3 ms·

http://artofmanliness.com/about-2/ http://artofmanliness.com/about-2/ It's a gender-specific blog. A good one, too.

by mkr-hn 15y ago

_delirium 15y ago
This article isn't gender-specific, though, except in a very lazy way that just gratuitously throws in the word "man" and "manliness" a few times in an article that has nothing to do with them, unless you count some vague reference to old-fashioned ideas about what constitutes a "real man". It would require changing about four sentences, and not even changing them a lot, to make this a completely gender-nonspecific article. The blog overall, from a brief skim, seems about 50% sexist nonsense, and 50% obsessed-with-old-accoutrements-of-masculinity hipsters (I expect to find some fancy moustaches and pipes). If it matters, I'm a man, and I find this kind of stuff trying to tell me what it means to be a "real man" pretty offensive, backwards crap.
- mkr-hn 15y ago
  I recommend more than a brief skim. We appear to be looking at two different blogs.
  - _delirium 15y ago
    Could you suggest an article for me to take a look at that does not reference some sort of normative idea of: 1) manliness; or 2) real men? I.e. that does not try to tell me what I have to be like in order to be a manly-real-man?
    - mkr-hn 15y ago
      There's no point if you see "real man" and terms like it and assume the whole thing is sexist schlock. You're looking at the intentional usage of outdated language as a styilistic choice and inferring things around it.
      - _delirium 15y ago
        I don't see any way not to extrapolate it that way, since the concept of "real man" is inseparable from an attack on men who don't conform to the author's perceived requirements of "manliness", as somehow not being "real" men, or defectively masculine. I.e. not just old-fashioned language, but old-fashioned ideas better left buried.
        mkr-hn 15y ago
        You are wrong. You can read a few posts without preconceptions to see why. I'm not going to pollute the thread with this tangent any more. edit: http://artofmanliness.com/faq/ http://artofmanliness.com/faq/ "1. What makes you experts on manliness? We’ve never said we’re experts. In fact, the idea that there’s such a thing as an “expert in manliness” is sort of silly. We’re just two people who are passionate about helping men become better men. We want to provide an alternative men’s magazine for men who are tired of the crap that’s put out for men by most media outlets. We see our role as researchers and writers who try to dig up the best information out there and make that info available to readers. I’m learning right along with everyone else." http://artofmanliness.com/2010/05/16/what-is-manliness/ http://artofmanliness.com/2010/05/16/what-is-manliness/
        aangjie 15y ago
        I did take a look around and taking a trial run on my RSS subscription reader, but as far as research goes, i still think many articles are just plain opinions.
    - ChuckMcM 15y ago
      I suspect if you replace 'man' with 'human' and 'manliness' with 'humanliness' it might an easier read for you. The original author in the thirties was was writing in the style which was deemed 'proper' at the time, and I am sure that if they were alive today they would agree that 'women' are just as susceptible to 'spectatoritis' as men are.
      - _delirium 15y ago
        For the original book, yeah; the quotes from there don't really bother me, and I read 19th-c stuff pretty frequently. It's this blog which bothers me more; it seems to be going out of its way to inject phrases like "manly 'philosophy of leisure'" when just "philosophy of leisure" would do. But I suppose it is the raison d'etre of the blog...
- FlemishBeeCycle 15y ago
  Unless you have a specific example, merely omitting mention of both genders hardly qualifies as "sexism" to me? There are plenty of gender-specific magazines for females that do the same thing all the time. I don't see why everyone must now pepper their prose with "he or she" and use an exact 50/50 proportion of examples using both male and female names (actually, you wouldn't need an equal proportion, as it seems that sexism only applies to men) lest they be labeled sexist? Secondly, just because it's popular today to think of men differently than the "old-fashioned way" doesn't mean that modern thought is "more correct" as to what defines a man, nor does it mean that people who disagree with the modern idea are "wrong" (I'm not suggesting that the "old-fashioned way" is in anyway correct either, but still people have different opinions - and the popular modern idea is just one more). But I digress, the blog is quite self-aware and I've always read it with a sort of tongue-in-cheek sense of humor; the "gratuitously" throwing in of "man" and "manliness" is part of the writing style.
  - Hawramani 15y ago
    It's ironic that many authors resort to using the blatantly sexist 'she' to avoid being called sexist. I would love to see any evidence that the usage of 'he' somehow harms females, and I would support any evidence-supported solution that is suggested (for one thing, I wouldn't want it to harm my wife and daughters), but so far this whole issue seems to be completely locked in the realm of hypothesis, and it's without the feeblest suggestion of evidence.
    - zasz 15y ago
      It's not that using "he" is sexist, so much as it's an indicator of a society where being male is the "default" setting, and it's always a little bit surprising to see a woman doing something. So I would argue that no, it's not really sexist to use "she" as a pronoun, if you're doing it to be rebellious. It isn't about putting down men. It's about encouraging the visible presence of women. The pronoun thing is probably a minor issue in the gender wars, though. That "he" is the default pronoun isn't a problem so much as, say, that the vast majority of scientists are men, which sends the message to young girls that science is not for them. There's some interesting studies and anecdotes in this page: http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/pap/node6.html http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/pap/node6.html

http://artofmanliness.com/about-2/ http://artofmanliness.com/about-2/ It's a gender-specific blog. A good one, too.

by mkr-hn 15y ago

http://artofmanliness.com/about-2/ http://artofmanliness.com/about-2/ It's a gender-specific blog. A good one, too.

This article isn't gender-specific, though, except in a very lazy way that just gratuitously throws in the word "man" and "manliness" a few times in an article that has nothing to do with them, unless you count some vague reference to old-fashioned ideas about what constitutes a "real man". It would require changing about four sentences, and not even changing them a lot, to make this a completely gender-nonspecific article. The blog overall, from a brief skim, seems about 50% sexist nonsense, and 50% obsessed-with-old-accoutrements-of-masculinity hipsters (I expect to find some fancy moustaches and pipes). If it matters, I'm a man, and I find this kind of stuff trying to tell me what it means to be a "real man" pretty offensive, backwards crap.

mkr-hn 15y ago
I recommend more than a brief skim. We appear to be looking at two different blogs.
- _delirium 15y ago
  Could you suggest an article for me to take a look at that does not reference some sort of normative idea of: 1) manliness; or 2) real men? I.e. that does not try to tell me what I have to be like in order to be a manly-real-man?
  - mkr-hn 15y ago
    There's no point if you see "real man" and terms like it and assume the whole thing is sexist schlock. You're looking at the intentional usage of outdated language as a styilistic choice and inferring things around it.
    - _delirium 15y ago
      I don't see any way not to extrapolate it that way, since the concept of "real man" is inseparable from an attack on men who don't conform to the author's perceived requirements of "manliness", as somehow not being "real" men, or defectively masculine. I.e. not just old-fashioned language, but old-fashioned ideas better left buried.
      - mkr-hn 15y ago
        You are wrong. You can read a few posts without preconceptions to see why. I'm not going to pollute the thread with this tangent any more. edit: http://artofmanliness.com/faq/ http://artofmanliness.com/faq/ "1. What makes you experts on manliness? We’ve never said we’re experts. In fact, the idea that there’s such a thing as an “expert in manliness” is sort of silly. We’re just two people who are passionate about helping men become better men. We want to provide an alternative men’s magazine for men who are tired of the crap that’s put out for men by most media outlets. We see our role as researchers and writers who try to dig up the best information out there and make that info available to readers. I’m learning right along with everyone else." http://artofmanliness.com/2010/05/16/what-is-manliness/ http://artofmanliness.com/2010/05/16/what-is-manliness/
        aangjie 15y ago
        I did take a look around and taking a trial run on my RSS subscription reader, but as far as research goes, i still think many articles are just plain opinions.
  - ChuckMcM 15y ago
    I suspect if you replace 'man' with 'human' and 'manliness' with 'humanliness' it might an easier read for you. The original author in the thirties was was writing in the style which was deemed 'proper' at the time, and I am sure that if they were alive today they would agree that 'women' are just as susceptible to 'spectatoritis' as men are.
    - _delirium 15y ago
      For the original book, yeah; the quotes from there don't really bother me, and I read 19th-c stuff pretty frequently. It's this blog which bothers me more; it seems to be going out of its way to inject phrases like "manly 'philosophy of leisure'" when just "philosophy of leisure" would do. But I suppose it is the raison d'etre of the blog...
FlemishBeeCycle 15y ago
Unless you have a specific example, merely omitting mention of both genders hardly qualifies as "sexism" to me? There are plenty of gender-specific magazines for females that do the same thing all the time. I don't see why everyone must now pepper their prose with "he or she" and use an exact 50/50 proportion of examples using both male and female names (actually, you wouldn't need an equal proportion, as it seems that sexism only applies to men) lest they be labeled sexist? Secondly, just because it's popular today to think of men differently than the "old-fashioned way" doesn't mean that modern thought is "more correct" as to what defines a man, nor does it mean that people who disagree with the modern idea are "wrong" (I'm not suggesting that the "old-fashioned way" is in anyway correct either, but still people have different opinions - and the popular modern idea is just one more). But I digress, the blog is quite self-aware and I've always read it with a sort of tongue-in-cheek sense of humor; the "gratuitously" throwing in of "man" and "manliness" is part of the writing style.
- Hawramani 15y ago
  It's ironic that many authors resort to using the blatantly sexist 'she' to avoid being called sexist. I would love to see any evidence that the usage of 'he' somehow harms females, and I would support any evidence-supported solution that is suggested (for one thing, I wouldn't want it to harm my wife and daughters), but so far this whole issue seems to be completely locked in the realm of hypothesis, and it's without the feeblest suggestion of evidence.
  - zasz 15y ago
    It's not that using "he" is sexist, so much as it's an indicator of a society where being male is the "default" setting, and it's always a little bit surprising to see a woman doing something. So I would argue that no, it's not really sexist to use "she" as a pronoun, if you're doing it to be rebellious. It isn't about putting down men. It's about encouraging the visible presence of women. The pronoun thing is probably a minor issue in the gender wars, though. That "he" is the default pronoun isn't a problem so much as, say, that the vast majority of scientists are men, which sends the message to young girls that science is not for them. There's some interesting studies and anecdotes in this page: http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/pap/node6.html http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/pap/node6.html