Am I defending a 'manel'?

In my last article here, I sought advice on our new podcast, and unsurprisingly got some very useful suggestions. I also got some criticism about the podcast being fundamentally a 'manel'. And yes, it is true. It is hosted by men, who go back a pretty long way. So not only is it a 'manel,' it might give off an old boys' club sort of vibe. As we host our podcast live on Bakstage, the 'manel' criticism has turned up there as well.

To further queer the pitch, I am personally with the attack on 'manels' in general. I think it is absolutely important to call that sort of thing out, and there is no doubt that there has been a systemic removal of women's voices from public discussions in the name of expertise (which is not a viable defence to have a 'manel' anyway.)

And, may the queering of pitches never stop, we are quite aware that given that Misters is a brand in the men's sexual wellness space, it can, without much effort end up being seen as one of the MRA-types. Misters is not that. The defence coming up later in the piece is not that. Might be, ironically, quite the opposite.

And before I put together my defence for this particular 'manel,' let me also lay out that in episodes where we need an expert (because of the particular theme), we have generally had women on the show. The gender of the expert has not mattered to us, so I can't claim that we have specifically looked for women experts, nor that this is part of the defence. It has just been so. However, the show definitely is a 'manel' in a very literal, inarguable, sense because the people at its core, the co-hosts, are all men.

Now for the defence of the 'manel':

"The fundamental challenge is that men do not talk to other men about sex and when they do, they are under great pressure to exaggerate," is something I say around 116 times every month. Not whimsically, no. (Although that would be interesting, but no, let's not digress. Well not anymore than we have, already.) I say it because a lot of discussions at Misters--whether marketing or logistics, reviewing the call centre operations or website metrics and so on--lead to this as at least a contributing issue.

So, we look at our podcast as an opportunity to present an alternative texture of conversation among male friends. We do not get together to outdo each other with stories of sexual 'conquest,' and are instead happy to acknowledge and articulate vulnerabilities. In fact it is in that conversation that we feel we offer a worthwhile podcast, because in no way do we want to sermonise.

And we can leverage the vast science and data strength that Misters has acquired in the men's sexual wellness space to address what comes up in what is a very intimate conversation.

To discuss the manel* question, and not only because we are self-indulgent, and not to get a free pass to carry on conducting manels, we invited four women friends of the podcast to join the conversation. It was a pretty interesting episode, I thought.

Spotify link below, in case you want to listen in. Either way, let me know what you think?

* Perceptive readers would have noticed that I dropped the quotes from the word, 'manel' towards the end of the piece. Well, that's because I think there should be no doubt about its word-ness. Language needs to evolve and to the decision-makers at OED, c'mon, add it already!