tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,572
|
Post by tallguy on Jan 19, 2017 16:28:57 GMT -5
I have a definition that I like of what makes a "real" man. Someone who is wise enough to know what he wants, who is strong enough to go out and get what he wants, and is sensitive enough to care about HOW he gets it. Isn't that also the definition of a "real" woman?
The issue I have with all of this hippy-dippy stuff is that men ARE different than woman. And I dont' know why that is a bad thing. If I wanted a man to be like me I would be a lesbian.
Uh, no, not really. There are swaths of our society where such women would be criticized for NOT being real women, but for trying to be men instead. Women should be homemakers and mothers. Go back a few decades and that was almost universal.
|
|
imawino
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 22:58:16 GMT -5
Posts: 5,370
|
Post by imawino on Jan 19, 2017 16:29:37 GMT -5
So, the OP refers to teaching men that manhood is not defined by violence, sex, status and aggression and refers to a "healthy masculinities" conference, and a bunch of people interpreted that in their heads to meaning that we are teaching men not to be men? And we want to turn them into women? Because without the violence and aggression their dicks would fall off?
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,572
|
Post by tallguy on Jan 19, 2017 16:31:37 GMT -5
So, the OP refers to teaching men that manhood is not defined by violence, sex, status and aggression and refers to a "healthy masculinities" conference, and a bunch of people interpreted that in their heads to meaning that we are teaching men not to be men? And we want to turn them into women? Because without the violence and aggression their dicks would fall off? Uh-huh. Doesn't make sense to me either.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,572
|
Post by tallguy on Jan 19, 2017 16:33:27 GMT -5
I have a definition that I like of what makes a "real" man. Someone who is wise enough to know what he wants, who is strong enough to go out and get what he wants, and is sensitive enough to care about HOW he gets it. I think that's a very good definition. And it fits almost all the men I've ever encountered. The ones it doesn't fit seem to be the psychopaths, sadists, assholes, and ones with other deep character flaws. For the record I've met as many women who fit that description, with the same exceptions. So why again are we saying that men have to be 'retrained' in the ways of masculinity? So they are less likely to become psychopaths, sadists, assholes, or have other deep character flaws?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 14, 2024 19:19:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2017 16:36:29 GMT -5
So, the OP refers to teaching men that manhood is not defined by violence, sex, status and aggression and refers to a "healthy masculinities" conference, and a bunch of people interpreted that in their heads to meaning that we are teaching men not to be men? And we want to turn them into women? Because without the violence and aggression their dicks would fall off? Uh-huh. Doesn't make sense to me either. Oh comeonnow, after the same retread political discussions over and over this thread is a breathe of fresh air!
|
|
quince
Senior Member
Joined: Sept 23, 2011 17:51:12 GMT -5
Posts: 2,699
|
Post by quince on Jan 19, 2017 16:38:46 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with enjoying sports, crude humor, strip clubs, and beer.
What would be wrong is someone telling a dude who enjoyed knitting, fruity drinks, working out problems through conversation, and watching romantic comedies that he would only attract lesbians.
Enjoying those things does not make someone a woman. Saying it is OK to like that kind of thing to a group of men is not trying to take away their man-ness.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Jan 19, 2017 16:46:45 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with enjoying sports, crude humor, strip clubs, and beer. What would be wrong is someone telling a dude who enjoyed knitting, fruity drinks, working out problems through conversation, and watching romantic comedies that he would only attract lesbians. Enjoying those things does not make someone a woman. Saying it is OK to like that kind of thing to a group of men is not trying to take away their man-ness. That's not what I said. I said if I wanted a man who acted like a woman I would just be a lesbian (I like manly men so that is a statement only about me)
I get that not all men are masculine in the typical sense of the word. And that's absolutely fine. But what's not fine is telling guys who are masculine that the it somehow leads to violence, aggression, etc. That is BS. A person that is violent or aggressive is an asshole and they can be either gender.
We will never end violence. There are always going to be bad people out there. But I hate that we are somehow teaching boys that they are all somehow bad just because they are boys. I only have girls but if I had sons I would not be teaching them this BS. I would teach them to never hit first, treat a woman with respect unless she disrespects you and that no means no. But I would never tell them that their masculinity is bad.
I do wonder if the people on here that think this is a great idea would be just as thrilled with something like "feminine toxicity"
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,256
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 19, 2017 16:46:53 GMT -5
I don't think men inflict "toxic masculinity" on other men... ... I disagree with you. Think locker rooms and similar locations.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jan 19, 2017 16:51:05 GMT -5
So, I haven't read the article, but I am familiar with the concept of toxic masculinity (and I work on a college campus). First, I remind you that write-ups of classes and seminars in official university publications are often ridiculous and use academic language and phrasing that none of us would ever use in real life. However, the idea of toxic masculinity is very basic. Toxic masculinity is that idea that there is only one way to be a "real" man. Toxic masculinity is what tells us that "boys don't cry", tells us to "man up" or "grow a pair". It is what tells us that boys are mean to girls because they like them, and that that's okay. It is the idea that tells us that men who don't like sports and beer aren't real men. If you don't play a sport, you're a "sissy". In a sense, the idea of toxic masculinity is the idea that our societal patriarchal norms have been bad for/holding back men as well as women.
The fight against toxic masculinity then is the fight for inclusion of all men. It is the fight that says it is okay for boys/men to cry, if they feel like it. It is the fight that says hitting someone is not how you express that you like them. It is the fight that says you cannot define men or masculinity based on any one set of parameters any more than you can define women/femininity based on one set of parameters. It is the fight that says you be you, I'll be me, and we'll both be okay.
It is NOT a fight that says men must cry. (Some men never will, just like some women never will.) It is not a fight that says sports are bad. And it is not a fight that says men are inherently bad.
It is a fight against systematic, entrenched, discrimination against men who don't behave the way "society" thinks men should behave. The fundamental problem I think isn't necessarily the subject matter or the fact that examining masculinity is a bad thing, I think it's the inherent negativity of "toxic" masculinity. Right out of the gate, the phrase carries with it connotations of negativity, of something that needs to be "fixed" or "changed." And, as the author points out, could you imagine the kerfuffle if a men's group held a seminar about all the problems with women and how they could be fixed?
I think there may be some merits to studying and discussing this topic, but the way it's packaged and presented is definitely flawed. Instead of "Toxic Masculinity" how about a seminar on "constructive ways to channel aggression" or "Masculinity and the 21st century." Rather than treating masculinity as something that needs to be fixed, how about treating it as something to be studied or channel it in a positive direction.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,572
|
Post by tallguy on Jan 19, 2017 16:51:19 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with enjoying sports, crude humor, strip clubs, and beer. What would be wrong is someone telling a dude who enjoyed knitting, fruity drinks, working out problems through conversation, and watching romantic comedies that he would only attract lesbians. Enjoying those things does not make someone a woman. Saying it is OK to like that kind of thing to a group of men is not trying to take away their man-ness. That's not what I said. I said if I wanted a man who acted like a woman I would just be a lesbian (I like manly men so that is a statement only about me)
I get that not all men are masculine in the typical sense of the word. And that's absolutely fine. But what's not fine is telling guys who are masculine that the it somehow leads to violence, aggression, etc. That is BS. A person that is violent or aggressive is an asshole and they can be either gender.
We will never end violence. There are always going to be bad people out there. But I hate that we are somehow teaching boys that they are all somehow bad just because they are boys. I only have girls but if I had sons I would not be teaching them this BS. I would teach them to never hit first, treat a woman with respect unless she disrespects you and that no means no. But I would never tell them that their masculinity is bad.
I do wonder if the people on here that think this is a great idea would be just as thrilled with something like "feminine toxicity"
Well, fortunately, nobody seems to be doing that. What they ARE saying is that violence and aggression are NOT necessary components of masculinity.
|
|
Chocolate Lover
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:54:19 GMT -5
Posts: 23,200
|
Post by Chocolate Lover on Jan 19, 2017 16:54:19 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with enjoying sports, crude humor, strip clubs, and beer. What would be wrong is someone telling a dude who enjoyed knitting, fruity drinks, working out problems through conversation, and watching romantic comedies that he would only attract lesbians. Enjoying those things does not make someone a woman. Saying it is OK to like that kind of thing to a group of men is not trying to take away their man-ness. That's not what I said. I said if I wanted a man who acted like a woman I would just be a lesbian (I like manly men so that is a statement only about me)
I get that not all men are masculine in the typical sense of the word. And that's absolutely fine. But what's not fine is telling guys who are masculine that the it somehow leads to violence, aggression, etc. That is BS. A person that is violent or aggressive is an asshole and they can be either gender.
We will never end violence. There are always going to be bad people out there. But I hate that we are somehow teaching boys that they are all somehow bad just because they are boys. I only have girls but if I had sons I would not be teaching them this BS. I would teach them to never hit first, treat a woman with respect unless she disrespects you and that no means no. But I would never tell them that their masculinity is bad.
I do wonder if the people on here that think this is a great idea would be just as thrilled with something like "feminine toxicity"
You mean like the idea that it's ok for a female to hit a male for calling her a name but it's never ok for a male to hit a female? I bit my son's principal's head off for that. I was calling about the fact that she hit him and broke his glasses and his original version was that he called her a b!tch. (there were several different versions from the kids present) So she hit him hard enough to break his glasses. And he said that would teach him to call young ladies that. I said someone needs to teach her not to hit people over name calling because it isn't ok for my son to reciprocate with the same behavior. Listening to him backpedal was a little funny. I think that's as toxic as boys will be boys. Or he hits you because he likes you. It's not ok for me to hit my spouse if it's not ok with me if he hits back. Or any male/female pairing for that matter. That the toxicity you mean?
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jan 19, 2017 16:55:13 GMT -5
I don't think the answer to men who are violent is to take the "man" out of them. It's to take the "asshole" out of them. And "assholes" come in both genders. Or beat the asshole out of them, as the case may be.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,622
|
Post by swamp on Jan 19, 2017 16:55:48 GMT -5
Very true. But the male assholes tend to be more violent than the female assholes. They are generally passive aggressive or catty. Neither of which are pleasant characteristics. But see, what you just said seems to nail it. Men ARE different than woman. It just is and it is ok.
I find it offensive that we want to change men. I like men the way they are. If I wanted to date a woman I would be a lesbian.
There is huge pressure on DS not to cry. Ever. He's sensitive. He loves babies and animals. He can't stand to see anything or anyone hurt. There is not an aggressive bone in his body. That's just who he is, and I want him to be OK with that, not pretend he is someone he isn't.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Jan 19, 2017 16:56:34 GMT -5
That's not what I said. I said if I wanted a man who acted like a woman I would just be a lesbian (I like manly men so that is a statement only about me)
I get that not all men are masculine in the typical sense of the word. And that's absolutely fine. But what's not fine is telling guys who are masculine that the it somehow leads to violence, aggression, etc. That is BS. A person that is violent or aggressive is an asshole and they can be either gender.
We will never end violence. There are always going to be bad people out there. But I hate that we are somehow teaching boys that they are all somehow bad just because they are boys. I only have girls but if I had sons I would not be teaching them this BS. I would teach them to never hit first, treat a woman with respect unless she disrespects you and that no means no. But I would never tell them that their masculinity is bad.
I do wonder if the people on here that think this is a great idea would be just as thrilled with something like "feminine toxicity"
Well, fortunately, nobody seems to be doing that. What they ARE saying is that violence and aggression are NOT necessary components of masculinity. Do you really think that's some huge new revelation? You don't seem to think that and you didn't have retraining...did you?
|
|
imawino
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 22:58:16 GMT -5
Posts: 5,370
|
Post by imawino on Jan 19, 2017 16:56:49 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with enjoying sports, crude humor, strip clubs, and beer. What would be wrong is someone telling a dude who enjoyed knitting, fruity drinks, working out problems through conversation, and watching romantic comedies that he would only attract lesbians. Enjoying those things does not make someone a woman. Saying it is OK to like that kind of thing to a group of men is not trying to take away their man-ness. That's not what I said. I said if I wanted a man who acted like a woman I would just be a lesbian (I like manly men so that is a statement only about me)
I get that not all men are masculine in the typical sense of the word. And that's absolutely fine. But what's not fine is telling guys who are masculine that the it somehow leads to violence, aggression, etc. That is BS. A person that is violent or aggressive is an asshole and they can be either gender.
We will never end violence. There are always going to be bad people out there. But I hate that we are somehow teaching boys that they are all somehow bad just because they are boys. I only have girls but if I had sons I would not be teaching them this BS. I would teach them to never hit first, treat a woman with respect unless she disrespects you and that no means no. But I would never tell them that their masculinity is bad.
I do wonder if the people on here that think this is a great idea would be just as thrilled with something like "feminine toxicity"
I don't think that is the point at all.
The point is teaching young men that they are still masculine without the violence, aggression, "boys talk" about subjugating women, etc. The point is that they are STILL masculine without those traits.
Much the same way we have been impressing upon girls and young women for the last couple of decades that they don't have to conform to the old traditional norms of being submissive and meek and docile and let a man take care of them in order to be feminine, and a real woman. Teaching girls that lesson didn't turn them into boys. Most people would argue that letting go of those traditional stereotypes was empowering. Why shouldn't that be true for males?
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,622
|
Post by swamp on Jan 19, 2017 16:57:19 GMT -5
I think it is a bunch of liberal crap. I don't know how telling boys/men "It's ok to cry" will stop violence. I don't want anyone telling me how to act as a woman. I taught my boys to be gentlemen. They also learned how to behave in various situations. So the behavior in the football locker room is different than that in church. I think it is important to be able to fit into all kinds of situations. Of course my boys grew up in a household where Mom worked in a male-dominated profession, made more money than Dad and drinks beer. Dad works in a profession where there are more women and he drinks fruity-drinks. That is just how we roll. My ex was a typical alpha male but he loved his umbrella drinks! I remember one waitress teasing him about it and he said, "hey, I'm confident in who I am so I'm ok with my girlie drinks"...lol DH likes his girly drinks too. But he is totally not alpha. And I'm OK with it.
|
|
Chocolate Lover
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:54:19 GMT -5
Posts: 23,200
|
Post by Chocolate Lover on Jan 19, 2017 16:59:25 GMT -5
So, I haven't read the article, but I am familiar with the concept of toxic masculinity (and I work on a college campus). First, I remind you that write-ups of classes and seminars in official university publications are often ridiculous and use academic language and phrasing that none of us would ever use in real life. However, the idea of toxic masculinity is very basic. Toxic masculinity is that idea that there is only one way to be a "real" man. Toxic masculinity is what tells us that "boys don't cry", tells us to "man up" or "grow a pair". It is what tells us that boys are mean to girls because they like them, and that that's okay. It is the idea that tells us that men who don't like sports and beer aren't real men. If you don't play a sport, you're a "sissy". In a sense, the idea of toxic masculinity is the idea that our societal patriarchal norms have been bad for/holding back men as well as women.
The fight against toxic masculinity then is the fight for inclusion of all men. It is the fight that says it is okay for boys/men to cry, if they feel like it. It is the fight that says hitting someone is not how you express that you like them. It is the fight that says you cannot define men or masculinity based on any one set of parameters any more than you can define women/femininity based on one set of parameters. It is the fight that says you be you, I'll be me, and we'll both be okay.
It is NOT a fight that says men must cry. (Some men never will, just like some women never will.) It is not a fight that says sports are bad. And it is not a fight that says men are inherently bad.
It is a fight against systematic, entrenched, discrimination against men who don't behave the way "society" thinks men should behave. The fundamental problem I think isn't necessarily the subject matter or the fact that examining masculinity is a bad thing, I think it's the inherent negativity of "toxic" masculinity. Right out of the gate, the phrase carries with it connotations of negativity, of something that needs to be "fixed" or "changed." And, as the author points out, could you imagine the kerfuffle if a men's group held a seminar about all the problems with women and how they could be fixed?
I think there may be some merits to studying and discussing this topic, but the way it's packaged and presented is definitely flawed. Instead of "Toxic Masculinity" how about a seminar on "constructive ways to channel aggression" or "Masculinity and the 21st century." Rather than treating masculinity as something that needs to be fixed, how about treating it as something to be studied or channel it in a positive direction.
I don't read it as "Toxic" masculinity , I read it as "toxic masculinity" which to me is different. The former is that all masculinity is toxic(one word describing the whole of the other word*) and the latter is the parts of masculinity that are toxic(one phrase describing the harmful parts of the 2nd word). *which is what I think some of the offended are reading it as
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,622
|
Post by swamp on Jan 19, 2017 17:01:36 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with enjoying sports, crude humor, strip clubs, and beer.
What would be wrong is someone telling a dude who enjoyed knitting, fruity drinks, working out problems through conversation, and watching romantic comedies that he would only attract lesbians. Enjoying those things does not make someone a woman. Saying it is OK to like that kind of thing to a group of men is not trying to take away their man-ness. I like all those things. But I'm not a man. Does it make me less of a woman? No.
DH likes fruity drinks and decorating the house. Does that make him a woman? No.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,622
|
Post by swamp on Jan 19, 2017 17:02:42 GMT -5
Well, fortunately, nobody seems to be doing that. What they ARE saying is that violence and aggression are NOT necessary components of masculinity. Do you really think that's some huge new revelation? You don't seem to think that and you didn't have retraining...did you? To some people it is. How often to do you hear excuses for boys behavior as in "boys will be boys?"
|
|
MJ2.0
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 24, 2014 10:27:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,049
|
Post by MJ2.0 on Jan 19, 2017 17:04:38 GMT -5
I don't think men inflict "toxic masculinity" on other men... ... I disagree with you. Think locker rooms and similar locations. This is also extremely prevalent in black-run barber shops. It's actually EXTREMELY prevalent in the black community.
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,240
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Jan 19, 2017 17:06:18 GMT -5
These attitudes are taught. We aren't born to be aggressive due to hormones.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,572
|
Post by tallguy on Jan 19, 2017 17:06:34 GMT -5
Well, fortunately, nobody seems to be doing that. What they ARE saying is that violence and aggression are NOT necessary components of masculinity. Do you really think that's some huge new revelation? You don't seem to think that and you didn't have retraining...did you? Do I believe that the average guy thinks that? No, but the average guy is not the one showing up on the news at night. Do I believe that there is a significant number of men out there that DO think that? Yes. And no, I did not require re-training. I was not only born with the capabilities to fill my own definition, but in a good family as well. Many do not have those advantages, sadly.
|
|
MJ2.0
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 24, 2014 10:27:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,049
|
Post by MJ2.0 on Jan 19, 2017 17:06:49 GMT -5
Lol at this thread.... I read the title guessing at the responses and it went exactly the way I knew it would.
Pointless.
|
|
quince
Senior Member
Joined: Sept 23, 2011 17:51:12 GMT -5
Posts: 2,699
|
Post by quince on Jan 19, 2017 17:07:56 GMT -5
Gossiping/Cattiness/judginess over clothing and grooming standards seem pretty toxic femininity to me.
The kinds of men's groups that talk about women though LIKE that kind of femininity. They don't like the kind that wants to be paid equally, to whatever work they are suited for/ expects men to help around the house/with the kids, don't just stay in the kitchen barefoot, pregnant, and defer to their husband in all the things, and they do talk about it.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 48,109
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Jan 19, 2017 17:10:05 GMT -5
The issue I have with all of this hippy-dippy stuff is that men ARE different than woman.
Not really. Science is showing more and more each day that on a biological and brain level we are NOT that different from each other. A lot of the societal norms that we tend to hold dear and as 'fact" about both sexes are rooted in Victorian ideals that were created in order to support the status quo.
We've spent a lot of time focusing on breaking down stereotypes regarding women but nobody seems to be paying as much attention to those that men are subjected to. Largely because, especially in America, we tend to view a lot of the stereotypes against men as positives.
How many people here have pretty much said that a man who stays at home is not a "real" man?. I've lost count of how many threads about parents have had posters say that it is perfectly normal and acceptable for a man to not be interested in his children because "men are not programmed to be nuturers/parents" which is FAR from true.
Men are far less likely to come forward if they are raped because people don't believe a man can be raped. Men "always want sex" so therefore a man can't "truly" be raped because deep down he probably wanted it/enjoyed it. Men are "stronger" than women so getting raped by a woman must be impossible. If he really didn't want to be raped he should not have been able to get a boner (just like women shouldn't be able to get pregnant if they were truly raped).
Getting raped by another man is even worse, it's implied if that happened you must be a closet homosexual because otherwise you would have "punched him in the nuts".
The "punch him in the nuts" is a direct quote from a post that was on here when a similar topic was raised.
It's the same thing with sexual harassment, men are even less likely to be believed than women. They also get the double whammy of having it be assumed they are sexual harassers because "all men think about and want is sex".
We've spent a large amount of time telling girls they can be anything but have not spent nearly as much time encouraging boys to find new niches to expand into. While women are moving into certain fields that means they are also moving OUT of other fields. Those fields are ripe for men to move into but nobody is saying that because those are "women's" jobs or "fluff" jobs.
I see no reason why it should be considered "hippy dippy liberal crap" for men to have their own empowerment type groups to talk about issues related to their gender.
In fact this is part of the problem and highlights the unconcious cultural biases that men face. The mere idea that men may want to form a group to discuss issues related to their gender is apparently "trying to turn men into women".
|
|
quince
Senior Member
Joined: Sept 23, 2011 17:51:12 GMT -5
Posts: 2,699
|
Post by quince on Jan 19, 2017 17:12:34 GMT -5
i <3 DQ.
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,240
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Jan 19, 2017 17:15:49 GMT -5
Reminds me of a barbershop I used to go to. It was white and catered to males because the magazines on the table were Playboy and Sports mags. So one day my wife takes our son. He finds out they are my wife and son. He's calling my wife "little lady." Asks her where she works. When she tells him he says "so you are a secretary." My son starts to giggle. She tells him she is in management and makes 6 figures. BTW he's from an old Italian political family in Baltimore. He talked a lot and couldn't cut and talk at the same time. I just wanted a hair cut and get out.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Jan 19, 2017 17:20:53 GMT -5
Do you really think that's some huge new revelation? You don't seem to think that and you didn't have retraining...did you? Do I believe that the average guy thinks that? No, but the average guy is not the one showing up on the news at night. Do I believe that there is a significant number of men out there that DO think that? Yes. And no, I did not require re-training. I was not only born with the capabilities to fill my own definition, but in a good family as well. Many do not have those advantages, sadly. Thank you for your answer. I do not think there are a significant number of men out there who think violence is the answer to any question. I think men are generally great. And believe me, I have more reason to think otherwise than most. I hope you are wrong in your assertion that it's a significant number but I guess I don't know for sure.
On your other point, I do agree that how a person is raised goes a long way in determining what kind of adult they will be. However, it's not a strict determination. At a very early age, we know right from wrong regardless of what we see at home. You can't live in this world, go to school, etc., and not learn that. Whether or not you choose to take the right path is a choice after a certain point - not a given due to your raising. I'm not sure any retraining is going to change that. But maybe it will. Who knows? I guess it can't hurt.
I don't think that any preferences a man has makes him less of a man. Personally, I'm attracted to a certain type of man. Others are attracted to a different kind. I'm assuming it the same with men. The only thing "wrong" is for us to think we have the right to tell others what they should prefer.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 48,109
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Jan 19, 2017 17:20:56 GMT -5
And another way our stereotypes hurt men is with post partum depression. It has been clinically shown men are just as likely as women to suffer ppd but there is no screening no support for fathers because we as society still cling to the Victorian notion that men do not experience any kind of emotional change your the birth of their children.
They do and they experience changes in testosterone production just like women do with estrogen.
DH had ppd. The only reason I figured it out was because I had just read about the subject in a paper.
Fathers need help too and they aren't getting it due to our insistence on clinging to out dated in scientifically valid ideas about what a real man should be.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Jan 19, 2017 17:23:30 GMT -5
Do you really think that's some huge new revelation? You don't seem to think that and you didn't have retraining...did you? To some people it is. How often to do you hear excuses for boys behavior as in "boys will be boys?" Never. Not in real life anyway. Except maybe on TV. But then I don't have kids. Maybe I'd hear it more if I did.
|
|