4 ms·

Wow, I never thought of that, i think it's even worse then you're letting on. She Hulk didn't need to because, by suggestion of the dialogue, women already have

• ravenstine 4y ago
  > the male role model "grit and hard work" model doesn't convey to men that you can lean on others. Perhaps that hasn't been portrayed in a while, but then again, when was the last time men and boys actually had a role model and one with actual "grit"? Yes, we have male protagonists, and ones with substantial authority and muscle growth, but it's been a long time since I've actually seen a legit role model. The reason you can't easily convey a value about depending on others is that modern storytelling requires that every character must be significantly flawed. Having one character lean on others only is called for if that creates an opportunity where said character can be betrayed, which is useful for dramatic purposes. Look at any plot from a movie before the 2000's that's focused on a strong male character. Usually there's a subplot where he's got to rely on some other guy or inspire other men to take action when they otherwise wouldn't. > However, there are so many more male role models with different ways to grow and improve, whereas women are really treated as not needing to. This is reality. You are describing the quintessential male experience. Having to start with nothing and work your way up (or fail) is what it is to be a man. We are not told we are handsome or attractive by anyone but our mother unless we find a partner who can express that or if we are a 9 or above on the decile scale. Women aren't as greatly valued for their problem solving capability as they are for their beauty and reproductive capability. That's just how it is based on how the sexes differ, and it isn't even something that necessarily has to be fixed. People who deviate from the norm shouldn't be forced into roles that don't suit them as individuals, and those who it a norm shouldn't have to give up who they are in order to satisfy the minority.
  • sacrosancty 4y ago
    > This is reality. Indeed and it goes further than mere compliments. Women actually don't need to be successful at a career or be resilient to failures or "strong" - they can still have a good life with a family and be wealthy by being supported by a successful man. Men typically can't do that so they need all this grit and self-determination. All that role model and life advice stuff isn't just made up for no reason, it's there to help people get a good life for themselves in the world that they exist in.
    • ravenstine 4y ago
      It depends on the individual and what one defines as a "career". Being an excellent spouse, mother, and homemaker are a form of career. It's a career that countless women over millennia gravitated to because they are the bearers of children, have less body strength on average, are vulnerable for 9 months at a time, and have far fewer ovum than there are available sperm. Some women will be on either end of the bell curve, but to be closer to the middle of the bell curve is nothing to be ashamed of. Instructing women to emulate everything typical of men is to indoctrinate them into self denial. Bearing and raising children and being a supportive spouse takes a form of grit all of its own. It's just a type of grit where the building of self-worth isn't required. I'm reminded of a time I was in a circle of people from various backgrounds, and the person in the middle of the circle asked the women to raise their hands if they've ever been told they are pretty by anyone besides their mother. Every single one of them raised their hands, even the ones who weren't conventionally attractive. The men were then asked to raise their hands if they've ever been told they are handsome by anyone besides their mother. Not a single man in the circle raised his hand, and this group included a few particularly popular individuals with the women in this cohort. That experience isn't representative of everyone, but it told me a lot. > All that role model and life advice stuff isn't just made up for no reason, it's there to help people get a good life for themselves in the world that they exist in. Choosing a role in life is efficient. Spending one's entire life without learning the role one is suited for usually means a lot of wasted time and effort. Yet this is antithetical to what we tell young people today, which is that what is most important is who they are in the present as individuals. The individual is important, but individuality is overrated because everyone is an individual, more or less, and individuality provides no structure or framework. Past societies figured this out because life is simply too short to blow a bunch of time figuring things out from scratch. Today, we have longer life expectency and automation has made everyday life very easy, so we've fooled ourselves into thinking that it is our individuality that we should be exploring to the exclusion of selecting roles that take the greater society into consideration.