Glenster wrote: » I don't particularly want everyone to get medals. Though I wouldn't be protesting with placards if they did. I don't have a problem with men being paid more if they're better, just not because they're men.
Galwayguy35 wrote: » Would it not occur to you that men often do well paying jobs that would be a bit more dangerous, for example working in a mine or on an oil rig or fishing off the coast of Alaska. Nobody is stopping women going for these jobs if they want more money.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Electrodes pain fantasy notwithstanding, were in agreement about this. FORCING boys to be feminine would be harmful. And nobody's talking about forcing anyone to do anything, except yourself. I'm talking about ensuring boys are free and have choices and you respond by saying 'forcing boys to behave... Electrical trodes and a lot of pain'. If it's bad when feminists are wrong, it must be worse for some people when they're right. Hence needing to change the topic from giving boys choices to forcing boys to do something and pretending that's the topic under discussion.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » I've never used that phrase in my life. Never heard it said in real life either. I don't​ have a clue what it means. Again, you're the one talking about it, not me.
feminism toxic masculinity About 344,000 results (0.68 seconds)
Glenster wrote: » I don't know about jobs on a rig or in Alaska. I live in Dublin.
silverharp wrote: take jobs like fixing high tension cables or working on mobile masts, I don't think Ive ever seen a woman up on them. Are they barred from the profession? I assume its much better paid than working in a crèche and doing a childcare "degree". is it the patriarchy and internalised mysoggyknees?
silverharp wrote: » Its obvious that some men have a more feminine nature and there is nothing wrong with that but if I was to suspect a feminist agenda it would be take out men are very masculine in their approach to things when that's their nature too, telling men not to be masculine would be like trying to teach a cat to perform tricks that a dog would normally do, you might achieve it but only with the attachment of electrodes and a lot of pain. :pac: If feminists were neutral there wouldn't be phrases like "toxic masculinity" . and when it comes to it "toxic masculinity" is what builds roads and cities and is that which rolls out the next technological wonder. the choice is there to be a hipster Barista no shame.
Glenster wrote: » I don't know anything about where you work. I know where I work 75% of the partners are men, and 100% of the receptionists and cleaners are women. And there are all sorts of reasons you can use to explain that away. And I'm saying just because you can explain it doesn't mean its not an issue. I don't think I have my fingers in my ears just because I refuse to turn around and say "Issue dropped" just because someone says that one of the main reasons women are paid less is because more men are in managerial roles.
BMMachine wrote: » What are the problems with feminism? There are none really, unless of course you are really paranoid and full of spite - then Im sure there are loads
BMMachine wrote: » Now off down to the rape crisis centre and tell the people there your views on feminism
optogirl wrote: » why is this sinister?
We must stop indoctrinating boys in feminist ideology A school in Oxford has become the first to introduce “Good Lad” workshops, in which boys are singled out for sessions that teach them about “the scale of sexual harassment and violence aimed at female students” and how they must stand up for women's rights. The workshops are the latest in a mushrooming series of initiatives in which ideologically-driven activists are being invited into schools, driven by the belief that boys need to be re-educated to prevent them from becoming a threat to women. In November last year, The Times reported on a programme in London Schools in which two American women, one a former sex crime prosecutor, “re-programme teenage boys’ sexual manners so they are fit for a feminist world”. According to the report, they start the class by asserting that “misogyny is on the rise”, before going on to “describe real-life sex crimes that have happened to teenagers in this area with brutal accuracy”. The article concludes – approvingly -- that by the end of the session, the boys are “scarred for life”. In context of the chasm between boys’ and girls’ educational attainment and a rising male suicide rate that is now nearly four times that of women’s, why are schools deciding that when it comes to talking about gender, what boys need most is an extra dose of guilt and shame? Since when was it acceptable to impose ideology on school children? You’d never know it from the rhetoric, but a man – and particularly a young man -- is around twice as likely to be a victim of violent crime as a woman. And it’s not just drunken street violence either. A 2009 NSPCC report into domestic violence in teenage relationships, showed teenage boys suffer comparable rates of violence from their girlfriends as do teenage girls from their boyfriends. In the same year another report, this time by Childline, found that of the children who called to report sexual abuse, a total of 8,457 were girls (64pc) and 4,780 were boys (36pc). The charity also found boys were more likely to say they had been sexually abused by a woman (1,722 cases) than by a man (1,651). In March, the Government announced the introduction of new consent classes for children aged as young as 11. The plans were launched on International Women’s Day and the PSHE guidelines repeatedly state they are primarily part of the Government’s A Call to End Violence Against Women and Girls strategy. In 2001, novelist and feminist icon Doris Lessing made a shocking assessment of what she had seen while visiting a school classroom. She told the Edinburgh Book Festival, "I was in a class of nine- and 10-year-olds, girls and boys, and this young woman was telling these kids that the reason for wars was the innately violent nature of men. "You could see the little girls, fat with complacency and conceit while the little boys sat there crumpled, apologising for their existence, thinking this was going to be the pattern of their lives." Lessing expressed deep concern that what she had witnessed was just a glimpse of an increasingly pervasive culture of toxic feminism in schools that was weighing down boys with a collective sense of guilt and shame. She had every right to be worried. It seems there is now a drive to make shame and guilt a formal part of boys’ education.
Glenster wrote: » Jesus, The real question raised by this thread is why so many men seem to hate women.
VinLieger wrote: » Incredibly poor straw man attempt, yet surprisingly A-typical for today's uninformed entitled millennial "feminists"
Neptune Latte wrote: Criticising lunatic feminists does not equal hatred of women.
Omackeral wrote: » So many men hate women, do they? Where is the evidence of that? You're lying for the sake of it now because you've nothing else. Another example of deluded modern day ''feminist'' thinking. Pathetic.
optogirl wrote: » wow - you're like someone with sunburn getting a pat on the back. What are you so angry about?
bodice ripper wrote: » I can't imagine what makes you think women would be hired for these jobs. I tried to get work laboring and the was no chance. FAS wouldn't let me do a forklift course. Couldn't get work as a binman either. I would have preferred to work at any of these over minimum wage retail.
silverharp wrote: but you cant do away with "stereotypical male roles" as you seem to indicate you want to achieve. The choice already exists hence my question of what needs to change now? what will annoy feminists is that male behaviour will tend towards typical types and some of them will revolve around what is considered typical male behaviour.
silverharp wrote: In fairness I wouldn't raise boys to be more like girls, I think its clear that not all boys are cut out to be "roaringly masculine" as in to be fighter pilots or firemen while playing rugby at the weekend in between building their own house from scratch. So I think the pressure to conform to the Marlboro man image isn't there so much now, so great job done! But at the same time they still need to be career oriented for example because frankly put women don't want men they have to support so I don't see any point in telling boys to abandon their roles completely because it will be the quickest way to have them exit the gene pool
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » I'm not encouraging anyone to force children to do anything. You keep coming back to that as if it was part of my argument. Let children tell you about their interests and forget your male and female stereotypes. Boys will tend towards some interests and girls tend towards some interests. In the main children are interested in all kinds of things and parents can impose all kinds of limiting beliefs on children. I thought opposing limiting beliefs was
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » I thought opposing limiting gender stereotypes was one of the raison d'être of the men's rights movement.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » See how many limiting gender stereotypes you can spot in the post above. Hint : Masculine Jobs and sport. Feminine need for a provider, threatening male child with being unable to find a partner unless they conform to your gender roles. And this poster thinks gender stereotypes are in the past
silverharp wrote: what kind of limiting beliefs? parents have to pass on values and ethics, would you expect a parent to not steer a kid into working hard in school and leave it to the kid? it would be a bad parent that wouldn't direct the child. A parent that insists that their kids become a particular profession might be said to have crossed a line and it may backfire.
silverharp wrote: I would have assumed in terms of court related matters, ive not observed that its as broad brush as feminism. it would want to challenge that mothers are the default guardian when in a number of cases the father is probably the better parent. or court sentencing where female sentences are shorter than male sentencing or painting domestic abuse as a female only issue. they are objectively damaging stereotypes which have harsh legal consequences
silverharp wrote: they aren't all constructs pulled out of thin air, they are constructs or observations based on biology and bell curve behaviour. I think most kids would see through being raised completely gender neutral because it wouldn't reflect reality
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » There's nothing gender specific or limiting about encouraging education. Limiting beliefs would be telling children that boys should play x and girls play y. Boys role is to provide further the family, girls role is to expect to be taken care of to borrow a few examples from your earlier post
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » They're descriptions of tendancies among children, not prescriptive templates for behaviour. Seeing them as desirable masculine or feminine traits is limiting to the boy who has an interest in things that fall outside of traditional masculinity. We're all about freeing boys from gender stereotypes in principle - unless someone actually tried to do anything about it, then they're just interfering feminists​ who (insert pajorative here).
[Deleted User] wrote: » Hilarious. As a man who has just become a father and is entitled to 2 weeks paid paternity leave (introduced in Sept 2016), I'd rather be at work so won't be taking the government up on it. I also like the fact that instead of staying in the same room as the newborn and being woken up every 30 minutes I have the freedom to go into another bedroom and sleep through the night. How many mothers, who are apparently not "slaving", have this freedom? It could only be an unmarried, childless man who has not had to mind children who dismisses the work of child rearing. Work is a holiday compared to the tempermental torture of babies who are unable to communicate except by crying and who decide when you can sleep, when you can wake up and how much work you can do at home (usually absolutely none). The people who get most riled up about "feminism" consistently come across as not having a clue of the real world, as never having grown beyond their own little mé féiner interests to a position of being able to care for somebody else. The one, outstanding issue where men are discriminated against is regarding access to the children in the event of a break up. Other than that serious issue, the whole anti-feminist movement is perpetrated by a false sense of victimhood by the most emotionally undeveloped of males on the lookout for a scapegoat for their own failings.
silverharp wrote: » I would have assumed in terms of court related matters, ive not observed that its as broad brush as feminism. it would want to challenge that mothers are the default guardian when in a number of cases the father is probably the better parent. or court sentencing where female sentences are shorter than male sentencing or painting domestic abuse as a female only issue. they are objectively damaging stereotypes which have harsh legal consequences
silverharp wrote: picking sports is partly what's popular partly what sports the parents are into and obviously what the kid likes , parents are normally reasonable and throw lots of sports at kids and see what sticks. the main divider is team sports versus individual ones
silverharp wrote: As for the provider bit, i never said girls should be taught to be taken care of but for boys whether you tell them or not they will figure out that higher income and status means its easier to find a partner. you wouldnt contradict the point that if you sampled a 100 male doctors and 100 males who work in comic shops don't have the same experience in the dating market?
ceadaoin. wrote: » The courts already judge each case based on its own circumstances and make the best decision for the children involved. The fact is that in the majority of families, the woman is still the default carer, even when both parents work full time. Particularly in Ireland it seemshttp://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/international-study-finds-irish-men-contribute-least-to-childcare-1.2560675 So if men want this to change then more men need to step up and contribute equally to the care of their children. That would bring about more change than blaming women or feminism don't you think?
Sweetemotion wrote: » After repeal the 8 is granted is that the end of feminism in Ireland as we all have equal rights?
silverharp wrote: » Im not blaming "women or feminism" , its about a court system which views the mother as the default parent short of her being a crack addict. I don't see how a couple arranged things when they were married as being the decider. it should look at things like who broke up the marriage or the character of the 2 parents. Lets say the mother had an affair and the father was the innocent party, to me that is strong evidence that the mother is an incompetent mother as she didn't care about putting the kids futures at risk. Or in your example if the kids are in full time childcare because of work then either parent is capable of being the lead parent.
Lady Spangles wrote: » Feminism is about much more than abortion. It's not just about women in Ireland, or Europe. It's a global movement that includes ALL genders and not just cisgendered women. Believe it or not, it's about men too. Everyone is included.
Lady Spangles wrote: » Feminism is about much more than abortion.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » I'm sure it wouldn't shock you to find out that everyone isn't as enlightened as yourself. So you'd support the seminar that sparked this discussion? (Well you might if not for the knee-jerk responses to anything organised by feminists)
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » You never said it's how they should be taught, you assumed it's the case that would encourage expect men to be providers. The point about jobs isn't gender specific. I would find a woman with a career more attractive than the same woman who plans to sit around scratching​ her metaphorical balls all day, as a career. That's an entire personality difference between those two otherwise identical people. Wealth has always been attractive. That's not gender specific.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4c2f272c464d99a9eee64a80fbe71a0c.svg)
