Anti-male movement

Triceratops Ballet · 30-08-2017 6:40pm

silverharp wrote:

I'd argue that a good maths would likely have a higher IQ than either a primary teacher or a home economics teacher. its a rarer ability

They could have a very high IQ, and be a terrible teacher.
I was educated by many academics in college who couldn't teach, so stating that a maths teacher is more valuable than a home ec teacher (which I'm not sure I agree with home ec teaches you valuable life skills) on the basis of IQ is flawed, because to be a successful teacher you need to be able to inspire your students to learn. I'm sure we all had very intelligent teachers who couldn't teach.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-08-2017 7:09pm

Wibbs wrote:

You answered your own question. What the hell does feminist thought and feminists have to do with telling men how they should feel or think. You're so invested in this politic it doesn't seem to compute for you. OK, let's switch it around. Would you be happy if avowed men's rights types who led with the lingo of that movement were offering support to women with mental illnesses and/or advising them of how they should feel and think? I seriously doubt it. Rightfully too.

I'd support any group that discusses options for men to have confidence in their masculinity. I don't care if they're also feminist. I don't need to reject them out of hand because they're feminist. I've never heard of other groups doing it. I'd support them too as long as the content is positive.

Wibbs wrote:

Only in your on the defensive "oh noes, feminism is in the cross hairs" mindset.

Look, your so focused on feminism have you've forgotten the point was supposedly to help men. You don't seem interested in discussing men's issues' at all, just whining about other people who are actually doing something.

Wibbs wrote:

I stand by my statement that "modern "feminism" can be reduced to this; women are always victims and men are always to blame. Try finding me an example where it doesn't. I dare you. I double dare you.

Dare and double dare accepted. Marriage equality was a feminist issue. I don't think it had much to do with women being victims and blaming men. Likewise repealing the 8th amendment is a feminist issue and it has nothing to do with blaming men.

silverharp · 30-08-2017 7:11pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yeah I know. As I said in the post you quoted bit not sure you read " In reality I'd say there are dozens of masculine traits which men have to varying degrees. I'd say the really important point is to discuss the ways to express themselves with confidence. "

How would you define traditional masculinity?

hard to sum up in one paragraph but generally competing to find your place in the world and or earn the respect of your peers, community, being a provider.

silverharp · 30-08-2017 7:30pm

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

They could have a very high IQ, and be a terrible teacher.
I was educated by many academics in college who couldn't teach, so stating that a maths teacher is more valuable than a home ec teacher (which I'm not sure I agree with home ec teaches you valuable life skills) on the basis of IQ is flawed, because to be a successful teacher you need to be able to inspire your students to learn. I'm sure we all had very intelligent teachers who couldn't teach.

there are good and bad teachers in every subject so that cancels out, you are still left that there are less people that could teach maths than could teach a softer subject. I just had a quick look at how many students took H maths and H english, 35K took English and only 14K took Maths. Also I'd say it would be rare for someone doing H maths to only do lower level English.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-08-2017 7:43pm

silverharp wrote:

hard to sum up in one paragraph but generally competing to find your place in the world and or earn the respect of your peers, community, being a provider.

No need to limit yourself to one paragraph. Take as many paragraphs as you need.

I'm not disagreeing with anything you said but they are outcomes rather than traits. Also are those outcomes specifically masculine? They seem just as applicable to anyone.

I suspect that there is no definitive set of masculine traits that would be agreed by most posters. Not without being so vague as to be applicable to anyone.

So I think he objective is more about fostering confidence in the traits and interests that men have, than shoehorning them into any template of traits.

iptba · 30-08-2017 7:59pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Marriage equality was a feminist issue.

Was it?

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Likewise repealing the 8th amendment is a feminist issue and it has nothing to do with blaming men.

There are some feminists who are anti-abortion/pro-life. For example, I remember a group who called themselves "Feminists for life" speaking at a debate when I was in college.

Also the existence of anti-abortion laws is sometimes blamed on the patriarchy/"patriarchal institutions" e.g. the Catholic Church.

Pat Mustard · 30-08-2017 8:04pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

What are you on about? Who's refusing to do what because they're on their phone?

Assuming you misfired there so. I answered your question in good faith, could you answer the same question? What's your goal? Cheers

This is a discussion forum. My goal is discuss issues honestly and to point out bullsh1t.

"What are you on about" is a classic refrain of yours, at this this stage. You pretend not to understand what people post. You've done this before, many times. It wasn't clever when you did it before and it isn't clever now. It's nonsense.

Go back and read my post if you didn't understand it the first time. It's in plain English.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-08-2017 8:06pm

iptba wrote:

Was it?

Yeah.

iptba wrote:

There are some feminists who are anti-abortion/pro-life. For example, I remember a group who called themselves "Feminists for life" speaking at a debate when I was in college.

Feminists with different opinions? Humm, It's almost as if feminists aren't a hive mind.

Reproductive rights are very much a feminist issue.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-08-2017 8:17pm

Pat Mustard wrote:

Go back and read my post if you didn't understand it the first time. It's in plain English.

So I went back and read your post and this was it...

Pat Mustard wrote:

I like to point out utter bullsh1t where I see it.
I like people to back up their points and not lazily and dishonestly refuse to do so on the grounds that they are posting from their phones.

Apropos of nothing you accuse me of something to do with my phone. - which has nothing to do with the discussion so the idea that you're interested in honest discussion is kinda disproved in the same post.

Pat Mustard wrote:

This is a discussion forum. My goal is discuss issues honestly and to point out bullsh1t.

"What are you on about" is a classic refrain of yours, at this this stage. You pretend not to understand what people post. You've done this before, many times. It wasn't clever when you did it before and it isn't clever now. It's nonsense.

Look if you want to discuss the topic, I'm interested. In this exchange you haven't mentioned anything tangentially related to the topic of discussion. You opened this exchange with a question which I answered honestly and you haven't even referenced my response - which would probably be the next step in an honest discussion. This cheap point scoring should be beneath any poster.

silverharp · 30-08-2017 8:51pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

No need to limit yourself to one paragraph. Take as many paragraphs as you need.

I'm not disagreeing with anything you said but they are outcomes rather than traits. Also are those outcomes specifically masculine? They seem just as applicable to anyone.

I suspect that there is no definitive set of masculine traits that would be agreed by most posters. Not without being so vague as to be applicable to anyone.

So I think he objective is more about fostering confidence in the traits and interests that men have, than shoehorning them into any template of traits.

in a very general sense men need to excel at something and have something which is theirs, so you could have a guy who has a boring job but if he lets say is a fishing expert and fanatic then he has that thing that marks him out and contributes to his self esteem.
There are going to be men out there that suffer "a failure to lift" but until they find their thing they are unlikely to be happy and will end up falling into substance abuse or other problems etc. whats the expression men are either builders or destroyers

El_Duderino 09 · 30-08-2017 9:16pm

silverharp wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

No need to limit yourself to one paragraph. Take as many paragraphs as you need.

I'm not disagreeing with anything you said but they are outcomes rather than traits. Also are those outcomes specifically masculine? They seem just as applicable to anyone.

I suspect that there is no definitive set of masculine traits that would be agreed by most posters. Not without being so vague as to be applicable to anyone.

So I think he objective is more about fostering confidence in the traits and interests that men have, than shoehorning them into any template of traits.

in a very general sense men need to excel at something and have something which is theirs, so you could have a guy who has a boring job but if he lets say is a fishing expert and fanatic then he has that thing that marks him out and contributes to his self esteem.
There are going to be men out there that suffer "a failure to lift" but until they find their thing they are unlikely to be happy and will end up falling into substance abuse or other problems etc. whats the expression men are either builders or destroyers

Again I'm not necessarily disagreeing with any of that. But is any of it specific to men? Do women not need to "excel at something, to have something which is theirs"?

Ot seems like we're gone away from traits of traditional masculinity. That's not a problem, I'm just curious to know what other people think traditional masculinity actually is. Im also wondering what other masculine traits are considered positive and how they should be fostered, in other poster's opinions

mzungu · 30-08-2017 9:16pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

We're speaking at cross purposes. I was speaking about the feminist group in relation to discussing masculinity, not mental health.

The Pieta House at Electric Picnic gathering? Anyways, is masculinity not always shoehorned in as the source of mental illness in males? Eg. Your man from the Rubberbandits on the Late Late etc.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I do t know anything about that speech in the middle of your post. Do you want to tell me about it in your own words?

I believe that in amongst the word salad, he is trying to convey (in his view) the inherent selfishness that comes naturally to him as a man, that selfishness and aloofness being reenforced by masculinity and patriarchy.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So we keep coming back to this question about what happens if a guy is just naturally traditionally masculine. I'm thinking a devil may care, James Dean type, confident, hardy, great with women and has money and power, and is comfortable in his own skin. Same rules apply to that guy as every other person. Best of luck to him as long as he's not harming anyone else and his views as as valid as anyone else in the discussion about finding the issues that matters to him and finding solutions.

I guess the representations above would be the masculinity you would find in the movie world, although you forgot the Marlboro dangling from the lips! A few of the above do exist in real life, albeit not the experience of the average man.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So the next question is about how many men fit that description- I'd say probably not that many. The main question is about how many men are comfortable in their masculinity. In reality I'd say there are dozens of masculine traits which men have to varying degrees. I'd say the really important point is to discuss the ways to express themselves with confidence.

No idea. First, one would need to find out exactly what the problem was. It seems that masculinity seems to be the default assumption, but how many are people in debt, stuck in a rut, money worries, drink/drug problems etc. It is also worth noting that suicide rates among young women are rising too, so I think a lot of the blame for this may reside somewhere in the modern lifestyle.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I'd say a problem is that some men think that if they're not James Bond then they're failing as a man.

I wouldn't agree here. Perhaps, maybe for a small few, but overall, I think there is something else going on. Most can discern the difference between make believe and reality.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

We're all dancing around the idea of masculinity so could you define traditional masculinity? And how many men fit that definition?

I did say, "their own style of traditional masculinity" (because can we really know what traditional masculinity should entail? I won't claim to anyway), but in hindsight, I probably shouldn't have used the word "traditional" because there are quite a number of traits that come under the banner. However, the image I had in mind was the young man who would not be comfortable sharing his feelings but perhaps a bit lost in life turning up at the event at Electric Picnic hearing a well revered RTE personality talking about how he believes his strong silent persona was inherently a bad thing, and likening oneself to a "cockroach". I don't think that is a good message to send out, because for Michael Harding that might have been a bad thing, but for somebody else it would be perfectly natural. Like I said before, the man is entitled to his say, but I do hope some of the other panelists are not singing from the same hynm sheet to provide an alternate viewpoint.

Triceratops Ballet · 30-08-2017 9:20pm

silverharp wrote:

there are good and bad teachers in every subject so that cancels out, you are still left that there are less people that could teach maths than could teach a softer subject. I just had a quick look at how many students took H maths and H english, 35K took English and only 14K took Maths. Also I'd say it would be rare for someone doing H maths to only do lower level English.

Ok I can see you're point, kind of and all of that would be great if we were starting from scratch but we're not, if you take a glance at the teaching forum you'll see how infrequently permanent teaching jobs come up, especially for a subject like Maths you're probably talking about waiting for a tenured teacher to retire or for a new school to open. In addition to that you'd have to get the agreement of the teaching unions, which let's face it, won't happen.
Also since women are in the majority in teaching, there are probably enough female maths and science teachers who have their masters in.education to fill the gaps which doesn't solve the problem of getting men into teaching

cavalcade · 30-08-2017 9:32pm

Sleepy wrote: »

I've never seen a grad get a 6 figure salary in Ireland. Maybe in the US (a friend landed something in that region a year or two out of college in Boston) but I've never seen it in Ireland.

Well, depends on how many grad salaries you have seen and the calibre of employer

cavalcade · 30-08-2017 9:34pm

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

They could have a very high IQ, and be a terrible teacher.
I was educated by many academics in college who couldn't teach, so stating that a maths teacher is more valuable than a home ec teacher (which I'm not sure I agree with home ec teaches you valuable life skills) on the basis of IQ is flawed, because to be a successful teacher you need to be able to inspire your students to learn. I'm sure we all had very intelligent teachers who couldn't teach.

Do you believe that a higher IQ leads to a higher standard of living, a higher salary and a better life overall?

silverharp · 30-08-2017 9:49pm

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Ok I can see you're point, kind of and all of that would be great if we were starting from scratch but we're not, if you take a glance at the teaching forum you'll see how infrequently permanent teaching jobs come up, especially for a subject like Maths you're probably talking about waiting for a tenured teacher to retire or for a new school to open. In addition to that you'd have to get the agreement of the teaching unions, which let's face it, won't happen.
Also since women are in the majority in teaching, there are probably enough female maths and science teachers who have their masters in.education to fill the gaps which doesn't solve the problem of getting men into teaching

I believe not all teachers who teach maths actually studied maths in college so you could upgrade that particular subject and also implies there is some kind of skills shortage in secondary education. The primary reason would be to teach the subject to the highest standard but overall it would not bring in a lot of men.
Not sure if there is a good enough reason to get more men in. I as a parent think there is a value in boys having more male teachers. Junior went into first year this year and he said most of his teachers are men and he was delighted. So short of making an exception and taking teaching out of the points race and have a rule that ~30% say of places are reserved or male trainees assuming the quality of candidates is acceptable not sure if there is a solution or even a problem to solve.

Triceratops Ballet · 30-08-2017 9:58pm

cavalcade wrote:

Do you believe that a higher IQ leads to a higher standard of living, a higher salary and a better life overall?

To be honest I haven't thought about it at all.

Wibbs · 30-08-2017 10:03pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I'd support any group that discusses options for men to have confidence in their masculinity. I don't care if they're also feminist. I don't need to reject them out of hand because they're feminist.

And this is where we differ. I would. As I have repeatedly said how is it the business of feminist peddling feminist thought going on about the "patriarchy" to be advising men of anything? As I also said would you have issue with MRA types peddling MRA thought and going on about the "red pill" to be advising women of anything.

I've never heard of other groups doing it. I'd support them too as long as the content is positive.

"Positive" in other words a feminist worldview. You seem to have a problem with any other world view.

Look, your so focused on feminism have you've forgotten the point was supposedly to help men.

In your head. Forget for a moment that I think current feminism is a busted flush of a movement. Let's imagine I took a hit to the head and didn't. I'd still not see how the hell a movement for the advancement of women has any business with men and what issues they might have. That's some real arrogance going on there to even think so.

That at least one of the panel is a life long self hating man simply because he is one is hardly a good example for anyone. OK again flip the script in the all too receding hope it might pass through the mist... Here's the quote of part of his thinking. With a twist.

But what she didn’t tell the man over breakfast was that as a child she longed to be a boy. She trembled in their company. She feared them and worshipped them.

Although she didn’t grow into a boy. She didn’t even grow into a stinging bee or a boxer. She just became another matriarch, like a giant cockroach in an armchair. And as she got older she imagined a faint metallic tang hanging in the air around her, as if she had been working all day under a jeep, cleaning the oil filters.

She went to the leisure centre and soaked in the steam room to clear away the smell. She groomed herself with perfume and plucked her eyebrows. Because she would not have been bothered if she smelled like a buck goat, or even a stallion. They bleed too, like humans. But not a rusting car. And sometimes femininity felt mechanical. As if her heart were made of metal.

That was what matriarchy did to her over the years. Except that in every single dream that ambushed her at night, she changed into a butterfly and cried out – This is me! This too is me! But she didn’t tell him that over breakfast. Which was a pity, because he might have listened.

If a woman had written that I would first suggest a trip to nearest shrink. I would most certainly find it objectionable and self hating and an indication of more issues than Time magazine's back catalogue. I would not in a million bloody years suggest such an individual be let within an asses roar of counselling young women who may be struggling with questions. What answers would such a muppet give them? So women you're here to seek out what it is to be a woman. I'll tell you, I wish I was a man. Fcuk right off luv would be my answer. Yet this kinda crosseyed insanity is OK to peddle to men?

You don't seem interested in discussing men's issues' at all, just whining about other people who are actually doing something.

Again would you have issue with MRA types peddling MRA thought and going on about the "red pill" to be advising women of anything? I mean they'd also be "doing something".

Dare and double dare accepted. Marriage equality was a feminist issue. I don't think it had much to do with women being victims and blaming men.

You're actually serious? Marriage equality for gay folks? It had eff all to do with feminism beyond the periphery. Another right on cause to latch itself to. Never mind that some feminist were on the agin side. It was a people issue, on all sides of the debate.

Likewise repealing the 8th amendment is a feminist issue and it has nothing to do with blaming men.

Funny how the patriarchy is regularly trotted out as a reason for having the amendment in the first place. From the Greek for ruling man/father. Again t'is the men's fault.

Nil Points, but good effort. Try again. I hold out for little hope mind you.

Dr Crayfish · 30-08-2017 10:14pm

I'm not even going to read the posts, but anyone who thinks there's an anti-male movement is probably just not getting laid. Men always have and always will rule the world. Simple as that.

silverharp · 30-08-2017 10:29pm

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

I'm not even going to read the posts, but anyone who thinks there's an anti-male movement is probably just not getting laid. Men always have and always will rule the world. Simple as that.

both can be true, there can be an anti male movement but men will still "rule the world" there just might be a few extra casualties along the way.

Wibbs · 30-08-2017 10:34pm

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

I'm not even going to read the posts

That's pretty much all you needed to say really. Anything that follows that statement can quite comfortably be discarded. Like the stranger in the pub who butts into a conversation mid flow and offers his "wisdom" on a subject he has little clue of the debate around.

QV:

anyone who thinks there's an anti-male movement is probably just not getting laid. Men always have and always will rule the world. Simple as that.

Thought so. Bloody hell, I'm a prophet.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-08-2017 10:42pm

Wibbs wrote:

And this is where we differ. I would. As I have repeatedly said how is it the business of feminist peddling feminist thought going on about the "patriarchy" to be advising men of anything? As I also said would you have issue with MRA types peddling MRA thought and going on about the "red pill" to be advising women of anything.

I'd have to judge it on the content as long as it's positive.

Wibbs wrote:

"Positive" in other words a feminist worldview. You seem to have a problem with any other world view.

Nope positive inn the ways I've already stated several times - fostering confidence in the traits of masculinity that individual men have.

Wibbs wrote:

In your head. Forget for a moment that I think current feminism is a busted flush of a movement. Let's imagine I took a hit to the head and didn't. I'd still not see how the hell a movement for the advancement of women has any business with men and what issues they might have. That's some real arrogance going on there to even think so.

Oh god if you thought feminism was such a busted flush you wouldn't spend so much of your time bemoaning it's successes. But let's imagine. I wasn't at the talk so I can't comment on the contents. Maybe you were there so you can give your take on it. As I said, if it's positive I'd support it.

Wibbs wrote:

If a woman had written that I would first suggest a trip to nearest shrink. I would most certainly find it objectionable and self hating and an indication of more issues than Time magazine's back catalogue. I would not in a million bloody years suggest such an individual be let within an asses roar of counselling young women who may be struggling with questions. What answers would such a muppet give them? So women you're here to seek out what it is to be a woman. I'll tell you, I wish I was a man. Fcuk right off luv would be my answer. Yet this kinda crosseyed insanity is OK to peddle to men?

I wouldn't know what to make of it. That isn't a very coherent story. If that's the way the guy speaks then I'd say the talk didn't make much sense. If the guy really is a 'self hating Man' I'd be interested to know what the hell that even means. Was he speaking as a cautionary tale or suggesting to other men how they could be like him and also hate themselves? I'd be interested to know what that even means but I imagine that I wouldn't bother stopping into the talk if I were at the picnic and walking past the tent.

Wibbs wrote:

You're actually serious? Marriage equality for gay folks? It had eff all to do with feminism beyond the periphery. Another right on cause to latch itself to. Never mind that some feminist were on the agin side. It was a people issue, on all sides of the debate.

Hold on. Feminism both had eff all to do with it AND it was "Another right on cause to latch itself to"? How does that work? Get the story straight at least. Feminism either was it wasn't involved in that issue. So what if some feminists were in the agin side? What group in the world has everyone with exactly the same opinion? The hive mind feminism only exists in your mind. It couldn't possibly exist in reality.

Wibbs wrote:

Funny how the patriarchy is regularly trotted out as a reason for having the amendment in the first place. From the Greek for ruling man/father. Again t'is the men's fault.

Not for me it isn't. If you insist the men are to blame for the 8th amendment then that's up to you. I just see it as a modern legislative issue. Much like gay marriage, it could never have been possible at he time the laws were created. But now times have changed. Nothing to do with blaming men as far as I'm concerned.

Wibbs wrote:

Nil Points, but good effort. Try again. I hold out for little hope mind you.

Ok what about shared paternal leave? That isn't men's fault and it benefits both men and women as it gives parents better scope to choose how they parent. Or do you consider that to be men's fault too?

El_Duderino 09 · 30-08-2017 11:07pm

mzungu wrote:

The Pieta House at Electric Picnic gathering? Anyways, is masculinity not always shoehorned in as the source of mental illness in males? Eg. Your man from the Rubberbandits on the Late Late etc.

If I recall correctly, the rubberbandits guy was saying that some aspects of traditional masculinity such as stoicism and toughness were the very factors that prevented men from seeking help for mental illness. I think that's not too controversial to say. I would have thought most people agree that some aspects of stereotypical masculinity would conflict with seeking help - this goes down to the silly stereotype of men refusing to ask for directions because men should have a good sense of direction and men dont ask for help. Surely challenging those unhelpful stereotypes is good.

mzungu wrote:

I believe that in amongst the word salad, he is trying to convey (in his view) the inherent selfishness that comes naturally to him as a man, that selfishness and aloofness being reenforced by masculinity and patriarchy.

I don't know about selfishness but aloofness is definitely part of a stereotype of masculinity. James Dean relies on no man.

mzungu wrote:

I guess the representations above would be the masculinity you would find in the movie world, although you forgot the Marlboro dangling from the lips! A few of the above do exist in real life, albeit not the experience of the average man.

I know it was a bit of a long shot. Some other posters kept coming back to saying "but what about the men who are naturally masculine". I was trying to make the point that here are very few men who are like that in reality. So it's worth discussing other forms of masculinity other than the small sliver of men who live like the Marlboro man.

mzungu wrote:

No idea. First, one would need to find out exactly what the problem was. It seems that masculinity seems to be the default assumption, but how many are people in debt, stuck in a rut, money worries, drink/drug problems etc. It is also worth noting that suicide rates among young women are rising too, so I think a lot of the blame for this may reside somewhere in the modern lifestyle.

I wouldn't have masculinity as a cause of mental illness but I'd say it can be a barrier to seeking help early by chatting with friends about mental health and seeking primary medical care. Maybe you're right and the cause is more to do with modern lifestyle. I don't know.

mzungu wrote:

I did say, "their own style of traditional masculinity" (because can we really know what traditional masculinity should entail? I won't claim to anyway), but in hindsight, I probably shouldn't have used the word "traditional" because there are quite a number of traits that come under the banner. However, the image I had in mind was the young man who would not be comfortable sharing his feelings but perhaps a bit lost in life turning up at the event at Electric Picnic hearing a well revered RTE personality talking about how he believes his strong silent persona was inherently a bad thing, and likening oneself to a "cockroach". I don't think that is a good message to send out, because for Michael Harding that might have been a bad thing, but for somebody else it would be perfectly natural. Like I said before, the man is entitled to his say, but I do hope some of the other panelists are not singing from the same hynm sheet to provide an alternate viewpoint.

I don't think you could really define masculinity anyway. I think it's a nonsense as it's being bandied around in this thread as if it has an agreed upon meaning.

For me, masculinity is about doing what you enjoy with confidence. That goes for your hobbies, sports, friends, the things you like to chat about, career, partner choice and so on. As long as you're not harming anyone you're doing what you want with confidence and you're having a good time, then id recognise that as positive masculinity.

If there's such a thing as negative masculinity I'd say it's when someone uses an imaginary ideal form of traditional masculinity to as a yardstick that they don't measure up to. E.g. they are experiencing depression but they think 'real men' don't ask for help, or real men are tough enough to deal with it, or real men are stoical about these things. So they don't ask help and they don't get treatment.

My point is that there isn't anything wrong with the 'traditional masculinity' but it's not really applicable to most men and it's not always helpful anyway. There are lots of ways to be a man so I think it's worth discussing the all the ways that actually apply to most men rather than focusing on the small group of traits of old school masculinity as thought they were the ideal.

Triceratops Ballet · 30-08-2017 11:47pm

silverharp wrote:

in a very general sense men need to excel at something and have something which is theirs, so you could have a guy who has a boring job but if he lets say is a fishing expert and fanatic then he has that thing that marks him out and contributes to his self esteem. There are going to be men out there that suffer "a failure to lift" but until they find their thing they are unlikely to be happy and will end up falling into substance abuse or other problems etc. whats the expression men are either builders or destroyers

I'm not trying to pick bones here but is there anything in this that couldn't be said for women too, women also strive to find something they're good at, and find their place in the world, and feel the same boost when they achieve that, and the same sense of loss or disillusionment when they don't, or can't. Granted how women deal with those pitfalls is different because women are socialised to talk about that kind of thing and ask for help.

It's almost as if we're all largely the same trying to make our way in the world, and labels like masculinity and femininity don't really mean anything anymore!

silverharp · 31-08-2017 8:03am

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

I'm not trying to pick bones here but is there anything in this that couldn't be said for women too, women also strive to find something they're good at, and find their place in the world, and feel the same boost when they achieve that, and the same sense of loss or disillusionment when they don't, or can't. Granted how women deal with those pitfalls is different because women are socialised to talk about that kind of thing and ask for help.

in this case its about the kids, I dont care about the male teachers as such except that they bring a unique attribute ie that they are male and that could benefit some boys in a way female teachers couldnt.

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

It's almost as if we're all largely the same trying to make our way in the world, and labels like masculinity and femininity don't really mean anything anymore!

I dont understand that comment. At a group level it clearly does and at an individual level your gender might affect something you do or want to do. eg if a woman wants to be a firefighter I dont care, can you do the job as good as a man, if you cant I dont want that individual allowed in under a quota or soft physical because it will endanger people in the future.

Triceratops Ballet · 31-08-2017 8:11am

I was responding to your definition of masculinity

Triceratops Ballet · 31-08-2017 8:21am

silverharp wrote:

I dont understand that comment. At a group level it clearly does and at an individual level your gender might affect something you do or want to do. eg if a woman wants to be a firefighter I dont care, can you do the job as good as a man, if you cant I dont want that individual allowed in under a quota or soft physical because it will endanger people in the future.

Fwiw I actually agree on this using a different yardstick for women is completely dimempowering, and just gives people a stick to beat them with "you only got this job cos you're a woman" or "yeah we had to drop the standard for diversity"

silverharp · 31-08-2017 8:37am

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

I'm not trying to pick bones here but is there anything in this that couldn't be said for women too, women also strive to find something they're good at, and find their place in the world, and feel the same boost when they achieve that, and the same sense of loss or disillusionment when they don't, or can't. Granted how women deal with those pitfalls is different because women are socialised to talk about that kind of thing and ask for help.

It's almost as if we're all largely the same trying to make our way in the world, and labels like masculinity and femininity don't really mean anything anymore!

let me try again

the thing is men are biologically different to women so what puts a man "in the zone" is going to differ to some extent to women and various pressures are going to be dialed up or down based on gender

Triceratops Ballet · 31-08-2017 8:56am

silverharp wrote:

let me try again the thing is men are biologically different to women so what puts a man "in the zone" is going to differ to some extent to women and various pressures are going to be dialed up or down based on gender

But the drive to succeed at whatever the specific thing is, is the same and the feeling when one fails is the same. The difference might be the thing they want to succeed at but the expectations and personal outcomes are the same.

Let's talk about John and Mary, both in rubbish jobs but it's their personal passions thar keep them going, jobs just pay the bills. John's passion is marathon running, he's training to do the Dublin marathon in October, want to do it sub 3 hours (I dunno if that's good or possible but it's an example) he trains every evening and at weekends, gives it everything. He finishes in 2:59.He's on top of the world!

Mary plays football, loves it, trains in her spare time, evenings and weekends, she puts in so much work cos she wants to make the country team and play at croker, her coach sits her down after training and tells her the call came, she's up (again no idea if that's how it works)

So other than biology what's the difference between John and Mary?
Marathon running and football can be subbed for anything, maybe they're both passionate about baking, and want to win bake off.

Equally there are men who don't have a passion, and they're not drowning in a sea of failed masculinity

El_Duderino 09 · 31-08-2017 9:05am

silverharp wrote: »

let me try again the thing is men are biologically different to women so what puts a man "in the zone" is going to differ to some extent to women and various pressures are going to be dialed up or down based on gender

That's true but it's moves sideways from the original definition of masculine traits. It started as this "in a very general sense men need to excel at something and have something which is theirs". Then you mentioned fishing. So is wanting to excel at something the masculine trait or is the focus of the area of expertise the masculine part?

If fishing is a masculine trait, then if a woman enjoys fishing is she exhibiting a masculine trait?

Anti-male movement

Comments