When will men get liberated from gender roles?

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2020 8:57am

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Great. So in your opinion, there's nothing to be don't on gender roles. It would have probably been a lot easier to say that than go all rowing the houses with the recreational whinging about feminism.

So the order of discussion was:
1 A question about men and gender roles.
2 a big whinge about feminism
3 Oh no, there was no 3. The end.

So pretty much exactly what I said to begin with.

I didn’t say that though.

Have you any opinion one way or the other on the feminist theory of liberation from gender roles yourself?

El_Duderino 09 · 10-02-2020 9:05am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I didn’t say that though.

Have you any opinion one way or the other on the feminist theory of liberation from gender roles yourself?

Ah, yeah but it's what you did. have a whinge about feminism and that's it, the end. Unless you have decided there are issues where men could benefit from liberation from gender roles. Feel free to come at the question from any angle other than whinging about feminism. Only joking, I know that's the only approach you might take.

To answer your question: In a discussion about men and gender roles, I would just start by looking at men and gender roles. I wouldn't start by whinging about feminist theory at all.

Like, seriously. Look at the question you asked there. You've even changed the question so the only thing to do is whinge about feminism. For such an impotent and uninfluential movement, it's had a big impact on your thought. You can't even think about a men's issues without starting by talking about feminism.

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2020 9:30am

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

To answer your question: In a discussion about men and gender roles, I would just start by looking at men and gender roles. I wouldn't start by whinging about feminist theory at all.

The question though, isn’t about men and gender roles. The question is as the title of the thread suggests -

“When will men get liberated from gender roles?”

Liberation is the key word in that question, as the question itself is based upon the assertion that men are trapped by gender roles that it is argued they need liberating from.

The question of liberation from gender roles is a theory founded in women’s liberation from gender roles, and in order to see whether or not it would be of any benefit to men, I would think it only prudent to examine how the theory has worked out for women.

That’s the only reason I bring feminism into the discussion, because it’s a feminist theory, of the women’s liberation movement, and I’m pointing out that it hasn’t achieved a whole lot for women, nor has it been very effective in addressing issues which women are affected by.

Therefore I see no utility in suggesting the same theory should be applied to men to address issues which affect men. I think the application of the theory would have the same effect as it has had with women - absolutely none. That’s why women are choosing to liberate themselves from feminism, because they see it as no longer representing their interests, because it’s now more concerned with representing men’s interests, and suggesting that it’s men need liberating from gender roles.

TomSweeney · 10-02-2020 9:43am

I saw a bloke in a mini skirt the other day op, not a bother on him and no one noticed or gave a f*ck!!
live and let live, fair play to him - he actually looked well in it ...

El_Duderino 09 · 10-02-2020 10:30am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The question though, isn’t about men and gender roles. The question is as the title of the thread suggests -

“When will men get liberated from gender roles?”

Liberation is the key word in that question, as the question itself is based upon the assertion that men are trapped by gender roles that it is argued they need liberating from.

The question of liberation from gender roles is a theory founded in women’s liberation from gender roles, and in order to see whether or not it would be of any benefit to men, I would think it only prudent to examine how the theory has worked out for women.

That’s the only reason I bring feminism into the discussion, because it’s a feminist theory, of the women’s liberation movement, and I’m pointing out that it hasn’t achieved a whole lot for women, nor has it been very effective in addressing issues which women are affected by.

Therefore I see no utility in suggesting the same theory should be applied to men to address issues which affect men. I think the application of the theory would have the same effect as it has had with women - absolutely none. That’s why women are choosing to liberate themselves from feminism, because they see it as no longer representing their interests, because it’s now more concerned with representing men’s interests, and suggesting that it’s men need liberating from gender roles.

Sure, you can only view the whole question through the prism of feminism - which is exactly what you've been saying you're not doing while at the same time doing it.

And you see it as prudent to limit the entire discussion to feminism and conclude that because you don't like feminism, you can't imagine any way it could be helpful to men to free them from the current gender roles.

For such a rubbish movement, feminism has certainly shaped when way you think.

Do to phrase the question another way: do you think men could benefit in any way from any change to their gender role? And do you think that an answer to that question would also begin by talking about feminism?

silverharp · 10-02-2020 10:43am

Deleted User wrote: »

I think it's to remove the personal angle. Create a block phrase to cover the situations where men are involved, and therefore remove individuality. Feminism is, after all, rooted in Marxism, and 'selective' collective responsibility is a strong theme in associated ideologies.

The part I find interesting is that as feminist ideas are pushed along, and women engage in more expressions of their own freedom, many females are behaving in the manner that feminists supposedly found so offensive in males. Many of the terms created in the last decade can be easily applied to the behavior of many women in public spaces (although I'm sure there's some excuse for women behaving in such a way).

They seem to just want to reverse roles and behaviour for sure yet at the same time slip into gender tropes, look at feminist leaning cinema these days, no hero story for the lead , they land on the scene perfectly formed with little to learn

Deleted User wrote: »

It seems to be growing online especially among youtubers covering the gender/equality debate, and we'e seen how phrases promoted online gain traction in the RL.

Still, I find there's a misplaced sympathy for female issues as if it's only a decade since they gained equality... like we're still living in the early 90s. That people feel the need to give more leeway to women or feminists... that they wouldn't give to males in the same situation. So, perhaps this will just be another double standard to apply where men are responsible but women aren't

I’d be surprised if it did, I’d guess in a way the motivation is more to disable the feminist use of the term, don’t throw stones in glasshouses and all that, a common one I’ve seen recently is when a female teacher has been charged with sexual abuse charges against a male student , the tag line will be “when will we teach girls not to rape?”

There is a double standard for sure, in some situations women are equal in every way to men and in others women need special treatment because of their constitution relative to men, even though in many situation its actually in group female competition for example that maybe a problem for women which men would be oblivious to more often than not.

Deleted User wrote: »

Feminists, and the media. I find the term is more of a stick to beat men with. It's just so vague, allowing them to include just about anything that they find offensive. It's like the metoo campaign. Everything could be included on the same level as the more serious accusations, and that gave them license to behave whatever way they wished. An excuse for mob justice. I see the toxic masculinity as another attempt at validating the same excuses for mob justice.. or believing women simply due to their gender (rather than evidence).

I dunno about the males. I've never actually met a straight male feminist, except for those existing online... and I can't take them seriously. I've met a few gay guys who were feminists but they were extremely feminine gays, so... they're more interested in behaving as a female than as a male. Stands to reason that their views would be biased a certain way.

Im sure Ill go to my grave without meeting a male who uses the term “patriarchy” in a sentence un-ironically but there are bound to be a few squeaky wheels out there and some looking for some media attention.

silverharp · 10-02-2020 10:54am

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Do to phrase the question another way: do you think men could benefit in any way from any change to their gender role? And do you think that an answer to that question would also begin by talking about feminism?

Given that there are no laws on the books enforcing male gender roles , havnt males been free for a couple of decades now to choose whatever role they want?

Most men realise that they need to be financially independent for themselves and their own lives and to attract the opposite sex. So what roles do you want to see changed? or what roles are you even talking about?

Mad_maxx · 10-02-2020 10:59am

Central Bank wrote: »

Why do you get so sensitive and touchy when people criticise feminism?

You do realise it's perfectly ok to be critical of something, that doesn't mean you are "whinging" about it.

Feminism has sacred cow status today, up there with Islam when it comes to discourse in Liberal company

Mad_maxx · 10-02-2020 11:01am

silverharp wrote: »

They seem to just want to reverse roles and behaviour for sure yet at the same time slip into gender tropes, look at feminist leaning cinema these days, no hero story for the lead , they land on the scene perfectly formed with little to learn

I’d be surprised if it did, I’d guess in a way the motivation is more to disable the feminist use of the term, don’t throw stones in glasshouses and all that, a common one I’ve seen recently is when a female teacher has been charged with sexual abuse charges against a male student , the tag line will be “when will we teach girls not to rape?”

There is a double standard for sure, in some situations women are equal in every way to men and in others women need special treatment because of their constitution relative to men, even though in many situation its actually in group female competition for example that maybe a problem for women which men would be oblivious to more often than not.

Im sure Ill go to my grave without meeting a male who uses the term “patriarchy” in a sentence un-ironically but there are bound to be a few squeaky wheels out there and some looking for some media attention.

I've met them, tend to be social democrat voters

silverharp · 10-02-2020 11:11am

Central Bank wrote: »

Men would benefit by embracing and accepting their masculinity rather than feeling ashamed of it.

That's true, its objectively better to be the most masculine version of yourself than being the least masculine….change my mind!

10-02-2020 11:18am

silverharp wrote: »

They seem to just want to reverse roles and behaviour for sure yet at the same time slip into gender tropes, look at feminist leaning cinema these days, no hero story for the lead , they land on the scene perfectly formed with little to learn

Well... I find the removal of gender roles to be highly selective.

Feminists push the working female angle, the professional female who competes directly with males in the workplace, but doesn't lower herself to the same negative behaviors. The problem, of course, is that these feminists don't want to compete or negotiate either, so they seek to change the environment to suit their desires. Competition is transformed into a negative male trait with associations to aggressiveness. Hence the need for gender quotas, and regulations to reduce male involvement such as borderline behaviors which can be interpreted as harassment (mansplaining/Manterrupting/etc).

Earlier in the days of feminists pushing equality, they talked down about women who wanted to have a family, rather than pursue a career... Then it shifted to women doing both. Which is why we see the need to provide an environment where women can do both. The approach is pushed that males aren't interested in parenting, and it was their negative attitude that encouraged a culture to be created whereby males would work (because that's what they all wanted), and females would stay at home. Now, we're seeing the reinforcement of the idea that since women are the only ones capable of bearing children, they have a greater appreciation of life. Men can only destroy, not create life. Which, in turn, reinforces the point that only women can nurture life and therefore are better parents. The link is made that the best parent is the one that bears the child.. so a further reinforcement of a role based on gender.

You see similar reinforcement of gender roles in woke movies, where the male is a predator, a stumbling fool, or an eager supporter for female needs (but with a underhand agenda of wanting sex). The females, as you said, are essentially perfect. Strong, confident, capable, etc. No measure of growth or moments defining how they changed to become who they are, except when they need to show that males are the cause for their transformation... due to a negative situation.

Feminism needs an enemy, and lacking one, they'll create one. "Male" society for the most part has moved away from sexism against women. Sure, there are individuals, and a few moronic groups out there, but they're the exception rather than the norm. However, feminism needs an enemy to validate it's position. So, regardless of how males evolve within society, I suspect feminists will always seek to pull males back to being the aggressor... especially now that we can be unaware of our sexism, with subconscious sexism.

Honestly, I'm amazed by the number of people who believe in, and worse yet, support this crap.

I’d be surprised if it did, I’d guess in a way the motivation is more to disable the feminist use of the term, don’t throw stones in glasshouses and all that, a common one I’ve seen recently is when a female teacher has been charged with sexual abuse charges against a male student , the tag line will be “when will we teach girls not to rape?”

Ahh, but it's generally not seen as rape by the female teacher. A large part of that is male culture supposing that sex is always a good thing... but society as a whole should be above that, knowing that an adult having sex with a minor is wrong in any situation... but hey, double standards exist in many attitudes.

It's the same with the "I believe her" milarky. Could you imagine males saying the same thing? Or it being even remotely tolerated in this modern society of ours? If equality was the goal for feminists or SJWs then this kind of thing would be shot down immediately. Alas...

There is a double standard for sure, in some situations women are equal in every way to men and in others women need special treatment because of their constitution relative to men, even though in many situation its actually in group female competition for example that maybe a problem for women which men would be oblivious to more often than not.

The part I find interesting is that most of us live in a technological age. Few women seek employment in physical positions where males have the biological advantage. Instead, most women are entering positions which are related to the mind, skills that aren't physical, etc but they still need a boost. Not because they're inferior, but because they face discrimination... even after 30 years of laws to prevent discrimination...

What I've learned is that no change will ever be enough until males are excluded for any activity that women want to engage in. As long as males are involved and have even a remote chance of success, that is an unacceptable threat to female equality.

Im sure Ill go to my grave without meeting a male who uses the term “patriarchy” in a sentence un-ironically but there are bound to be a few squeaky wheels out there and some looking for some media attention.

True enough

10-02-2020 11:20am

Central Bank wrote: »

Men would benefit by embracing and accepting their masculinity rather than feeling ashamed of it.

Ahh but what does it mean to be masculine? Along with what trait/behaviors etc?

Where is the balance between being masculine and feminine for a male?

El_Duderino 09 · 10-02-2020 11:23am

Central Bank wrote: »

Why do you get so sensitive and touchy when people criticise feminism?

You do realise it's perfectly ok to be critical of something, that doesn't mean you are "whinging" about it.

Of course. It’s grand to criticise anything (I’ve covered this a few times earlier in the thread) Context is the issue. In the context of critiquing feminism, it’s perfectly normal to criticise feminism.

In the context of a men’s issue, starting and ending the discussion by criticising feminism, and never actually getting on to discuss the men’s issue, is just whinging about feminism.

And whinging about feminism is fine just like whinging about football or Indian food is fine. But some people convince themselves they’re actually addressing men’s issues when all they’re doing is whinging about feminism. And that’s just a wasted opportunity to actual discuss men’s issues. And I think men’s issues are important and should be discussed, promoted and solved. I think men's issues are important, other people like using any opportunity to whinge about feminism.

sondagefaux · 10-02-2020 11:26am

mr_fegelien wrote: »

Yet men are still ridiculed for wearing feminine attire, choosing careers like nursing, etc..

Are they?

sbsquarepants · 10-02-2020 11:43am

Deleted User wrote: »

Feminism needs an enemy, and lacking one, they'll create one. "Male" society for the most part has moved away from sexism against women. Sure, there are individuals, and a few moronic groups out there, but they're the exception rather than the norm. However, feminism needs an enemy to validate it's position. So, regardless of how males evolve within society, I suspect feminists will always seek to pull males back to being the aggressor... especially now that we can be unaware of our sexism, with subconscious sexism.

Honestly, I'm amazed by the number of people who believe in, and worse yet, support this crap.

You and me both!

Feminism has gone the way of a lot of other protest movements, times have changed, equality is all but assumed in this day and age (in the western world anyway, i'm not talking about the tribal villages of Pakistan!) - i don't know a single person who believes that women are in some way inferior to men, not one single person. Different yes - that's undeniable, but lesser, no, i don't know anyone who thinks that.

But when your entire reason for existence is to fight oppression, you better find someone or something who is oppressing you - enter the patriarchy!

These oppressive patriarchs.... they don't have mothers, sisters, wives, girlfriends, daughters they care about? For some bizarre reason they are more interested in helping out random strangers, who just happen to posses mickeys than they are in helping their own flesh and blood.....sure, that sounds entirely plausible!

Deleted User wrote: »

It's the same with the "I believe her" milarky. Could you imagine males saying the same thing? Or it being even remotely tolerated in this modern society of ours? If equality was the goal for feminists or SJWs then this kind of thing would be shot down immediately. Alas...

When women come forward with these claims they need to be believed....No they absolutely don't, they need to be treated with compassion, dignity and professionalism while their claims are investigated!

Women, are not some angelic creatures, incapable of either lying or making mistakes. There is a reason why courts of law value evidence over opinion.

El_Duderino 09 · 10-02-2020 11:54am

silverharp wrote: »

Given that there are no laws on the books enforcing male gender roles , havnt males been free for a couple of decades now to choose whatever role they want?

Most men realise that they need to be financially independent for themselves and their own lives and to attract the opposite sex. So what roles do you want to see changed? or what roles are you even talking about?

So just to clarify, is your answer to the question below, no?
“do you think men could benefit in any way from any change to their gender role?”

I can think of a couple but I doubt you’ll agree.

One example would be the old school role of men being stoical and not looking for help when needed. The fact that men don’t seek help for physical or mental health issues as frequently as women, leads to more men experiencing more acute and less treatable illnesses. The rate of men dying by suicide is a serious issue in my opinion. Men not seeking help for the causal factors, is a serious issue Old school gender roles such as stoicism is most likely a causal factor in seeking help. You might or might not agree.

Likewise men tend to massively underreport domestic violence against them particularly by female partners. Likely due to perceived gender roles making it more difficult to seek help, report the rates and need for support services for men who experience domestic violence.

I see these things as important issues and well worth consideration. But I suspect you don’t agree.

silverharp · 10-02-2020 12:12pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So just to clarify, is your answer to the question below, no?
“do you think men could benefit in any way from any change to their gender role?”

I can think of a couple but I doubt you’ll agree.

One example would be the old school role of men being stoical and not looking for help when needed. The fact that men don’t seek help for physical or mental health issues as frequently as women, leads to more men experiencing more acute and less treatable illnesses. The rate of men dying by suicide is a serious issue in my opinion. Men not seeking help for the causal factors, is a serious issue Old school gender roles such as stoicism is most likely a causal factor in seeking help. You might or might not agree.

Likewise men tend to massively underreport domestic violence against them particularly by female partners. Likely due to perceived gender roles making it more difficult to seek help, report the rates and need for support services for men who experience domestic violence.

I see these things as important issues and well worth consideration. But I suspect you don’t agree.

Domestic abuse is one area where there should be change, the Amber Heard debacle in the US is clearly evidence that its not about men speaking up as such but that the legal system, police and “toxic femininity” conspire to force men to be quiet.

As for stoicism and mental health, Ive no fixed views , I think however there could be issues with it being approached from a female centric approach though

El_Duderino 09 · 10-02-2020 12:23pm

silverharp wrote: »

Domestic abuse is one area where there should be change, the Amber Heard debacle in the US is clearly evidence that its not about men speaking up as such but that the legal system, police and “toxic femininity” conspire to force men to be quiet.

As for stoicism and mental health, Ive no fixed views , I think however there could be issues with it being approached from a female centric approach though

Why, why, why, why, why, why, do you even think it would be looked at from the female centric approach? Do you think my question or examples above used or suggested looking from a female centric approach?

10-02-2020 12:24pm

sbsquarepants wrote: »

These oppressive patriarchs.... they don't have mothers, sisters, wives, girlfriends, daughters they care about? For some bizarre reason they are more interested in helping out random strangers, who just happen to posses mickeys than they are in helping their own flesh and blood.....sure, that sounds entirely plausible!

The part I find interesting is the complete lack of a similar organisation or concept for females. It reinforces the idea that women are agentless creatures lacking any power or influence, but also lacking the potential for either thing.

Females have held important roles within society for long periods of time. Mothers raising their children, teachers teaching their students, land owners (a minority but still present in many cultures) who had power over their serfs. There's no mention of women in positions of power to counter the supposed negative influence of males. Just as the whole anti-suffragette movements led by women are pushed into the background, or that in our modern age, the majority of criticism against women doesn't come from males, but from other women.

We have allowed society to give females a clear pass in any degree of responsibility for the development of society both in the past and present. The important influence that a wife has on her husband is ignored. The influence that mothers have over their children is ignored (except when it suits the agenda). The influence that women have over males while single/dating is ignored.

Instead, males have all the power and influence to inspire change... and yet, when there is talk about female rights, it was women who marched and fought for those rights. The males who marched and fought alongside them are relegated to a footnote, or ignored entirely. When the case of male rights is brought up, we should do the same as women did.. and who are we campaigning against? Yup. Not women who hold against male rights, but the establishment.. which apparently only males have any influence over to shape, and the only ones held accountable for how it's developed over time.

I often find these threads fascinating because females get such a free pass for the development of society, except where positive change was implemented. And that free pass is given out by both male and female posters... it's just something ignored.

When women come forward with these claims they need to be believed....No they absolutely don't, they need to be treated with compassion, dignity and professionalism while their claims are investigated!

Women, are not some angelic creatures, incapable of either lying or making mistakes. There is a reason why courts of law value evidence over opinion.

Yup. Hence, the reason why equality, actual real equality, is something that feminists won't want... because they would be held to the same standards as males.

silverharp · 10-02-2020 1:18pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Why, why, why, why, why, why, do you even think it would be looked at from the female centric approach? Do you think my question or examples above used or suggested looking from a female centric approach?

If you take simple stuff like going to the doctor , getting tests done etc. for sure men should do this more , that would seem to be a no brainer , if a man takes better care of his car then his meat wagon then he isn’t doing it right. There are certainly plenty of online interest in male health , there are any number of forums, podcasts etc. with a strong male interest in health, diet , exercise.
On the general mental health side there are objectively good things to have in place, friends, cut out drugs and alcohol bad diet if they are causing problems, there are loads of good strategies that men ought to be made aware/more aware of. On the other hand on a quick google it seems 2/3 of people seeking counselling from the NHS are women, which still means plenty of men are doing so, so its not binary that men don’t seek mental health solutions from professionals.
Im just not sure what to quantify here? I’d expect male and female behaviour to differ on plenty of things and both sexes have something to learn from the others general behaviour while at the same time I don’t necessarily see being “stoic” as a bad thing , surely ploughing through whatever the issue might be and learning from it is an achievement?

El_Duderino 09 · 10-02-2020 1:29pm

silverharp wrote: »

If you take simple stuff like going to the doctor , getting tests done etc. for sure men should do this more , that would seem to be a no brainer , if a man takes better care of his car then his meat wagon then he isn’t doing it right. There are certainly plenty of online interest in male health , there are any number of forums, podcasts etc. with a strong male interest in health, diet , exercise.
On the general mental health side there are objectively good things to have in place, friends, cut out drugs and alcohol bad diet if they are causing problems, there are loads of good strategies that men ought to be made aware/more aware of. On the other hand on a quick google it seems 2/3 of people seeking counselling from the NHS are women, which still means plenty of men are doing so, so its not binary that men don’t seek mental health solutions from professionals.
Im just not sure what to quantify here? I’d expect male and female behaviour to differ on plenty of things and both sexes have something to learn from the others general behaviour while at the same time I don’t necessarily see being “stoic” as a bad thing , surely ploughing through whatever the issue might be and learning from it is an achievement?

Sure, and being freed from a gender role would be having the freedom to be stoical and ploughing through the issue if that's helpful, and seeking help when that's helpful. The rate of men dying by suicide should be an indication that men who need help, are not getting the help they need and that's something I think is worth addressing.

I think you're in agreement with me on this - but let me know if you're not. And we didn't need to mention feminism or begin with a critique if feminist theory or having an aul whinge about feminism, to find an issue where men would benefit from more freedom in gender roles.

Simple fact is there are men who need help on a range of topics and I'm in favour of supporting those blokes. Discussing the topics is one of the first steps towards establishing ways to help them more effectively

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2020 2:35pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sure, you can only view the whole question through the prism of feminism - which is exactly what you've been saying you're not doing while at the same time doing it.

I’m not doing that though. I’m looking at where the idea comes from, and what effect it has had on it’s originally intended audience -

Various groups, most notably the feminist movements, have led efforts to change aspects of prevailing gender roles that they believe are oppressive or inaccurate.

Gender role, Wikipedia

And the evidence I have suggests that the idea of women’s liberation from gender roles hasn’t achieved anything for women. That’s not a criticism of feminism, it’s a criticism of the idea of liberation from gender roles. On that basis, as I have said a number of times now - I do not believe the idea provides anything useful to address issues experienced by men.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

And you see it as prudent to limit the entire discussion to feminism and conclude that because you don't like feminism, you can't imagine any way it could be helpful to men to free them from the current gender roles.

At some point, you’re going to have to stop trying to put words in my mouth. I gave feminism credit for coming up with the idea, because they did, but the idea hasn’t been at all successful among women in addressing issues which women experience. That’s not a criticism of feminism, it’s a criticism of the idea of liberation from gender roles.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

For such a rubbish movement, feminism has certainly shaped when way you think.

It hasn’t though, let’s not give credit where it’s not due.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Do to phrase the question another way: do you think men could benefit in any way from any change to their gender role? And do you think that an answer to that question would also begin by talking about feminism?

The question is fine the way it is. I’ve already given my answer to the question in the opening post, numerous times now. I’m not talking about feminism specifically, that’s just where the idea of liberating people from their gender roles comes from. That’s why I examine existing evidence before I go bull-headed applying a theory to anything else. First I look at areas where it has been applied, and question has it been successful in achieving it’s aims in those areas. It hasn’t been successful in addressing issues experienced by women IMO, and therefore on the basis of my conclusion from that evidence, I don’t see how it would be any more effective when you try to apply it to men.

You appear to be arguing that something which IMO hasn’t worked out well for women could somehow work out well for men in addressing issues experienced by men. You haven’t presented any evidence or foundation for that belief. That’s essentially what I’m looking for, is evidence or a foundation for what your beliefs are based upon?

silverharp · 10-02-2020 4:56pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sure, and being freed from a gender role would be having the freedom to be stoical and ploughing through the issue if that's helpful, and seeking help when that's helpful. The rate of men dying by suicide should be an indication that men who need help, are not getting the help they need and that's something I think is worth addressing.

I think you're in agreement with me on this - but let me know if you're not. And we didn't need to mention feminism or begin with a critique if feminist theory or having an aul whinge about feminism, to find an issue where men would benefit from more freedom in gender roles.

Simple fact is there are men who need help on a range of topics and I'm in favour of supporting those blokes. Discussing the topics is one of the first steps towards establishing ways to help them more effectively

Don’t a lot of women attempt suicide , men just seem to be “better” at it especially in a country like the US where guns are easily available? I don’t have a problem with gender roles but at the same time 2 people discussing this might have different pictures of what they are talking about. Anyone raising a son (no manuals on gender roles) will know instinctually that their sons will be judged by society in general be it work etc. and women in particular when it comes to dating etc. All I see gender roles as being is having a sense of how the game of life is played and to be successful at it in male terms.

El_Duderino 09 · 10-02-2020 5:01pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You haven’t presented any evidence or foundation for that belief. That’s essentially what I’m looking for, is evidence or a foundation for what your beliefs are based upon?

Sure i have. I think men dying by suicide is a bad thing. I think men die by suicide at a much greater rate then women. I think men seek help at a lower rate then women. I think there are aspects of traditional gender roles for men including stoicism, self sufficiency which discourage men from seeking help for medical issues (loads of research on this).

And still you don't think there's any benefit to freeing men from the gender roles, even ones that contribute to serious illness and death. I think its clear enough.

El_Duderino 09 · 10-02-2020 5:09pm

silverharp wrote: »

Don’t a lot of women attempt suicide , men just seem to be “better” at it especially in a country like the US where guns are easily available? I don’t have a problem with gender roles but at the same time 2 people discussing this might have different pictures of what they are talking about. Anyone raising a son (no manuals on gender roles) will know instinctually that their sons will be judged by society in general be it work etc. and women in particular when it comes to dating etc. All I see gender roles as being is having a sense of how the game of life is played and to be successful at it in male terms.

Sure women attempt suicide too - strange question TBH. I suppose the question i'd ask next is whether you see suicide as a bad thing and if you think we ought to explore ways to reduce suicide.

I think you're taking an incredibly narrow view of gender roles but phrasing it incredibly broadly: "having a sense of how the game of life is played and to be successful at it in male terms". Be fair, that's a bit of an odd definition of gender roles. But it's so broad that I could probably say that dying by suicide due to a sense of duty to "plough through" on your own, would probably not be considered a very successful way to play the game. Would you agree?

There's loads of research on this as a cause of men not seeking help for mental and physical health conditions.

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2020 5:15pm

silverharp wrote: »

Don’t a lot of women attempt suicide , men just seem to be “better” at it especially in a country like the US where guns are easily available?

To be fair to them (I use the neutral term as I have no idea whether El_D is male or female), El_D was not aware of this before I made the point earlier in the thread -

WHY ARE MORE WOMEN COMMITTING SUICIDE?

The suicide rate among women has increased exponentially for the past 20 years. The burden of trying to do it all just may be the culprit.

One conclusion that can be drawn from the above is that women’s liberation has simply placed different expectations on women, which has resulted in an exponential increase in suicidal behaviour and ill mental health among women.

And that’s precisely why I would urge anyone to think about the effects that liberation from their gender roles has on people - it has the effect of increasing suicidal behaviour and ill mental health. Quite why anyone is of the belief that liberation from their gender roles would reduce suicidal behaviour and ill mental health in men is beyond me, when the evidence just isn’t there to support their theory. The evidence we have suggests the opposite effect.

El_Duderino 09 · 10-02-2020 5:26pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

To be fair to them (I use the neutral term as I have no idea whether El_D is male or female), El_D was not aware of this before I made the point earlier in the thread -

WHY ARE MORE WOMEN COMMITTING SUICIDE?

The suicide rate among women has increased exponentially for the past 20 years. The burden of trying to do it all just may be the culprit.

Hold on. I told you i didn't know the rate of suicide for women was rising. As far as I'm aware the rate of suicide is still about 3-4 times higher for men than women. And I think that's a fairly alarming statistic.

I can't speak for you, but as a bloke who cares about men's issues, that's a fairly striking fact and I think it's worth discussing and finding solutions for those blokes who need help. don't you?

Widdershins · 10-02-2020 5:39pm

Iirc men use more brutal and infallible methods. Im just wondering how familiar people generally are with the two main strands of feminism as they diverge drastically on numerous issue. Radical and liberal. They're deceptive names. And jusr as an example, Louise O'Neill would be a libfem, like most of the feminists people seem to refer to in the AH threads.

Mad_maxx · 10-02-2020 5:45pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Well... I find the removal of gender roles to be highly selective.

Feminists push the working female angle, the professional female who competes directly with males in the workplace, but doesn't lower herself to the same negative behaviors. The problem, of course, is that these feminists don't want to compete or negotiate either, so they seek to change the environment to suit their desires. Competition is transformed into a negative male trait with associations to aggressiveness. Hence the need for gender quotas, and regulations to reduce male involvement such as borderline behaviors which can be interpreted as harassment (mansplaining/Manterrupting/etc).

Earlier in the days of feminists pushing equality, they talked down about women who wanted to have a family, rather than pursue a career... Then it shifted to women doing both. Which is why we see the need to provide an environment where women can do both. The approach is pushed that males aren't interested in parenting, and it was their negative attitude that encouraged a culture to be created whereby males would work (because that's what they all wanted), and females would stay at home. Now, we're seeing the reinforcement of the idea that since women are the only ones capable of bearing children, they have a greater appreciation of life. Men can only destroy, not create life. Which, in turn, reinforces the point that only women can nurture life and therefore are better parents. The link is made that the best parent is the one that bears the child.. so a further reinforcement of a role based on gender.

You see similar reinforcement of gender roles in woke movies, where the male is a predator, a stumbling fool, or an eager supporter for female needs (but with a underhand agenda of wanting sex). The females, as you said, are essentially perfect. Strong, confident, capable, etc. No measure of growth or moments defining how they changed to become who they are, except when they need to show that males are the cause for their transformation... due to a negative situation.

Feminism needs an enemy, and lacking one, they'll create one. "Male" society for the most part has moved away from sexism against women. Sure, there are individuals, and a few moronic groups out there, but they're the exception rather than the norm. However, feminism needs an enemy to validate it's position. So, regardless of how males evolve within society, I suspect feminists will always seek to pull males back to being the aggressor... especially now that we can be unaware of our sexism, with subconscious sexism.

Honestly, I'm amazed by the number of people who believe in, and worse yet, support this crap.

Ahh, but it's generally not seen as rape by the female teacher. A large part of that is male culture supposing that sex is always a good thing... but society as a whole should be above that, knowing that an adult having sex with a minor is wrong in any situation... but hey, double standards exist in many attitudes.

It's the same with the "I believe her" milarky. Could you imagine males saying the same thing? Or it being even remotely tolerated in this modern society of ours? If equality was the goal for feminists or SJWs then this kind of thing would be shot down immediately. Alas...

The part I find interesting is that most of us live in a technological age. Few women seek employment in physical positions where males have the biological advantage. Instead, most women are entering positions which are related to the mind, skills that aren't physical, etc but they still need a boost. Not because they're inferior, but because they face discrimination... even after 30 years of laws to prevent discrimination...

What I've learned is that no change will ever be enough until males are excluded for any activity that women want to engage in. As long as males are involved and have even a remote chance of success, that is an unacceptable threat to female equality.

True enough

Feminism is a strand of the broader grievance industry, their are careers to be maintained, new intersectionalist courses to run

Money

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2020 5:46pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Hold on. I told you i didn't know the rate of suicide for women was rising. As far as I'm aware the rate of suicide is still about 3-4 times higher for men than women. And I think that's a fairly alarming statistic.

I can't speak for you, but as a bloke who cares about men's issues, that's a fairly striking fact and I think it's worth discussing and finding solutions for those blokes who need help. don't you?

I do, but I also think that’s a different discussion than the idea being discussed here. The idea being discussed here is liberating people from their gender roles. It hasn’t worked out so well for women, and there is no evidence to suggest that the theory would work out well for men either. All it appears liberation from their gender roles does is places a different set of expectations on people. Then they struggle to live up to those expectations, causing them to suffer from ill mental health and engage in suicidal behaviour.

As you claim to care about men’s issues, I don’t understand why you would entertain a theory when the evidence suggests that the application of the theory overwhelmingly has the opposite of it’s intended effect, and why would you want to impose those different expectations upon men which the evidence shows that it leads to an increase in ill mental health and suicidal behaviour?

As alarming as the statistic of a high male suicide rate is for you now, I don’t know what you’d be like if you thought you were responsible for an exponential increase in ill mental health and suicidal behaviour among men as a result of applying a theory which it doesn’t appear you’ve given much thought to.

Is it desperation? Clutching at straws? Something has to explain why you would entertain the notion of liberation from their gender roles as a means to address men’s issues.

When will men get liberated from gender roles?

Comments