Thoughts on the Men's Table

A COUPLE weeks ago, the story goes, 10 guys dressed in sweats and baseball caps, sporting attitudes and cold beers, marched into the North House dining hall and proceeded to hold a "Men's Table." Their topic: How to Get Laid at Harvard. This is, as I've heard it, how the story goes.

There is another side to it, too. The president of the North House Committee presented it to the masters, tutors and about half of the house at the Gender Forum held the following Wednesday night. He and others assured us that they had not planned the table ahead of time, or decked themselves out specifically for the event. They did not talk about How to Get Laid at Harvard. And most importantly, they did not mean any harm.

As I listened to the various "sides" during the Wednesday debate, a pattern to the discussion became clear. People would express anger at the men's insensitivity and then discuss sexism at North House--in the Holiday Show, in the "joke of the week" or the everyday kind. Several speakers would try to explain sexism, from their experiences.

Then, inevitably, a participant in the Men's Table would rise and again declare his innocence. Or he would plead that he was really a nice guy and didn't intend to hurt or humiliate anyone, least of all the "girls in the house."

They seemed to suggest that if we could all just understand that everyone had the story wrong and that we were blowing it way out of proportion, then, finally, they would be able to clear up this mess. Then we would all be one big happy family again. Neither they nor North House could be called sexist, and all this nastiness would go away.

I DESCRIBE their response because it demonstrates that focusing on "guilt or innocence" is pointless. Anyone can represent the Men's Table in any way he or she wants. No one on either side can prove anything.

Anyone can represent the Men's Table any way he or she wants. But by centering the dialogue on their "innocence," these men (whether they realized it or not) limited the discussion such that they did not have to listen to anyone's anger. By focusing on "the facts" as they saw them, they were able to dismiss the rage of a lot of women and men in the house as simply misguided and irrational. That's bad. Ironic, too: answering discrimination with anger seems to me the only reasonable response, really.

Still, such anger is difficult to hear. You have to be open enough to realize that being white and male carries with it privileges of which you may not be aware. If you want to stop offending people, you have to be willing to realize that nice guys can be prejudiced, too. You have to be a little more willing to change your ideas about the world. Why? Because if you really didn't mean any harm, and you do want someone to explain all of this to you, you'd better prepare yourself to hear a lot of anger. And you'd better be ready to listen.

I SUPPOSE that the first step in getting the Men's Table guys to listen is for us to listen to them, to believe that they mean it when they say they didn't mean any harm. Personally, I do believe that. However sincere, though, "I didn't know" is not a good apology. A good apology will come months down the road, when they can finally say that they understand why this incident was a bigger deal than they'd bargained for.

I honestly don't know if it's possible to explain my experience to anyone who isn't a woman, or even to a woman who hasn't experienced it blatantly. Maybe it is possible. I can try: I can tell you about obscene phone calls I've gotten, about how personally I took the Montreal Massacre... I could tell you that writing this makes me afraid I am inviting more abuse. Those women in Montreal were shot because they were feminists, or called that. I'm a feminist. What's going to happen to me?

I can tell you a lot of things like this, but I can't do it without getting upset and angry. Sexism does not make sense to me; I don't respond to it well. So how do I get someone who can't or won't see things from my point of view to accept this anger, and respond? I can talk about fear; I don't know what has to happen for anyone to begin to understand.

Ann E. Blais '91, a junior in North House, is co-chair of the Women's Alliance.