Maybe it’s because I live in a rural area, but no guy I know seems interested/comfortable with any kind of emotionally deep relationship with another guy. Definitely not throwing shade there, I feel the same way and completely unprepared on how to speak with anyone other than my wife emotionally.
The more seemingly well adjusted guys are all family guys with kids, so they basically have no time to do anything that doesn’t involve the kids.
The ones without kids and the guys that never married or divorced all got into solitary hobbies like hunting or fishing. I like to trail run, so it’s basically the same with me. I feel like it’s basically impossible to make friends with another guy and I do try to!
Something I talk to a therapist about but otherwise have little idea what to do with is the fact that I literally have no actual guy friends, just coworkers and a few old college buddies that live hours away, so we only get together about one a year. I feel like the article was pretty good and it is very interesting that a trans man was able to capture the feeling so well.
It’s definitely cultural as well. I’m European and never struggled to make guy friends. I moved to New Zealand which is very British, and I really struggle here. My guy friends are other immigrants from Europe or South America. However, 80 percent of my friends are female. I love them but at times I definitely do miss having more dudes to hang out with.
Kiwi blokes are super quiet and steer away from serious conversation. It’s really hard here.
Just recently we had a popular post: "The Will To Change Men, Masculinity, And Love By bell hooks". I can take a couple quotes from the preface of that book:
I had not been able to confess that not only did I not understand men, I feared them.
Militant feminism gave women permission to unleash their rage and hatred at men...
I think too many feminists do hate men, and to say "no true feminist hates men" is falling into the no true scotsman fallacy. Typically the loudest people in a group are the most extreme and I don't believe most feminists hate men, but I also think it's understandable how some people do believe that.
I'm a cis, heterosexual, white male. I also pretty heavily defend human rights, try not to be a skeeze ball, and like to think of myself as generally a pretty decent dude. During the height of the MeToo movement and the #NotAllMen thing, though, it really felt like society as a large, or at least the parts of it I want to occupy, viewed many aspects of my simple existence as villainous.
Believe me, I KNOW that no one reasonable has ever thought it was all men, or all white people, or all straight people, or all cis gendered people. That doesn't stop it from hurting anymore when you're walking around the city with a woman you consider a really good friend, and she's posting pictures of stickers that actually DO say "all men suck" she finds to social media.
I'm also not blind. I know this is the same treatment that marginalized groups have faced since the dawn of time. Maybe it's finally time for men to get theirs. Or, we can all acknowledge that any condemnation over an immutable human feature just plain sucks. Just my 2 cents on the matter.
During the height of the MeToo movement and the #NotAllMen thing, though, it really felt like society as a large, or at least the parts of it I want to occupy, viewed many aspects of my simple existence as villainous.
I just stopped bothering. My input was clearly neither desired nor welcome, so I stopped offering it. I'll happily stay out of the way, but if they want active support I want to stop hearing that my opinion isn't valid on any given set of subjects, before I even voice it.
Mostly the "man" part. Pretty clear in the OP I thought. I was quite simply born as a male, and happened to identify as that gender. A significant enough portion of the population seems to believe that, because a patriarchy exists, all men have benefited from it, and all men want to continue it. The same idea plays through well enough for skin color, and orientation.
I know what I am, I know my thoughts, my feelings and my intentions. It starts to play with your sense of self-worth to be told that these things, things that have never caused you to do anything to harm anyone else, must be bad parts of yourself, because look at what people have done in their name.
It's not the same scale, no. I'm not facing segregation, and don't have to fight for my right to vote. Any of a number of other advantages you want to point out. Yeah, I benefited in some ways from the circumstances of my birth. All of this, common talking points from the sides of the aisle that I want to belong to. The side of the aisle that believes that no person should ever feel marginalized because of something that they had no control over. To hear that, and then feel like these same people are telling you you're part of the problem because of your existence... It's not hard to see how that can really impact one's sense of worth to the world.
telling you you're part of the problem because of your existence... It's not hard to see how that can really impact one's sense of worth to the world.
I don't mean to invalidate what you're feeling, but that's what it's like to be a minority in America. I have dealt with that in some shape or form for as long as I can remember. Sorry, I don't have any answers, but I do empathize with you.
Right. I explained in both of my previous comments that I understand that. I recognize that it's a similar mechanism of action, and that relatively speaking, I've got it good. It's really disheartening to see so many (the 'left' not you) getting so close to understanding that -everyone- deserves to be treated with respect by the default, and somehow turning it into a zero-sum game where, for it to get better for some, there must be a class that suffers.
Is it necessary? If so, it's a zero-sum game. Fine. That's just going to encourage an endless cycle of warfare to be the class currently not suffering.
If it's not necessary, if it's NOT a zero-sum game, then why are we treating it like it is?
I'm sorry that you've had to experience this. It terrible to have sexism not only impacting one group of people, but both/all. I haven't experienced what you have, it's not possible for me to exactly as I'm female. Could you share one or two specific examples that made you feel that way? It would help me to understand your experience to help paint a picture. You are under no obligation to, nor does my request imply your argument is invalid.
Sometimes discrimination can be more of a gut feeling. Sometimes it is obvious but hidden, and sometimes it is direct. I'm going to list a few examples. None of which left me weeping and defeated, but all of them felt unpleasant. I want to hear your experience particularly so I can avoid doing this to others, but also because your experience is outside of my own.
Some of my examples:
as a Flight Attendant, we have to do cabin checks every 10-15 minutes, this includes bathrooms. I've had two people go unconscious in the bathroom, it's not personal when I knock and ask if you're OK. I did so recently, the man came out shortly afterwards stood over me and shouted three inches from my face, "can't I even take a shit?". I responded, calmly (I've been at this too long), "any time someone is longer than ten minutes we have to check on them, I'm so sorry." His response, "I wasn't ten minutes, bitch," and he returns to his seat.
I was a regulatory compliance manager having a regular meeting with the director of regulatory compliance who was like a mentor to me. He lived an hours flight away with his wife on weekends and rented an apartment to stay in near the office during the week. He knew I was divorcing at that time. He suggested we had future meetings at his condo, using phrases such as "I know you must be lonely," and "I'm away from my wife too often." I was polite but declined and changed the subject. He canceled our future meetings on the calendar, when I asked, via email, he responded by email to say I no longer needed his mentorship.
I was so proud to pass my private pilots final stage check with less than fifty hours, about average for our class but some took upwards of seventy. I shared my accomplishment in the class groupchat to be told, by a male student, "your examiner goes easy on women." I didn't press it because it was a stand alone comment amongst the congratulations, but I felt he implied that somehow my PPL was worth less than his.
It seems so silly to type out these things that hurt me. I almost feel it's an unfair ask to commit yours to 'paper', I just don't know how else to learn what your feeling, except to assume that your situation may be different but your feelings similar to mine.
You're being downvoted, but even though most wouldn't express it explicitly, men consistently demonstrate a very similar danger response to other men as women.
Are we though? Are we bastards, or is that a product of the environment, the society, we've been born into? Is there something specific to men that makes them somehow evil, aggressive, bad, whatever word you want to use to describe them? Are there no good men? If there are, how do we explain them?
I believe there are good men. The existence of good men means there isn't something inherent to man that makes one not good. So again, why are men right bastards?
It's a self feeding loop. Men have to be bastards because men are bastards, and only bastards get ahead. Or, we can accept that, regardless of these arbitrary lines and divisions, each human is an individual, capable of acts of good, evil, and everything in-between.
The rare wackadoodles proposing an asexual lesbian commune are simply not who most people are talking about, when they mention feminism. Those loons can wear the label. Nobody can stop them. But they're not relevant.
Feminism is gender egalitarianism with an archaic name. When people denounce self-proclaimed feminists who don't agree with that, it's not fallacious bickering, it's active gatekeeping, and it's fucking important. Some clear boundaries are necessary for a movement demanding systemic change. Any political label can have a complicated history, and it's not somehow a contradiction to point to the fringe weirdos and say they were just plain wrong.
Various countries' intelligence services have started ringing alarm bells about this: disgruntled young men who feel like they don't have a future is, well, a national security risk.
It's a real shame, how we mortgage young people's future for tax cuts for the old & rich today.
What's a real shame is we're not doing anything about it simply because young men are people.
Feminism didn't arrive because women were "a source of trouble" or anything. It's because women deserve a life of freedom of choice, independence, and inclusion in society.
Why aren't we striving to provide young boys and men with the same sense of purpose and ideal? Shouldn't be borne out of a sense that they'll be a problem later but rather because it's just right.
Feminism absolutely arrived because women made themselves a source of trouble.
I just came back from the National Park at Seneca Falls NY about women’s liberation. Women are even still today working for equal rights, and women’s right to vote came after 70 years of activism and fight.
We will get improvements to housing, wages, health care, and every other good action we need from our leaders and wealthy powerful society, when we make it more uncomfortable for them to keep helping themselves than to change and help the rest of us — and not one minute before.
Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.
The worst part is the guy they’ll vote for to “shake things up” will be taking even more from them. It’s a combined failure of education and success of social media disinformation and misinformation.
I don't think that's true (well, your second sentence; your first is absolutely correct).
This kind of thing has been happening before the advent of mass and social media: this is just basic human tribalism at play. The only difference is scale.
People want to feel like they belong, and the political Left has done a really bad job at talking to the anxieties of the poor, especially young, male poor. The populist Right, meanwhile, has had a plan and has welcomed these people with open arms.
The Left abandoned the poor because it's political leaders fell in love with neoliberalism. And I don't think I can blame them, because triangulation worked very well and made a lot of people very rich while also cutting the traditional right-wing parties off at the knees. The problem is that it left the Left vulnerable to being flanked by right-wing populists who were ready to give comfort and validation to disadvantaged people; answers that were simple, easy and appealing, and make them feel like they were being listened to.
I can see how the leadership of, eg, the US Democratic party, or the Liberals in Canada, might be shocked by this, but for anyone involved on the ground this has been brewing since at least 2000. The real warning signs should have been when people of colour and LGBTQ folk started getting nervous about how progressive governments were big on empty gestures but very quiet when money was on the line, but the loss of young, working-class men happened a couple decades before that.
It's like we have an entire political class that slept through how the 1930s and 1940s happened. Which is of course, facetious, but it seems true, and the reason is because they didn't, and still don't, want to see it because they have been making too much money off of the problem.
Contrary to the pretty lies we like to say here in the US, “There’s help if you need it/you matter/don’t be afraid to get help” There are no meaningful resources to help those not attached to meaningful capital, and seeking help will almost certainly leave you with more problems than you started with.
And if you’re a man, you’ll also be ridiculed for it.
We made a society that works against itself to the point that we eagerly send the biggest losers out to die of exposure under a freeway, of course screaming “time out please I give up I need help” isn’t going to end well for you.
I wish at the very least we could be honest with ourselves and cut out the patronizing, cutesy lies that we say to absolve ourselves of the guilt of our society’s cruelty.
I agree with the first paragraph as my own experience with a much-needed year of therapy left me in debt
I disagree with the second sentence entirely. Even my very conservative father supported me going. There’s tons of terrible men in this country but we need to stop perpetuating the myth that every man in the US has a fratboy mentality.
There are no meaningful resources to help those not attached to meaningful capital
This is not true. I received lots of free counseling and psychologist treatment when I was on medi-cal, both as a child and as an adult. You do need to seek it out to receive it.
Medi-Cal is the state of California's Medicaid implementation. It is only available to residents of California and even within the state, its usefulness varies widely.
That’s true, but other states have their own versions of the program, with similar coverage. I’m sure there are differences, but I don’t know the extent of the differences. I would like to think that they’re minor, since it’s a federally funded program, but who knows. States like Texas seem to always circumvent my expectations.
I’m sure there are differences, but I don’t know the extent of the differences. I would like to think that they’re minor, since it’s a federally funded program, but who knows.
Coverage has improved in most states since 2020, but few states try to implement Medicaid as comprehensively as California, and several implement it as minimally as possible without violating federal law.
Well that’s super disappointing to hear. I grew up poor and on welfare, but I was always able to get medical care and counseling because of that program. Every state in the nation should offer that to people who need it.
Yeah, Medi-Cal has a ton of problems (like paying healthcare providers way less than they earn from every other insurance plan) and its county-by-county administration is a bit wonky, but it has been a boon to me as well.
Yes, they definitely pay less and are a pain for doctors to deal with. As a result, we were never able to see any of the best doctors, since they just refused to accept medi-cal. But I was always able to get treatment. I would have been SOL without it as a kid, because I was always getting injured due to sports and adrenaline seeking.
Yall call this civilization? We might have spaceships and cellphones, however we can’t help but crush some strangers head with a rock and take all their shit. It’s just now its through the economic system or the justice system.
Just because you don’t think so doesn’t mean those things haven’t had influence on the cultural perception of it.
I understand the desire to separate yourself from those things as an individual. And I don’t know what method will work, but simply telling people the “manosphere” just doesn’t count isn’t going to change anyone’s minds.
Saying manosphere bs represents masculinity is like saying TERFs represent feminism.
They’re minority extreme angles on a topic, to the point we give them different names so we know what’s being spoken about because they are not the baseline.
That may be the case but it is not a rebuttal to my point.
Those things have had an i fluence on the perception of masculinity. And yes, TERFs have had an influence on the perception of feminism. And simply saying they don’t count isn’t an effective way of countering that influence.
I feel like the point is rather that instead of redefining masculinity into something more positive, we should rather deconstruct gender norms in general. Because regardless of masculinity being something “positive” or “negative”, it is still an expectation for people to live up to. And eventually people will fail to live up to them. That’s why I would say it is preferable to deconstuct gender as a whole, rather than redefining it.
I think we should redefine “womanhood” into something more “positive” too! Go fuck yourself, seriously, stop that tiring sexist bullshit, it’s ok to be a man if it’s ok to be a woman. God I’m tired of this non debate trying to pigeon hole people as if one’s “gender” is ALL one’s personality is. I’m so fed up with this it’s not even funny. Start caring for something real for fucks’ sakes, the world is burning and all you talk about is about dicks and vaginas. Jesus christ…
first of all, I really apreciate your comment is thematically consistent with your username. checks out!
it’s ok to be a man if it’s ok to be a woman.
I never said otherwise! gender and identity is fine, and people should live and express themselves however they feel the happiest with.
all you talk about is about dicks and vaginas
I am specifically not doing that. gender is not tied to sex. I think you really miss my point here. I think that men should be free of any gender expectation. People should be able to identify themselves without having to meet any expectations imposed by society.
as if one’s “gender” is ALL one’s personality
I quite literally advocate for the opposite - gender does not (intrinsically) mean anything for one’s personality.
If the goal of the article is to promote agenderism, it goes about it poorly. From the tagline of
It’s perfectly fine to be a “feminine” man. Young men do not need a vision of “positive masculinity.”
Before leading into countless criticisms based purely on a far-right view of masculinity. It takes a rather hostile approach to many people’s identities and falsely attributes a perspective onto it that not everyone shares.
While it would be interesting to live in a world without gender, it’s a very radical change. It would be more prudent to achieve the shorter timeframe goal of eliminating that harmful right wing conceptualisation in the meanwhile.
Not to mention the morality, as we would effectively be erasing people’s experiences, as for many people they do identify as somewhere on a gender spectrum.
Is it okay to say that’s wrong, and they shouldn’t? I don’t know, I can see the merit, but I can also see the oppression in dictating how others live and identify.
There’s also a bit of a colonial attitude issue, can we say tell other cultures (ex. Indigenous) to stop their traditions around gender such as coming of age ceremonies?
While it would be interesting to live in a world without gender, it’s a very radical change.
I don’t think that is necessary. What we should do is to detach gender from any form of judgement or expectation. There is this feminist, liberal idea of how a modern man should be like, act like, feel like - but at the end of the day it is still maintaining the concept that men have some sort of role to fulfill. That it is what bothers me about gender expectations: you are supposed to be in a certain way just because of the sex you were born with/the gender you appear to be. And no matter how you want to (re)define it, you’re always going to have people who won’t feel comfortable in these categories.
There’s also a bit of a colonial attitude issue, can we say tell other cultures (ex. Indigenous) to stop their traditions around gender such as coming of age ceremonies?
What exactly is the colonial attitude supposed to be? This discussion seems to focus on western ideas around gender?
It’s not just men. My mother was pushed down the FaceTube YouBook weaponized disinformation rabbit hole.
It’s outrage porn… They LOVE being angry at ‘the system’ or ‘corporations’ or ‘the WHO’ etc. etc.
Yes, there’s a lot of stupid corrupt shit going on, but posting on social media is the most impotent thing a person could do to make a difference. (Yes, I appreciate the irony.)
It’s not just being angry at the system, but getting to feel morally superior to everyone else who isn’t clued into their “secret” knowledge. That’s the main allure of conspiracy culture. You always get to be right, and the people you hate will always be wrong. Conspiracies melt brains.
Oh yeah, phonecalls with my mother would start pleasant and turn into her bullshit about ‘the great reset’ or ‘the great barrington declaration’, and when I expressed doubt in the accuracy of her information, she’d go full-on smug asshole and say shit like “Well, I guess we’ll know which one of us is right soon enough.” or “Don’t come crawling back to me when your investments all go to zero.”. It was 100% ‘escape to the future’ fallacy, all day every day.
I eventually got tired of the bullshit and went zero-contact, filtered her eMails to the spam folder, blocked her number, etc.
I anticipate that I’ll get the call one day that she’s in the hospital and nobody will come pick her up, but until then, my sanity remains intact.
Yup, we had a disagreement about the electrical grid, and she insisted that green power would result in province-wide blackouts every night or whenever the wind stopped blowing. I sent her the power generation mix from the Electricity System Operator, showing that renewables accounted for a single-digit percentage point of the generating capacity of the province… Nope, “Why can’t you just respect what I believe?” “Because you’re full of shit?” click
It creates such a weird environment because women bashing men has become a very socially accepted if not encouraged thing. In some cases that’s not bad, but it’s putting young men just emerging into a world of social media in a position where they feel they’re being viewed as the bad guy.
That’s why you have all these far right influencers scooping up young guys and feeding them all the validation they aren’t getting in a positive way from the society around them.
Idk I don’t have a solution but I do have a little boy and trying to teach him to navigate the world keeps me awake at night.
It creates such a weird environment because women bashing men has become a very socially accepted if not encouraged thing. In some cases that’s not bad, but it’s putting young men just emerging into a world of social media in a position where they feel they’re being viewed as the bad guy.
Women: treat young men like they're an asshole by default
Men: act like an asshole because they're treated like one regardless
I mean it’s not really about who started it. The goal is to create a more equitable society right? So demonizing men-young men in particular—doesn’t really achieve that goal.
I’d even argue that doing so will do exactly the opposite. Young men with delicate identities aren’t receiving positive reinforcement about their being from any direction unless they already have a strong role model.
There is the big big big underlying issue that a lot of men really, really suck and make it impossible to create systems that will provide that reinforcement… so guys just have to figure it out.
Women: treat young men like they're an asshole by default
This is different than demonizing young men.
An asshole would maybe do things like sexually harassing a woman, or give her unwanted attention, or be dangerous to her.
The issue is that women sometimes have to expect that a man could do these things for their own safety.
Like a man offering to give a woman a ride when she's walking down the street. Or a man offering a woman a drink at the bar that she didn't see poured.
Those could be nice gestures if the man isn't an asshole. But if the man is an asshole, the woman could get herself killed or worse. So women have to anticipate that ANY man could be an asshole because their lives literally depend on it.
And if that translates to anticipating that ALL men are assholes, and treating all situations as such, until proven otherwise... that's going to be upsetting to some men.
Men need to recognize that this problem is not caused by women, but instead caused by assholes. If you're not an asshole, and someone anticipates that you are, the answer is to react with understanding and to figure out how to adjust your behaviour so that it doesn't look like something that the evil assholes would do. (E.g. if you want to buy her a drink, let her see the server pour it)
I know that it's hard for men to figure it out, because we don't really have many positive role models or even instructional videos. Someone needs to bring back those instructional videos for social norms they had in the 50's, but adjust them for modern times...make some TikToks or something, lol
And it shouldn't need to be said, but I'm not saying that women should be throwing refused drinks in the faces of strange men. But I don't think that's what the original commenter meant is happening.
I think that, when women are mad at the things men do, men need to be mad at asshole men for doing those things, not at women for being victims of the assholes.
Let's talk about dogs. You want to raise your kid to not be terrified of dogs, but dogs kill and main a lot of kids every year. So you have two choices. First, any time a dog comes near your kid, you can shout, "Stay away from that dog! They're dangerous and could kill you!" Or you could explain to them that dogs can be dangerous. They're tough, they have sharp teeth and strong jaws, and some are taught to be particularly dangerous for a variety of reasons. You should be wary when you meet a new dog, and should watch for signs that the dog is friendly or not, and approach it in stages if you want to be friends with it, while being wary that things can change quickly.
One says all dogs are bad, the other says any dog could be bad, and you shouldn't assume differently before they make their intentions clear. One demonizes dogs, the other promotes due caution. Neither one gives the dog the benefit of the doubt, but one does leave the door open for the dog to be friendly.
Bro, let’s stop pretending that men are in the driver’s seat for women’s behavior. They are grown adults. I’m not saying you’re all wrong, this kind of behavior is often understandable. Having said that, lot of the toxicity I see has nothing to do with men’s actions, it’s just people bullying other people and getting a dopamine rush from it.
Stuff like saying how stupid and simple minded the male mind is in a story about boys underperforming girls in school. Things that are rooted in resentment but not directly tied to any asshole in particular, and wouldn’t be considered acceptable if they were flipped the other way around. Another one I saw recently was that men should be subjected to genital mutilation so they know what it’s like (which is a good one considering how normalized circumcision is). Cruelty for the sake of cruelty. Does it come from resentment? Maybe, but since when was it appropriate behavior to take our grievances out on everyone?
What I’m saying is that there’s a lot of genuine bullying out there that can’t be justified as a reaction to others.
Grownups of all genders aren’t taking responsibility for things they say. It’s like everyone’s turning into their own little Donald trump and can say whatever fucked shit that’s on their mind, and their in-group immediately validates, excuses and reinforces it.
How many black folks do you see bragging on social media about committing crimes and getting endorsements from other black people? The way posts like KillAllMen or any other such posts get traction on social media?
Based on your statements, I'd say "Enough" means at least one so that you can claim some moral high ground.
Which in turn make some men feel alienated and push them towards content creators like Peterson or Tate.
Which, as you say, is a choice. Their choice. They can either suck it up and not take a minority of vocal extremists as gospel, or they can become the same because they're insecure.
Listen, if I have to specifically follow what these feminists say about 'man-hating' content that is going viral, then that's not very useful.
Because even if I know these feminists don't agree what's being posted, their views have low visibility compared to misandrist content which doesn't help the victimization that other young men are feeling.
If a black person robs your house and he says "I robbed your house because I'm black", you're gonna hate black people because they commit crimes. The thing is, no one says "I robbed your house because I'm black" because it doesn't make sense and it's not true.
However, the feminists that hate men do say "I hate men because I'm feminist", which make a lot of men think that feminism is about hating men, before they have to chance to learn what feminism is really about. Specially considering that the "I hate men" feminists are very loud.
The name doesn't make it easier though. This doesn't happen in English, but in spanish (my language) when a man does sexism it's called "machismo". And we say "machismo" way more often than "sexismo". To someone unaware, "feminist" seems like "the women version of machismo".
In my opinion we should stop using the term "feminism" and change to a more accurate term that isn't misleading. In the western modern society (not the USA, abortion banning troglodytes) women don't really need that radical of change anymore, we're almost there in gender equality, can't risk going back by making young men afraid of the movement just because the name is no longer accurate.
However, the feminists that hate men do say “I hate men because I’m feminist”, which make a lot of men think that feminism is about hating men, before they have to chance to learn what feminism is really about.
Then maybe they should stop wallowing in ignorance and listen to something other than an extreme. It's still their choice to react rather than think about their positions. Making someone else change because you're too scared to do it first is lazy and cheap. There's no way to scream a rational position like there is an extreme position, and you're never going to get rid of them by reacting as they do.
Stop using them as an excuse for your unwillingness to change. They're not at fault for your choices.
I suggest you read my comment again. It seems like you are replying to another dude. I don't know what my "unwillingness to change" refers to.
I am a feminist suggesting that we should change the name from "feminism" to any other thing like "gender equality" or whatever.
Because a lot of people are politically lazy. They don't care to inform themselves about what "feminism" means, they just heard their Andrew tate telling them that it's a women-run society or whatever bullshit. Which would make sense if it's the first time you heard the term, it's right there "fem-something".
It's much easier to convince people that A means equal rights if A is called "equal rights". It works too well, some people even think that china is communist because it's ran by the communist party, and that the DPRK is democratic because the D stands for democratic.
I agree, but words are important. Men will find it hard to relate to a movement called feminism. It's not just being uninformed. It's being excluded by the language.
I don't think so. The Hispanics would have to travel a long way to be an illegal immigrant in my country to steal my job. Why wouldn't they just go somewhere closer to LATAM?
This is true, but it’s just like how the alt-right morphed. With the internet these days, and with social media more specifically, there are these identities wherein people try to out-____ each other: out-“leftist” each other, out-“conservative” each other, etc. So, with feminism, people wanted to “out feminist” the other feminists. For strangers. On the internet. To think they’re more hardcore. It’s fuckin dumb, but it’s fuckin everywhere, and within every ideology. You think women deserve equal rights? Well I believe women deserve REPARATIONS! You think women deserve reparations? Well, I hate MEN!
Similarly: “you think we should stop immigration? Well I think we should kill all non whites!”
No ideology is immune. I’ve seen it in every circle.
There will always be idiots, trying to claim an ideology for their own image, and who utterly misunderstand the idea itself. To be fair, though, some of those people just have really personal reasons for being drawn to an idea in the first place, and their emotions get the best of them. However, that doesn’t excuse the behavior. Because racists use the same logic. “I was robbed by black men…BLACK MEN ARE ALL CRIMINALS!” It’s boiler plate prejudice. Those feminists that hate men are falling into the same trap as racists. They generalize and slip under the current of hate. Now, it’s hard to start at the same place, because feminism has some logical backbone while racism doesn’t. But the catalyst is the same: prejudice and hate.
Yeah, some feminists hate men, but they’re small minded people who like the concept of claiming an ideology for themselves and who bastardize and undercut the goals. It’s sad, but it’s true. And it’s everywhere. The problem with it is that people who dislike the original, sound idea, will use those idiots as effigies to paint the entire idea with the worst brush available. It’s a shame.
I hate it, I consider myself a feminist because I want to claw the term back, not give it up to some assholes. It's feminist to give men grace and understanding because vulnerability isn't a feminine trait, it's a human one. It's feminists to demand paternity leave because new mothers shouldn't be carrying the entire weight of child rearing along with a job while men are obligated to miss formative years of their child's existence. Etc, etc
I wish I could push that message and blot out all the genuine misandrists (who almost invariably are also transphobic), but it's an uphill battle when the assholes on the other side only give voice to those people to prove their point.
They used to just be on the Internet, but that brainrot is reaching gen z. Half of my younger female coworkers openly talk shit about men.(then pull the "oh I don't mean you" card when I give them the side eye. Like that's less offensive)
If the possibility that a man will treat a woman badly (everything between belittling and straight up murder) is high enough, it is a life insurance to expect every man to be dangerous until proven otherwise. Its the same logic as "don't talk to cops".
I've seen other men giving me answers to questions my wife asked to many times. Of course thats not dangerous, but thats still asshole-behaviour and you can recognise a whole lot of this behaviour everyday, if you just listen to your female coworkers instead of giving them the side eye.
They probably wouldn't feel the need to "not-you" you, if they KNEW you are not a possible asshole.
If the possibility that a man will treat a woman badly (everything between belittling and straight up murder) is high enough, it is a life insurance to expect every man to be dangerous until proven otherwise. Its the same logic as "don't talk to cops".
No, it's not life insurance. It's pathological paranoia that doesn't effectively improve one's safety. If you go through life with an incredibly simplistic model of judgement, where any interaction with men or cops is dangerous until proven otherwise, you are simply trading one set of risks for another. There are many situations where a certain cop or man could be in a position to help or protect you, and you might fail to recognize that.
If you're not making any distinction between "belittling and straight up murder", then you're really just handicapping your ability to distinguish people who are actually violently dangerous from people who are just normal people. Most people act like assholes on a regular basis, but that doesn't make them dangerous.
The fear of men is vastly over exaggerated. Men are still far more likely to be assaulted or murdered than women. Even when women are attacked, it's rarely a stranger.
Tons of men I've known endlessly talk shit about women. It's a standard feature of our species to talk shit about the opposite gender. It's a standard of our species to talk shit in general really.
Talking shit about a person is one thing, grouping people into categories and denigrating or dehumanizing the whole category is another.
I'm not saying either are good, but the whole grouping people and creating an us vs them attitude is very harmful to society. Much more than talking shit about Joe because he's being a dick. There are very few situations where it's useful such as when one group by its definition harms the other, such as slave owners, corporate executives with a fiduciary duty for profit over employees and customers, etc... In any situation where there is nuance it's best to avoid making groups.
Hate misandry or misogyny without projecting it as a feature common to all men or women or feminists even if you feel a large portion of them exhibit that feature.
My problem isn't per se in the fact that Cleese is transphobic, it's the fact that saying to a transphobe "hey, you're like this moronic character that was created by a transphobe" might be taken as a compliment by said transphobes, and so not have the intended effect.
I am glad this perspective is being presented. I think ftm people have a unique view of how difficult it can be to be a man that throws light on a lot of men's issues.
I hope this person can present more along these lines. I think I could come up with hundreds of questions.
I’m a trans guy who transitioned in the 2000s. I’d be happy to answer any questions you have on the unique perspective of men’s issues from someone who spent 20 ish years as a woman.
I’m crossing my fingers that you’ll get a reply, and not as a PM. I’m bursting with curiosity but such things are so very difficult to even have opportunity to be enlightened.
For me, testosterone primarily feels like the ability to focus and critically think - like my head was foggy before and is now clear. Everything seems to be logical, and my ability to troubleshoot complex issues is dramatically stronger when my T levels are good. Without T, everything feels extremely emotional and even minor things feel like they’re high-stakes. That’s not to say that I don’t feel emotion with T, rather the emotions are more appropriate for the situation. I do find that I care less about people in general when on T - For example, when I see a stranger with a problem I don’t feel like I have an obligation to help them whereas before I had an intristic need to help everyone around me.
I had many biological changes, such as a change in body fat and muscle, significant facial/body hair, hair thinning - which is a miserable conversion in and of itself, period loss, and changes in my genitals that I would prefer not to discuss. All of these were euphoric to me, meaning they made me feel good and more like myself.
I think that the best way for a man to understand a woman and vice-versa is to roleplay online as the opposite gender. For example, you may have noticed that people are more willing to help and harass you as a female character. Male characters mostly get ignored.
I thought on this one for a while and couldn’t come up with a strong response that doesn’t just parrot the talking points of this community.
I felt indifferent and uninterested in strip clubs before transitioning. I still feel the same way. They just seem like a bad time to me.
Before transitioning I didn’t understand gender dynamics at all. I thought it was a level playing field and had no grasp on the many courtesies and dangers that women face that men do not, and vice-versa. It’s often frustrating to see people rag on men’s or women’s behavior/privilege/issues, because people rarely hit the mark on reality.
I did also want to mention that one thing blew my mind - The way that the dynamics of a room change when it’s all men, versus when there’s a single woman in the room. With all men, it seems like guys relax and suddenly don’t feel the need to walk on eggshells. Social courtesies become significantly less important and men tend to communicate more directly. Next time you’re in a room of all men and a woman walks in, keep an eye out for the subtle differences in how men behave.
To be clear, clarity of mind is my own personal experience and it’s unclear if T affected me that way because that’s what it’s like for everyone or if it can be attributed to dysphoria. In other words, it’s possible that I didn’t feel right in my body so I couldn’t focus on the things around me.
Bear in mind that Estrogen levels drop during menopause so you’ll find out one day. :)
On your last point. Guys only get to be guys when around other guys, exclusively.
Lots of women act like men aren’t right or they aren’t good enough when they actual normal and do normal guy shit.
Guys wants to call each other a cunt and rip into each other and tell funny stories, it’s how they bond and trust each other. Girls don’t like that and think guys should stop it. Either the guys act normal to them and it goes to HR or they act normal to each other and the girl is pissed off she is treated differently and goes to HR. The only thing to do is to act completely professionally.
Boys are just built different and I don’t think it’s fair that women always tell us and actual children how they should and shouldn’t act in a way that is against their nature.
Guys are in dire need of male only spaces where they can shoot the shit. I only really had it in sports clubs or as a child, or luckily in some work environments. But work isn’t the same as outside so that’s sucks. Wish my knee wasn’t fucked.
If you yearn for a male only space, check out the Freemasons. There’s something there for everyone, and it’s a great way to make friends later in life.
I did not find that people take me more seriously at work as a man. However, I work in tech and all companies I have worked are focused on ensuring that women have an equal place at the table. I imagine that other fields yield different results. – I did want to note that I had the opposite experience with healthcare. As a woman, doctors were less likely to take me seriously. As a man, they take anything I say to be the truth and trust me to make decisions.
Disadvantages of being male are:
People are more reluctant to help you with anything and everything, as if he’s a man, so he’s got it.
Harder to date and socialize. It’s downright isolating at times.
Strangers are less likely to trust you.
There are fewer social programs to help men in need. I was homeless for a spell and there were no shelters for men, for example.
It’s much harder to get a job in tech as a man, because companies try to meet a gender quota despite most applicants being men.
Strangers are more likely to be violent towards men.
Must be careful around women so they don’t think I am a danger. For example, if walking at night and a woman is coming from the opposite direction I feel obligated to cross the street so they don’t think I’m going to attack or harass them.
FWIW, I hire in Tech, and our percentage of female applicants is incredibly low, usually under 1%. I do pay extra attention to their resumes, but often they aren’t even close to qualified for the position.
It’s much harder to get a job in tech as a man, because companies try to meet a gender quota despite most applicants being men.
I’ve worked at woke companies who fought tooth and nail to say that they didn’t give women special preference in interviews. You can’t deny statistics, though. If you have 40% women engineers but only 10% of applicants are women then of course it’s easier.
The issue is that most people in despair are inclined to vote for a massive change. They just want anything different than the current status quo.
At the moment in the USA, only the right is offering substantial, systematic change. As awful as it sounds to centrists and the left (I.e. the majority of the population), they don't offer any substantial alternative.
We're basically at a point where the current status quo/political center WILL be replaced by something else. Centrists need to realise that the only alternative to right wing change is left wing change...
Those people don't want "left wing change" because it helps the people that they hate as well as helping them. They'd rather shit their pants so we have to smell it.
I agree, they don't currently. The problem is that most also don't want right wing change, they just haven't realised that one or the other is inevitable.
They'll probably realise too late, but many would prefer left wing change to right wing change. The problem is, that there just isn't any substantial left wing options being offered, so they'll go with the right wing option by default.
TIL my friendships with my bros are about 5x healthier than average.
I read this thought it sounded super melodramatic and exaggerated. I guess it’s just more rare to have deep friendships with the boys. Looking back it got me thinking that I might be the weird one with friends that have deep conversations and know/worry about the others mental health.
So i guess, to any guys that read this and felt like it could have been written about them: go out on a limb and talk to your friends. Chances are they want/need a more meaningful friendship too. They are also probably similarly apprehensive about opening up.
I try to do that, but somehow it’s magnitudes harder to talk to men and I can’t figure out why. I’m probably already more open about how I feel than most men (at least in part because of the communities I chose to be part of, therapies, age, …), but opening up to women (or non-binary persons) feels way more natural and easy for me and I don’t even know if that’s because other men’s reaction to these topics are somehow subtly different (even with men who are also rather open) or because of some inhibitions on my behalf (e.g. not feeling safe around them because of bad experiences or because of an absent father figure or…).
I have no issue opening up to other men, so long as they’re receptive, but very often (almost universally) I’ve ended up regretting it when I have done so.
Sure, it’s not anything too tragic or traumatic. Openness has often been met with derision or mockery. Even if the other person is supportive during the initial openness, whatever is confessed is often brought up later for more negativity. In some cases, if my feelings were about a separate individual and I was seeking advice about them, the person to whom I was talking has taken what was said to the other individual in question.
Wow, that’s awful. While not tragic, that does sound like little-t traumatic. What a way to discourage opening up. I’m sorry you had to go through with that. I hope you eventually find some better friends that can more respectfully hold your emotions.
I’m with you. Guys are much easier to talk to about a lot of things.
Though girls are easier in some ways.
Talk to a girl about an insecurity and she will beat you with it. Worried about being small oh just join a gym even if you go all the time. Worried about being short, oh I wouldn’t ever dream of dating someone shorter than me but there are girls out there who are shorter than you so try with them. Worried about low pay, oh you will get paid more in the future and then you will have worth. Anything like that girls are awful.
Missing something like a dead relative or ex. Girls tend to be better with that.
If you feel sad or talk to girls if you feel vulnerable or want help solving a problem talk to boys.
It is melodramatic. He’s writing as an outsider who doesn’t know yet how to interact as a man, and may or may not have full male hormonal balance yet. Men form deep relationships with their male friends, but only on a long enough timeline for trust to be built, and then we display it differently. His perspective is that of a woman’s, so he’s probably missing a lot of nuance in reactions he’s getting. Something as simple as a knowing nod can mean a lot between men. Just because we’re not all lovie dovey, and hugging and kissing, doesn’t mean we’re broken, it means we’re men, with male mannerisms, male emotions, and male forms of bonding.
For those that haven't seen it, the bear meme is an article some lady wrote. A majority of women would rather be alone in the woods with a random bear, than a random man. Then she posted about getting hate mail for that.
The title and some comments read like a revelation of people who, without looking into it, assumed feminism is for women or is anti men and are surprised that the movement actually wants to free everyone from the cycle of abuse.
In my experience, in general for all movements, loudest ones are always a bit more extreme and sometimes over the edge. It seems to be very strongly coupled with activism and in many cases drives the movement forward. So I have trouble accepting that reason as an excuse to so quickly dismiss something, especially a major movement.
However this is a very widespread issue and a reason my comment sounded a bit annoyed. But since it is an actual problem, articles and discussions like this are important and meaningful. Hope your community keeps growing and more men who struggle with of abuse from the patriarchy are able to find a safe space and a support system 🧡
Yep. There's an unfortunate amount of people who cloak themselves under the guise of being a feminist, or claiming to care about women's issues, that could be more accurately referred to as misandrists.
It's my belief that there's a heavy overlap between these people and TERFs. With TERFs hating trans women in particular (notice how prominent TERFs like JKR never seem to talk about trans men? It's always "men in dresses infiltrating women's public toilets", which amusingly is also pushing the misogynistic idea that women are delicate fragile flowers that eternally need protection in every aspect of their lives).
But why? Why trans women in particular? Because not only do these TERFs view trans women as men, it's worse. They view trans women as men infiltrating their women-only "club", and that's something they don't tolerate.
It's unfortunate that terminally online minorities within movements that screech the loudest can have such a profound effect on the image of that movement. I think it's also a big part of why menslib movements struggle. People hear anything to do with it and their brain is clouded with preconceptions like angry incels, Andrew Tate, Jordan Peterson, etc. People who often purport themselves as activists of men's rights, when in reality they're usually either grifters or people yearning to be back in the 1950s.
It's unfortunate that terminally online minorities within movements that screech the loudest can have such a profound effect on the image of that movement.
It’s cause we are in the age of valuing the loudest opinion not the most logical.
It probably is. Not everyone has a robust education, misinformation is rampant, and there is always a new generation still learning the world. At a glance the word "feminism" appears as a movement just for women, so occasionally having headlines like this can help the misinformed or still learning to reevaulate their understanding.
Some people are surprised to learn it is not just about women.
It's because of the name and history of fighting for women. The movement should have gone for "egalitarianism" if they didn't want people to think of women first/exclusively.
It's why I've vehemently rejected the label of feminist even when I'm in feminist spaces with feminist friends: I'm here for everyone, there's a word for that, use it.
Except movements are often named after the oppressed group. Black Lives Matter, for example, doesn’t really want cops to only stop killing Black people. Black people are just disproportionately impacted.
Feminism is about raising up women’s status in society. That benefits men in the process though.
Except movements are often named after the oppressed group
That's nice, but I don't care. Doing things in a stupid way because "that's how we've always done it" is literally conservativism, which I'm not really for.
This thread originates from a comment surprised that people would look at a gendered term and assume actions done in that name are for said gender, this should be an obvious and predictable outcome, one that's been seen countless times, and has a simple and easy fix
No your position is dumb, it is petty and so silly and a perfect example of how dumb you're being. No one decided this. It just developed this way. Your critique is the name?
Feminism is an egalitarian movement that likely you'd not even know what the word meant had this movement not continued for its history. Feminism is the grandmother of almost any egalitarian movement today.
That's petty and sexist as fuck. Literally the perfect example of toxic masculinity
It is the equivalent of only using soaps labeled "for men"
Do you need things gendered correctly for you to use it? Maybe your gender should've fought for equality first then. Maybe then you can have your Malenism or whatever you'd want it to be called
This man is against a movement that champions for him because the name is gendered towards a group that he doesn't identify with. He is resistant to it and the position it takes up because of the name.
There is no council of "the Feminists" who vote the name. This is a term that has evolved into this place, not one person put it this way and the absolute silly pettiness of it is his reason to oppose it?
And you think I'm failing to understand that position? You know who takes positions like that? Children.
But they're not. They are simply saying that lay people assuming feminism is for feminine gender is to be expected as they may go on the face value of it. They aren't saying that the goal of feminism is anti men, rather they agree it is anti abuse due to patriarchal structures but the naming only brings confusion and irrational reactions for the uninformed.
He is not a feminist because they should've renamed themselves. That's not a criticism, that's a stance of someone masquerading as an ally it is a well-known position many men take so they don't have to actually support the movement that works on their behalf.
That criticism has been used to bring genuine resistance to the movement and the fact all these dudes in here still say/think this shit shows why this person is a dummy.
Ok, but is that the case for this specific person? Or are you using the general trend to attack someone in particular who may not exhibit the negative traits you associate with their position? Condemning someone as a fake ally when they are not is not a good move for several reasons.
"They said something negative about my movement, they must be an enemy"
You assumed their gender, they did not mention it in the comment. Given the context, quite embarrassing.
You can't accept simple critique about a name. Their only complain of the movement is the name, that's a fucking good ally to have. I'm all in about the feminist movement, I acknowledge that it's about everyone, and I still see why some people would get confused.
Are you a troll? You must be a troll. If you are not, you really need to talk with someone about how incapable you are about receiving critique.
To address the least objectionable part of this comment (it bugs me and the rest has been covered already):
This is a term that has evolved into this place, not one person put it this way
How do you expect terms to evolve without people making arguments like this? You accept it as a fact that these terms evolve and are agreed upon somehow, but you're missing that this happens through individual people making points like this.
Why does it need to evolve? It is feminism you know what it is. You are for all of it but the name, so you won't support it?
And don't do what dummy above said and claim you support it but don't use the label because it is gendered. That is some privileged ass shit bro. Bore me to death out here
I mean, we do, but a surprising amount of people don't. This is precisely why the name should evolve. Well, that and the perspective that the movement's goals have changed significantly enough from individual liberation of women to comprehensive equality of everyone, which should come with a corresponding change in the name. These are related.
You are for all of it but the name, so you won’t support it?
It's more that if people are informally introduced to the movement, their preconceptions are formed by its name. This can turn them off from seeking or accepting the real nature of the movement once it's explained to them. As a reminder, most people put very little thought into this sort of thing, so making a good impression for the people who are potential allies is important. You can argue that that's stupid and shouldn't be necessary, but it won't stop it from working like that.
And don’t do what dummy above said and claim you support it but don’t use the label because it is gendered.
I don't think I've ever encountered a situation where it's useful to directly say "I am a feminist" because it's generally clear from my other opinions, but I would if the situation required it. I do agree that an alternative label would be better, though.
That's not evolution lol that is forced rebranding because of how some dudes feel. If their hurdle is the term feminism then good, they're not ready to be adults.
Shake my god damn mother fuckin entire head bro. shake that shit left and then right over how foolish you boys are.
Horsepower, Butterfly, Literally, Blowjob, The Democraric People's Republic of Korea. You cool with that shit but not Feminism? Because your weiner isn't in the title????
Like bro there are still places called Indian Creek in America. Feminism is the term we gotta go after though?
I bet every dude saying this line of thought uses words like literally and doesn't bat an eye.
Every movement has a canon: the core principles behind it, a mythology about its history, and the textbook statement of its objectives.
Every movement also has a reality. Thousands or millions of people with their own ideosynchratic beliefs forming a complex social web. Within this web, a vibrant biosphere of memes [0] develop, spread and evolve on this social web. A movement is simply a name we give to a cluster of memes within this complex web. It is not any of the myths we tell about it; those are merely particular memes holding the cluster together.
The author of this article is a self described liberal feminist. She identifies a change that occurred within her bubble of feminism, where it became increasingly anti-man.
To be clear, that is not all the author says. Once she gets to the "Let's talk about how the patriarchy harms men and boys" section, she stops the meta conversation about the movement itself, and spends the rest of the article discussing mens issues directly.
However, to your comment, and the first part of the article, maybe we need to stop hiding behind the mythology we tell ourselves about feminist; and start recognizing that the "feminist" portions of the social web are still susceptible to anti-feminist memes.
[0] in its original sense; as a direct analog to the genes of biology.
I think that it’s very straightforward that the movement fighting against patriarchy benefits everyone suffering under it and empowers all of its victims. I will elaborate more in a second but first, here is the fundamental definition of feminism:
Feminism is a range of socio-political movements and ideologies that aim to define and establish the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes.
Gender equality, also known as sexual equality or equality of the sexes, is the state of equal ease of access to resources and opportunities regardless of gender, including economic participation and decision-making; and the state of valuing different behaviors, aspirations and needs equally, regardless of gender.
I understand your concerns about the word, and it was about women when it started, obviously, as women have needed and still need to fight for basic legal rights and autonomy, but since its inception the movement has evolved and widened a lot. It is also crazy how arguments like yours disregard all the battles that feminists fought - ones that are the reason why we all have a better society, healthier relationships and kinder childhoods. All these changes have benefited men no less than women. Men have been substantially liberated from many harsh and crushing burdens of more extreme patriarchy, such as the stress from unequal financial burden or the responsibilities and expectations disrupting bonding with children, trauma of watching mothers receive unequal treatment or live through abuse or themselves being victims, etc. Not supporting the movement that keeps fighting for that change that benefits everyone, just because women are being abused by patriarchy more, and are therefore more represented in the movement more, is shocking to me. Disregarding and diminishing all the efforts and benefits by nitpicking over the origin of the word just seems ungrateful and unfair.
fighting against patriarchy benefits everyone suffering under it
So right from the get go, the language you use assumes masculinity or “patriarchy” is inherently broken and needs to be fixed. I find that sexist and imo a non sexist take is to free people from human greed and selfishness.
as women have needed and still need to fight for basic legal rights and autonomy
Yes! That’s when feminism made sense. It was named after women, for women’s rights, which they got. Feminism being a success meant it was not needed as much.
ones that are the reason why we all have a better society,
That’s is VERY subjective and I doubt you would get most people to agree that feminism made their life better. As I guy I can inform you that it has made my life much, much worse. I doubt you would believe me though.
Disregarding and diminishing all the efforts and benefits by nitpicking over the origin of the word just seems ungrateful and unfair.
I mean if that’s what you took away from my comment then you misunderstood. Feminism worked well for women, and I’m happy for them. They are the judge on what helps them and what does not. Same way women have that right, I have the right to state that feminism has made life better for women at the expense of men.
If there are women out there fighting for true equality, please note that if your truly fighting for men, you would use the terminology that communicates that the best, by not using the label feminism.
History would disagree. We're still living in a society shaped by Quaker beliefs about sex, children, and the human body in general.
It's telling that the article didn't interview anyone with expertise on the history of sex or people who study sex professionally (as academic scientists and researchers). Porn is definitely more easily viewed than ever before and that may be shaping kids views of sexuality but how is that shaping adult's views of sexuality? Why are kids special?
I'll tell you why kids are special: It's because it has become acceptable to assume that kids being exposed to sex of any kind is somehow "bad". Nowhere in the article do they talk about why it is that kids aren't learning about healthy sexual relationships: Because we hide that from them.
No one wants to talk to their kids about sex but if there's one thing you should tell kids (not just your own!) about porn it's this: It's fake
It's the classic puritanical/quaker view of sexuality. Kids should be shielded and protected from any mention of sex and sexuality. Then when they turn 18 or get into their first sexual situations a switch is flipped and they're chastised for not "knowing better".
“The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn.
Children aren't quite as good as the unborn, but they're close. Advocating for children still lets you feel good about yourself without having to actually associate with children. They're a group it's pretty much OK to be paternalistic toward. If they do resent your condescension, you can easily write it off because they're just children.
I answer every question my son has honestly and in plain, easily understood language. He's in middle school. Boy are his friends being fed some bullshit from their parents and unfettered access to the Internet. Smile and nod, kiddo, then come ask me. If I don't know, we'll look it up together, but I will not keep him in the dark. The dangerous thing about sex is ignorance of it. And yeah, porn ain't real.
Non-masculine perspectives are incredibly important in making sure that that the lived experiences of others are present in discussions on masculinity, but please remember that this is a space to discuss issues pertaining to men and masc individuals; be kind, open-minded, and take care that you aren’t talking over men expressing their own lived experiences.
The post before this one is about protecting our sons from right-wing radicalization.
From what I’ve seen, the mod(s) have taken pains to make this not an aLl LiVe MaTtEr sub.
I think a lot of men believe “I’m one of the good ones” and don’t stop to think that a random woman on the street (or in the woods, in this case) has no way of determining that.
It's worth to know that nobody is ever infallible. I've always thought that same thing, "I'm a good guy.". But I've learned that it's better to think, "i may think I'm a good guy, but I need to be careful about how I come off," because I have said some fucked up things without realizing it.
Like, I have genuinely made some people uncomfortable without me realizing it, and I've been trying hard to be more aware of not only the situation I'm putting someone in, but the vibes I'm giving off.
I had a pretty pivotal experience around this realization when I was in my late teens. A buddy of mine and I were driving around town running errands, and we ended up driving past this same woman a couple of times like miles apart. At one point, I rolled down my window and asked if she needed a ride. The look on her face broke part of me. She was terrified of me. I'd never been looked at like that before.
I was so nieve at that point in my life. It never even occurred to me how horrifying 2 guys you don't know rolling up and trying to get you in their car might be. Neither of had any bad intentions...it was hot as hell out, and we figured she'd been walking for miles at that point. But none of that matters...we were like clumsy giants destroying a village we wanted to visit because we never considered the fact that we were just too big.
I still feel bad when I think about it and that was 20 years ago.
I went on a date with a woman many years ago and we had dinner. It's was clear we weren't vibing but we had a polite dinner and chatted and on the way out insisted I could drive her home instead of her taking an Uber like she did to get there. I offered a couple times and she agreed. I dropped her off and watched from the car to make sure she made it inside. I had good intentions and didn't intended to do anything more than drop her off. But man looking back, I wish I would have just waited with her for the Uber to show up. I bet that was uncomfortable for her.
I think you might be right in that idea. One time I was out with my wife at a club show. She got a little too drunk and stumbling. I was walking her out of the club to pick up the metro and go home, when some chick stopped us (her) and whispered something in my wife's ear.
My wife responded "No, it's good. He's my husband."
When I asked my wife what was that about and she told me that she was "checking to make sure I knew you." My first response was "oh yeah that makes sense. Men suck." I was low-key glad they checked on my wife though. They had no way of knowing if "I'm one of the good ones."
Did they apologize to you afterwards? If not then that's what's fucked up about this whole situation in society. You can't treat a person that you just suspected was a harasser like wind after you do it, and excuse it with "men are shitty, so I'm forgiven for my own shitty behaviour towards the good ones".
Men's Liberation
Top