The Red Knob

Then I reached inside a Snide bush

And the next thing that I knew,

I felt my hand touch someone!

And I’ll bet that you know who.

And for those people familiar with Dr Seuss’s wonderful book -The Sneetches, you may also recall another story within that weighty tome entitled ‘What was I scared of?’ - a cautionary tale of meeting with a pair of ( American style) animated but empty lime-green pants via a Snide bush ( don’t think you’ll find this in Bean’s Trees and Shrubs Hardy in the British Isles ). At least that’s one interpretation. Now, it’s been pointed out that the previous posting is more than a little snide - having a dig at the good folk at Brook and their glorious leader - below the belt, unwarranted, and very unfair. Possibly. The reality is that there isn’t enough of Brook to go round - and actually we do like their glorious leader, although admittedly we do have a funny way of showing it. As for the Brits of sexual health - yes, we should be celebrating good practice - but the question is - is it good practice? Great if it is. Or - are we perpetuating further versions of the same old, same old. A slap on the back for building a prize sandcastle as the tide rises around us.

One of the founding reasons for the existence of the Proudhon inspired anarcho-syndicate ( but hey, we’re really apolitical and a limited company to boot) that is The Red Knob was to agitate and raise the profile of the paucity of work around young men’s sexual health. We can be overjoyed at the work of the glorious leader, fpa, or  the pioneering blokes at Working With Men - but is it enough? The people mentioned would possibly agree that it is not. However, it becomes problematic when the same old, same old is hauled out at award ceremonies and  put into practice guidance - especially when it is driven by one idealogy that is either not cogniscent of or disregards evidence-based practice from other fields - ie our oft-trotted-out-tale of sociology/feminist inspired work around recasting masculinity ( and heaven knows that some men do indeed require a different mould) that has become the unquestioned de rigueur practice guidance that workers at the sharp-end are told ‘what works’ - only it doesn’t always. But - times change.

A great deal of work around young men’s sexual health was carried out during the earlier part of this decade - driven by an agenda around reducing teenage pregnancies. The people at the cutting edge of this work - and in many ways who still are, gave us our practice guidance on work with men - with young men. But the practice guidance has become moribund and we’re all becalmed in an accepted state of the doldrums - which no one bothers to question. Yes - undoubtably much of the guidance does work - but it doesn’t work with all young men - those so-called hard-to-reach masculinities, who really aren’t that hard-to-reach at all - it’s just that we’re not using the right approach - and this is where things become problematic for current guidance.

Current practice guidance on sexual health work with young men is based upon feminist thought around recasting masculinity - and this is fine where it works - but it is problematic when it encounters entrenched masculine cultures. The credibility cost for young men involved in those entrenched masculine cultures around engaging in a dialogue around their masculinty, and sexual health, becomes too high - and creates a barrier to engagement. Hence we need to bring onboard approaches that are sensitive to the masculine cultures that they inhabit - hence the work of The Red Knob.  The practice guidance on this work needs to be updated and rewritten. However, this can only be done if  the arbiters of young men’s sexual health are prepared to accept a real ‘what works’ approach - that sometimes in order to convey health information to young men in a credible way - that is acceptable and accessible to them, we need to make use of approaches that make use of the language, the codes, and traits of masculine cultures -  however uncomfortable that may make the proponents of feminist approaches  feel  - in order to address immediate health concerns. That doesn’t mean to say that efforts to recast some elements of masculinty should be abandoned - not at all - there is a need for feminist based work and thought to remain embedded within this work - not only around sexual health, but other issues such as domestic violence - but in order to address immediate health concerns the sociology-based camp of men’s health work  - ie the people who are behind current guidance - need to recognise that sometimes the approaches they advocate don’t always work - that we sometimes do need to work within cultures to affect change - not batter them from the outside with a dialogue that may as well be Ukranian.

 This really is a plea - let’s rewrite the guidance on this  - so that the work we deliver with young men is less one-size-fits-all prescriptive,  based upon one ideology and is open to all approaches that work. Social marketing eh. Nestor Makhno , would have advocated for direct action - but we’re not quite there yet ( although there’s a gentleman in Cerne Abbas that’s begging for it) . Beyond the Snide bush - if  Sneetches, an unnamed small, furry, yellow creature, and a pair of lime-green pants can kiss and make up and get on with it - then why can’t we?

Filed under: Op Ed