do not support this. Data collected by UN Women, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the World Bank and many others highlight the strikingly low funding committed to and spent on gender equality and women’s needs across the humanitarian, development and peace and security spectrum. And this is within an already seriously inadequate global humanitarian financing framework.
To take one example, Syria, South Sudan and the Philippines received the greatest proportion of humanitarian assistance targeting gender equality and women’s needs in 2014, yet this still only amounted to 1% of the total humanitarian aid to each of these countries.
The isolation faced by displaced men as they lose their positions as breadwinners in families and communities is often connected to destructive behaviour and increased vulnerability to recruitment by extremists. This is an important point. Employment for refugees is a major priority, and more and better mental health services are urgently needed for displaced people. But citing issues of male isolation and destabilisation without referencing the repercussions of this on women sidesteps tough ethical issues.
Increased unemployment, isolation and anxiety among men goes hand in hand with increased violence against women. Even with lives turned upside down by displacement, men use their positions of power to curtail women’s freedoms. A recent report by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and Unicef, the UN children’s agency, notes: “Many men, unable to provide for their families, feel emasculated and respond by further restricting the lives of their wives and daughters.” Staggeringly, the study found that more than half of Syrian refugee women interviewed in Jordan are forbidden from leaving home by male family members – and that includes going once a week to a women’s centre.
“What about men” is a kneejerk reaction guaranteed to get headlines in the current global climate, but it thrives by obscuring deep gender inequalities. It also introduces a petty squabble over marginal resources, as if the modest portion of spending dedicated to women and girls’ empowerment is a massive drain on the bank.
Those who ask the question should seek to answer it honestly themselves. If masculinity becomes unmoored in a crisis because of a loss of power and the traditional ways in which a man can “be a man”, how exactly are we proposing to remedy that?
Reinstating the status quo is not the answer, even though powerful conservative forces are pushing to roll back decades of hard-won gains for women’s rights and gender equality. Calling for assistance “commensurate to need” is equally impossible at a time of financial cuts, while also obscuring the fact that interpreting who needs what is a political process.
The recognition of women’s needs is a significant political achievement for humanitarian and development assistance. If the “What about men?” reaction is put forward to challenge this achievement, rather than an effort to thoughtfully engage men in transforming gender relations, it is vital to counter it with a sustained chorus of evidence and fact.
Dr Anne Marie Goetz is clinical professor at New York University. She has served at the UN since 2005 as a policy director of governance, peace and security. Rachel Dore-Weeks is UN Women’s adviser on peace, security and humanitarian action in the Arab States region.