6 ms·

Demonization of all things male? That's just ridiculous. There are nasty things both men and women have to struggle with. I'd say the problem with male suicide

by bakhy 11y ago

Demonization of all things male? That's just ridiculous. There are nasty things both men and women have to struggle with. I'd say the problem with male suicides probably exists for longer than 20 years. Patriarchy has existed for a long time, and together with it its accompanying set of high expectations of men. Pressures to be strong, successful, never show emotion or weakness, to serve your family,.. there is nothing new there. It used to come with much more rewards, but feminism has eroded that away. So now we are kinda equal, while the old cultural norms still survive, causing pain to men. Patriarchy is the common enemy.

facepalm 11y ago
The difference is that women don't need to prove their worth to society. They can bear children. What can men do? If they can't find a way to make themselves useful, what is their place?
- bakhy 11y ago
  That's extremely reductionist. We are human beings, not reproduction machines. The concept of "worth" is much more complex. I don't think a woman can simply bear children, and she's good. I presume you were trying to make a point that this may be a "core" biological difference, which will always lead to a difference in suicide statistics between men and women. You may be right, you may be wrong, but it is in any case too early, maybe even defeatist to talk about that now. I believe it is high time for a male revolt against patriarchy, and that it might, even if you are right, at least reduce this problem.
  - facepalm 11y ago
    "You may be right, you may be wrong, but it is in any case too early, maybe even defeatist to talk about that now" After hundreds of thousands of years of existance of humans you think it is too early to talk about that? I consider that ridiculous. You can not simply escape reality by crying "reductionism". Of course it is a statement of averages. Not every woman is fine, things can get in the way. But on average, woman will be considered to be valuable to society no matter what.
    - bakhy 11y ago
      What are you talking about? :D I meant, given that we are right now facing this problem of high suicide rates among men, it is definitely too early and too defeatist to ascribe it to biological differences. (If that is what you were trying to say. As I already said, I'm not sure if I understood correctly what you were trying to say.) We have to look at our culture and at ways in which we can change this. Maybe in the end we won't make the problem go away completely, but we must try. That is what I meant.
      - facepalm 11y ago
        I wasn't talking about male suicide specifically. But if you want, I think there should be a lot of data about that already, too.
- Nursie 11y ago
  >> The difference is that women don't need to prove their worth to society. They can bear children. Yes, I frequently read articles in the press about women on welfare with large families, and how amazing they are for having children, and how privileged we all are to contribute to their upkeep! I am not defined by my use to society. I live my life for me and the people I love, my place is what I make it, not what 'society' decides to offer me.
  - facepalm 11y ago
    The frequency of stories is irrelevant to the frequencies in real live. It's just your perception. And where are the stories about men on welfare? And I am pretty sure that you depend on society (the people around you) a lot. You sound as if you look down on welfare moms. How would your friends like you as a welfare mom - would they still be your friends? How would you feel?
  - facepalm 11y ago
    Another thought on welfare moms: if you are a welfare mom, you still have your children to care for, which makes you useful. What does a man on welfare have to make himself feel useful?
    - bakhy 11y ago
      Just stop, dude. This is not elementary algebra, these are people we are talking about. Go out and meet some.
      - facepalm 11y ago
        The article was about suicide statistics. Your belief that welfare moms should be the most prone to suicide is probably false.
M8 11y ago
"we are kinda equal" Which gender legally gets the kids, house and alimony in +90% of divorces?
- bakhy 11y ago
  We could start listing examples of injustices, each one of us could find them, and we would only get farther from finding any solution, or farther from just having a meaningful discussion. I am not negating that there are prejudice against men. I simply wish to point out the obvious - these prejudice are a product of patriarchy. It was not feminism that painted the picture of the man as incompetent parent. It is a very old tenet of patriarchy, that mothers are better parents. That men go around drinking, fighting, they are too aggressive, too incompetent at small housework... These things are really old. They are patriarchy.
  - mattlutze 11y ago
    > these prejudice are a product of patriarchy. Is this the argument to make, though? It forces the assertion that "if not for patriarchy, these prejudices wouldn't exist." I'm not sure that that logically follows. > It was not feminism that painted the picture of the man as incompetent parent. It is a very old tenet of patriarchy, that mothers are better parents. That men go around drinking, fighting, they are too aggressive, too incompetent at small housework... These things are really old. They are patriarchy. You're certain this paragraph is true? Patriarchy holds a male at the head of the organizational unit under the belief that that person will do a better job managing that organization. This doesn't lead to "he's the head of the house but a useless parent." I'm fairly certain that that is a modern invention for comedy.
    - bakhy 11y ago
      > It forces the assertion that "if not for patriarchy, these prejudices wouldn't exist." Implications cannot be automatically reversed, as anyone visiting this site should know ;) I.e. "Patriarchy => prejudice X" does not automatically imply "!Patriarchy => !prejudice X". As for your explanation on patriarchy, it is simplistic. Probably all ideological systems that humans have ever followed have been rich with mythology, symbolism, and various ideals. Patriarchy, like any other human system of thought, is not merely such a cold, pseudo-rational conclusion. There are always ideals that come with a system, most importantly, in this case, the concept of the ideal man and woman. Basically, ask yourself, why was it thought that men would better "manage the organization"? What characteristics were idealized in men to make them fit this role? What is the ideal "man of the family"?
redml 11y ago
Using the word "Patriarchy" unironically gives away the fact you don't care about mens problems, because you're automatically blaming men for these problems. You live in an age of abundance now, but 50 or so years ago you might be singing a different tune, and you can't reprogram society overnight without causing serious harm.
- bakhy 11y ago
  You fail to grasp one crucial distinction - patriarchy is not a term that labels all men. It is a system. The crimes of patriarchy are not automatically the fault of all men. It is perfectly possible to be a man and against patriarchy (you're speaking with one right now, actually). As for "reprogramming society" - that's just spreading FUD. Society is not a piece of stone, it changes constantly. And far from it that any of these changes happen simply overnight. And to simply assume that patriarchy is the direct cause of our society's abundance today, well... to say the least, you may need to provide some proof :D
  - mkr-hn 11y ago
    The word is easy to misunderstand. I usually just avoid it entirely and discuss the symptoms instead. Most people agree that what patriarchy is is something that needs changing, so it's silly to stick with a word that so reliably muddies what should be an uncontroversial conversation.
    - bakhy 11y ago
      Well, it should not be easy to misunderstand an attack on patriarchy as an attack on all men. That misunderstanding makes no sense, unless a person has certain rhetorical goals... Generally, your approach is smart, but topics like this have to stir up emotion. I believe it is completely impossible to have a meaningful discussion about such topics, which affect people's lives, without getting emotional. I guess only people who are completely unaffected by the problem at hand can have the luxury of objective distance...
      - 11y ago

by bakhy 11y ago

facepalm 11y ago

The difference is that women don't need to prove their worth to society. They can bear children. What can men do? If they can't find a way to make themselves useful, what is their place?

bakhy 11y ago
That's extremely reductionist. We are human beings, not reproduction machines. The concept of "worth" is much more complex. I don't think a woman can simply bear children, and she's good. I presume you were trying to make a point that this may be a "core" biological difference, which will always lead to a difference in suicide statistics between men and women. You may be right, you may be wrong, but it is in any case too early, maybe even defeatist to talk about that now. I believe it is high time for a male revolt against patriarchy, and that it might, even if you are right, at least reduce this problem.
- facepalm 11y ago
  "You may be right, you may be wrong, but it is in any case too early, maybe even defeatist to talk about that now" After hundreds of thousands of years of existance of humans you think it is too early to talk about that? I consider that ridiculous. You can not simply escape reality by crying "reductionism". Of course it is a statement of averages. Not every woman is fine, things can get in the way. But on average, woman will be considered to be valuable to society no matter what.
  - bakhy 11y ago
    What are you talking about? :D I meant, given that we are right now facing this problem of high suicide rates among men, it is definitely too early and too defeatist to ascribe it to biological differences. (If that is what you were trying to say. As I already said, I'm not sure if I understood correctly what you were trying to say.) We have to look at our culture and at ways in which we can change this. Maybe in the end we won't make the problem go away completely, but we must try. That is what I meant.
    - facepalm 11y ago
      I wasn't talking about male suicide specifically. But if you want, I think there should be a lot of data about that already, too.
Nursie 11y ago
>> The difference is that women don't need to prove their worth to society. They can bear children. Yes, I frequently read articles in the press about women on welfare with large families, and how amazing they are for having children, and how privileged we all are to contribute to their upkeep! I am not defined by my use to society. I live my life for me and the people I love, my place is what I make it, not what 'society' decides to offer me.
- facepalm 11y ago
  The frequency of stories is irrelevant to the frequencies in real live. It's just your perception. And where are the stories about men on welfare? And I am pretty sure that you depend on society (the people around you) a lot. You sound as if you look down on welfare moms. How would your friends like you as a welfare mom - would they still be your friends? How would you feel?
- facepalm 11y ago
  Another thought on welfare moms: if you are a welfare mom, you still have your children to care for, which makes you useful. What does a man on welfare have to make himself feel useful?
  - bakhy 11y ago
    Just stop, dude. This is not elementary algebra, these are people we are talking about. Go out and meet some.
    - facepalm 11y ago
      The article was about suicide statistics. Your belief that welfare moms should be the most prone to suicide is probably false.

M8 11y ago

"we are kinda equal" Which gender legally gets the kids, house and alimony in +90% of divorces?

bakhy 11y ago
We could start listing examples of injustices, each one of us could find them, and we would only get farther from finding any solution, or farther from just having a meaningful discussion. I am not negating that there are prejudice against men. I simply wish to point out the obvious - these prejudice are a product of patriarchy. It was not feminism that painted the picture of the man as incompetent parent. It is a very old tenet of patriarchy, that mothers are better parents. That men go around drinking, fighting, they are too aggressive, too incompetent at small housework... These things are really old. They are patriarchy.
- mattlutze 11y ago
  > these prejudice are a product of patriarchy. Is this the argument to make, though? It forces the assertion that "if not for patriarchy, these prejudices wouldn't exist." I'm not sure that that logically follows. > It was not feminism that painted the picture of the man as incompetent parent. It is a very old tenet of patriarchy, that mothers are better parents. That men go around drinking, fighting, they are too aggressive, too incompetent at small housework... These things are really old. They are patriarchy. You're certain this paragraph is true? Patriarchy holds a male at the head of the organizational unit under the belief that that person will do a better job managing that organization. This doesn't lead to "he's the head of the house but a useless parent." I'm fairly certain that that is a modern invention for comedy.
  - bakhy 11y ago
    > It forces the assertion that "if not for patriarchy, these prejudices wouldn't exist." Implications cannot be automatically reversed, as anyone visiting this site should know ;) I.e. "Patriarchy => prejudice X" does not automatically imply "!Patriarchy => !prejudice X". As for your explanation on patriarchy, it is simplistic. Probably all ideological systems that humans have ever followed have been rich with mythology, symbolism, and various ideals. Patriarchy, like any other human system of thought, is not merely such a cold, pseudo-rational conclusion. There are always ideals that come with a system, most importantly, in this case, the concept of the ideal man and woman. Basically, ask yourself, why was it thought that men would better "manage the organization"? What characteristics were idealized in men to make them fit this role? What is the ideal "man of the family"?

redml 11y ago

Using the word "Patriarchy" unironically gives away the fact you don't care about mens problems, because you're automatically blaming men for these problems. You live in an age of abundance now, but 50 or so years ago you might be singing a different tune, and you can't reprogram society overnight without causing serious harm.

bakhy 11y ago
You fail to grasp one crucial distinction - patriarchy is not a term that labels all men. It is a system. The crimes of patriarchy are not automatically the fault of all men. It is perfectly possible to be a man and against patriarchy (you're speaking with one right now, actually). As for "reprogramming society" - that's just spreading FUD. Society is not a piece of stone, it changes constantly. And far from it that any of these changes happen simply overnight. And to simply assume that patriarchy is the direct cause of our society's abundance today, well... to say the least, you may need to provide some proof :D
- mkr-hn 11y ago
  The word is easy to misunderstand. I usually just avoid it entirely and discuss the symptoms instead. Most people agree that what patriarchy is is something that needs changing, so it's silly to stick with a word that so reliably muddies what should be an uncontroversial conversation.
  - bakhy 11y ago
    Well, it should not be easy to misunderstand an attack on patriarchy as an attack on all men. That misunderstanding makes no sense, unless a person has certain rhetorical goals... Generally, your approach is smart, but topics like this have to stir up emotion. I believe it is completely impossible to have a meaningful discussion about such topics, which affect people's lives, without getting emotional. I guess only people who are completely unaffected by the problem at hand can have the luxury of objective distance...
    - 11y ago