Can we have one day please

135

Comments

  • @Hugal
    Contrary to popular belief, I do not malign men. I am quick to counter false narratives, yes. But that is far from the same thing. And I think that is where most women are as well.
  • asher wrote: »
    Yes, I've never seen anything distinctive about masculinity, except for negative stuff. I mean, the positive stuff, warmth, engagement, strength, bravery, etc., is also found in women. But men can certainly find each other in positive ways.

    Fuck. Me.

    This. This is the problem the ship has in discussing men's stuff.

    I'm gonna repeat what quetzalcoatl wrote:

    'I've never seen anything distinctive about masculinity except for negative stuff.'

    Just let that sink in. Then reach for the petrol can, bottle, rag and matches.

    Burn the ship

    Asher

    OK, remind me of the good things about men, distinctive to them.

    The one good thing which is distinctive to all men is that they are men.

    The one good thing that is distinctive to all women is that they are women.

    In all seriousness--they exist, and that is good. Does anyone here want them (either of "them") NOT to exist?

    I think we've got a straw man or three going.
  • Doc Tor wrote: »
    I am clearly talking to my fucking self here. Perhaps we could have an annual Read for Comprehension Day too.

    I noted your comment and appropriated it to myself in an attempt to take all the credit.
  • I had to break with this topic earlier this year because it was mashing too many of my hot buttons. it still does.

    The thing that I have noticed about men in general is that my experience of them as individuals is pretty positive all around. My partner, my father, my neighbors, my friends, they all seem to know how to conduct themselves individually as well rounded human beings (as much as any of us is able to).

    It just seems to me that when men assemble as a group, something happens.

    For example.

    I belong to a network of entrepreneurs who have all taken an intensive course that teaches a radically different - cooperative and consensus-based - model of corporate governance. The foundation of consensus building and cooperation and building the win-win is what made me think there's a pace for me, as a woman, in that kind of business dynamic.

    The goal of such thinking is to create a win-win for small and medium sized businesses and investors who want more transparency, long term growth and stability and better operating conditions for smaller enterprises who have difficulty growing in an adversarial market system with limited access to large pools of capital.

    Just this week, a man in the group said "Let's create a leaderboard where we can rank the members with the most deals., biggest gains ... blah blah blah..."

    And, unsurprisingly, most of the male members were on board with this. I was like *facepalm* - the death of a great idea.

    And I couldn't help but wonder how many of them were NOT on board but didn't want to object for fear of being ridiculed.

    As if implementing this new idea isn't challenging enough we now have to have winners and losers within the group. Great. Let's just fragment all of our energy and resources while we make this a game of who gets the most points because it's just not fun unless somebody is the winner and somebody else is the loser.

    When I have spoken to the individual members they are all great guys and several are people I aim to be in partnership with, but there's something about the majority-male group dynamic that just seems to bring out the worst in many, and others seem to go along just to get along.

    And let me be clear I will not be the lone feminine voice piping up with "But what about....?" If the men in the group can't see what's wrong with this internal competition idea then I'm just going to walk away.

    AFF

    But you know, this is part of the problem. If you are in a group--any group--and a wrongheaded subgroup starts up a stupid idea, you'd do everybody a huge favor by speaking up. Walking away leaves the idiots in control. I understand why you did it, but I think you were wrong.

    And you mention that there was a sizable minority of men who were not on board with the idea, though they said nothing (shame on them)--at least, that's what "most of the male members were on board" means. So the stupid idea was not in fact endemic to and coterminous with the-state-of-being-a-man.

    Is there any chance on earth that we can acknowledge that when HUMANS "assemble as a group, something happens ... that just seems to bring out the worst in many, and others seem to go along just to get along" ?




  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    Doc Tor wrote: »
    I am clearly talking to my fucking self here. Perhaps we could have an annual Read for Comprehension Day too.

    I noted your comment and appropriated it to myself in an attempt to take all the credit.

    "Just like a man"
  • Is there any chance on earth that we can acknowledge that when HUMANS "assemble as a group, something happens ... that just seems to bring out the worst in many, and others seem to go along just to get along" ?

    Clearly that doesn't happen to women's groups, LC. Not from what seems to be the consensus in this thread.

  • But you know, this is part of the problem. If you are in a group--any group--and a wrongheaded subgroup starts up a stupid idea, you'd do everybody a huge favor by speaking up. Walking away leaves the idiots in control. I understand why you did it, but I think you were wrong.

    I haven't walked away yet. I am just sick and fucking tired of being the one who points up the obvious flaw in the plan/process/way of doing things and being the one who is expelled from the group for being the irritant.

    I am not actually interested in doing anybody any favors here, and I don't care if it's wrong to stay silent. I have never, ever, EVER, not once in my entire life been thanked or god forbid rewarded for speaking up.

    Do you know the expression "No good deed goes unpunished"? Well fuck that, I've had a belly full of that and it has netted me exactly nothing. I have neither the energy nor the inclination to try to save idiots from their idiocy.

    I have too few years left on this planet to give a flying fuck if this business model lives or dies. I would of course love it if it did because it would mean there is hope that by doing things differently we can experience different results. But I won't lose any sleep if it doesn't.
    And you mention that there was a sizable minority of men who were not on board with the idea, though they said nothing (shame on them)--at least, that's what "most of the male members were on board" means. So the stupid idea was not in fact endemic to and coterminous with the-state-of-being-a-man.

    I said that I didn't even know if there was a minority that disagreed. It's impossible to know if all who agreed were actually gung-ho, or if some weren't but didn't have the cojones to check their peers.
    Is there any chance on earth that we can acknowledge that when HUMANS "assemble as a group, something happens ... that just seems to bring out the worst in many, and others seem to go along just to get along" ?

    Of course we can say that. It's one of the reasons why I have never felt safe in a group. Not in school not in work not in worship.

    I'm just saying that the groups I find it to be hardest to be heard in are the groups that are majority-male, and I'm not interested in wasting any more energy trying to roll that sisyphean boulder up another hill.

    AFF



  • mousethief wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    asher wrote: »
    I think the demand for distinctive positives is a straw man - there aren't any - but the assertion of distinctive negatives is prejudice.
    I don't think it's a straw man. When the OP has said (in a post after the OP) that in addition to being an opportunity to talk about issues that confront men in specific ways, International Men's Day can also be "a day to celebrate men and the positive things about manhood," it seems reasonable to ask "exactly what 'positive things about manhood' do you have in mind?"

    Men doing positive things.
    If that’s what was meant, then okay. But it’s not what was said; “men doing positive things” is not the same as “the positive things about manhood.”

  • If you mean "positive things only men can do" then your list is going to be short. Only men can speak out AS MEN about male privilege. Only men can AS MEN shut down sexist office talk. I've been told it's important for men AS MEN to do these things, to take their privilege and use it to change the conversation. It may be the people who said so are wrong, or that I misunderstood them. But if you want something only men can do, it's for them to do things as a man. Whether or not that is ever important, or in this or that circumstance, one can start a new dialogue on and palaver for an eternity.
  • I don’t necessarily disagree with any of that.

    But what was said that people asked about was “positive things about manhood.” (Emphasis added.) That’s not talking about what positive things men can or should do; it’s talking about the positive aspects of masculinity, of being a man as opposed to a woman.

    It may well be a dead-end or counter-productive aspect of the larger conversation. But when it’s been raised by the OP, it’s really not that surprising that people ask “what sort of things are you thinking of?”

  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    According to OU research, from boys males are competitive it is just how it is. That gets mitigated as we grow older but there is a natural competitiveness in males. This has its good and bad points.
    Girl tend to build around what is in or out. That too has its problems and is mitigated as we grow older. Neither is the best both have good points and bad points.
  • Nick Tamen wrote: »
    I don’t necessarily disagree with any of that.

    But what was said that people asked about was “positive things about manhood.” (Emphasis added.) That’s not talking about what positive things men can or should do; it’s talking about the positive aspects of masculinity, of being a man as opposed to a woman.

    It may well be a dead-end or counter-productive aspect of the larger conversation. But when it’s been raised by the OP, it’s really not that surprising that people ask “what sort of things are you thinking of?”

    @Nick Tamen I think for me the fracture comes at your words 'as opposed'.

    Is it not OK if men were to talk about some positive things that some men do that some women also do?

    Isn't that what happens on all International <insert name here> Days? That the things celebrated are never exclusive to that group?

    If societal groups celebrating their identifies are only ever allowed to celebrate exclusive positives, then there won't be much to celebrate.

    Cheers

    Asher
  • Hugal wrote: »
    According to OU research, from boys males are competitive it is just how it is. That gets mitigated as we grow older but there is a natural competitiveness in males. This has its good and bad points.
    Girl tend to build around what is in or out. That too has its problems and is mitigated as we grow older. Neither is the best both have good points and bad points.

    How is it determined to be "natural"? As the father of a three year old daughter I'm well aware that the socialisation of girls by adults (and older children) is simply different. My daughter has been told she looks pretty or beautiful, a boy the same age might get handsome or smart but they don't mean quite the same. Boys are encouraged to be competitive, socialised into competitive sports (both playing and supporting), raised with stories of men winning things, conquering things, discovering things. Girls are... not. Unless you make a deliberate effort to seek out female examples.

    Clothing is a good example of how socialisation works. My wife and I both wear trousers all the time, but my daughter loves wearing dresses. For the first couple of years she was in t-shirt and trousers, on the basis that they're easier to move in. Now is her new-found love of dresses natural? No. It's because Peppa Pig wears a dress. It's because other girls her age wear dresses. Children learn from what is around them. I can remember aged 6 or 7 cultivating an interest in football (a game I have since reverted to avoiding) because it was expected at school and my lack of interest led to me being bullied.
  • asher wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    I don’t necessarily disagree with any of that.

    But what was said that people asked about was “positive things about manhood.” (Emphasis added.) That’s not talking about what positive things men can or should do; it’s talking about the positive aspects of masculinity, of being a man as opposed to a woman.

    It may well be a dead-end or counter-productive aspect of the larger conversation. But when it’s been raised by the OP, it’s really not that surprising that people ask “what sort of things are you thinking of?”

    @Nick Tamen I think for me the fracture comes at your words 'as opposed'.

    Is it not OK if men were to talk about some positive things that some men do that some women also do?

    Isn't that what happens on all International <insert name here> Days? That the things celebrated are never exclusive to that group?
    <insert name here> Days/months exist to counter the rubbish that exists as the default. Again, it is about being equal. The celebration comes as a counter to the denigration that is the societal norm.
    For example, International Women's day often celebrates women in science. This is not to say men don't do science, or that women do it better. It is to recognise that women also do science and are often overlooked. It is to say that science is not a male only activity.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    Hugal wrote: »
    According to OU research, from boys males are competitive it is just how it is. That gets mitigated as we grow older but there is a natural competitiveness in males. This has its good and bad points.
    Girl tend to build around what is in or out. That too has its problems and is mitigated as we grow older. Neither is the best both have good points and bad points.

    How is it determined to be "natural"? As the father of a three year old daughter I'm well aware that the socialisation of girls by adults (and older children) is simply different. My daughter has been told she looks pretty or beautiful, a boy the same age might get handsome or smart but they don't mean quite the same. Boys are encouraged to be competitive, socialised into competitive sports (both playing and supporting), raised with stories of men winning things, conquering things, discovering things. Girls are... not. Unless you make a deliberate effort to seek out female examples.

    Clothing is a good example of how socialisation works. My wife and I both wear trousers all the time, but my daughter loves wearing dresses. For the first couple of years she was in t-shirt and trousers, on the basis that they're easier to move in. Now is her new-found love of dresses natural? No. It's because Peppa Pig wears a dress. It's because other girls her age wear dresses. Children learn from what is around them. I can remember aged 6 or 7 cultivating an interest in football (a game I have since reverted to avoiding) because it was expected at school and my lack of interest led to me being bullied.

    That is the research and I did say things are mitigated.

    LB in that vein let’s celebrate male nurses and cabin crew. Both are traditionally strongly female occupations
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    <insert name here> Days/months exist to counter the rubbish that exists as the default. Again, it is about being equal. The celebration comes as a counter to the denigration that is the societal norm.
    For example, International Women's day often celebrates women in science. This is not to say men don't do science, or that women do it better. It is to recognise that women also do science and are often overlooked. It is to say that science is not a male only activity.

    That's the only reason <insert name here> Days/months exist? Father's Day exists because of a denigrating social norm? That kind of goes against the tale of the Patriarchy doesn't it? Veterans Day? We practically worship veterans in this country.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    Making a Man

    I think it it would be helpful to model and praise traditional male virtues in ways that do not promote violence, coercion or emotional repression. I also think that is attainable - and is of course something that some men are already doing.

    Re mental health, I really like the work that CALM are doing.
  • finelinefineline Kerygmania Host, 8th Day Host
    Some points:

    1. International Women’s Day was created to address societal inequality. It draws attention to achievements by women that were overlooked in their time - women scientists, for instance. It also draws attention to the systematic and often cruel oppression of women that happens around the world.

    2. International Women’s Day is not about celebrating positive aspects of femininity. I suspect a lot of women would question such an idea, as of course all women are different, and I don’t believe there is any consensus about defining personality traits.

    3. International Women’s Day is not about raising awareness of illnesses that women are more susceptible to - there are other awareness initiatives for those, such as breast cancer awareness. As there are with prostate cancer and male mental health issues and rates of suicide.

    4. My observations on social media is that when women try to talk about gender inequality, a lot of men get very defensive/aggressive and try to deny it. Eg. Pay gap can’t be real because their wife earns more than they do. Women can beat men too, so domestic abuse is equal and not about gender. I’m a nice guy, so it can’t be true. Women are just whiners who want to see themselves as victims. Feminists are nasty people. Etc.

    5. So there is a day for women to come together, and statistic are compiled to show how male oppression of women is actually a real thing, impacting women around the world.

    6. On this day, women post about it on social media. And guess what the response is? Men saying ‘Oh, gosh, that is actually pretty bad - I didn’t fully realise it was such an issue.’? I’ve known one person to respond like that - a rather privileged young woman who for years had scoffed at the idea of gender inequality because her own life was so cushy, and she was very genuine in her realisation that she was wrong. But I’ve never seen a man respond that way. The majority male response tends to be ‘It’s not fair! Why the fuck should women get a day? This is gender inequality right here! Why don’t we get a day?’

    So, I can totally understand how, when men finally realise they have a day - that in fact all it takes is creating a day for themselves - and they post about it, that some women might not be fully supportive!
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    Politician, I do think one of the reasons this guy inspires such gut pro and anti responses, is because he is a traditional looking man who is publicly emotionally responsive to people. Some people find that very inspiring and others find it very disturbing.
  • @fineline: "6. On this day, women post about it on social media. And guess what the response is? Men saying ‘Oh, gosh, that is actually pretty bad - I didn’t fully realise it was such an issue.’? I’ve known one person to respond like that - a rather privileged young woman who for years had scoffed at the idea of gender inequality because her own life was so cushy, and she was very genuine in her realisation that she was wrong. But I’ve never seen a man respond that way. The majority male response tends to be ‘It’s not fair! Why the fuck should women get a day? This is gender inequality right here! Why don’t we get a day?’"

    For what it's worth, I've often responded to such things with, "Good grief! I had no idea that was an issue; now I know I must do something about it". Assuming half the world's population are all reacting in the same way doesn't help this discussion.
  • @fineline: "6. On this day, women post about it on social media. And guess what the response is? Men saying ‘Oh, gosh, that is actually pretty bad - I didn’t fully realise it was such an issue.’? I’ve known one person to respond like that - a rather privileged young woman who for years had scoffed at the idea of gender inequality because her own life was so cushy, and she was very genuine in her realisation that she was wrong. But I’ve never seen a man respond that way. The majority male response tends to be ‘It’s not fair! Why the fuck should women get a day? This is gender inequality right here! Why don’t we get a day?’"

    For what it's worth, I've often responded to such things with, "Good grief! I had no idea that was an issue; now I know I must do something about it". Assuming half the world's population are all reacting in the same way doesn't help this discussion.

    Do you understand the word "majority"? Have you ever used Twitter?

    I'm just wondering because first you seem to think "majority" means all men and second you seem unaware of the polarising nature of social media platforms and the phenomena of raging, angry men who will pounce on any initiative by women as being something something something grrr.
  • The majority male response tends to be ‘It’s not fair! Why the fuck should women get a day? This is gender inequality right here! Why don’t we get a day?’"

    On what do you base this broad brushing?
  • mousethief wrote: »
    The majority male response tends to be ‘It’s not fair! Why the fuck should women get a day? This is gender inequality right here! Why don’t we get a day?’"

    On what do you base this broad brushing?

    Have you ever seen or spoken to a woman (or in fact anyone who isn't a white male) about what happens if she posts about something relating to a "day" of this kind?

    It's constant barracking. That's the broad-brush: it happens all the bloody time.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    fineline wrote: »
    Some points:

    1. International Women’s Day was created to address societal inequality. It draws attention to achievements by women that were overlooked in their time - women scientists, for instance. It also draws attention to the systematic and often cruel oppression of women that happens around the world.

    2. International Women’s Day is not about celebrating positive aspects of femininity. I suspect a lot of women would question such an idea, as of course all women are different, and I don’t believe there is any consensus about defining personality traits.

    3. International Women’s Day is not about raising awareness of illnesses that women are more susceptible to - there are other awareness initiatives for those, such as breast cancer awareness. As there are with prostate cancer and male mental health issues and rates of suicide.

    4. My observations on social media is that when women try to talk about gender inequality, a lot of men get very defensive/aggressive and try to deny it. Eg. Pay gap can’t be real because their wife earns more than they do. Women can beat men too, so domestic abuse is equal and not about gender. I’m a nice guy, so it can’t be true. Women are just whiners who want to see themselves as victims. Feminists are nasty people. Etc.

    5. So there is a day for women to come together, and statistic are compiled to show how male oppression of women is actually a real thing, impacting women around the world.

    6. On this day, women post about it on social media. And guess what the response is? Men saying ‘Oh, gosh, that is actually pretty bad - I didn’t fully realise it was such an issue.’? I’ve known one person to respond like that - a rather privileged young woman who for years had scoffed at the idea of gender inequality because her own life was so cushy, and she was very genuine in her realisation that she was wrong. But I’ve never seen a man respond that way. The majority male response tends to be ‘It’s not fair! Why the fuck should women get a day? This is gender inequality right here! Why don’t we get a day?’

    So, I can totally understand how, when men finally realise they have a day - that in fact all it takes is creating a day for themselves - and they post about it, that some women might not be fully supportive!

    International Men’s day was started so men can be seen as positive role models for boys and to highlight issues affecting men because we are not good at talking about them. It is not a reaction to International a Women’s day so that crap can be put in the bin where it belongs.

    I never said my wife earning more than me proves that men earning more than is not the norm, it proves that it happens and it is happening more and more. So chuck that in the bin as well.
    Not many men I know are surprised at the state of play. We are told every day how bad it is. By the way that tends to be in higher paid jobs. In lower paid jobs men and women tend to be in the same pay band. So whilst statistics prove it true over all there are some strong exceptions. So some of that belongs in the bin.
    Male oppression is having an impact around the world is not something I have ever denied. I have Said it is changing and will take a few generations to sort.
    Some women in here seem to pay lip service to the positive things but emphasise the crap. I am saying we should acknowledge the crap and deal with it but emphasise the positives.
    That bin is looking very full.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    Missed the edit window. I would add that when I tried to make my points several women got defensive and started to say men always feel they need to defend themselves. Crap. In my case at least. I believe very strongly in what I am saying. It is not defensive.
  • Hugal wrote: »
    fineline wrote: »
    Some points:

    1. International Women’s Day was created to address societal inequality. It draws attention to achievements by women that were overlooked in their time - women scientists, for instance. It also draws attention to the systematic and often cruel oppression of women that happens around the world.

    2. International Women’s Day is not about celebrating positive aspects of femininity. I suspect a lot of women would question such an idea, as of course all women are different, and I don’t believe there is any consensus about defining personality traits.

    3. International Women’s Day is not about raising awareness of illnesses that women are more susceptible to - there are other awareness initiatives for those, such as breast cancer awareness. As there are with prostate cancer and male mental health issues and rates of suicide.

    4. My observations on social media is that when women try to talk about gender inequality, a lot of men get very defensive/aggressive and try to deny it. Eg. Pay gap can’t be real because their wife earns more than they do. Women can beat men too, so domestic abuse is equal and not about gender. I’m a nice guy, so it can’t be true. Women are just whiners who want to see themselves as victims. Feminists are nasty people. Etc.

    5. So there is a day for women to come together, and statistic are compiled to show how male oppression of women is actually a real thing, impacting women around the world.

    6. On this day, women post about it on social media. And guess what the response is? Men saying ‘Oh, gosh, that is actually pretty bad - I didn’t fully realise it was such an issue.’? I’ve known one person to respond like that - a rather privileged young woman who for years had scoffed at the idea of gender inequality because her own life was so cushy, and she was very genuine in her realisation that she was wrong. But I’ve never seen a man respond that way. The majority male response tends to be ‘It’s not fair! Why the fuck should women get a day? This is gender inequality right here! Why don’t we get a day?’

    So, I can totally understand how, when men finally realise they have a day - that in fact all it takes is creating a day for themselves - and they post about it, that some women might not be fully supportive!

    International Men’s day was started so men can be seen as positive role models for boys and to highlight issues affecting men because we are not good at talking about them. It is not a reaction to International a Women’s day so that crap can be put in the bin where it belongs.

    Bollocks. Of course it was a reaction. That's why it uses the same phrasing and is a day rather than a week or month or an ongoing campaign. It's like claiming that a straight pride march isn't a reaction.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    Bollocks back no. It uses the same wording but there was an idea to do something like it anyway
  • Jemima the 9thJemima the 9th Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    Alright then. What would Hugal, Asher and the fellas like me, as a woman, to do, to be supportive of the problems facing men?

    I’m aware of the problems regarding mental illness and suicide, and the ridiculousness of the “man up and don’t talk about your feelings” shit. I work in healthcare, I have access to psychological therapies self-referral leaflets to hand, and give them out pretty freely, when a patient says they’re feeling down / lonely / anxious etc. I reckon I give them out about 50/50 male female split. When I see good stuff for men & mental health, I publicise it as best I can in my own little way. I came across one of those shed schemes locally where men who are good at making stuff and are lonely / recently retired / bereaved go to meet up and chat and do stuff.

    I am physically affectionate with The Boy (who is 7). We explicitly don’t do man up bullshit. He hates both competition and football so he’s already not one of the boys. MrJt9 and I work as best we can to avoid gender stereotypes at home. We fail, obv, but we try.

    So, is that the sort of thing you’re after?
    And what else would you like to see?
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    Alright then. What would Hugal, Asher and the fellas like me, as a woman, to do, to be supportive of the problems facing men?

    I’m aware of the problems regarding mental illness and suicide, and the ridiculousness of the “man up and don’t talk about your feelings” shit. I work in healthcare, I have access to psychological therapies self-referral leaflets to hand, and give them out pretty freely, when a patient says they’re feeling down / lonely / anxious etc. I reckon I give them out about 50/50 male female split. When I see good stuff for men & mental health, I publicise it as best I can in my own little way. I came across one of those shed schemes locally where men who are good at making stuff and are lonely / recently retired / bereaved go to meet up and chat and do stuff.

    I am physically affectionate with The Boy (who is 7). We explicitly don’t do man up bullshit. He hates both competition and football so he’s already not one of the boys. MrJt9 and I work as best we can to avoid gender stereotypes at home. We fail, obv, but we try.

    So, is that the sort of thing you’re after?
    And what else would you like to see?

    That is great. Not all are like you. I have been very clear on here about what I see. All men are not bastards. We need to acknowledge and deal with the crap done by men and at the same time encourage men not paint us all with same brush. Things are changing but it will not happen tomorrow we need patience.
  • ArethosemyfeetArethosemyfeet Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    Hugal wrote: »
    Bollocks back no. It uses the same wording but there was an idea to do something like it anyway

    All the googling for the origins of the idea find references to IWD. You may want it to be something else but that's where it starts. Take this, for example, about the first IMD events in the UK:
    https://web.archive.org/web/20170710143239/http://www.internationalmensday.com/united-kingdom.html
    First up, a reference to IWD with accompanying whataboutery. That it started with a group of students is not at all a surprise, given the "why don't we have a men's officer?" whining that was prevalent when I was a union officer.
  • asher wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    I don’t necessarily disagree with any of that.

    But what was said that people asked about was “positive things about manhood.” (Emphasis added.) That’s not talking about what positive things men can or should do; it’s talking about the positive aspects of masculinity, of being a man as opposed to a woman.

    It may well be a dead-end or counter-productive aspect of the larger conversation. But when it’s been raised by the OP, it’s really not that surprising that people ask “what sort of things are you thinking of?”

    @Nick Tamen I think for me the fracture comes at your words 'as opposed'.

    Is it not OK if men were to talk about some positive things that some men do that some women also do?
    Of course that’s okay. And if that is what @Hugal had said in the quoted part of his rant—“talk about positive things men do”—I doubt we’d have gone down this rabbit hole.

    But it’s not what he said. The quoted part didn’t seek discussion about positive things that men do, it sought discussion on positive things “about manhood.” “About manhood” is directed more to the nature of men, of masculinity, than to acts done by men. It’s about traits of the group as a whole, not acts of individuals.

    It seems pretty clear that’s what many posters, male and female, understood him to be talking about—traits associated with manhood or masculinity. It’s not surprising that those posters responded with questions about what exactly Hugal had in mind when he said “positive things about manhood.”

    I don’t see how that was an unreasonable question. And if talking about positive things that men have done was what was really intended, the questions provided an opportunity to clarify. Though the example he has now given—that boys/men tend to be more competitive, which he says has good and bad points—seems to indicate he was indeed talking about broad traits of men as a group, not things some men do.

  • I kind of think that the sorts of things I was talking about earlier - our responses to male violence, how to be in a world where the patriarchy is changing, that should at this stage be for us to work on. This might be about my own insecurities though...

    Fuck. I don't know Jemima. I don't want to exclude women but I also feel the need to talk about this stuff as men.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    The majority male response tends to be ‘It’s not fair! Why the fuck should women get a day? This is gender inequality right here! Why don’t we get a day?’"

    On what do you base this broad brushing?

    Woah! I was quoting @fineline at that point, and arguing against a broad brush approach.
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    I really really really dislike intensely any suggestion that there is systemic or structural discrimination against men.

    Based on Tubb's extract above, you can fuck international men's day sky high.
  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    I really really really dislike intensely any suggestion that there is systemic or structural discrimination against men.

    Based on Tubb's extract above, you can fuck international men's day sky high.

    Loss of historic privilege ≠ discrimination

  • The one good thing which is distinctive to all men is that they are men.

    The one good thing that is distinctive to all women is that they are women.

    In all seriousness--they exist, and that is good. Does anyone here want them (either of "them") NOT to exist?

    I think we've got a straw man or three going.

    Adult male and female humans objectively exist, but 'men' and 'women' are value-laden descriptors. If they were not then it would be impossibly to describe any man as unmanly or any woman as unwomanly.

    The question then becomes whether 'man' and 'woman' as currently defined are useful descriptors for the individual and/or for society.
  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    I really really really dislike intensely any suggestion that there is systemic or structural discrimination against men.

    There is, but it is confined to specific areas, pales in comparison to the systemic injustices women face and is still a result of PATRIARCHY.

    Take, for example, the suspicion, often voiced, that a man wanting to work with (particularly young) children must be a paedophile. That arises out of sexist notions of women as caregivers, and men as uncontrollable sex addicts. The same patriarchal assumption, that caring for children is women's work, underlies discrimination in custody battles, and the disparity between maternity and paternity pay at many if not most employers (if I were a mother I'd get 3 months on full pay and 6 months on the statutory rate; as a father I get 1 week on full pay and 1 week on the statutory rate, and even if I share leave with my wife it would only be paid at the statutory rate). These are, in the grand scheme of things, minor issues.
  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    I really really really dislike intensely any suggestion that there is systemic or structural discrimination against men.

    There is, but it is confined to specific areas, pales in comparison to the systemic injustices women face and is still a result of PATRIARCHY.

    Take, for example, the suspicion, often voiced, that a man wanting to work with (particularly young) children must be a paedophile. That arises out of sexist notions of women as caregivers, and men as uncontrollable sex addicts. The same patriarchal assumption, that caring for children is women's work, underlies discrimination in custody battles, and the disparity between maternity and paternity pay at many if not most employers (if I were a mother I'd get 3 months on full pay and 6 months on the statutory rate; as a father I get 1 week on full pay and 1 week on the statutory rate, and even if I share leave with my wife it would only be paid at the statutory rate). These are, in the grand scheme of things, minor issues.

    I can give another example - I did some work in a GP surgery once where the uniform requirements for reception and admin staff were pinned to the wall.

    Skirt, blouse, etc.

    Clearly it had never even crossed anyone's mind that a man might do that job.

    But as you say, minor issues in the scheme of things. And still telling that we're talking about the lowest paid jobs here. Practice managers, and, of course, GPs, are frequently men.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    Hugal wrote: »
    Bollocks back no. It uses the same wording but there was an idea to do something like it anyway

    All the googling for the origins of the idea find references to IWD. You may want it to be something else but that's where it starts. Take this, for example, about the first IMD events in the UK:
    https://web.archive.org/web/20170710143239/http://www.internationalmensday.com/united-kingdom.html
    First up, a reference to IWD with accompanying whataboutery. That it started with a group of students is not at all a surprise, given the "why don't we have a men's officer?" whining that was prevalent when I was a union officer.
    Ok I was miss informed what I read did not include that.
  • Another minor example in the scheme of things, but still there, the assumption that a man looking after his own children during the day is “babysitting”.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    Yes my use of Manhood seems to have caused a bit of confusion. Sorry
    Patriarchy is not going to go away overnight. I keep saying this. A lot of men particularly younger men are changing this. We need to encourage rather than blame them for something they are trying to change.
  • TubbsTubbs Admin
    edited November 2019
    "Simon wrote:
    I really really really dislike intensely any suggestion that there is systemic or structural discrimination against men.

    Based on Tubb's extract above, you can fuck international men's day sky high.

    I deleted the comment as I thought better of it so here's a brief summary ...

    Taken at face value, the current aims of International Men's Day sound like something to build on and the history section has been updated to make it less of an anti-women whine.

    Thing is, society's current set of expectations around what men and women "should be" - the roles and stuff - help no one but I have no idea what to put in their place.

    The current tone of dialogue is unhelpful as no one seems willing to listen to different points of view, just shouting across each other and "call others out". (Now there's a white, middle class construct if ever there was one).

    I totally understand the idea of privilege but, having spent some time in a church on a council estate in South London, I sometimes wonder about that as well. [ETA: If we'd suggested to some of those people they were more privileged than others, I think they'd have laughed in our faces].
  • I think that underlying the OP's request for 'men' to have a day to be 'men' is a belief that men are to some extent being sidelined or ignored or muted in some way.

    That is nonsense of course but I suspect it's driven by societal change. That change is twofold:
    1. Social expectations of male behaviour, attitudes, and responsibilities is not what it was thirty years ago.
    2. And crucially, social expectations of female behaviour, attitudes, and responsibilities is not what it was thirty years ago.

    I say 'crucially because much of the traditional expectations of male behaviour, attitudes, and responsibilities was based on what females were expected to do, or more often expected not to do or actively excluded from. The male role was then to do what the female could not do for herself.

    In other words, with female independence and emancipation male identity had to change as the traditional male role was no longer required and while many younger males have adopted new forms of behaviour, attitudes, and responsibilities. not all have (hence the evil INCEL movement) and many older males have been left bitter and disorientated.

    There is a similar phenomenon among some older females who want men to have the out-dated qualities of power and dominance.
  • Tubbs wrote: »

    Thing is, society's current set of expectations around what men and women "should be" - the roles and stuff - help no one...

    Really?
    I'd like to know what, in your opinion, those expectations are and why you believe they help no one.
  • The example often given about discrimination is war. There have been times when men had to join up, and/or were vilified for not wanting to.
  • Tubbs wrote: »

    Thing is, society's current set of expectations around what men and women "should be" - the roles and stuff - help no one...

    Really?
    I'd like to know what, in your opinion, those expectations are and why you believe they help no one.

    It probably could have been better phrased. The story of my posting life but @Jemima the 9th has already provided one - that women are the parents and men the babysitters. And anything a man does child-care wise is totally remarkable.

    Others include stuff about boys not crying (still!). Then there's language - a man has leadership skills whilst a woman is bossy. Plus the fact that the same product will cost twice as much if it's pink ...
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    I think that underlying the OP's request for 'men' to have a day to be 'men' is a belief that men are to some extent being sidelined or ignored or muted in some way.

    That is nonsense of course but I suspect it's driven by societal change. That change is twofold:
    1. Social expectations of male behaviour, attitudes, and responsibilities is not what it was thirty years ago.
    2. And crucially, social expectations of female behaviour, attitudes, and responsibilities is not what it was thirty years ago.

    I say 'crucially because much of the traditional expectations of male behaviour, attitudes, and responsibilities was based on what females were expected to do, or more often expected not to do or actively excluded from. The male role was then to do what the female could not do for herself.

    In other words, with female independence and emancipation male identity had to change as the traditional male role was no longer required and while many younger males have adopted new forms of behaviour, attitudes, and responsibilities. not all have (hence the evil INCEL movement) and many older males have been left bitter and disorientated.

    There is a similar phenomenon among some older females who want men to have the out-dated qualities of power and dominance.

    Not sidelined painted in a way that is not true. Men are changing. Yet we are still seen as oppressors. The system we inherited is wrong not men. We are expected to be a positive role model for boys but what they see on TV and social media is often negative. Often how bad men are and have been. It pisses me off. We need to change the way men are viewed. Not as misogynistic dinosaurs but positive people who are changing.
  • Tubbs wrote: »
    Tubbs wrote: »

    Thing is, society's current set of expectations around what men and women "should be" - the roles and stuff - help no one...

    Really?
    I'd like to know what, in your opinion, those expectations are and why you believe they help no one.

    It probably could have been better phrased. The story of my posting life but @Jemima the 9th has already provided one - that women are the parents and men the babysitters. And anything a man does child-care wise is totally remarkable.

    Others include stuff about boys not crying (still!). Then there's language - a man has leadership skills whilst a woman is bossy. Plus the fact that the same product will cost twice as much if it's pink ...

    Ah-ha. I didn't grasp that you were talking about the negative expectations that make many men's lives a misery. Agree with all those you cited.

    Just as an example of this sort of crap and how insidious it is, I am male and 58 and never learned to drive a car. Driving just never interested me, though I rather like some cars for their aesthetics.

    That shouldn't be a problem yet for some reason I feel a need to explain to any woman driving her car with me in the passenger seat that I don't have a problem with the arrangement or feel that my masculinity is in any way threatened.

    I really don't have a problem and it isn't, so why do I feel this need? It's because I grew up with certain values that are damned hard to shake off.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Transition away from the idea to the man as a breadwinner, a man gaining his identity, familial and societal role, from being the breadwinner, is difficult thing for many men. Just saying "get over it" doesn't help; you're asking people to try to undo a lifetime (50 or 60 years in some instances) of programming and brainwashing and reinforcement, and do it instantly. There is no help to do this. Men unable to do it on a dime are ridiculed and made to feel (guess what) unmanly. We should be discussing this, providing support for these men, helping them transition. Saying "there's nothing special about being a man," even if true, only adds salt to the wound. Frankly I don't know how to square this circle. But ridicule and spite aren't it.

    I just wanted to circle back and pick up this comment because no one else seems to have pushed back on it yet. What you describe (persisting without help in the face of ridicule) is exactly what women have had to go through in entering the workplace in larger numbers.

    Ask the wives of laid-off coal miners here in Appalachia who are now desperately training as healthcare aides, lab technicians, anything to bring in a little money, as their husbands are either physically wrecked from the mines or emotionally wrecked from their livelihoods collapsing. These women have been told all their lives that their role is to stay home and raise a family. In many cases their churches are still telling them that if you put a child in day care you might as well hand him straight over to Satan. But somehow women in poverty have been able to put aside their "traditional" upbringing (and sometimes a real desire to be at home and raise their own children) to eke out survival for the sake of their family. Why have women been able to make this huge transition in their societal expectations and it seems to be too difficult for men?
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Transition away from the idea to the man as a breadwinner, a man gaining his identity, familial and societal role, from being the breadwinner, is difficult thing for many men. Just saying "get over it" doesn't help; you're asking people to try to undo a lifetime (50 or 60 years in some instances) of programming and brainwashing and reinforcement, and do it instantly. There is no help to do this. Men unable to do it on a dime are ridiculed and made to feel (guess what) unmanly. We should be discussing this, providing support for these men, helping them transition. Saying "there's nothing special about being a man," even if true, only adds salt to the wound. Frankly I don't know how to square this circle. But ridicule and spite aren't it.

    I just wanted to circle back and pick up this comment because no one else seems to have pushed back on it yet. What you describe (persisting without help in the face of ridicule) is exactly what women have had to go through in entering the workplace in larger numbers.

    Ask the wives of laid-off coal miners here in Appalachia who are now desperately training as healthcare aides, lab technicians, anything to bring in a little money, as their husbands are either physically wrecked from the mines or emotionally wrecked from their livelihoods collapsing. These women have been told all their lives that their role is to stay home and raise a family. In many cases their churches are still telling them that if you put a child in day care you might as well hand him straight over to Satan. But somehow women in poverty have been able to put aside their "traditional" upbringing (and sometimes a real desire to be at home and raise their own children) to eke out survival for the sake of their family. Why have women been able to make this huge transition in their societal expectations and it seems to be too difficult for men?

    Doesn't Appalachia have a huge opioid problem, suggesting that both men and women are struggling? Women do also tend to have better emotional support networks in the first place.
This discussion has been closed.