6 ms·

>Men have been getting the good end of sexual discrimination for centuries. Not really. Men have had more freedom but less security. Just because you personall

by nawitus 14y ago

>Men have been getting the good end of sexual discrimination for centuries. Not really. Men have had more freedom but less security. Just because you personally like your gender role (as it seems), that doesn't mean other men agree (or agreed in the past). Sure, men were allowed to be employees and women cared for the children at home (though reality was actually a lot more complex than that, but we can accept this caricature for now), but men had to work or they wouldn't find a women to marry. Women didn't have to work, as they could be supported by their husband. Work was pretty gruesome in the past, even if homework was also harder in the past. Of course, there's little proper scientific research on this subject, as "women's studies" start from their assumption that women had and have everything worse without really proving it. The problem with saying that the men's gender role of more freedom but more responsibility doesn't take into consideration that some people prefer to have less freedom and less responsibility, while some women prefer to have more freedom and more responsibility and some less freedom and less responsibility (or at least prefered in the past). >Having received a substantial boost just for being born with a dick, I'm ok with manning up. Even if we assume that men had better starting position in the past, that doesn't apply anymore. Young women are outearning and have more success in education. True equality can only be reached through the abolition of gender roles for both men and women, not assuming that men need to "man up" and therefore saying that gender inequality is somehow positive and should exist. You also made the claim about "imbalance". There's no imbalance in favor of women in Western countries. Men have just as much gender equality problems as women, but even speculating this is politically incorrect. Here's a study o the subject: http://granum.uta.fi/granum/kirjanTiedot.php?tuote_id=18450 http://granum.uta.fi/granum/kirjanTiedot.php?tuote_id=18450

wpietri 14y ago
You've made a lot of soup out of a small amount of meat. Some quick replies to clear up misunderstandings: I agree that patriarchy is bad for men too. I disagree that it was equally bad for both genders. I disagree that we have reached balance. By "manning up", I don't mean reinforcing gender roles or maintaining gender inequality. I mean that men should, as the relatively privileged parties, not be whiny at either the shift toward balance or the small anti-male inequities that crop up temporarily along the road to equity.
- nawitus 14y ago
  You're enforcing the stereotypical gender role of men: "Don't whine, that's unmanly, don't complain, deal with your own problems". That's pretty offending to me. I want people to treat other people as individuals, not representative of their gender. I don't care about my own gender role. I don't want people to say "man up" to men if I face some injustice. And I don't want (the reverse I guess) it happen to women either. Your path doesn't lead to equality, it just slows down progress.
  - wpietri 14y ago
    I was echoing the words of the comment I was responding to. As I already explained to you, I am in favor of gender equality. Your high drama here comes across to me as concern trolling, especially given the other things you have posted.
- jimzvz 14y ago
  >...men should, as the relatively privileged parties, not be whiny at either the shift toward balance or the small anti-male inequities that crop up temporarily along the road to equity. Translated from feminist rhetoric: Men have no right to complain about discrimination against them. shanelja and nawitus, I think abundance of people with similar views to wpietri highlights how real your points actually are.
  - wpietri 14y ago
    I think everybody has a right to complain. E.g., the recent rich people complaining that their tax rates might become almost as high as their secretaries? They're totally within their legal right to complain. But I have the legal right to say that they're whiny idiots when they appear unable to notice or acknowledge the context of their complaint. If you're going to cry, "have sympathy for meeeeeee", you really should make sure you've demonstrated some sympathy for others.
    - jules 14y ago
      I hope you realize the irony in your last sentence.
king_jester 14y ago
> Men have had more freedom but less security. This isn't true no matter how you slice it. Men had more economic security because they could work, whereas most women could not. Men have bodily security in ways women do not, esp. in regards to sexual assault and domestic violence. > men had to work or they wouldn't find a women to marry I think you have this backwards. Men didn't have to marry. However, since women at large could not work and support themselves, many had no choice but to be attached to someone who could work. Due to past stigmas about women were not married, this put women in a position where getting married was a near necessity. > Women didn't have to work, as they could be supported by their husband. Not only would women have little recourse but to marry someone, but women by far were expected to should domestic duties. That is a lot of work and is a full time job in and of itself. > Of course, there's little proper scientific research on this subject, as "women's studies" start from their assumption that women had and have everything worse without really proving it. This is blatantly not true. There is a ton of written and academic research work on gender, sexism, etc. and women's studies is a real academic discipline. > The problem with saying that the men's gender role of more freedom but more responsibility doesn't take into consideration that some people prefer to have less freedom and less responsibility, while some women prefer to have more freedom and more responsibility and some less freedom and less responsibility (or at least prefered in the past). Men are much more able to pursue the less freedom and less responsibility life, as you put it, compared to women because of how they are treated in society at large. Historically most women did not have the option for the less freedom and less responsible life since they would either be pigeonholed into domestic care or they would have been working poor. > Even if we assume that men had better starting position in the past, that doesn't apply anymore. Young women are outearning and have more success in education. This is plainly not true. Most women still earn less than their male counterparts. Further, women still suffer far more from domestic and sexual violence and have their bodies policed much more than men. > True equality can only be reached through the abolition of gender roles for both men and women, not assuming that men need to "man up" and therefore saying that gender inequality is somehow positive and should exist. Gender inequality exists right now, even without something like Lulu, and will continue to exist for the foreseeable future. Having an app that deals with one aspect of that reality is totally legit. > You also made the claim about "imbalance". There's no imbalance in favor of women in Western countries. Amazingly you say that there is no real research on women's studies, but then go on to conclude there is not problem at all. > Men have just as much gender equality problems as women, but even speculating this is politically incorrect. Ah yes, saying men have it as hard as women, which is demonstrably not true at a societal level, will summon the PC police. > Here's a study o the subject: http://granum.uta.fi/granum/kirjanTiedot.php?tuote_id=18450 http://granum.uta.fi/granum/kirjanTiedot.php?tuote_id=18450 The summary of that study tries to use misandry and matriarchy seriously to describe the social and political condition of a western country. This is laughable on its face.

by nawitus 14y ago

wpietri 14y ago

You've made a lot of soup out of a small amount of meat. Some quick replies to clear up misunderstandings: I agree that patriarchy is bad for men too. I disagree that it was equally bad for both genders. I disagree that we have reached balance. By "manning up", I don't mean reinforcing gender roles or maintaining gender inequality. I mean that men should, as the relatively privileged parties, not be whiny at either the shift toward balance or the small anti-male inequities that crop up temporarily along the road to equity.

nawitus 14y ago
You're enforcing the stereotypical gender role of men: "Don't whine, that's unmanly, don't complain, deal with your own problems". That's pretty offending to me. I want people to treat other people as individuals, not representative of their gender. I don't care about my own gender role. I don't want people to say "man up" to men if I face some injustice. And I don't want (the reverse I guess) it happen to women either. Your path doesn't lead to equality, it just slows down progress.
- wpietri 14y ago
  I was echoing the words of the comment I was responding to. As I already explained to you, I am in favor of gender equality. Your high drama here comes across to me as concern trolling, especially given the other things you have posted.
jimzvz 14y ago
>...men should, as the relatively privileged parties, not be whiny at either the shift toward balance or the small anti-male inequities that crop up temporarily along the road to equity. Translated from feminist rhetoric: Men have no right to complain about discrimination against them. shanelja and nawitus, I think abundance of people with similar views to wpietri highlights how real your points actually are.
- wpietri 14y ago
  I think everybody has a right to complain. E.g., the recent rich people complaining that their tax rates might become almost as high as their secretaries? They're totally within their legal right to complain. But I have the legal right to say that they're whiny idiots when they appear unable to notice or acknowledge the context of their complaint. If you're going to cry, "have sympathy for meeeeeee", you really should make sure you've demonstrated some sympathy for others.
  - jules 14y ago
    I hope you realize the irony in your last sentence.

king_jester 14y ago

> Men have had more freedom but less security. This isn't true no matter how you slice it. Men had more economic security because they could work, whereas most women could not. Men have bodily security in ways women do not, esp. in regards to sexual assault and domestic violence. > men had to work or they wouldn't find a women to marry I think you have this backwards. Men didn't have to marry. However, since women at large could not work and support themselves, many had no choice but to be attached to someone who could work. Due to past stigmas about women were not married, this put women in a position where getting married was a near necessity. > Women didn't have to work, as they could be supported by their husband. Not only would women have little recourse but to marry someone, but women by far were expected to should domestic duties. That is a lot of work and is a full time job in and of itself. > Of course, there's little proper scientific research on this subject, as "women's studies" start from their assumption that women had and have everything worse without really proving it. This is blatantly not true. There is a ton of written and academic research work on gender, sexism, etc. and women's studies is a real academic discipline. > The problem with saying that the men's gender role of more freedom but more responsibility doesn't take into consideration that some people prefer to have less freedom and less responsibility, while some women prefer to have more freedom and more responsibility and some less freedom and less responsibility (or at least prefered in the past). Men are much more able to pursue the less freedom and less responsibility life, as you put it, compared to women because of how they are treated in society at large. Historically most women did not have the option for the less freedom and less responsible life since they would either be pigeonholed into domestic care or they would have been working poor. > Even if we assume that men had better starting position in the past, that doesn't apply anymore. Young women are outearning and have more success in education. This is plainly not true. Most women still earn less than their male counterparts. Further, women still suffer far more from domestic and sexual violence and have their bodies policed much more than men. > True equality can only be reached through the abolition of gender roles for both men and women, not assuming that men need to "man up" and therefore saying that gender inequality is somehow positive and should exist. Gender inequality exists right now, even without something like Lulu, and will continue to exist for the foreseeable future. Having an app that deals with one aspect of that reality is totally legit. > You also made the claim about "imbalance". There's no imbalance in favor of women in Western countries. Amazingly you say that there is no real research on women's studies, but then go on to conclude there is not problem at all. > Men have just as much gender equality problems as women, but even speculating this is politically incorrect. Ah yes, saying men have it as hard as women, which is demonstrably not true at a societal level, will summon the PC police. > Here's a study o the subject: http://granum.uta.fi/granum/kirjanTiedot.php?tuote_id=18450 http://granum.uta.fi/granum/kirjanTiedot.php?tuote_id=18450 The summary of that study tries to use misandry and matriarchy seriously to describe the social and political condition of a western country. This is laughable on its face.