"Femininity is admired but not respected like masculinity" Do you agree?

nigel_wilson · 28-05-2018 10:38AM #1

I was on this niche forum where I got to know a few people that I've met up with here in Ireland. There's a lad who always wanted to dress more feminine so some people were helping him. He's fairly tall though has a very 'pretty boy face' for a 20yr old guy and not muscular at all so I would think that he could pass as a girl.

He's gone through a transformation since the start of this year and pretty much looks like a 'posh' effeminate guy (not in a derogatory way). A few of his male and female friends have complimented him on the new look but he overheard a few people saying "Though he looks good, I think I would take him more seriously if he was masculine, just my honest opinion".

He says he ignores any haters as most people are accepting but I do wonder if that's an isolated opinion? Would a fair amount of people think that about femininity in general? I have seen the exact statement online being made on Reddit's 'theredpill' and 'FeMRA Debates' where someone explained that there are two types of unaccepting reactions towards non-gender conforming men. 1.) People who react with strong/silent disapproval or people who are 'okay with it' but respect the person less. They gave an example of 'liking someone but not respecting them' e.g. the class clown who you like hanging around but wouldn't take him seriously with consulting him for any academic work.

So is that really the case with effeminate men or more importantly femininity in general? Perhaps a man may look very posh and 'cute' with androgynous clothing but do most people really respect him less compared to if he had a more masculine persona?

Mr.H · 28-05-2018 10:48AM

I'd find it difficult to take a man seriously if he had pig tails hot pants and a belly top. But then again that's just me.

Seriously though I really don't understand that whole metro rubbish. Why the hell do you wanna girl yourself up? I know a guy who wears makeup FFS. Makeup. No way will he ever be taken seriously. Way too self obsessed.

Wibbs · 28-05-2018 10:56AM

I'd kinda agree. A woman dressing "more like a man" is going to get much less hassle than a man dressing "more like a woman". As it is much women's fashion would have been seen as masculine a century ago. Which suggests in fashion at least femininity on men is less respected.

Outside that I'm less sure. For example women often report that if they are assertive in business the way men are they're more likely to be seen as a "bitch" and men who are effeminate are looked down upon or seen as "gay". And as you said there are the obvious negative reactions and the hidden, but still negative reactions.

Personally speaking I actually prefer assertive women, the coquettish "girly" thing doesn't appeal. Effeminate men? Depends on the man. I know a gay lad who can be a bit "flamboyant"

but not in that drama diva way. He's actually one of the most together people I know. I can't abide that drama queen guff in either sex and yes would mark them down in my estimation. Ditto for vain narcissists of either gender, though will admit I would tend to give women more leeway in that.

farmchoice · 28-05-2018 11:20AM

i watched a documentary about a woman in America who wanted to know what it was like to be a man, she was a lesbian and a feminist activist and came at it from that angle.

anyway she lived as a man for about a year and in general her opinion of men and their struggles etc ect changed.
during the doc she went on numerous dates as a man and one of the biggest shocks she got was that by and large woman were looking for manly men as opposed to more feminine men, she was taken aback by this.

seamus · 28-05-2018 11:29AM

farmchoice wrote: »

one of the biggest shocks she got was that by and large woman were looking for manly men as opposed to more feminine men, she was taken aback by this.

I do think women's sexual preferences are something that is largely overlooked.

Maybe it's because we've spent so long convincing ourselves that women are precious flowers who reluctantly give up sex to men. Or maybe women have felt it's "wrong" to admit that they admire masculine features.

But I think a lot of value would be added to society if we were to acknowledge and celebrate female sexuality in the same way that we do for male sexuality.

Instead we're moving down the road of suppressing male sexuality; calling "offence" at sexy ads, trying to teach people that admiring a woman physically is wrong. And that's good for nobody.

There is a happy medium; acknowledging that both sexes have a visual/physical aspect to sexuality, without allowing it to become a commodity, and without making it the defining aspect of either gender's value.

Women do have a point in that in times gone by they've been taught that if they're not sexy or not a mother, then they have no social value. And "taught" by society as opposed to someone standing at a blackboard saying those words to them.
Yes, we need to value women as people (which one could argue we are most of the way there), but not lose sight of the fact that we are animals, and the physical and visual is also important and shouldn't be shamed into suppression.

Wibbs · 28-05-2018 11:34AM

True Farmchoice, but there can be cultural angles to this too. America is not an exact fit with Ireland for example. Even though we've imported some of their dating culture in recent times. EG in countries with fewer social supports "manly men with money are more attractive and sought out. In countries with more social supports this is still there to some degree, but less in play. It's not so long ago(the 80's) in the US where maternity leave wasn't in law and paid maternity leave is still more up to the employers. Plus medical bills can go stratospheric. So it makes sense that American women would preselect men on their earning potential and assertiveness. This would also tend to encourage more traditionally masculine ways of acting.

One eyed Jack · 28-05-2018 12:04PM

nigel_wilson wrote: »

So is that really the case with effeminate men or more importantly femininity in general? Perhaps a man may look very posh and 'cute' with androgynous clothing but do most people really respect him less compared to if he had a more masculine persona?

It depends upon context, not gender. I wouldn't be able to take a man seriously if they turned up to a business meeting looking effeminate in their appearance. I also can't take men in slim fit suits seriously, though the same look seems to make some of my female colleagues a bit weak-kneed. If the same man had the same effeminate appearance and for example they were a theatrical performer, in that context I would be judging them by a different standard, and the one that stands out for me was a Kylie impersonator who was far more qualified to call themselves a gender discombobulator than Panti Bliss, for whom there is no doubt that they're a man presenting themselves poorly as a woman. That's why I can't take PB seriously - I can respect him as a human being, while also having no respect for the way in which he chooses to present himself.

With regards to femininity in general, well again of course it depends upon context. How does one define femininity? That's a rhetorical question by the way but for myself, I know it when I see it :pac: Basically the demure woman stuff is how some women express their femininity, and it's how some males choose to impersonate that persona because that's what they perceive femininity to be from their perspective. I prefer women with balls (metaphorically speaking :pac:), and for a long time I admired Hillary Clinton as a woman who I took seriously. But during her presidential election campaign when she wheeled out America Ferrera, Lena Dunham and Sarah Silverman (they remind me of the three witches in Macbeth, they offered warning signs of what was to come if Hillary was elected President

), and I lost all respect I had for her capabilities as a leader. I didn't lose any respect for her as a woman, but from that point on I couldn't take her seriously as a potential leader.

silverharp · 28-05-2018 01:17PM

It seems like a masculine woman can get respect and feminine women can get respect but feminine men will tend to be seen as weak and ineffectual unless they have a skill that comes to the fore over their personality or demeanour.

iptba · 28-05-2018 05:43PM

farmchoice wrote: »

i watched a documentary about a woman in America who wanted to know what it was like to be a man, she was a lesbian and a feminist activist and came at it from that angle.

anyway she lived as a man for about a year and in general her opinion of men and their struggles etc ect changed.
during the doc she went on numerous dates as a man and one of the biggest shocks she got was that by and large woman were looking for manly men as opposed to more feminine men, she was taken aback by this.

Sounds like it could be this you are thinking of:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip7kP_dd6LU

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Made_Man_(book)

---

https://abcnews.go.com/2020/Entertainment/story?id=1526982

Vincent even dabbled in the art of picking up women and agreed to wear a hidden camera for "20/20" during her exploits.

She was quickly reminded that in this arena, it's women who have the power, she said.

"In fact, we sit there and we just with one word, 'no,' will crush someone," she said. "We don't have to do the part where you cross the room and you go up to a stranger that you've never met in the middle of a room full of people and say the first words. And those first words are so hard to say without sounding like a cheeseball or sounding like a jerk."

Vincent encountered some pretty cold shoulders in her attempts at the bar, but she did manage to go on about 30 dates with women as "Ned," mostly arranging them on the Internet.

Vincent said the dates were rarely fun and that the pressure of "Ned" having to prove himself was grueling. She was surprised that many women had no interest in a soft, vulnerable man.

"My prejudice was that the ideal man is a woman in a man's body. And I learned, no, that's really not. There are a lot of women out there who really want a manly man, and they want his stoicism," she said.

Vincent thought the perfect end to her 18-month saga would be to join a men-only therapy group, a place where guys tried to bond and show their emotions instead of hiding them.

Again, Vincent saw the men struggle with vulnerability. "They don't get to show the weakness, they don't get to show the affection, especially with each other. And so often all their emotions are shown in rage," she said.

---

"Men are suffering. They have different problems than women have, but they don't have it better," she said. "They need our sympathy. They need our love, and maybe they need each other more than anything else. They need to be together."

Ironically, Vincent said, it took experiencing life as a man for her to appreciate being a woman. "I really like being a woman. ... I like it more now because I think it's more of a privilege."

johnnyskeleton · 29-05-2018 05:01AM

nigel_wilson wrote: »

He says he ignores any haters as most people are accepting but I do wonder if that's an isolated opinion? Would a fair amount of people think that about femininity in general? I have seen the exact statement online being made on Reddit's 'theredpill' and 'FeMRA Debates' where someone explained that there are two types of unaccepting reactions towards non-gender conforming men. 1.) People who react with strong/silent disapproval or people who are 'okay with it' but respect the person less. They gave an example of 'liking someone but not respecting them' e.g. the class clown who you like hanging around but wouldn't take him seriously with consulting him for any academic work.

I'm not sure I'd class those two reactions as unaccepting necessarily. People are entitled to basic courtesy and not to be abused as a basic level. But no one is automatically entitled to respect or to be liked. The fact that someone dresses in a way that, in popular culture, has become part of a protected group of sexual identity, even though he is still a straight man, is not in itself a reason to respect someone any more or less.

I will respect a professor of astrophysics who happily imparts their expertise regardless of how he/she dresses. If the only thing that is noteworthy about someone is that they dress in a "nonconforming" manner and thats all they talk about, well I wont be rude to them but I wont automatically respect or like them.

Overall I guess the scenario is that some people try to gain status by achieving things - whether its that you wrote a book or ran a 5km or whatever. Others do it by playing the oppression olympics where they identify a reason to be oppressed and who is the oppressor, usually straight white men, then if they are not as well respected as the most successful of the oppressor group, then it is the proof of oppression.

El_Duderino 09 · 29-05-2018 11:29AM

I suppose it depends on how you define masculinity and femininity. I think it’s amazing that we could try to discuss this topic without even trying to narrow down a definition of those terms.

I have my own rule of thumb but I’d be interested in your take. What elements make up masculinity and femininity?

Can a gay man be masculine? Can a camp hetero man be masculine? I’d say the answer to both those questions is yes. I think it’s a fascinating question which lots of people assume they’re talking about the same thing, but they’re probably not.

So what makes up masculinity and femininity?

DEFTLEFTHAND · 29-05-2018 03:25PM

They're designed to compliant one another.

Men in general are not attracted to women who exude masculine traits.

Likewise women in general are not attracted to men sexually who exude feminine traits.

El_Duderino 09 · 29-05-2018 03:42PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

They're designed to compliant one another.

Men in general are not attracted to women who exude masculine traits.

Likewise women in general are not attracted to men sexually who exude feminine traits.

So could you gauge masculinity and femininity based on attractiveness to the opposite sex?

silverharp · 30-05-2018 08:26AM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So could you gauge masculinity and femininity based on attractiveness to the opposite sex?

interesting way of putting it but its probably more complicated , you have what people think of as masculine "traits" then there are "traits" that tend to be male on a numbers basis but not considered so masculine, just behaviour etc more typical of males. then you have traits or abilities which are more independent of sex but which might be more desirable in one sex than the other.
A male doctor versus a female doctor for instance would throw up gender differences but trying to apply the logic of your question would break down some

seamus · 30-05-2018 08:28AM

iptba wrote: »

Sounds like it could be this you are thinking of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Made_Man_(book)

---

https://abcnews.go.com/2020/Entertainment/story?id=1526982

It's probably worth watching through the whole thing.

I did skip through it myself, but noted that people in this thread had pulled a comment that "women like manly men" out of this documentary.

When in reality it was more nuanced than that. She said that she had revealed the truth to almost all women that she dated. Most were shocked and a little angry at first. Many walked away, but a surprising number wanted to continue. Said they'd felt "a connection" and wanted to explore the relationship further, even though they identified as heterosexual.

How many hetero men would do the same?

The discussion needs to not just focus on "many women like manly men". That's as unhelpful as pretending that women don't like sex because it puts pressure on men to be "manly" men.

It also needs to be acknowledged that physical attractiveness is one tiny aspect of attraction overall - for both men and women. Saying that women "in general" like manly men implies that if you're not a manly man you're going to struggle to find a partner. Which is simply not true. It only becomes true if you believe it.

Even the inverse isn't true; a woman being "feminine" doesn't guarantee that she's batting them away, and a woman who's more masculine can be a complete magnet for every man in the room.

Attraction is way more subtle than just physical appearance for both sexes, and while the physical is certainly a strong initial push, it burns away very quickly.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2018 09:09AM

silverharp wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So could you gauge masculinity and femininity based on attractiveness to the opposite sex?

interesting way of putting it but its probably more complicated , you have what people think of as masculine "traits" then there are "traits" that tend to be male on a numbers basis but not considered so masculine, just behaviour etc more typical of males. then you have traits or abilities which are more independent of sex but which might be more desirable in one sex than the other.
A male doctor versus a female doctor for instance would throw up gender differences but trying to apply the logic of your question would break down some

I imagine it is much more complicated than attractiveness.

What's an example of "what people think of as masculine "traits" then there are "traits" that tend to be male on a numbers basis but not considered so masculine, just behaviour etc more typical of males".

What would be a masculine trait and what would be a trait that tends to be male but isn't considered masculine?

silverharp · 30-05-2018 09:14AM

seamus wrote: »

The discussion needs to not just focus on "many women like manly men". That's as unhelpful as pretending that women don't like sex because it puts pressure on men to be "manly" men.
....

It also needs to be acknowledged that physical attractiveness is one tiny aspect of attraction overall - for both men and women. Saying that women "in general" like manly men implies that if you're not a manly man you're going to struggle to find a partner. Which is simply not true. It only becomes true if you believe it.

it could also be motivational, if you take manliness to mean things like being assertive, taking risks (the good kind) etc. then incorporating these things into your thinking would make a "better person" and more attractive to women to boot.

Calhoun · 30-05-2018 09:42AM

On one level I don't think I have ever ever worked with the manliest of men and thought I'd follow them into battle or over a cliff.

One on level looks to an extent can turn us off people but I don't think looks are all it's at. If you know and work with someone traits like assertiveness and comfortable in their own skin shines through.

I am not discounting small minded people who will see someone dressed a certain way and instantly dismiss them they do exist but got the most part I would hope people especially friends would look deeper than that.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2018 09:43AM

silverharp wrote: »

it could also be motivational, if you take manliness to mean things like being assertive, taking risks (the good kind) etc. then incorporating these things into your thinking would make a "better person" and more attractive to women to boot.

This is kind of the point of the question I asked above. Is masculinity only comprised of good things?

Is that also to say that assertiveness in a woman would add to her masculinity and make her less feminine and less appealing to men on average?

silverharp · 30-05-2018 09:46AM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I imagine it is much more complicated than attractiveness.

What's an example of "what people think of as masculine "traits" then there are "traits" that tend to be male on a numbers basis but not considered so masculine, just behaviour etc more typical of males".

What would be a masculine trait and what would be a trait that tends to be male but isn't considered masculine?

For example the stereotypical introverted computer nerd, this kind of person would be associated with being male but masculine isn't a word that would come to mind, whereas think of the traits of someone who does a very physical job that requires certain skills say a steeplejack, this kind of person would display more masculine traits like the physical abilities and desire to actually do the job.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2018 12:00PM

silverharp wrote: »

For example the stereotypical introverted computer nerd, this kind of person would be associated with being male but masculine isn't a word that would come to mind, whereas think of the traits of someone who does a very physical job that requires certain skills say a steeplejack, this kind of person would display more masculine traits like the physical abilities and desire to actually do the job.

So does a trait need to be good in order to be masculine?

I would have thought a trait that is mostly associated with men would be masculine regardless of whether it's good or not.

tritium · 30-05-2018 12:18PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So does a trait need to be good in order to be masculine?

I would have thought a trait that is mostly associated with men would be masculine regardless of whether it's good or not.

Why do you need to assign a trait as good or bad though? Take for example risk taking, a trait that’s in most studies found to be a more ‘male’ characteristic. Risk taking isn’t actually good or bad, it’s just a solution to someone’s utility curve. When risks go bad it’s easy to apply hindsight however not taking risk, the more classically feminine trait, also has a negative possible outcome.

Any trait can have examples of its negative and positive application, however it’s flawed to describe a trait as good or bad. It’s one of the reasons why the hang up in some academics areas on being masculine bothers me quite a bit- it’s narrowing a much broader debate about how both genders display their ‘nature’ for want of a better word, typically with the aim of finding something ‘wrong’

farmchoice · 30-05-2018 12:23PM

tritium wrote: »

Why do you need to assign a trait as good or bad though? Take for example risk taking, a trait that’s in most studies found to be a more ‘male’ characteristic. Risk taking isn’t actually good or bad, it’s just a solution to someone’s utility curve. When risks go bad it’s easy to apply hindsight however not taking risk, the more classically feminine trait, also has a negative possible outcome.

Any trait can have examples of its negative and positive application, however it’s flawed to describe a trait as good or bad. It’s one of the reasons why the hang up in some academics areas on being masculine bothers me quite a bit- it’s narrowing a much broader debate about how both genders display their ‘nature’ for want of a better word, typically with the aim of finding something ‘wrong’

that's a very well put and insightful post.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2018 12:50PM

tritium wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So does a trait need to be good in order to be masculine?

I would have thought a trait that is mostly associated with men would be masculine regardless of whether it's good or not.

Why do you need to assign a trait as good or bad though? Take for example risk taking, a trait that’s in most studies found to be a more ‘male’ characteristic. Risk taking isn’t actually good or bad, it’s just a solution to someone’s utility curve. When risks go bad it’s easy to apply hindsight however not taking risk, the more classically feminine trait, also has a negative possible outcome.

Any trait can have examples of its negative and positive application, however it’s flawed to describe a trait as good or bad. It’s one of the reasons why the hang up in some academics areas on being masculine bothers me quite a bit- it’s narrowing a much broader debate about how both genders display their ‘nature’ for want of a better word, typically with the aim of finding something ‘wrong’

I don't need to assign a trait as good or bad. I as hoping the other poster would come around to that conclusion of their own accord. I said as much h in the post above that masculine traits would be masculine regardless of good or bad.

Were still no closer to narrowing down a usable definition of masculine and feminine.

tritium · 30-05-2018 01:21PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I don't need to assign a trait as good or bad. I as hoping the other poster would come around to that conclusion of their own accord. I said as much h in the post above that masculine traits would be masculine regardless of good or bad.

Were still no closer to narrowing down a usable definition of masculine and feminine.

You, and only you, brought in the concept of good and bad. Telling me you know it’s irrelevant after the fact is a bit pointless tbh

At any rate my answer gives you one, probably imperfect, way to define masculine and feminine for a given trait, assuming you can assign a distribution for each gender across the spectrum for that trait

silverharp · 30-05-2018 01:34PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So does a trait need to be good in order to be masculine?

I would have thought a trait that is mostly associated with men would be masculine regardless of whether it's good or not.

but then it would just be interchangeable with male?

here is the google definition of the term masculine

possession of the qualities traditionally associated with men.
"handsome, muscled, and driven, he's a prime example of masculinity"

synonyms: virility, manliness, maleness, vigour, strength, muscularity, ruggedness, toughness, robustness

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2018 02:11PM

tritium wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I don't need to assign a trait as good or bad. I as hoping the other poster would come around to that conclusion of their own accord. I said as much h in the post above that masculine traits would be masculine regardless of good or bad.

Were still no closer to narrowing down a usable definition of masculine and feminine.

You, and only you, brought in the concept of good and bad. Telling me you know it’s irrelevant after the fact is a bit pointless tbh

At any rate my answer gives you one, probably imperfect, way to define masculine and feminine for a given trait, assuming you can assign a distribution for each gender across the spectrum for that trait

I asked whether it was the case. I didn't say I think more the case and to clarify, I don't think it's the case. I think good and bad are irrelevant to determining masculine or feminine traits.

So just to clarify, are you in agreement with my earlier statement that masculinity and femininity are more to do with traits that are more prevalent in men or women respectively and not to do with good or badness?

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2018 02:16PM

silverharp wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So does a trait need to be good in order to be masculine?

I would have thought a trait that is mostly associated with men would be masculine regardless of whether it's good or not.

but then it would just be interchangeable with male?

here is the google definition of the term masculine

possession of the qualities traditionally associated with men.
"handsome, muscled, and driven, he's a prime example of masculinity"

synonyms: virility, manliness, maleness, vigour, strength, muscularity, ruggedness, toughness, robustness

Do you agree with that definition? Would you consider it complete? It only really deals with physical characteristics so it is pretty interchangeable with male.

silverharp · 30-05-2018 02:36PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Do you agree with that definition? Would you consider it complete? It only really deals with physical characteristics so it is pretty interchangeable with male.

I have a sense in how the term is used, as far as a forum like this I'd generally stick to male and female and go with the distribution graph idea mentioned above by another poster to compare or contrast the genders in the round. but for example I have heard women saying they have more masculine traits or some men saying they have a more feminine side or I can get if a women says they like a "manly man" , which at a base level is just a mixture of genetics features and particular testosterone levels perhaps which influence behaviour.

You mentioned traits that the opposite sex admire but it also might be traits that the same sex admire hence the reason we like hero movies or admire someone like Bill Clinton for his ability to command a room with his personality.

El_Duderino 09 · 30-05-2018 02:51PM

silverharp wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Do you agree with that definition? Would you consider it complete? It only really deals with physical characteristics so it is pretty interchangeable with male.

I have a sense in how the term is used, as far as a forum like this I'd generally stick to male and female and go with the distribution graph idea mentioned above by another poster to compare or contrast the genders in the round. but for example I have heard women saying they have more masculine traits or some men saying they have a more feminine side or I can get if a women says they like a "manly man" , which at a base level is just a mixture of genetics features and particular testosterone levels perhaps which influence behaviour.

You mentioned traits that the opposite sex admire but it also might be traits that the same sex admire hence the reason we like hero movies or admire someone like Bill Clinton for his ability to command a room with his personality.

No someone else mentioned that in general women are attracted to masculine men and men are attracted to feminine women. I was asking further questions about that statement.

I think it is the case that most people use the terms on the basis that you know it when you see it. An 'ah shur you know yourself' definition. I'd imagine that if it can't be described in a way that people agree on, then how can we have a discussion about masculinity and femininit?

I think it should be clear that when people throw around terms like masculine and feminine, they're thinking of different things if they know what they're thinking of at all. Nobody has a problem using the terms but it's proving quite difficult to pin down what is meant by those terms

silverharp · 30-05-2018 03:07PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

No someone else mentioned that in general women are attracted to masculine men and men are attracted to feminine women. I was asking further questions about that statement.

I think it is the case that most people use the terms on the basis that you know it when you see it. An 'ah shur you know yourself' definition. I'd imagine that if it can't be described in a way that people agree on, then how can we have a discussion about masculinity and femininit?

I think it should be clear that when people throw around terms like masculine and feminine, they're thinking of different things if they know what they're thinking of at all. Nobody has a problem using the terms but it's proving quite difficult to pin down what is meant by those terms

we are dealing with people, just because you cant break it down to x number of chemical reactions doesn't mean it lacks any meaning. If I asked you who would you judge to be more feminine, the actress Emily Clarke or the pundit Julie Bindel, are you saying you wouldn't have a clue how to go about answering the question? or more likely it would be an easy enough question to answer

"Femininity is admired but not respected like masculinity" Do you agree?

Comments