4 ms·

You have selectively quoted that article. Note the last four paragraphs are: >Andrew McNerney, 70, admitted there was initially some resistance to becoming a m

You have selectively quoted that article. Note the last four paragraphs are: >Andrew McNerney, 70, admitted there was initially some resistance to becoming a mixed group. >He said: "There was apprehension, but in all honesty, it's turned out well. >"We [the men] escape now and again [to the quiet room] and have a chat and weigh things up." >But he added: "It's a lovely atmosphere, and it's been good."

JimDabell 1y ago
Yes. I selectively pulled out the bits that I thought were relevant instead of quoting the whole thing. I know he said that it’s been good, but taken in relation to the rest of the article, I don’t place much weight on it. The women persistently pressured the men to join, the men were apprehensive, they allowed them in for one morning, one morning turned into all the time, women now comprise 50% of the group, and the men’s area is now relegated to a back room they escape to. They got one of the men to say it was good, but that’s not the story that the article was telling.
- williamdclt 1y ago
  > that’s not the story that the article was telling. It is though? Reading the article, I'm fully getting a sense that its point is that it was an improvement for everyone (despite the article describing it as being triggered from nagging from the women). Now you can choose not to believe that, but that _is_ the story the article was telling, or at least it's how I understand it.
  - boppo1 1y ago
    [flagged]
- afavour 1y ago
  > the men were apprehensive, they allowed them in for one morning, one morning turned into all the time Your assumption is that it “turned into all the time” against the wishes of the men but that’s not clear at all. Being apprehensive about change and then quickly discovering it was for the better is something we all experience in life.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
xandrius 1y ago
I agree with the post, if the genders were reversed, people wouldn't generally feel this open about it.
- SiempreViernes 1y ago
  That's because the genders aren't valued equally by society, so they don't permute. Once gender equality is established they could switched and the statements would be equivalent.
  - steveBK123 1y ago
    I dunno, generationally we may be correcting a problem that will soon no longer exist, or even invert. Women are attending and graduating college in higher numbers than men in GenZ. Much of the man-o-sphere GenZ rightward turn seems to be resentment at society being sure what the use of men is anymore. That is, from a very young age girls are told they can do/be whatever they want. Often now, boys are described in terms of what they can't/shouldn't be, or in how their very gender gives them a sort of ancestral debt of shame for wrongs done by the men of previous generations. You'll hear left wing progressive parents in places like NYC tell stories like "my 8 year old boy came home from school crying because his teacher told hime everything bad that has happened in history was because of men" and stupid stuff that's unthinkable if it was reversed. Men by and large are still expected by society to be the provider, and shamed if they aren't. Women generally won't "date/marry down" anymore than they ever did. But women are now achieving higher educational attainment than men. It's a setup for future societal disfunction, so I do think we do need to solve the male part of the equation after spending the last 50 years raising women up.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - HankStallone 1y ago
      Yes, I know parents who wonder why the boys at school seem to have no ambition, and don't apply for scholarships and get involved in things as much as they used to. The same parents also notice that all the literature at school now has female protagonists--not half of it, but nearly all of it. They don't seem to make the connection between these things. Boys at school are told to sit down and shut up (and take drugs to do so if necessary) so the girls can thrive, and they internalize that. Some people act as though this is reparations for the many years when the reverse was true. But even if they're right about the past, they're not improving the situation by swapping the injustice.
fragmede 1y ago
> > But he added: "It's a lovely atmosphere, and it's been good." Which man, who ever wants to get laid again, would be stupid enough to give anything short of an absolutely glowing review about that change to a reporter.
- aaronbaugher 1y ago
  Yeah, you can imagine the headline they'd put on that one. And that's how the ratchet works. Go to any subreddit that talks about relationships, and every time there's a man versus woman scenario, unless it's very clear that the woman was in the wrong, nearly all the women will side with the woman. But half the men will also side with the woman, because they don't want to offend the women -- even anonymous women on the Internet who almost certainly will never sleep with them. The other half of the men get downvoted to oblivion, or they learn to keep certain opinions to themselves, and it ends up looking like everyone thinks women are always right.
  - boppo1 1y ago
    /r/askmenover30 and /r/askmenadvice are not like you describe (yet).

JimDabell 1y ago

Yes. I selectively pulled out the bits that I thought were relevant instead of quoting the whole thing. I know he said that it’s been good, but taken in relation to the rest of the article, I don’t place much weight on it. The women persistently pressured the men to join, the men were apprehensive, they allowed them in for one morning, one morning turned into all the time, women now comprise 50% of the group, and the men’s area is now relegated to a back room they escape to. They got one of the men to say it was good, but that’s not the story that the article was telling.

williamdclt 1y ago
> that’s not the story that the article was telling. It is though? Reading the article, I'm fully getting a sense that its point is that it was an improvement for everyone (despite the article describing it as being triggered from nagging from the women). Now you can choose not to believe that, but that _is_ the story the article was telling, or at least it's how I understand it.
- boppo1 1y ago
  [flagged]
afavour 1y ago
> the men were apprehensive, they allowed them in for one morning, one morning turned into all the time Your assumption is that it “turned into all the time” against the wishes of the men but that’s not clear at all. Being apprehensive about change and then quickly discovering it was for the better is something we all experience in life.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

xandrius 1y ago

I agree with the post, if the genders were reversed, people wouldn't generally feel this open about it.

SiempreViernes 1y ago
That's because the genders aren't valued equally by society, so they don't permute. Once gender equality is established they could switched and the statements would be equivalent.
- steveBK123 1y ago
  I dunno, generationally we may be correcting a problem that will soon no longer exist, or even invert. Women are attending and graduating college in higher numbers than men in GenZ. Much of the man-o-sphere GenZ rightward turn seems to be resentment at society being sure what the use of men is anymore. That is, from a very young age girls are told they can do/be whatever they want. Often now, boys are described in terms of what they can't/shouldn't be, or in how their very gender gives them a sort of ancestral debt of shame for wrongs done by the men of previous generations. You'll hear left wing progressive parents in places like NYC tell stories like "my 8 year old boy came home from school crying because his teacher told hime everything bad that has happened in history was because of men" and stupid stuff that's unthinkable if it was reversed. Men by and large are still expected by society to be the provider, and shamed if they aren't. Women generally won't "date/marry down" anymore than they ever did. But women are now achieving higher educational attainment than men. It's a setup for future societal disfunction, so I do think we do need to solve the male part of the equation after spending the last 50 years raising women up.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - HankStallone 1y ago
    Yes, I know parents who wonder why the boys at school seem to have no ambition, and don't apply for scholarships and get involved in things as much as they used to. The same parents also notice that all the literature at school now has female protagonists--not half of it, but nearly all of it. They don't seem to make the connection between these things. Boys at school are told to sit down and shut up (and take drugs to do so if necessary) so the girls can thrive, and they internalize that. Some people act as though this is reparations for the many years when the reverse was true. But even if they're right about the past, they're not improving the situation by swapping the injustice.

fragmede 1y ago

> > But he added: "It's a lovely atmosphere, and it's been good." Which man, who ever wants to get laid again, would be stupid enough to give anything short of an absolutely glowing review about that change to a reporter.

aaronbaugher 1y ago
Yeah, you can imagine the headline they'd put on that one. And that's how the ratchet works. Go to any subreddit that talks about relationships, and every time there's a man versus woman scenario, unless it's very clear that the woman was in the wrong, nearly all the women will side with the woman. But half the men will also side with the woman, because they don't want to offend the women -- even anonymous women on the Internet who almost certainly will never sleep with them. The other half of the men get downvoted to oblivion, or they learn to keep certain opinions to themselves, and it ends up looking like everyone thinks women are always right.
- boppo1 1y ago
  /r/askmenover30 and /r/askmenadvice are not like you describe (yet).