'Young men in Ireland need feminism'

Skommando

tonygun wrote: »

No, it says a lot about how disconnected and out of touch with the reality of the lives of the younger generation that the traditional 'trusted' politicians and journalists are, that it takes a comedian in a shopping bag to bring these issues to light.

No, what is says far more, is how you've been conditioned to think that a someone wearing a plastic bag pretending to be a comedian makes their message credible.

osmiumartist

Edups wrote: »

Oh here we go again another feminist thread where we bash the wimmin.

And we all know the real objective of feminism is to bash men...

RDM_83 again

Lewis Purple Bather wrote: »

I do think that's changing. I work with a suicide prevention/bereavement organisation, have done on and off for the past ten years or so. Over that ten years I've definitely seen a change in the young men who are coming through. Both in terms of talking about their experiences and emotions in front of their peers (these would be school/college groups) and in terms of being emotional - in the early days I remember a couple of occasions where a young man would be close to tears and then switch into anger, that hasn't happened in ages.

Mind you, the rates of youth male suicide in Ireland have remained fcuking atrocious, though if there had been no recession and something approaching a functioning mental health infrastructure over that period maybe it'd be different.
.

Is there any actual evidence that increased emotional openness in general actually reduces suicides rates among men, I've not seen anything to support that view either statistically and personally.

I would argue that the way feminism would be most positive to the young men that this dude is talking about is to try change women's attitude to lower achieving men.

We presently have this very mixed message sent out where its meant to be ok for men to be vulnerable, insecure and not particularly financially viable however despite this all being ok, a guy that is that way will face the harsh bite of reality when he is trying to find a partner (long term or casual).

We can see this pretty openly when criticism of men with what is judged to be negative attitudes towards feminism/women occurs, they are basement dwelling ugly guys who are just jealous and insecure.
The latter two points can't be dismissed as stuff done by a tiny fringe of feminists or media pundits because it happens on here too.

Take a look at this thread (have used as an example), and more relevantly take a look at who thanks and comments on it shaming the guy for reacting negatively to his GF hiding the fact she had 500 sexual partners.
Hint a lot of the same people who think that men should be emotionally open on this thread are pretty quick to put the boot in when they are emotionally open in a way they don't like.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057247232

AnGaelach

Lewis Purple Bather wrote: »

Statistically speaking yes it does, and you would be far more likely to succeed in an attempt.

I mean, I'm after holding a pencil in my hand, letting go of it and ten times in a row it fell to the ground. Probably just a coincidence and no causal relationship, right? In almost EVERY country in the world men kill themselves at rates several times higher than women. That can't be brushed off as coincidence, not if you give a **** about men.

I'm not sure you understand the connection.

To give you an example that's been beaten to death; areas with higher ice cream sales also have increased risks of drowning, does ice cream lead directly to drowning?

Areas with large populations of rabbits are less likely to be active warzones, do rabbits bring down the likelihood of war?

Lewis Purple Bather wrote: »

But you are at some level quantifying it by saying that men who behave differently than yourself are less masculine. You're tying it to traits and behaviour and attitudes and measurable things, and also saying it's intangible. You can't have both.

Because there is an objective masculinity that is hard to define, it's like natural law. Not all law is equal, the SS never broke a law in Germany during ww2 but that's not to say what they did conformed with natural law.

If you don't like sports because it frightens you, then by definition you're not as masculine as an athlete. If you prefer to write books than weld, you're less masculine than the welder. If you like to watch romantic comedies, you're not as masculine as someone who spends his evenings running around a field with a sliotar and a hurl.

The above you can compare because one is inherently more effeminate than the other. However, comparing an athlete to a welder doesn't make sense, both are masculine, one cannot be more masculine than the other. You might prefer welding to football.

Lewis Purple Bather wrote: »

Masculine societies like what? The Caliphate? Feminine societies like what, Scandinavia?

Rome had the barbarians, Kievan Rus had the Mongols, and so on.

There is an inherent masculinity involved in all things men do, and what I'm saying is that we shouldn't shame some people for being masculine and trying to teach children to be less masculine.

Omackeral

The word feminism brings out the worst in absolutely everyone it seems, online anyway. Women hating men and men hating women. Everyone just be fcuking sound to each other regardless of gender. The word should just be equality at this stage anyway IMO, the word just rubs people the wrong way nowadays and they take a stance one way or the other and pick a side. It's so annoying. There should just be two groups; sound people and dickheads. Don't care if you're a man, woman, black, white, gay, trans, just be fcuking nice to people unless they give you a reason not to be.

Good god i'm triggered as fcuk here!

Steve012

DredFX wrote: »

Blindboy from the Rubberbandits (this isn't a joke, I promise) appeared on the Late Late yesterday, and one topic he broached was the need for feminism in young Irish men.

The most prominent issue he notices when speaking to men in Limerick is their fear of being unable to offer anything to women, or to provide for them, which Blindboy feels is a patriarchal value that will bite men in the behind if they don't consider feminism.

Snippet from the interview here, if you haven't seen it.

So, fellas, have you felt these kinds of pressures before, and do you think opening your mind to feminism would help ease your fears?

Fears of what man?

osmiumartist

Steve012 wrote: »

Fears of what man?

I don't fear any man! It's those militant lesbians you need to look out for...

Didas

Skommando wrote: »

No, what is says far more, is how you've been conditioned to think that a someone wearing a plastic bag pretending to be a comedian makes their message credible.

Who are these mystery people who have conditioned me to view the wearing of a plastic bag on ones head as giving the air of credibility?

I have the intelligence to see beyond the gimmick of the bag, and objectively consider the merits/pitfalls of the mans argument, based solely on the content of the opinion he has put forward.

mzungu

AnGaelach wrote: »

And at no point am I disputing that. What I am disputing however, is the calls for some people to tell kids they should be less masculine,

I do not agree with the above either. In fact I think it is abhorrent. Thankfully, it seems to be just a few ideologues who spout that kind of tripe.

what I am disputing is people who (while maybe not in this thread, there are plenty around) think that masculinity is a relic of a bygone age, when it simply isn't. Masculinity should be applauded, not scorned.

Once again, I agree. I don't think masculinity should be demonised. But, your main issue seems to be at certain groups who demonise it, but that has nothing to do with what the Rubberbandits had to say about it.

DredFX

Steve012 wrote: »

Fears of what man?

Not having the money, bro.

Skommando

tonygun wrote: »

Who are these mystery people who have conditioned me to view the wearing of a plastic bag on ones head as giving the air of credibility?

I have the intelligence to see beyond the gimmick of the bag, and objectively consider the merits/pitfalls of the mans argument, based solely on the content of the opinion he has put forward.

While he wears a plastic bag on his face ? As I said I'm curious as how you've been conditioned to think they should be followed as a credible source of opinion, expertise and advice ? No concerns at all your thinking has ended up in this position while he takes the piss out of you with a straight face ?

DredFX

Skommando wrote: »

While he wears a plastic bag on his face ? As I said I'm curious as how you've been conditioned to think they should be followed as a credible source of opinion, expertise and advice ?

He was probably conditioned to judge words, not appearances.

AnGaelach

DredFX wrote: »

He was probably conditioned to judge words, not appearances.

Aye, it'd be fairly hard to judge appearances when you've a 25c plastic bag wrapped around your face.

DredFX

AnGaelach wrote: »

Aye, it'd be fairly hard to judge appearances when you've a 25c plastic bag wrapped around your face.

I hear he briefly considered a Guy Fawkes mask but he was €49 and 75 cents short.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Is there any actual evidence that increased emotional openness in general actually reduces suicides rates among men, I've not seen anything to support that view either statistically and personally.

There isn't, though I'm not sure how it could be measured, any measuring of anything to do with suicide even at a brass tacks level is difficult, there are a lot of 'open verdict' and 'misadventure' deaths that would push our stats way up, while also the lessening stigma around it has lead to deaths being reported as suicide which wouldn't have been before.

I wasn't arguing in that post that men opening up would definitely reduce the levels, just pointing out the change I've noticed. The priority as far as I'm concerned is the actual mental health services and infrastructure. I don't think there's any country in the world where people feel the services are up to scratch, but for a first world country Ireland is atrocious.

Personally, through my work I have heard men talk about how talking helped them, though I can't go into details, not a cop out I swear, I really can't. More openness about mental health in a general way I think is definitely good because people are more aware of warning signs in their friends.

Pressure on people to be openly emotional when they don't want to be is damaging as well though. I don't think the message should be 'you have to talk about your feelings' but 'it's OK to talk, it's not emasculating, and don't give other men shít for it even if it's not your thing'.

vladmydad

DredFX wrote: »

Fair point. Men, on average, aspire to better-paying fields than women, instigate the majority of relationships, and don't have to take several months off work to birth and rear a child.

Still, as the gender pay gap closes and as women's places in top CEO lists proliferate, could that paradigm change?

Not being rhetorical. Genuinely interested in knowing.

There is no gender pay gap.That myth has been debunked a thousand times

Saipanne

DredFX wrote: »

Blindboy from the Rubberbandits (this isn't a joke, I promise) appeared on the Late Late yesterday, and one topic he broached was the need for feminism in young Irish men.

The most prominent issue he notices when speaking to men in Limerick is their fear of being unable to offer anything to women, or to provide for them, which Blindboy feels is a patriarchal value that will bite men in the behind if they don't consider feminism.

Snippet from the interview here, if you haven't seen it.

So, fellas, have you felt these kinds of pressures before, and do you think opening your mind to feminism would help ease your fears?

Men need it like a kick to the balls.

Didas

Skommando wrote: »

While he wears a plastic bag on his face ? As I said I'm curious as how you've been conditioned to think they should be followed as a credible source of opinion, expertise and advice ?

Yes. The bag is a gimmick, it has no effect or influence on the merits or pitfalls of the arguments he put forward.

Conditioned by who?

Grayson

AnGaelach wrote: »

I'm not sure you understand the connection.

To give you an example that's been beaten to death; areas with higher ice cream sales also have increased risks of drowning, does ice cream lead directly to drowning?

Areas with large populations of rabbits are less likely to be active warzones, do rabbits bring down the likelihood of war?



Because there is an objective masculinity that is hard to define, it's like natural law. Not all law is equal, the SS never broke a law in Germany during ww2 but that's not to say what they did conformed with natural law.

If you don't like sports because it frightens you, then by definition you're not as masculine as an athlete. If you prefer to write books than weld, you're less masculine than the welder. If you like to watch romantic comedies, you're not as masculine as someone who spends his evenings running around a field with a sliotar and a hurl.

The above you can compare because one is inherently more effeminate than the other. However, comparing an athlete to a welder doesn't make sense, both are masculine, one cannot be more masculine than the other. You might prefer welding to football.



Rome had the barbarians, Kievan Rus had the Mongols, and so on.

There is an inherent masculinity involved in all things men do, and what I'm saying is that we shouldn't shame some people for being masculine and trying to teach children to be less masculine.

What you have said explicitly is that men who don't play sports or live up to your ideals are less manly.

Personally I don't need to do any of that stuff. If you need to validate yourself by subscribing to this crap than that's your choice. I'm quite happy being me.

However I do think it's wrong to subject young lads to subscribe to your ideas. If they don't like certain things or act in certain ways then they're less manly. Why put pressures on young lads to be people they're not just to live up to your outdated ideals? Let people be who they want to. If someone wants to play sports than that's great. If they want to attend a rumba class, that's great too.

DredFX

vladmydad wrote: »

There is no gender pay gap.That myth has been debunked a thousand times

There is at a workforce-wide level. Various studies have corroborated it. Women, in general, earn less than men across the majority of the world's countries.

What is commonly debunked is the notion that a woman working in the same position as a man, with the same experience and tenure and workload, will earn less than him.

If you're still confused, consider re-reading the whole post you quoted.

The Specialist

Poor choice of words on his part I think, Feminism is a toxic term now to any male with a sense of self worth in their head.

AnGaelach

DredFX wrote: »

There is at a workforce-wide level. Various studies have corroborated it. Women, in general, earn less than men across the majority of the world's countries.

Which is nothing to do with a gender pay gap, and more to do with gender distribution in different industries.

AnGaelach

Grayson wrote: »

What you have said explicitly is that men who don't play sports or live up to your ideals are less manly.

Because that's the simple truth. If you write books for a living (which I've no problem with, I love reading books), you're not as masculine as a fireman.

Grayson wrote: »

Personally I don't need to do any of that stuff. If you need to validate yourself by subscribing to this crap than that's your choice. I'm quite happy being me.

Of course you don't, you're a self-professed male feminist.

Grayson wrote: »

However I do think it's wrong to subject young lads to subscribe to your ideas. If they don't like certain things or act in certain ways then they're less manly. Why put pressures on young lads to be people they're not just to live up to your outdated ideals? Let people be who they want to. If someone wants to play sports than that's great. If they want to attend a rumba class, that's great too.

I'm not advocating we go around kicking the shít out of kids who prefer to read books at lunch time. What I am advocating is for people to cut their whiny complaining about how masculinity is the root of all men's problems, when it simply is not.

mzungu

Lewis Purple Bather wrote: »

Pressure on people to be openly emotional when they don't want to be is damaging as well though. I don't think the message should be 'you have to talk about your feelings' but 'it's OK to talk, it's not emasculating, and don't give other men shít for it even if it's not your thing'.

The above kind of sums up my thoughts on the matter. Leaving all the feminism and gender roles stuff at the door. The end goal is to have people comfortable with themselves and their different personality traits. In short, if masculinity is your thing then great. If you don't feel masculine that is A OK too. I think the issue is, this general message can get lost when the discussion turns towards things that loopy Internet fringe groups (and a few Guardian columnists) have said about it. As I said before, I blame mainstream media for that. It makes having a conversation about it almost impossible.

Widdershins

American article but interesting. Very interesting stuff about ADHD levels rising in the young male population because of the manner in which they are treated in school-essentially the attempt to minimise energetic 'masculine' behaviour/values and instill 'female values'.


''Boys do not need to be rescued from their masculinity. But they are not getting the help they need....We should repudiate the partisanship that currently clouds the issues surrounding sex differences in the schools. We should call for balance, objective information, fair treatment, and a concerted national effort to get boys back on track. That means we can no longer allow the partisans of girls to write the rules.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/05/the-war-against-boys/304659/

DredFX

AnGaelach wrote: »

Which is nothing to do with a gender pay gap, and more to do with gender distribution in different industries.

That's only if you're really pedantic about the definition of a pay gap. The prime difference is that a good deal of feminists use that broad gap as an insinuation that it will be found in the workplace, discriminating against women doing the same work as men, which is nonsense.

Renegade Mechanic

kylith wrote: »

Why shouldn't the be if they want to be?

Because despite many people's campaigns to change what should be expected of men in society, the world remains uncaring and unchanged in it's requirement for men to be "men" in order to succeed.

That's where these problems are arising now. John with his regular "heart to heart" conversations is unable to rationalise why Dave with his "cold, toxic, insensitive attitude" got the promotion and it leads to bad things.
As long as this isn't recognised/is shouted down as an intolerance viewpoint, bad things will continue happening..

AnGaelach

DredFX wrote: »

That's only if you're really pedantic about the definition of a pay gap. The prime difference is that a good deal of feminists use that broad gap as an insinuation that it will be found in the workplace, discriminating against women doing the same work as men, which is nonsense.

I do agree with you that it's touted for political reasons and deliberately mis-sold to the public, I'm just quibbling over the terminology because it's not really a gender pay gap, it's a gender distribution gap.

RDM_83 again

Lewis Purple Bather wrote: »

Pressure on people to be openly emotional when they don't want to be is damaging as well though. I don't think the message should be 'you have to talk about your feelings' but 'it's OK to talk, it's not emasculating, and don't give other men shít for it even if it's not your thing'.

And how do you respond to the second part of my post, which shows that being emotionally open and talking about your feelings though apparently a good thing is something thats actually responded to very negatively by those that you would expect to espouse openness if your feeling the wrong way.

Its this mixed message that I feel is whats actually really harmful and leaves men feeling lost.

Progressive Feminist poster- "You should be open about your feelings"
Man is open about his feelings
Progressive Feminist poster- "How could you think that way, Your just insecure, grow up etc etc etc"
Man learns his lesson and either shuts up and deals his own way or enters spaces which while they may be toxic in general genuinely support him.

vladmydad

DredFX wrote: »

There is at a workforce-wide level. Various studies have corroborated it. Women, in general, earn less than men across the majority of the world's countries.

What is commonly debunked is the notion that a woman working in the same position as a man, with the same experience and tenure and workload, will earn less than him.

If you're still confused, consider re-reading the whole post you quoted.

Your answer is a complete oxymoron,you admit that with the same experience and whatnot they earn the same but say in general they don't.Thats because the calculation is fundamentally flawed .They take the gross earnings of all men and the gross earnings of all women and find an inevitable difference.Men and women make different career choices.Its as simple as that.Their is no systematic conspiracy to pay women less than men,so let's put this myth to bed.