Mens Rights: Do we need a movement

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

Agema:

Mothro:
5 pages in and what have we learned? Men = bad and the cause of all inequality.

Are you interested in anything explained in depth, or do you just want to criticise anything associated with feminism for the sake of opposing anything to do with feminism?

I don't mean this to be insulting, I ask because it's fair to let people know whether it's worth them spending time and effort constructing a thoughtful response of no interest or value to you.

Considering he made this post earlier, I think it's fair to say he doesn't actually care about the problems men face and just wants to complain about feminism. You know, that thing self proclaimed MRAs do all the time and why I, as a man, fucking hate them.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.1055458-Mens-Rights-Do-we-need-a-movement?page=3#24244121

Lil devils x:
It has everything to do with advancing men's rights. Without Toxic Masculinity, for example, you would not have the idea that women are too weak to take care of themselves, that women should not work but instead be taken care of by a man. Once that idea is purged, you can then address men ensuring women have equal access to finances and self sufficiency, that then leads to men no longer being forced to support women financially under the law. All of these things are related. You cannot just cut off financial support for women until you address why they deem the financial support necessary. It will continue to be necessary as long as there are women who are being denied access to their own finances by their own spouse, not allowed to work,and considered too weak or inferior to earn a living income.

Ok, that is kind of a fight that happened more than three decades before i was born and even for our (then) backward neighbor countries its two decades before i was born. While this is certainly an idea that should be fought against, i have never encountered it in real life.

Sadly, it is still common for men to have financial control. As long as that continues, courts will order men to support women. Men who do this make it more difficult on the men who do not, so society as a whole must address the men who do this in order to make it better for the men who do not. It should not just be women addressing this, of course men have to address other men as well. The problem is not enough men are addressing other men. You cannot expect women to do all the work.

I have heard that is now actually a hot topic in our German refugee community where expectations of the newcomers about family and roles do clash with our laws, but that doesn't really fit here. Courts are as likely to order a woman to support a man than vise versa reflecting the realities about financial control.

Toxic Masculinity has defined the roles for men in the workplace by empowering men who conform to their predefined roles and punishing men who break from those roles. Men who show emotion, take off to spend time with their families, or do not conform to their standards of masculinity are passed up for promotion, excluded from events, and frequently demoted or terminated regardless of their actual job performance.

That however is still a problem. Not the same kind of problem as in your area because of rather strict job security laws and laws providing rather generous maternity/paternity leave with inbuilt incentives to share the time off. But fathers still rarely take more than one month. And yes, capitalism is willing to exploit that which translates into a small incentive to hire men over women. There is some talk about how to fight that, maybe by always forcing both parents to take equal time off.
But i don't think "being passed over for promotion for taking time of for children" is that much a thing. There was a lot of fear it would happen when they introduced paternity leave but nowadays i see all levels of hierarchy usig it. It was more willingly accepted than anyone had anticipated, hinting at maybe those ideas about maskulinity were not that prevalent anymore anyway.

EDIT: also the idea that "Men can stop rape" is not remotely comparable to "Muslims can stop terrorism" as they are very different things. You are comparing apples to oranges. Terrorists kill more Muslims than any other group, they are not actually Muslims and could care less what Muslims have to tell them, they do not care what anyone tells them, they are terrorists, they will kill you for thinking about telling them anything. Men are still men and do have an actual impact on what is socially acceptable among men.

Those people still are Muslims. By Islam the main criterion is formally recognizing their god and Muhammed as last prophet. Failing anything else (aside from renouncing your faith) makes you at worst a muslim lacking piety or one being wrong about (aspect of faith).

And yes, those terrorist are usually extremists that don't really care that much about what other muslims have to say. Especially muslims of a different sect or at least school.

Which is why i think the analogy is so fitting. A man who actually managed to justify rape to himself won't care what other men say about it any more than he cares about what women say about it. He will most likely already know it which is the reason rapists actually try to hide rape. They are fully aware society doesn't approve. They will never try to engage in a discussion about rape and try to justify it (well, at least until caught).

And i as a man feel the same kind of annoyance everytime a rape happens towards all the calls on men to do something about it, implicitely using the existance of rape as some kind of failure of the community of men. And then insinuating that that only happened because we were actually ok with it because we should have been able to make it impossible somehow.

And that is exactly the same thing as the muslim communities complain about.

It is doing everyone a disservice to attempt to portray rape as something only monsters do, someone separate from society when the reality is it is family, friends, neighbors, who just happen to have raped someone. Men can stop rape help people realize that and change the way people think about rape.

Yes, everyone could be a rapist. And how does that matter ?

These things NEED to be addressed, and that is what the Men can stop rape organization is doing. They are actually doing something to help, why attack the very organizations that are improving things for both men and women long term?

I am not attacking the "Men can stop Rape"-organization. But i really don't think they can achieve anything. I mean, it is good that they want to help, they are probably nice people.

ALSO, Men do pay attention to what other men say/do when that is the majority of society. Expanding understanding one person at a time is how you get there. It is not about " random stranger" it is about employers, coworkers, teammates, friends, family doing this, not just " random strangers". It changes when you have people willing to help change it rather than continue to turn a blind eye. The goal here is to reduce the number of men who promote toxic ideals or bully other men into conforming to those toxic ideals.

Sure, but honestly, the last time i had any chance to do so was 5-6 years ago. That is how common i encounter anyone talking in a manner revealing casual toxic masculinity. I am ignoring one particular egdelord here who regularly uses racist, sexist and otherwise offensive comments just to provoke. But other than him, yes the last sexist joke i heard IRL was more than half a decade ago. And the joker was indeed a foreigner who claimed that would have been a harmless joke in his country.

Now, i do know from women that sexist comments are not actually that rare. Which is certainly not pleasent for them. But the idea that men have regular opportunities engage other men for sexist comments and thus are in some kind of privileged male communication position is just wrong. It is usually women who get to hear this crap.

There are plenty of spaces, in person and online that men get together and discuss things. Whether it is on video games, at work, at sporting events, or just online, there are still plenty of male dominated spaces where conversations can take place. Even the Rock is talking about it:

Sure, i have more male than female coworkers. Doesn't mean that the men anything together without the women. Every sport thing i ever was part of was mixed and that is normal. Sure, professionals often have sex based teams but i never was a professional and neither are most men. I have never been in an male only online place or group and wouldn't even know where to find one. Germany has not this strange British idea about Pubs as ale places, so we don't have those (and i don't drink anyway). One of my 4 tabletop-RPG groups is male only since last month since the female player got new shifts at work and couldn't make it anymore. That is the only "male space" i am part of and it is exactly the same as it was when it was mixed.

I don't get together with men. My father does not get together with men. None of my friends gets together with men afaik. Coincidence might make a small group of random people male only but there is no male communication sphere i am aware of.

Schadrach:

Gorfias:

[quote="Wrex Brogan" post="528.1055458.24244691"]Of course men need a movement. While feminism has done some good for mens rights through bringing attention to and addressing parts of toxic masculinity, a more directed movement that specifically focuses on the issues men face would be incredibly beneficial.

I'm going to ask something that usually gets denied but is often illustrative. What would you consider examples of positive masculinity?

Usually when I ask that I either get examples of men demonstrating superficial feminine qualities (implying that positive masculinity is defined by being feminine) or men behaving specifically to benefit women, sometimes to their own detriment (implying positive masculinity isn't about men at all but about how it can be used to benefit women).

'superficial feminine qualities' boy, let's talk about illustrative! Wanna be a little more vague with that definition, or am I gonna find out what that means when you have a whinge over me saying 'an example of positive masculinity is men being better with their emotions'?

But, hostility aside (hey, site's dying so might as well pick fights when I can, right?) and to answer the question in a slighty vague, then not-so-vague manner - examples of positive masculinity are things that are... the opposite of toxic masculinity. So, things like, men expressing their emotions in a healthy manner, men not being shamed for seeking help, men not feeling embarrassed for having problems, men not being shamed for not fitting an 'ideal' type of manliness/masculinity, men being helpful/supportive of one another in all manner of things, men not tolerating unacceptable behavior around them because 'bro code' (real Bro Code: Bros don't let Bros be assholes), men being respectful and understanding towards women (yeah, that's a positive masculinity trait - being a jerk to women doesn't make you a tough guy, it just makes you an asshole), men not shaming/ostracizing other men for doing non-masculine things... really, it's just masculinity that focuses on building up, supporting and respecting your fellow man, instead of trying to break and shame them for not fitting the impossible (and entirely fabricated) 'Alpha Wolf' ideal that toxic masculinity demands.

And while I won't speak from a universal perspective, gay men and body builders/weight lifters tend to have a lot of these positive aspects. Gay men since 'gay' is often considered 'feminine', so being a masculine gay man tends to lead to building a lot of the positive aspects around supporting your fellow man, and body builders/weight lifters since they often tackle a lot of the negative aspects of masculinity surrounding body image, exercise and dieting head-on (seriously, being a healthy weight lifter means doing a lot of 'feminine' things, like Yoga - anyone who thinks Yoga is 'feminine' has never thrown their back out doing a deadlift), and often support their fellow lifters due to the physical and emotional demands of the lifestyle.

So, yeah, to reiterate, positive masculinity is about building up and supporting your fellow man, not shaming or belittling them for failing to be 'manly'.

Wrex Brogan:

But, hostility aside (hey, site's dying so might as well pick fights when I can, right?) and to answer the question in a slighty vague, then not-so-vague manner - examples of positive masculinity are things that are... the opposite of toxic masculinity. So, things like, men expressing their emotions in a healthy manner, men not being shamed for seeking help, men not feeling embarrassed for having problems, men not being shamed for not fitting an 'ideal' type of manliness/masculinity, men being helpful/supportive of one another in all manner of things, men not tolerating unacceptable behavior around them because 'bro code' (real Bro Code: Bros don't let Bros be assholes), men being respectful and understanding towards women (yeah, that's a positive masculinity trait - being a jerk to women doesn't make you a tough guy, it just makes you an asshole), men not shaming/ostracizing other men for doing non-masculine things... really, it's just masculinity that focuses on building up, supporting and respecting your fellow man, instead of trying to break and shame them for not fitting the impossible (and entirely fabricated) 'Alpha Wolf' ideal that toxic masculinity demands.

Shouldn't positive masculinity still consist of stuff that men are expected to do but women are not expected to do ? Otherwise it is not really masculinity or gendered behavior.

Help me understand:

Toxic Masculinity - Men are hurting other men

Patriarchy - Men run the world for the benefit of mostly men

Which is it?

Mothro:
Help me understand:

Toxic Masculinity - Men are hurting other men

Patriarchy - Men run the world for the benefit of mostly men

Which is it?

Taking this in good faith, the first. The patriarchy isn't "for" anything, it just is. It generally benefits men to the detriment of women, yes, but it's not a perfect system designed for such. Hell, there isn't even a totally agreed upon idea of what is beneficial.

Thaluikhain:

Mothro:
Help me understand:

Toxic Masculinity - Men are hurting other men

Patriarchy - Men run the world for the benefit of mostly men

Which is it?

Taking this in good faith, the first. The patriarchy isn't "for" anything, it just is. It generally benefits men to the detriment of women, yes, but it's not a perfect system designed for such. Hell, there isn't even a totally agreed upon idea of what is beneficial.

The patriarchy is the go-to boogeyman when needed. So is toxic masculinity for that matter. They are both played when convenient.

It's a catch all, no matter what the situation there is a way to blame men in general. Are we going to let women define positive masculinity? Men don't go around trying to define positive and toxic femininity. Gender equality discussion is always a one way street where men are told to listen to the women (unless they agree with the women).

Men with life experience know that women asking for more sensitive men are not being completely honest because those are the men who get cheated on when she chases the bad boy. Men are expected to read her mind and shut down their feelings when she doesn't want to hear it. Men who fail to adapt to her mood changes will lose her sooner or later and they will blame themselves.

I have been in countless debates over the last 15 years and what we are seeing here is the same old thing. Anything and everything is used to dismiss the subject of Mens Rights. The 'you have to stop Toxic Masculinity before you can deal with Mens Rights' is just a newer stalling tactic. You can't even discuss it on a forum without first eliminating 'toxic masculinity' from the world.

Satinavian:

Wrex Brogan:

But, hostility aside (hey, site's dying so might as well pick fights when I can, right?) and to answer the question in a slighty vague, then not-so-vague manner - examples of positive masculinity are things that are... the opposite of toxic masculinity. So, things like, men expressing their emotions in a healthy manner, men not being shamed for seeking help, men not feeling embarrassed for having problems, men not being shamed for not fitting an 'ideal' type of manliness/masculinity, men being helpful/supportive of one another in all manner of things, men not tolerating unacceptable behavior around them because 'bro code' (real Bro Code: Bros don't let Bros be assholes), men being respectful and understanding towards women (yeah, that's a positive masculinity trait - being a jerk to women doesn't make you a tough guy, it just makes you an asshole), men not shaming/ostracizing other men for doing non-masculine things... really, it's just masculinity that focuses on building up, supporting and respecting your fellow man, instead of trying to break and shame them for not fitting the impossible (and entirely fabricated) 'Alpha Wolf' ideal that toxic masculinity demands.

Shouldn't positive masculinity still consist of stuff that men are expected to do but women are not expected to do ? Otherwise it is not really masculinity or gendered behavior.

No. Because men being "expected" to do anything is bullshit. Hell, expecting women to do anything is bullshit. Let men be feminine and women be masculine. Honestly so many ideas of what's masculine and feminine are so vague it's pointless. A lot of people say being protective is masculine, but mothers are protective of their children all the time. Taking care of yourself and making yourself presentable and attractive is considered feminine, but men are still expected to clean up for formal events.

Honestly, I say just stop labeling behaviors by gender altogether.

Thaluikhain:

Mothro:
Help me understand:

Toxic Masculinity - Men are hurting other men

Patriarchy - Men run the world for the benefit of mostly men

Which is it?

Taking this in good faith, the first. The patriarchy isn't "for" anything, it just is. It generally benefits men to the detriment of women, yes, but it's not a perfect system designed for such. Hell, there isn't even a totally agreed upon idea of what is beneficial.

You're wasting your time man.

Satinavian:

Lil devils x:
It has everything to do with advancing men's rights. Without Toxic Masculinity, for example, you would not have the idea that women are too weak to take care of themselves, that women should not work but instead be taken care of by a man. Once that idea is purged, you can then address men ensuring women have equal access to finances and self sufficiency, that then leads to men no longer being forced to support women financially under the law. All of these things are related. You cannot just cut off financial support for women until you address why they deem the financial support necessary. It will continue to be necessary as long as there are women who are being denied access to their own finances by their own spouse, not allowed to work,and considered too weak or inferior to earn a living income.

Ok, that is kind of a fight that happened more than three decades before i was born and even for our (then) backward neighbor countries its two decades before i was born. While this is certainly an idea that should be fought against, i have never encountered it in real life.

Sadly, it is still common for men to have financial control. As long as that continues, courts will order men to support women. Men who do this make it more difficult on the men who do not, so society as a whole must address the men who do this in order to make it better for the men who do not. It should not just be women addressing this, of course men have to address other men as well. The problem is not enough men are addressing other men. You cannot expect women to do all the work.

I have heard that is now actually a hot topic in our German refugee community where expectations of the newcomers about family and roles do clash with our laws, but that doesn't really fit here. Courts are as likely to order a woman to support a man than vise versa reflecting the realities about financial control.

Toxic Masculinity has defined the roles for men in the workplace by empowering men who conform to their predefined roles and punishing men who break from those roles. Men who show emotion, take off to spend time with their families, or do not conform to their standards of masculinity are passed up for promotion, excluded from events, and frequently demoted or terminated regardless of their actual job performance.

That however is still a problem. Not the same kind of problem as in your area because of rather strict job security laws and laws providing rather generous maternity/paternity leave with inbuilt incentives to share the time off. But fathers still rarely take more than one month. And yes, capitalism is willing to exploit that which translates into a small incentive to hire men over women. There is some talk about how to fight that, maybe by always forcing both parents to take equal time off.
But i don't think "being passed over for promotion for taking time of for children" is that much a thing. There was a lot of fear it would happen when they introduced paternity leave but nowadays i see all levels of hierarchy usig it. It was more willingly accepted than anyone had anticipated, hinting at maybe those ideas about maskulinity were not that prevalent anymore anyway.

EDIT: also the idea that "Men can stop rape" is not remotely comparable to "Muslims can stop terrorism" as they are very different things. You are comparing apples to oranges. Terrorists kill more Muslims than any other group, they are not actually Muslims and could care less what Muslims have to tell them, they do not care what anyone tells them, they are terrorists, they will kill you for thinking about telling them anything. Men are still men and do have an actual impact on what is socially acceptable among men.

Those people still are Muslims. By Islam the main criterion is formally recognizing their god and Muhammed as last prophet. Failing anything else (aside from renouncing your faith) makes you at worst a muslim lacking piety or one being wrong about (aspect of faith).

And yes, those terrorist are usually extremists that don't really care that much about what other muslims have to say. Especially muslims of a different sect or at least school.

Which is why i think the analogy is so fitting. A man who actually managed to justify rape to himself won't care what other men say about it any more than he cares about what women say about it. He will most likely already know it which is the reason rapists actually try to hide rape. They are fully aware society doesn't approve. They will never try to engage in a discussion about rape and try to justify it (well, at least until caught).

And i as a man feel the same kind of annoyance everytime a rape happens towards all the calls on men to do something about it, implicitely using the existance of rape as some kind of failure of the community of men. And then insinuating that that only happened because we were actually ok with it because we should have been able to make it impossible somehow.

And that is exactly the same thing as the muslim communities complain about.

It is doing everyone a disservice to attempt to portray rape as something only monsters do, someone separate from society when the reality is it is family, friends, neighbors, who just happen to have raped someone. Men can stop rape help people realize that and change the way people think about rape.

Yes, everyone could be a rapist. And how does that matter ?

These things NEED to be addressed, and that is what the Men can stop rape organization is doing. They are actually doing something to help, why attack the very organizations that are improving things for both men and women long term?

I am not attacking the "Men can stop Rape"-organization. But i really don't think they can achieve anything. I mean, it is good that they want to help, they are probably nice people.

ALSO, Men do pay attention to what other men say/do when that is the majority of society. Expanding understanding one person at a time is how you get there. It is not about " random stranger" it is about employers, coworkers, teammates, friends, family doing this, not just " random strangers". It changes when you have people willing to help change it rather than continue to turn a blind eye. The goal here is to reduce the number of men who promote toxic ideals or bully other men into conforming to those toxic ideals.

Sure, but honestly, the last time i had any chance to do so was 5-6 years ago. That is how common i encounter anyone talking in a manner revealing casual toxic masculinity. I am ignoring one particular egdelord here who regularly uses racist, sexist and otherwise offensive comments just to provoke. But other than him, yes the last sexist joke i heard IRL was more than half a decade ago. And the joker was indeed a foreigner who claimed that would have been a harmless joke in his country.

Now, i do know from women that sexist comments are not actually that rare. Which is certainly not pleasent for them. But the idea that men have regular opportunities engage other men for sexist comments and thus are in some kind of privileged male communication position is just wrong. It is usually women who get to hear this crap.

There are plenty of spaces, in person and online that men get together and discuss things. Whether it is on video games, at work, at sporting events, or just online, there are still plenty of male dominated spaces where conversations can take place. Even the Rock is talking about it:

Sure, i have more male than female coworkers. Doesn't mean that the men anything together without the women. Every sport thing i ever was part of was mixed and that is normal. Sure, professionals often have sex based teams but i never was a professional and neither are most men. I have never been in an male only online place or group and wouldn't even know where to find one. Germany has not this strange British idea about Pubs as ale places, so we don't have those (and i don't drink anyway). One of my 4 tabletop-RPG groups is male only since last month since the female player got new shifts at work and couldn't make it anymore. That is the only "male space" i am part of and it is exactly the same as it was when it was mixed.

I don't get together with men. My father does not get together with men. None of my friends gets together with men afaik. Coincidence might make a small group of random people male only but there is no male communication sphere i am aware of.

Simply because you have not realized that these things were existing, they still very much do exist, even in this day. Sadly, the thing you think disappeared decades ago are still quite rampant in the United States. Almost every single woman in our Domestic violence shelter here were prevented from working and had their male partner refuse to allow them access to their own finances. It is still one of the most extremely common controlling factors in abusive relationships. This is not just an immigrant issue here, the shelter is almost entirely white women, primarily Christians of European ancestry that were born in this nation.

Yes, men need much more time off for their children than just after the baby is born. Fathers need time off with their children every single year of the child's life, just as Mother's do and neither should be punished for it.

AS for Rape, the issue is many men do not even understand what rape is. There still is much that needs to be done to make sure men are even educated on what actually constitutes rape. Attempting to compare them to terrorists who listens to no one and influenced by nothing around them is doing a disservice because they are usually just like everyone else except they raped someone. Not even remotely comparable to someone who is part of a cult.

You do not have to have men already talking about something to start a conversation on something yourself. That is exactly what the men in these organizations have been willing to do is open the conversation rather than only discuss it is someone else stats it. The idea here is to get people talking about it so they can help solve it. Here int he US sex segregated teams are far more common than mixed. We have Mens' adult recreational leagues for baseball, football, basketball ect. Local tournaments for those are very common here. Pubs are fairly common not just in the UK, but the US, Spain, Mexico, Australia, Candada as well as Scandinavian countries. The US is a good deal larger place than Germany, you should not expect Germany to be "the rule" rather than the exception in terms of what is and is not common in the West.

Mothro:
Help me understand:

Toxic Masculinity - Men are hurting other men

Patriarchy - Men run the world for the benefit of mostly men

Which is it?

Food: needed to survive. Tastes good

Food: makes us fat, gives us diabetes

Which is it?

Mothro:

Thaluikhain:

Mothro:
Help me understand:

Toxic Masculinity - Men are hurting other men

Patriarchy - Men run the world for the benefit of mostly men

Which is it?

Taking this in good faith, the first. The patriarchy isn't "for" anything, it just is. It generally benefits men to the detriment of women, yes, but it's not a perfect system designed for such. Hell, there isn't even a totally agreed upon idea of what is beneficial.

The patriarchy is the go-to boogeyman when needed. So is toxic masculinity for that matter. They are both played when convenient.

It's a catch all, no matter what the situation there is a way to blame men in general. Are we going to let women define positive masculinity? Men don't go around trying to define positive and toxic femininity. Gender equality discussion is always a one way street where men are told to listen to the women (unless they agree with the women).

Men with life experience know that women asking for more sensitive men are not being completely honest because those are the men who get cheated on when she chases the bad boy. Men are expected to read her mind and shut down their feelings when she doesn't want to hear it. Men who fail to adapt to her mood changes will lose her sooner or later and they will blame themselves.

I have been in countless debates over the last 15 years and what we are seeing here is the same old thing. Anything and everything is used to dismiss the subject of Mens Rights. The 'you have to stop Toxic Masculinity before you can deal with Mens Rights' is just a newer stalling tactic. You can't even discuss it on a forum without first eliminating 'toxic masculinity' from the world.

No, the Patriarchy is not the " go to boogeyman". I actually come from a matriarchal culture where the women have traditionally always controlled the economy and finances and the men take the woman's name upon marriage. You should experience what that is like for a bit and you will see the very real differences between Patriarchal and Matriarchal cultures very quickly. These differences are intertwined into every aspect of society itself, not existing separate from it.

I haven't seen anyone dismiss men's rights in this thread, instead I see numerous resources provided to help further men's rights, not dismiss them. There are a good number of groups that are both pro mens rights and pro feminist. YOu accomplish more working with the people who have been advancing mens rights rather than against them.

And yes you cannot discuss mens rights without discussing " Toxic Masculinity" because that is the first obstacle to advance Men's rights. Those mens groups that are battling Toxic masculinity that exists in society are on the front lines for advancing mens rights. It is not helpful to them to claim that what they are doing does not exist.

In this thread alone, you have received numerous resources to help advance mens rights, been shown how Toxic Masculinity harms men's rights, and been shown why this conversation is important and yet you ignore all that and continue to make baseless claims.

Satinavian:

Wrex Brogan:

But, hostility aside (hey, site's dying so might as well pick fights when I can, right?) and to answer the question in a slighty vague, then not-so-vague manner - examples of positive masculinity are things that are... the opposite of toxic masculinity. So, things like, men expressing their emotions in a healthy manner, men not being shamed for seeking help, men not feeling embarrassed for having problems, men not being shamed for not fitting an 'ideal' type of manliness/masculinity, men being helpful/supportive of one another in all manner of things, men not tolerating unacceptable behavior around them because 'bro code' (real Bro Code: Bros don't let Bros be assholes), men being respectful and understanding towards women (yeah, that's a positive masculinity trait - being a jerk to women doesn't make you a tough guy, it just makes you an asshole), men not shaming/ostracizing other men for doing non-masculine things... really, it's just masculinity that focuses on building up, supporting and respecting your fellow man, instead of trying to break and shame them for not fitting the impossible (and entirely fabricated) 'Alpha Wolf' ideal that toxic masculinity demands.

Shouldn't positive masculinity still consist of stuff that men are expected to do but women are not expected to do ? Otherwise it is not really masculinity or gendered behavior.

So the answer to 'What are superficial feminine qualities' was 'I don't know', I take it? And you going to explain how anything I said does/doesn't fit into the 'stuff that men are expected to do but women are not expected to do' category, or should I preemptively chalk that one up as 'I don't know' too?

Hell, how's about a challenge for yourself - what would you define as positive masculinity? No shame in not having an answer, but I feel if you're going to hoist yourself as judge of what is 'illustrative', you should probably also have some money to put where your mouth is.

Mothro:
Men don't go around trying to define positive and toxic femininity.

Are you SURE about this one? I see plenty of men, and I can name names, defining femininity for women.

I have been in countless debates over the last 15 years and what we are seeing here is the same old thing. Anything and everything is used to dismiss the subject of Mens Rights. The 'you have to stop Toxic Masculinity before you can deal with Mens Rights' is just a newer stalling tactic. You can't even discuss it on a forum without first eliminating 'toxic masculinity' from the world.

So have I, and the lack of self awareness treating women like some malevolent hive mind is not going to help men either.

I repeat and I repeat without any hesitation; it's been the "Men's Rights" crowd that's come up with far more ways to demean men via popularizing garbage like "cuck" "Beta" "Mangina" "low t" "Soyboy" then even the dimwitted radfems have.

Wrex Brogan:

So the answer to 'What are superficial feminine qualities' was 'I don't know', I take it? And you going to explain how anything I said does/doesn't fit into the 'stuff that men are expected to do but women are not expected to do' category, or should I preemptively chalk that one up as 'I don't know' too?

So, things like, men expressing their emotions in a healthy manner -> true for women as well

men not being shamed for seeking help, men not feeling embarrassed for having problems -> positive for women as well

men not being shamed for not fitting an 'ideal' type of manliness/masculinity -> positive for women as well if switched for feminility

men being helpful/supportive of one another in all manner of things -> positive for women as well

men not tolerating unacceptable behavior around them because 'bro code' (real Bro Code: Bros don't let Bros be assholes)-> positive for women as well

men being respectful and understanding towards women (yeah, that's a positive masculinity trait - being a jerk to women doesn't make you a tough guy, it just makes you an asshole)-> positive for women as well, also such behavior should be a good thing regardless of the gender of the target too

men not shaming/ostracizing other men for doing non-masculine things... really -> positive for women as well if switched for feminility

it's just masculinity that focuses on building up, supporting and respecting your fellow man -> positive for women as well

Really that all is just general nice behavior for all people. It is not masculine or feminine at all. If anything, you could argue that at least point one and two are things that are even less common in men then in women and thus, if ever included in a gender stereotype should certainly not be part of masculinity.

Hell, how's about a challenge for yourself - what would you define as positive masculinity? No shame in not having an answer, but I feel if you're going to hoist yourself as judge of what is 'illustrative', you should probably also have some money to put where your mouth is.

Nope, i don't.

I think gender is bad, superflous and harmfull and should vanish from the world. Aside of procreation related realities there is no need to treat men any different then women in any situation or give them different roles or expectations.

Aside from that i am not even sure what the contemporary idea about masculinity from around here even is. I have already mentioned that several times. There is still more stuff that is considered feminine due to men having not really bothered to claim it for themself. But i can't really think about anything or even a set of things a women could do where i would say "she behaves like a man now, not like a women, that is totally masculine".

Mothro:
Help me understand:

Toxic Masculinity - Men are hurting other men

Patriarchy - Men run the world for the benefit of mostly men

Which is it?

You say that like they're mutually exclusive. I could give you the benefit of unlimited access to alcohol but that would probably end up hurting you as you get trashed more often. Not really thought your attempt at an argument through there

Mothro:
Help me understand:

Toxic Masculinity - Men are hurting other men

Patriarchy - Men run the world for the benefit of mostly men

Which is it?

Both.

I was typing out a long theoretical explanation for you, but then I realized that there's an easier way to explain this:
The majority of people in positions of power are men, most of the ultra-rich people are men, women still have a harder time getting promotions and raises compared to men and male attributes are still valued higher than feminine ones. These are all signs that we are living in a Patriarchy.

However, men are also somewhere between 3-5 times more likely to commit suicide compared to women. The reasons for this are well-researched and are directly linked to men's general inability to talk about their emotions, to maintain significant and important emotional bonds ("deep friendships") and unwillingness to seek help when faced with health issues or problems they can not deal with alone. All of these things are part of what's called Toxic Masculinity, the concept that society imposes on men a gender role that's rife with both destructive and self-destructive values. Values that men internalize and try to live up to even as it hurts them and the people around them.

Just wow. There have been some impressively misguided threads on these forums... but if this one doesn't quite take the cake, it at the very least has an elaborate Ocean's 11 (or 8, if you'd prefer) plan in an advanced state of preparation regarding said cake.

I actually tried to locate my copy of Iron John for this one, but I couldn't. (Must have been at least 15 years since I read it.) But no matter, I don't need it to point out that the problem with masculinity diagnosed by this "mythopoetic" Men's Movement is precisely that it's incomplete, that there's insufficient masculine influence for young men in modern society, what with men living among women and all. So the plan was to get them to withdraw from feminine influence into the backwoods, so that they could be taught The Ways of Manhood (whatever you consider those to be) without meddlesome womenfolk around. Quite how that translates into "must-let-Feminists-cure-you-of-toxic-masculinity" is a little difficult to work out.

Now, there seems to be something of a theme to the practical suggestions as to how this purification of masculinity would be accomplished, namely men embracing their weakness as a virtue. Obviously there's something to be said for compassion for others and not living in denial of one's own vulnerability. But all the same it's deeply suspect to condition people into seeking approval by cultivating a morbid oversensitivity, which is something this can and does easily degenerate into, especially when the process is overseen by bad actors pretending to "help".

Which brings us neatly into a position to balance the accounts of sex-based "toxicity". We hear a lot about toxic masculinity, but what about toxic femininity? Well, I'd like to nominate undermining disguised as nurture for your consideration for the part of this missing, elusive element.

StatusNil:
We hear a lot about toxic masculinity, but what about toxic femininity?

PUA's, Incels, MGTOW's, and Traditional Conservatives go on quite a bit about that if you're interested to hear.

Smithnikov:

StatusNil:
We hear a lot about toxic masculinity, but what about toxic femininity?

PUA's, Incels, MGTOW's, and Traditional Conservatives go on quite a bit about that if you're interested to hear.

...and I'll bet you think those who talk about toxic femininity are misogynists?

Mothro:

Smithnikov:

StatusNil:
We hear a lot about toxic masculinity, but what about toxic femininity?

PUA's, Incels, MGTOW's, and Traditional Conservatives go on quite a bit about that if you're interested to hear.

...and I'll bet you think those who talk about toxic femininity are misogynists?

Depends on, like everything else, context.

Smithnikov:

Mothro:

Smithnikov:

PUA's, Incels, MGTOW's, and Traditional Conservatives go on quite a bit about that if you're interested to hear.

...and I'll bet you think those who talk about toxic femininity are misogynists?

Depends on, like everything else, context.

Could you post a Toxic Feminine trait you agree with then?

Vendor-Lazarus:
Could you post a Toxic Feminine trait you agree with then?

That women are supposed to always *insert stereotypical female behaviour here* and not *insert the opposite of that behaviour*.

Key word there being "always".

I find it interesting that the people who are highly invested in "toxic feminity" are the same people who seem to have a lot of investment in deflecting any and all criticisms of men and don't seem to actually care about any women who might be suffering due to "toxic feminity" and just want an example of "well what about..." that they can pull so that they can ignore the problems of toxic masculinity.

erttheking:
I find it interesting that the people who are highly invested in "toxic feminity" are the same people who seem to have a lot of investment in deflecting any and all criticisms of men and don't seem to actually care about any women who might be suffering due to "toxic feminity" and just want an example of "well what about..." that they can pull so that they can ignore the problems of toxic masculinity.

I find it interesting that people who are espousing the view of "toxic masculinity" can't find and define a simple trait as toxic feminity..
Are all women inherently flawless and superior then? or are women the new standard to be beholden to? Are men naught but instinctually driven animals (Where have I heard something similar before?)

Fine, I'll reveal the nub then. There is nothing inherently toxic in masculinity. Men just value different things than women, in general. Trying to align everything against feminine values is akin to judging basketball by football rules. And I'm the first to say that I don't know diddly-squat about sports.

There are however issues that men are more prone to, just as it is with women. Which stems from intrinsic evolutionary adaptations. For example, men are more prone to physicalities. Violence. Women are more prone to subterfuge. Lying & social backstabbing.
We should deal with issues in a more direct manner (a male one if I may offend) not use a term that paints the whole gender and confuses the discussion.

StatusNil:

Now, there seems to be something of a theme to the practical suggestions as to how this purification of masculinity would be accomplished, namely men embracing their weakness as a virtue.

What do you see as a "weakness", which has been encouraged in such a way?

Mostly, I've seen the argument that men should be open about health/ mental health, should not feel that they have to suppress their fears & feelings (the 'strong-&-silent type', or the 'stiff upper lip'), and do not need to fulfil the stereotypically male roles society has encouraged for so long. None of which is weakness in the slightest.

Vendor-Lazarus:

I find it interesting that people who are espousing the view of "toxic masculinity" can't find and define a simple trait as toxic feminity..

Generally, the idea that all members of either gender should adhere rigidly to a particular role/behaviour is pretty toxic. So, I could point towards the belief that women should always stay at home, act solely as homemakers, and should not pursue career goals.

Obviously it's fine for a woman to do such things; the problem arises when people believe that women should be limited to these avenues. And there are women who believe these things, as well.

The only reason I would be reticent to use the phrase "toxic femininity" is that that phrase has obviously only been invented to counter the idea of toxic masculinity in a somewhat trite manner. I don't want to feed into that.

Vendor-Lazarus:

Fine, I'll reveal the nub then. There is nothing inherently toxic in masculinity.

Nobody has argued that masculinity is inherently toxic. The phrase "toxic masculinity", linguistically, simply does not indicate that, in the same way that the phrase "toxic gases" doesn't indicate that there's something toxic about all gases. It's not how the language works.

Vendor-Lazarus:

Smithnikov:

Mothro:

...and I'll bet you think those who talk about toxic femininity are misogynists?

Depends on, like everything else, context.

Could you post a Toxic Feminine trait you agree with then?

Being extensively deceptive.

I might be misunderstanding, however.

Vendor-Lazarus:

erttheking:
I find it interesting that the people who are highly invested in "toxic feminity" are the same people who seem to have a lot of investment in deflecting any and all criticisms of men and don't seem to actually care about any women who might be suffering due to "toxic feminity" and just want an example of "well what about..." that they can pull so that they can ignore the problems of toxic masculinity.

I find it interesting that people who are espousing the view of "toxic masculinity" can't find and define a simple trait as toxic feminity..
Are all women inherently flawless and superior then? or are women the new standard to be beholden to? Are men naught but instinctually driven animals (Where have I heard something similar before?)

Fine, I'll reveal the nub then. There is nothing inherently toxic in masculinity. Men just value different things than women, in general. Trying to align everything against feminine values is akin to judging basketball by football rules. And I'm the first to say that I don't know diddly-squat about sports.

There are however issues that men are more prone to, just as it is with women. Which stems from intrinsic evolutionary adaptations. For example, men are more prone to physicalities. Violence. Women are more prone to subterfuge. Lying & social backstabbing.
We should deal with issues in a more direct manner (a male one if I may offend) not use a term that paints the whole gender and confuses the discussion.

"Are all women flawless then?" Oh yes, I sure said that, yes sir, I sure said, that, you're not totally misrepresenting my argument at all, oh wait, yes you are. I have to say, women have plenty of problems. I just struggle to see problems that they have that are attached, ball and chain, to feminity, the way they can be with men and masculinity

"There's nothing inherently toxic in masculinity." Oh wow. A claim no one has any problem with because no one said anything otherwise, and you would've noticed that if you weren't so busy scrambling to play the victim card. See this is what I was getting at. You seem to be more interested in deflecting any and all criticisms of masculinity and the problems it has than addressing any problems, taking anyone pointing out that masculinity isn't PERFECT as a personal attack, and it's why I have no respect for the "toxic feminity" argument. It's someone else going "you know, you could really stand to improve on this" and you responding by going "yeah? Well, fuck you."

"Not use a term that paints the whole gender," it doesn't, ok? It doesn't paint the whole gender. You choosing to be offended by something because you refuse to acknowledge the way in which adjectives work is no one's problem but your own. Also I find the implication that men aren't prone to lying or backstabbing to be very divorced from reality, considering men dominate the world of capitalism, a world that celebrates both and is seen as very masculine. Meanwhile, when I think of being feminine, a lot of things come to mind. None of them involve lying and backstabbing. Women do them, sure, but they're not celebrated as being core aspects of feminity, of what it means to be a woman. In short, I'm not using a different term because you choose to be offended by it.

Vendor-Lazarus:
I find it interesting that people who are espousing the view of "toxic masculinity" can't find and define a simple trait as toxic feminity..
Are all women inherently flawless and superior then? or are women the new standard to be beholden to? Are men naught but instinctually driven animals (Where have I heard something similar before?)

The thing with femininity is that everyone with any sense already knew it was toxic, and progressive women won the battle over it a long time ago.

When women were campaigning for the right to vote, most of the activist groups who opposed them were women. We can argue that women were being lead or manipulated by male authority figures, but it's very clear that many deeply, deeply believed that giving votes to women was a bad idea, that making political decisions would compromise women's natural feminine virtue and make them more like men, and that women themselves were better off when they embraced their femininity and relegated themselves to being sweet and docile homemakers so that men would look after them.

At every stage of the feminist struggle, there have always been anti-feminist women who saw themselves as protecting "true" femininity from the women's liberation movement which they saw as ruining women, making them manly and angry and unattractive. Even today, it's not a coincidence that one of the most common attacks on feminists is to imply that they are unfeminine.

And all of this would seem completely ridiculous to even the most conservative modern women, because fundamentally the definition of femininity has changed. Many women still like to wear makeup and pretty clothes and adopt the superficial trappings of femininity, but most do not believe that natural femininity requires them to forego their own careers or education, or to rely on men for everything. In this sense, the "toxic" elements of femininity, the elements which were harmful to women, have at least partly been removed. It's not a complete process, to be sure, there are still plenty of examples of the limits of femininity restricting or hurting women. Women tend to be less confident and less outspoken than men in arenas where they really shouldn't be, for example, but the toxicity is quite negligible. Women, over the past century or so, have gone from being a social problem to a massive social advantage.

Because masculinity was always far more rewarding to men than femininity was to women, however, many men still cling to traditional masculinity with far greater persistence than women ever clung to traditional femininity. Many men still act and believe as if their worth as a human being is defined by exaggerated displays of dominance, physical or emotional toughness and competitiveness and that deviating from this rigid code of masculine behaviour will reflect badly on them or diminish them as people. There is no evidence that this is integral to men, and increasingly, many men do not display these exaggerated "masculine" qualities, but men are decades behind women in terms of social change, and they suffer for it (as do those around them, because part of traditional masculinity is that men tend to project their toxicity outwards at those around them through violence, excessive competitiveness and dominance-seeking).

"Detoxifying" masculinity will not necessarily mean the end of masculinity, it will not necessarily mean that men will not still be able to cherish and value the fun elements of masculinity, just as women today value makeup and pretty clothes, but it means that masculinity will not longer be a psychological straightjacket which constrains men's behaviour, or which directs them to harm those around them. It will no longer require that men reject emotional intimacy, it will no longer require men to be self-sufficient or to avoid seeking help and it will enable men to form genuine, loving equitable relationships with women and other men without needing to compete with or dominate them.

I mean, that's what the original mens' liberationists thought, and what liberal feminists who use the concept of "toxic masculinity" today mean. For full disclosure, I will point out that my personal and professional opinion is that masculinity and femininity are by definition toxic. They're both garbage inventions based on the primitive stereotypes of a dying patriarchal society, and if we are very lucky, then within a few human generations noone will care whether you're the appropriate sex to do whatever random shit you want to do, and we can all as a culture just fucking move on and get on with curing cancer or going to space or whatever.

undeadsuitor:

Mothro:
Help me understand:

Toxic Masculinity - Men are hurting other men

Patriarchy - Men run the world for the benefit of mostly men

Which is it?

Food: needed to survive. Tastes good

Food: makes us fat, gives us diabetes

Which is it?

To be fair, it all boils down to where all this patriarchy talk started. Patriarchy theory is basically the application of Marxist class conflict to gender (that's why everything gets framed in terms of women being oppressed as a class and the need for men to be the oppressor class).

The thing is, it's not exactly a good model for the dynamics of gender in society, but instead of discarding it and trying to arrive at a better model, they just add little additions that more or less expressly contradict (or at the very least make absolutely no damn sense in context of) gender-as-Marxist-class-conflict and hope that everyone forgets that's what is meant when talking about "the Patriarchy." Such as "Patriarchy hurts men too" (like how "capitalism hurts billionaires too" =p) or "toxic masculinity."

One of the key issues is that it's unfalsifiable -- because Patriarchy by definition is the idea that men as a class created society to benefit men as a class over women as a class, but since we've also decided that it can also benefit women over men or just simply harm men and that's fine too the Patriarchy can be at fault any time the world does not exactly match the preferences of the feminist invoking it.

Let me provide an example scenario: Less women are hired in a certain field than men. Assuming Patriarchy, why is this the case and how would moving to an application process where those doing the hiring are kept blind to the gender of applicants effect that?

Fieldy409:

Talking about male tears is obviously just a joke, like how you just joked about these women wanting to be in graphic pornography.

Didn't say she wants to engage in pornography, or that I would desire her to. For all I know it's a personal kink she engages in private with an appropriate number of other consenting adults. The joke extends no farther than that the double meaning of "male tears" means that the photo in question also implies she's advertising a preference for bukkake. Along similar lines "I drink male tears" and the male tears mugs also could be interpreted as publicly advertising "I swallow." /r/Trashy material for sure, but also not a request for or presumed desire to do so on camera.

Fieldy409:
I'd say the fact this Lady I've never heard of is working to help people not kill themselves says more to her character.

If a man were speaking for an organization to prevent something whose victims are overwhelmingly women, do you think a context exists in which he could talk (even jokingly) about killing women, even something as comparatively mild as just #KillAllWomen and keep that position?

The only reason it's not an issue for Clementine Ford is that

Gethsemani:

I was typing out a long theoretical explanation for you, but then I realized that there's an easier way to explain this:
The majority of people in positions of power are men, most of the ultra-rich people are men,

Men are over-represented at the very very top, therefore men as a class have built society to benefit men as a class and oppress women as a class. That's a fallacy of composition. Just ignore everyone else, and definitely don't pick a different slice to consider. Because if you look at the wrong slice of people, things might get awkward since the oppressor class and the oppressed class can't be the same class.

Hell, if I wanted to try to argue women as an oppressor class against men as an oppressed class it wouldn't be that difficult. You have one class that lives shorter lives, is subject to more harsh policing and longer punishments (the gap here is larger than the gap from race), is over-represented in awful but necessary jobs and among rough sleeping homeless, is nearly everyone who dies at work, and in general through several social structures their earnings tend to flow to members of the other class (women are a large majority of consumer spending and receive more in government benefits over an average lifetime). That doesn't sound like an oppressor class operating a system it created to benefit itself at the expense of that other class, does it?

All I did was instead of looking at the very top and deciding that determined who the oppressor class was and that the oppressed must be the other class, I looked at the bottom and determined the oppressed class and that the oppressor must be the other. Of course I don't believe it because I think Marxist class conflict is a terrible model for gender dynamics.

StatusNil:
I don't need it to point out that the problem with masculinity diagnosed by this "mythopoetic" Men's Movement is precisely that it's incomplete, that there's insufficient masculine influence for young men in modern society, what with men living among women and all.

Sounds like something akin to arguing that the increasingly rampant fatherlessness and decreasing availability of alternate male figures that could help fill that role in modern society has negative effects, especially on boys.

Schadrach:
Patriarchy by definition is the idea that men as a class created society to benefit men as a class over women as a class

It isn't. It's the idea that society has ended up seeing men as generally superior. It doesn't say anything (directly) about benefit, nor that it was deliberately created.

@Thread Title: No, we don't need a movement.

We need an organized Revolution. Hopefully a non-violent one, but, well...

Words and talk mean nothing. Actions do.

American Tanker:
@Thread Title: No, we don't need a movement.

We need an organized Revolution. Hopefully a non-violent one, but, well...

Words and talk mean nothing. Actions do.

....so are you saying that a violent revolution is acceptable if needed?

I'm sorry, you can't just shoot your mouth off like that and not expect people to call you out on it. What's the plan for the violent revolution if the non violent one doesn't work? Round up all the feminists and cap them in the back of the head?

American Tanker:

erttheking:
What's the plan for the violent revolution if the non violent one doesn't work? Round up all the feminists and cap them in the back of the head?

If it comes down to it...

I'd rather it not happen, but it may be unavoidable.

Considering that we basically need to oust them from every major media outlet, mainstream academia and most pop culture, things may degrade to the point of criminal or even outright violent behavior. Their main tactic is to always double down on their ideology, so I figure they'll do everything they can to retain power.

If they decide to use the law against us, we may have to become outlaws. Renegades.

Not a future I want, but a very real possibility that I don't know if I'm fully opposed to.

Ok. First of all. What's this "us" and "we" shit? Leave me the fuck out of your paranoid delusions. Second. My fucking God. I was giving you credit. I was expecting a "oh my god, that's not what I meant, stop putting words in my mouth" but I bring up "What's the plan? Kill all feminists?" and your reply is "if we have to." ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS!?

Also, can I just point out the irony that you were calling someone a snowflake not an hour ago, but apparently you want all feminist ideology purged from any and all media? Oh, you poor fucking thing, you have to acknowledge women as your equals, how DO you stand it.

Hate to burst your bubble buddy, feminism is here to stay, the world is better for it, plenty of men aren't insecure assholes who want to gun down women who have the audacity to claim that they're equal to men. Any, "violent" and "revolutionary" tactics you take will go down in history alongside that incel who killed a bunch of people because women wouldn't have sex with him. And will be taken just as seriously.

You disgust me.

Keep this kind of crap in the pages of Victora, why don't you?

https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/coiler-reads-victoria-a-novel-of-fourth-generation-what-the.360750/

And for the record, any time someone says the left are the violent types, I'm just gonna link your post where you say you'd accept a future where all feminists are killed. You saying that you don't want it doesn't count for fucking shit. Any scenario where a group is being strung up outside an apartment complex to be executed without trial in broad daylight and you aren't actively trying to stop it and are supporting the executioner, no matter how half-heartedly, is a situation where you're the BAD GUY! WHY DO I HAVE TO FUCKING EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU!?

Not referring to you with the "we" stuff. Just know that I visit other websites, i.e. One Angry Gamer, where my idea of a general revolution against radical feminism has support.

Second, it seems as if you're jumping to the conclusion that I want to kill all feminists, Moon Man-style. I just want to go on the record as stating that such should be seen as an ABSOLUTE last resort to be exercised if and only if said radical feminists manage to get law enforcement to declare all "Men's Rights" groups and ideals as terrorism. I don't see that as particularly likely.

Third, again, you're jumping to conclusions. Mainly, I just want media personalities and content creators to stop focusing on making sociopolitical agitprop, and instead go back to focusing on making actually enjoyable content again. Not saying that these feminist stories don't have their place, but they need to be more subtly woven into the stories and settings instead of dropped like anvils. Stop treating audiences like morons.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked