Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? *READ POST 1*

Connacht2KXX

irishexaminer .com/viewpoints/columnists/louise-oneill/virginity-has-been-framed-as-something-a-girl-must-safeguard-and-hold-on-to-as-long-as-possible-422480.html (can't link)

Louise O'Neill again. She is one of the most illogical Irish journalists out there (which is saying a lot). Her big gripe is with the western, straight, white patriarchy which treats women worse than dogs yet won't criticise any cultures/ideologies/religions that immiserate women, for fear of being islamophobic.

So the article - she basically assumes that women are so innocent and oppressed by the patriarchy and must be given a safe space to explore their sexuality yet boys (who mature slower than women) should just get on with it.

She goes on that women are over sexualised yet complains that not enough parents posts pictures of their teenage daughters in bikinis.

This quote stood out to me:

"when I began to speak publicly about my decision to write Asking For It, a novel that deals with the rape of a young woman in a small Irish town and the subsequent use of social media to circulate images of the attack, that I started to receive emails and letters from mothers of teenage daughters.

They would ask me how best to protect their daughters and their anxiety was palpable.

Their daughters were posting too many selfies on Instagram, they told me, their skirts were too short, tops too low-cut; these young girls were behaving in ways that didn’t seem ‘ladylike’ to their frantic parents."
There's so much to address here. Firstly, it is great that someone is speaking out about the dangers of social media which can ruin lives and exploit women.
However, O'Neill is not the one who should speak about it. She has created this overwhelming sense of paranoia in society about rape culture. I rarely, if ever, see the term rape culture correctly addressed. Terms such as rape culture, islamophobia, fatphobia etc are terms created by feminists, sjws and regressive liberals so as to stifle any criticism that can be levelled against them and make them feel like they are victims. When one hears the term rape culture, their immediate idea of the term should be a culture where rape is not only condoned but supported and rewarded, like in the Islamic world. However, this misleading term actually means: "rape culture is a setting in which rape is pervasive and normalized due to societal attitudes about gender and sexuality...Behaviors commonly associated with rape culture include victim blaming, sexual objectification, trivializing rape, denial of widespread rape, refusing to acknowledge the harm caused by some forms of sexual violence, or some combination of these" (taken from Wikipedia). Even this soft definition cannot be completely applicable to the western world. For example, I am considered a victim blamer if I say that a woman who gets wasted and walks home from a club at 4am and gets raped in an alley increases their chances of getting raped, yet is just as innocent as a man who gets raped at knife point on his way home from work. Furthermore, "some forms of sexual violence" include rape jokes, sex jokes and even interrupting women in a conversation. Many people openly say that there is widespread rape in the world, such as in the Middle East, the Congo and even in some parts of western Europe, such as Cologne on NYE, (cue the claims of racism, islamophobia, bigotry etc) yet claim that the figure that 1 in 4 women will get raped on campus is blown way out of proportion. This is considered "denial of widespread rape". The people who trivialise rape tend to be the feminists who make up these terms and make the definition of rape so broad that even arguing with a woman can be considered rape. They also never give a shít if men get raped, even though men get raped more than women. I have never seen a feminist protest outside of a prison, demanding the guards to help protect the victims of rape. I never saw feminists protesting when a man in the 80s got life in prison for rape, his wife divorced him, after 25 years he got out after being proven innocent due to DNA testing, got only $4m dollars in compo from the government (should have got at least $40m) and his wife was able to sue him for a few hundred grand in alimony payments. And good ol Louise can claim that our rape culture is so pervasive in Irish society because we teach women not to get raped, not men not to rape. I could write another 5 pages on why this is so unethical and plain stupid but I won't bother. Ploughing ahead on the sexism....

She mentioned the double standard of the whole Slane Girl incident and how no one talked about Slane Boy. This is so wrong for so many reasons. Feminists and sjws really hate science and logic. A 12 year old with basic biology can understand one of the founding reasons why no one criticised the boy - men have to work for sex, women don't. Men produce 400-800 spermatozoa at the time of ejaculation. We are programmed to try everything in our remit to get our genes into the next generation. Women produce one egg per month and child birth is a very dangerous process which means they have a lower sex drive and have to be careful about their mating choices. This is one (yes one, not the only factor) about why men who get a lot of women are called studs and women who sleep around are called sluts. Both the boy and the girl at the concert deserved to be reprimanded and denounced as they broke the law. But it isn't rocket science as to why society would be more inclined to give shít to the woman, rather than the guy. The "boys will be boys" phrase that O'Neill hates applies to stupid, drunk 20 year old men as they are hardwired that way. I feel these feminists are so afraid of admitting that men and women are different because they believe that they will lose all their rights. It's not sexist nor misogynistic to say that men and women are different in many ways but should be treated equally under the eyes of the law. Again, science and logic seems to go over her head.

O'Neill quoted some doctor: "harmful societal messages about gender roles teach boys and girls that girls are to blame when men and boys are disrespectful, aggressive or violent towards women and girls.” Wtf. Society says that women have the right escalate a verbal argument toa physical level by slapping, punching, spitting, kicking and/or throwing a drink at a man's face and if he even dares defend himself, he will go to jail. When the situations are reversed, the man also goes to prison.

Ok, I haven't realised that I've been ranting for the last 10 years about this one fúcking lunatic.
TLDR - O'Neill is a hypocrite

NI24

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Are they really? Is there any evidence that this sort of thing is really that widespread or now considered the norm?

Can't recall where but I did see something recently that indicated that it's not and that the majority of uni students these days aren't the coddled children they're increasingly being made out to be. Didn't surprise me; most of the time when you read this stuff it's from some small corner in the US. It's a big planet and if you're determined to find idiocy, the internet will facilitate. How many people go to university and how many cases like these are there?

I know the article to which you're referring but I can't remember the name or the periodical. They basically interviewed teachers and professors who admitted that less than than a tiny percentage of students ever complained about feeling unsafe or something like that. And I mean really small percentage.

The funny thing was I found that article buried in a thread on a forum I frequent. It's a forum that consists mainly of men who hate "SJWs" but when someone posted that article it was met with absolute silence. None of the usual ripping apart or joking or anything. It was if someone had canceled Christmas for them. And quick as a whip, the usual sensationalist headline showing how SJWs are taking over the world was linked and the usual outrage over the end of freedom was forecasted.

It's amusing how many of these Freedom is Dying, I tell you, Dying! men remind me of militia types who stockpile canned beets in case aliens land and try to take over the Earth.

gizmo555

Fintan O'Toole on the Irish Times website - all men are inherently violent and if a man, for example, aspires to a role in management, that's an expression of his inherent violence. (Don't forget, this is the guy who said he wouldn't run for elected office because he could make a more valuable contribution to society pontificating in the paper.)

O'Toole & Mullally, et al are the reason why I don't buy the IT any more - why would anyone sane pay to read this? All it is these days is a wannabee Guardian.

What’s the worst male trait?

The worst most damaging masculine trait is violence… the fact is, men hit people more than women do… Men are still encouraged in all sorts of ways to express themselves violently and that’s not just physical violence, it's psychological violence, it’s through domination. It’s through the idea that you can’t be a man unless you’re in some sort of dominant position. That’s innately violence. It produces not just the desire but perhaps the need to be in charge of someone else, particularly women.

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/fintan-o-toole-the-worst-masculine-trait-is-violence-men-hit-people-more-than-women-do-1.2802966

Eric Cartman

Nigel farage or donald trump bang on about immigrant terrorists and jts a "culture if fear" and "hate speech" according to the left , feminists do the exact same thing with men as the target and the left buy into it straight away.

If you keep telling women that all men are dangerous over and over, ofcourse theyll start to feel unsafe, its basically fox news logic for the left

um7y1h83ge06nx

gizmo555 wrote: »

Fintan O'Toole on the Irish Times website - all men are inherently violent and if a man, for example, aspires to a role in management, that's an expression of his inherent violence. (Don't forget, this is the guy who said he wouldn't run for elected office because he could make a more valuable contribution to society pontificating in the paper.)

O'Toole & Mullally, et al are the reason why I don't buy the IT any more - why would anyone sane pay to read this? All it is these days is a wannabee Guardian.

It's very sad that there are so many men out there today that are guilty, uncomfortable and ashamed for being men. It's not healthy for those men and it's not healthy for all men, particularly young men to be exposed to things like that. If you're a young man struggling with life and your identity this is another kick in the balls.

Why oh why can we all just try to be decent human beings. This male vs female gender wars we have to put up with in our media today is no more mature than the schoolyard Nintendo vs Sega console wars in the 90s.

Pawwed Rig

Darren Incalculable AcrossL wrote: »

It's very sad that there are so many men out there today that are guilty, uncomfortable and ashamed for being men. It's not healthy for those men and it's not healthy for all men, particularly young men to be exposed to things like that. If you're a young man struggling with life and your identity this is another kick in the balls.

There are studies that would indicate that this contributes to the sickeningly high suicide rate among men too.

Wibbs

maybe

Darren Incalculable AcrossL wrote: »

It's very sad that there are so many men out there today that are guilty, uncomfortable and ashamed for being men.

It's long streaks of pseudo misery like O'Toole who should be ashamed that they claim to be men. Pretty much any time I'e read one of his opinion pieces my reaction could be summed up by this;



With Clitbait©Me 2016 like Dulally and that other whinging wan whose name momentarily and mercifully escapes my response is if facepalm was an emotion I'm feeling it. Not least for the hard of thinking thundering gobshítes who believe them and buy into all that. Hang on… yes… I think I can feel a silent scream coming from my very soul… oh wait… ahh… it was wind. Grand so.

gizmo555

Wibbs wrote: »

It's long streaks of pseudo misery like O'Toole who should be ashamed that they claim to be men.

The O'Toole interview is in the context of a series started on Saturday by Hugh Linehan on "How to be a modern man in Ireland". The piece published on Saturday includes such gems as:

'I could murder, I could kill, I could rape. I’m no different to guys who have done those things. I know that’s in me. And I feel it’s in all of us, in a lot of human beings.'

'Some female colleagues suggested questions for this session, and one asked: why do young men kick each other in the head when they go out at weekends?'

'A thing that infuriates many women is the fact that men feel impelled to fill the room with the sound of their own voices, the phenomenon known as “mansplaining”. A female colleague wanted me to ask this group: “How it is that men know everything?” '

'Perhaps you’ve just answered the question what being a man is. Because women have to think about being a woman. Perhaps being a man is that you don’t have to think.'

There you have it - that's the Irish Times view of Irishmen. We're all inherently violent potential murderers & rapists, and unthinking, opinionated, loudmouthed, know-it-alls.

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/how-to-be-a-modern-man-in-ireland-irish-men-on-masculinity-feminism-and-violence-1.2803057

Wibbs

maybe

gizmo555 wrote: »

We're all inherently violent potential murderers & rapists, and unthinking, opinionated, loudmouthed, know-it-alls.

Given all the raping and killing and not thinking it's amazing how it was men that invented, developed and worked at building damn near every single thing around us in civilisation. Where did they find the time? I thought men were crap at multitasking. Colour me wrong.

I could murder, I could kill, I could rape. I’m no different to guys who have done those things

Whoever said and thinks like that is an atomic powered solid state moron. Apparently he's a clinical psychologist. A pursuit with an arguably high level of quackery so no shock there. He goes on to utter such gems as "I think being a man is being a human being, actually". No really? You don't saaayyy? Plato would be proud of that rapier sharp observation. Apparently he's "had more therapy than most people have had dinners, and I’ve never gotten over anything". *strikes therapy off the list of things worth much of a damn then*.

Another yahoo comes out with this gem: On my Twitter feed or Facebook, you hear “f**kboy” [womaniser] being thrown around as an insult. And if any of the lads was to turn around on Facebook and call a girl a “slut” they’d be lambasted" And he doesn't seem to see the…

Ah look, there is usually zero point engaging with this kind of media fcuknut that makes up that kinda article and/or "panel". These eejits go on about stereotypes and don't cop that they are walking talking perfect examples of a suite of them.

mzungu

gizmo555 wrote: »

'I could murder, I could kill, I could rape. I’m no different to guys who have done those things. I know that’s in me. And I feel it’s in all of us, in a lot of human beings.'

Bizarre.

If the IT really wanted to do something like this properly, they should do a series of interviews with the man on the street and not a handpicked selection of their friends who share the same worldview. That panel is not exactly representative of the average Irish man.

gizmo555

mzungu wrote: »

That panel is not exactly representative of the average Irish man.

Of course not. It's exactly representative of the Irish Times, which has SFA in common with the average Irish person, male or female.

kunst nugget

maybe

gizmo555 wrote: »

Fintan O'Toole on the Irish Times website - all men are inherently violent and if a man, for example, aspires to a role in management, that's an expression of his inherent violence. (Don't forget, this is the guy who said he wouldn't run for elected office because he could make a more valuable contribution to society pontificating in the paper.)

O'Toole & Mullally, et al are the reason why I don't buy the IT any more - why would anyone sane pay to read this? All it is these days is a wannabee Guardian.

What’s the worst male trait?

The worst most damaging masculine trait is violence… the fact is, men hit people more than women do… Men are still encouraged in all sorts of ways to express themselves violently and that’s not just physical violence, it's psychological violence, it’s through domination. It’s through the idea that you can’t be a man unless you’re in some sort of dominant position. That’s innately violence. It produces not just the desire but perhaps the need to be in charge of someone else, particularly women.

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/fintan-o-toole-the-worst-masculine-trait-is-violence-men-hit-people-more-than-women-do-1.2802966

It would have been interesting to see what his answer would have been to the question 'What is the most positive male trait?'

blue note

kunst nugget wrote: »

It would have been interesting to see what his answer would have been to the question 'What is the most positive male trait?'

I'd have been interested to read what the worst female trait would have been! I suspect it would be something very positive - caring too much about things, sacrificing themselves for others or some crap like that!

Sleepy

Darren Incalculable AcrossL wrote: »

Why oh why can we all just try to be decent human beings. This male vs female gender wars we have to put up with in our media today is no more mature than the schoolyard Nintendo vs Sega console wars in the 90s.

Ah come one now... there were some valid arguments on both sides of the Nintendo v Sega debate...

silverharp

Im of the opinion that if a parents today raised their sons to be like Finton they would be committing genetic death :pac:

Wibbs

maybe

blue note wrote: »

I'd have been interested to read what the worst female trait would have been! I suspect it would be something very positive - caring too much about things, sacrificing themselves for others or some crap like that!

Just my humble, but a lot of these men - and I've personally known quite a few in my time - are utterly beguiled by the very notion of womanhood. Notion, mind you, not the everyday normal reality of a human being that just happens to be a woman. They put this ideal and women in general on a pedestal, which of course tends to mean they put their idea of masculinity in a corresponding ditch. That idea of masculinity - again in my humble and experience - is forged at school and home and usually by absent or hectoring fathers and/or bullies. This is usually amplified by puberty where such more quiet, more studious lads tend only to view women from afar. The group in that panel are nearly all perfect fits for that model.

Sleepy

I'd have fallen into that category as a younger man tbh, I think it's very common amongst young lads in single-sex schools. How does someone get to their 40's without realising that women are just people too though? You'd hope that such nonsense would be knocked out of them by the time they graduated...

daithi7

kunst nugget wrote: »

It would have been interesting to see what his answer would have been to the question 'What is the most positive male trait?'

Good news, is no news..... So they wouldn't ever want to post the most positive trait of anything, most especially of men!!

silverharp

article with the focus on men shouldnt be walking off the plantation, you cant win, do the traditional work yourself to the bone and that is sexist and, downshift and build a life around minimum wage jobs and it needs to be pointed out and shamed.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/23/why-amazing-video-games-could-be-causing-a-big-problem-for-america/

Izquierdo represents a group of video-game-loving Americans who, according to new research, may help explain one of the most alarming aspects of the nation’s economic recovery: Even as the unemployment rate has fallen to low levels, an unusually large percentage of able-bodied men, particularly the young and less-educated, are either not working or not working full-time.

Most of the blame for the struggle of male, less-educated workers has been attributed to lingering weakness in the economy, particularly in male-dominated industries such as manufacturing. Yet in the new research, economists from Princeton, the University of Rochester and the University of Chicago say that an additional reason many of these young men — who don't have college degrees — are rejecting work is that they have a better alternative: living at home and enjoying video games. The decision may not even be completely conscious, but surveys suggest that young men are happier for it.

“Happiness has gone up for this group, despite employment percentages having fallen, and the percentage living with parents going up. And that’s different than for any other group,” says the University of Chicago’s Erik Hurst, an economist at the Booth School of Business who helped lead the research.

While young men might temporarily enjoy a life of leisure, the implications could be troubling for them as well as the economy. The young men aren’t gaining job experience that will better equip them to work in their 30s and 40s. That, in turn, could lead to a lifetime of decreased wages, limited opportunities and challenges such as depression and drug use — problems that the United States is already seeing in areas hit with heavy job losses......

Carlos Orange

No

silverharp wrote: »

article with the focus on men shouldnt be walking off the plantation, you cant win, do the traditional work yourself to the bone and that is sexist and, downshift and build a life around minimum wage jobs and it needs to be pointed out and shamed.

I don't know if there is really shaming in that article (maybe I missed it) but it will be interesting to see how society copes with the results of its negativity towards maleness and fatherhood and lack of caring about male educational achievement. How will masculinity having net negatives for young men in the UK play out in society?

silverharp

psinno wrote: »

I don't know if there is really shaming in that article (maybe I missed it) but it will be interesting to see how society copes with the results of its negativity towards maleness and fatherhood and lack of caring about male educational achievement. How will masculinity having net negatives for young men in the UK play out in society?

maybe shaming isn't the right word but in our supposed sexless society if men aren't giving 100% it needs to be pointed out, nobody cares if large numbers of women just have disposable retail and waitress jobs so there is a double standard here. Men playing video games is pretty much a pejorative these days even though for a lot of people it just displaces watching TV . If someone has a 9-5 job and plays 20 hours of video games a week its not different to watching TV 3 hours a night.

your graph looks about right, funny that women are more positive about masculinity than men, shocker!

Sleepy

psinno wrote: »

I don't know if there is really shaming in that article (maybe I missed it) but it will be interesting to see how society copes with the results of its negativity towards maleness and fatherhood and lack of caring about male educational achievement. How will masculinity having net negatives for young men in the UK play out in society?

That is one of the most depressing data visualisations I've seen in a long time.

And I work in data analytics, often working with social housing data.

py2006

Students staged a walkout yesterday in protest at a university's first ever 'consent classes' aimed at preventing rape and sexual harassment on campus.

One consent class saw a quarter of freshers walk out in disgust and handfuls walked out of several of the others.

Campus activist Ben Froughi, 23, a third-year accounting student, stood outside some of the sessions handing out fliers and encouraging students to boycott the talks if they disagreed with them.

'Consent talks are patronising,' he said. 'If students really need lessons in how to say yes or no then they should not be at university.

'There is no correct way to negotiate getting someone into bed with you. In suggesting that there is, consent talks encourage women to interpret sexual experiences that have not been preceded by a lengthy, formal and sober contractual discussion as rape.

'Consent talks propagate the backward message that all women are potential victims and all men potential rapists.'

Letree

silverharp wrote: »

article with the focus on men shouldnt be walking off the plantation, you cant win, do the traditional work yourself to the bone and that is sexist and, downshift and build a life around minimum wage jobs and it needs to be pointed out and shamed.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/23/why-amazing-video-games-could-be-causing-a-big-problem-for-america/Izquierdo represents a group of video-game-loving Americans who, according to new research, may help explain one of the most alarming aspects of the nation’s economic recovery: Even as the unemployment rate has fallen to low levels, an unusually large percentage of able-bodied men, particularly the young and less-educated, are either not working or not working full-time.

Most of the blame for the struggle of male, less-educated workers has been attributed to lingering weakness in the economy, particularly in male-dominated industries such as manufacturing. Yet in the new research, economists from Princeton, the University of Rochester and the University of Chicago say that an additional reason many of these young men — who don't have college degrees — are rejecting work is that they have a better alternative: living at home and enjoying video games. The decision may not even be completely conscious, but surveys suggest that young men are happier for it.

“Happiness has gone up for this group, despite employment percentages having fallen, and the percentage living with parents going up. And that’s different than for any other group,” says the University of Chicago’s Erik Hurst, an economist at the Booth School of Business who helped lead the research.

While young men might temporarily enjoy a life of leisure, the implications could be troubling for them as well as the economy. The young men aren’t gaining job experience that will better equip them to work in their 30s and 40s. That, in turn, could lead to a lifetime of decreased wages, limited opportunities and challenges such as depression and drug use — problems that the United States is already seeing in areas hit with heavy job losses......

Maybe people are becoming disillusioned with the drudgery of the 40 hr week. 9 to 5 if you are lucky and in many cases 9 - 6 or shift work. And whats it all for really in the end. So you can buy nice house, a fancy car, holidays away.. Remember 30 years ago a single wage was enough to provide that. Then 2 parents went out working and that now is just enough to pay for that. If the average working week became 60 hrs then costs of living would rise so that the 60 hr week would be just enough to provide the same.

I don't blame this new cohort of young people who just think na that's not for me. Give me enough to get by and i'll be happy enough sort of thing. I don't need a fancy house, new car, holidays, an iPhone 6, fancy clothes etc.

silverharp

Letree wrote: »

Maybe people are becoming disillusioned with the drudgery of the 40 hr week. 9 to 5 if you are lucky and in many cases 9 - 6 or shift work. And whats it all for really in the end. So you can buy nice house, a fancy car, holidays away.. Remember 30 years ago a single wage was enough to provide that. Then 2 parents went out working and that now is just enough to pay for that. If the average working week became 60 hrs then costs of living would rise so that the 60 hr week would be just enough to provide the same.

I don't blame this new cohort of young people who just think na that's not for me. Give me enough to get by and i'll be happy enough sort of thing. I don't need a fancy house, new car, holidays, an iPhone 6, fancy clothes etc.

the way I look at it is if you can hoof your way into the top ~20% go for it , you will get a reasonable deal, if you cant, "danger Will Robinson" and consider options carefully. It looks like the "gig economy" is becoming more a thing now so its not like everyone will get a choice, its take it or leave it.
I think this Japanese thing of locking oneself away in the parents spare room is awful and is a life unlived but if you can build a life where you have self esteem then yep go for it.

Letree

Letree wrote: »

Maybe people are becoming disillusioned with the drudgery of the 40 hr week. 9 to 5 if you are lucky and in many cases 9 - 6 or shift work. And whats it all for really in the end. So you can buy nice house, a fancy car, holidays away.. Remember 30 years ago a single wage was enough to provide that. Then 2 parents went out working and that now is just enough to pay for that. If the average working week became 60 hrs then costs of living would rise so that the 60 hr week would be just enough to provide the same.

I don't blame this new cohort of young people who just think na that's not for me. Give me enough to get by and i'll be happy enough sort of thing. I don't need a fancy house, new car, holidays, an iPhone 6, fancy clothes etc.

It's a whole other topic but really the west should be moving towards a 4 day/30 hour week in general. Universal basic income would make it doable but still worthwhile for anyone who wanted to put in the 40/50/60 hour weeks.

Letree

silverharp wrote: »

I think this Japanese thing of locking oneself away in the parents spare room is awful and is a life unlived.

Yeah that really is a sad existence.

silverharp

Deleted User wrote: »

It's a whole other topic but really the west should be moving towards a 4 day/30 hour week in general. Universal basic income would make it doable but still worthwhile for anyone who wanted to put in the 40/50/60 hour weeks.

I must say I'd be ideologically against a universal income, it sounds unaffordable for a start, and a bit like how 2 income households just pushed property prices up, this just sounds inflationary and any extra cash would get zapped in rent increases. if anything it would accelerate the "gig economy" retailers etc would love a pool of people that just want parttime jobs.

Letree

silverharp wrote: »

I must say I'd be ideologically against a universal income, it sounds unaffordable for a start, and a bit like how 2 income households just pushed property prices up, this just sounds inflationary and any extra cash would get zapped in rent increases. if anything it would accelerate the "gig economy" retailers etc would love a pool of people that just want parttime jobs.

I'm not sure about the universal income either. But regardless of what feminists say we now have equality in the West and with men and women now working a 4 day week or a 30 hour week should be plenty. Especially if we want shared parenting and enough children for population sustainability. We don't need both parents out toiling for 40 or 50 hours a week. Automation will play a large part too.

mzungu

silverharp wrote: »

funny that women are more positive about masculinity than men, shocker!

Yeah, I mean all this complaining about masculinity, relatively speaking, is done mostly by fringe elements. However, they get disproportionate media coverage so it does seem at times like it's a major movement, when in reality most well adjusted folk can see it is all BS.

Outside of the navel gazing, people are simply too preoccupied with the pressures of modern life to give a crap about all these makey-uppey theories doing the rounds in US colleges and Reddit!

Carlos Orange

No

mzungu wrote: »

Yeah, I mean all this complaining about masculinity, relatively speaking, is done mostly by fringe elements.

when in reality most well adjusted folk can see it is all BS.

That is pretty obviously not true given the way it is impacting on young mens view of masculinity.

silverharp

silverharp wrote: »

I must say I'd be ideologically against a universal income, it sounds unaffordable for a start, and a bit like how 2 income households just pushed property prices up, this just sounds inflationary and any extra cash would get zapped in rent increases. if anything it would accelerate the "gig economy" retailers etc would love a pool of people that just want parttime jobs.

I'm not "for" it really, just that it would make shorted working weeks a lot more feasible. Say, for example, set it now at around 8k. Tax 20% on everything up to 25k and have a staggered increase up to 70k. The wide variation in working hours would, I believe, lead to a fairly low cost of "basic" living but the variation in working hours wouldn't be reflected as widely in income so extra income would be more "valuable". Anyway, getting well away from sexism. :pac:

mzungu

Letree wrote: »

Maybe people are becoming disillusioned with the drudgery of the 40 hr week. 9 to 5 if you are lucky and in many cases 9 - 6 or shift work. And whats it all for really in the end. So you can buy nice house, a fancy car, holidays away.. Remember 30 years ago a single wage was enough to provide that. Then 2 parents went out working and that now is just enough to pay for that. If the average working week became 60 hrs then costs of living would rise so that the 60 hr week would be just enough to provide the same.

Add to this the debt that is incurred by going to college in the US averages at around $35,000 for a degree. One of the lads interviewed in the article mentioned that he did not want to have that to worry about aswell.

I don't blame this new cohort of young people who just think na that's not for me. Give me enough to get by and i'll be happy enough sort of thing. I don't need a fancy house, new car, holidays, an iPhone 6, fancy clothes etc.

A lot of lads in their twenties would feel that way, however I would like to know if this mindset would continue on much later than that? The ideal of the picket fences and all that jazz has never been more expensive, will these guys eventually toe the line and dive into suburbia or are the US looking at a Japan style situation coming down the line?
For example:

A survey of Japanese people aged 18 to 34 found that almost 70 percent of unmarried men and 60 percent of unmarried women are not in a relationship.

Moreover, many of them have never got close and cuddly. Around 42 percent of the men and 44.2 percent of the women admitted they were virgins.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/09/16/national/social-issues/sexless-japan-almost-half-young-men-women-virgins-survey/#.V-z1bZMrJBw

I suppose this might be a different argument, but now that there are so many options on the table, are these men and women who stay single simply doing so because the option is now there? Whereas before due to societal pressures they may have felt pressured into it. The article from the Washinton Times stated that these men were all happier than their counterparts in 2000, so maybe it might not be such a bad thing after all from the viewpoint of the individual. However, from an economic viewpoint, it is a cause for concern. My view would be if they are happy then more power to them.

silverharp

psinno wrote: »

That is pretty obviously not true given the way it is impacting on young mens view of masculinity.

Im trying to get my head around all this stuff and its difficult trying to figure out causes and effects. there has to be real world things happening too as well as media narratives. The way kids are raised for instance, if more kids in the US or US are growing up without dads, that is going to affect their view of masculinity because they wont have role models and its not a trait a mother can reinforce by definition. Paul Feig would be a poster boy for someone who had an absent/remote dad and look how he turned out Also maybe things like education which is probably being tweaked in favour of how girls learn.

Letree

mzungu wrote: »

For example:

Around 42 percent of the men and 44.2 percent of the women admitted they were virgins.[/URL]

I suppose this might be a different argument, but now that there are so many options on the table, are these men and women who stay single simply doing so because the option is now there? Whereas before due to societal pressures they may have felt pressured into it. The article from the Washinton Times stated that these men were all happier than their counterparts in 2000, so maybe it might not be such a bad thing after all from the viewpoint of the individual. However, from an economic viewpoint, it is a cause for concern. My view would be if they are happy then more power to them.

Those numbers are staggering. Something really odd happening over there, economy stagnated for a generation, they work very long hours and now they seem to be opting out of human relationships. Very worrying times.

mzungu

psinno wrote: »

That is pretty obviously not true given the way it is impacting on young mens view of masculinity.

That's why I said 'well adjusted'. A lot of young men are still trying to find themselves and are not at a stage where they possess the critical faculties to spot the BS. Hence why the the older demographics are not affected by it.

Silverharp makes a good point:

Im trying to get my head around all this stuff and its difficult trying to figure out causes and effects. there has to be real world things happening too as well as media narratives. The way kids are raised for instance, if more kids in the US or US are growing up without dads, that is going to affect their view of masculinity because they wont have role models and its not a trait a mother can reinforce by definition. Paul Feig would be a poster boy for someone who had an absent/remote dad and look how he turned out Also maybe things like education which is probably being tweaked in favour of how girls learn.

There most likely is a myriad of factors involved here. It can't just be a case of young men passively receiving messages of hostility towards masculinity from one source, it is most likely coming from a lot of other sources too.

mzungu

Letree wrote: »

Those numbers are staggering. Something really odd happening over there, economy stagnated for a generation, they work very long hours and now they seem to be opting out of human relationships. Very worrying times.

It would not be a life I would choose that's for sure. I would be interested to see how content they are in life (like the Washington Post article). If it was a case that they weren't depressed and that they are simply doing what makes them happy, then who would we be to judge.

That said, it is a very bizarre situation looking at it from an Irish viewpoint. I would be interested in hearing a Japanese rationale on the matter.

Letree

mzungu wrote: »

It would not be a life I would choose that's for sure. I would be interested to see how content they are in life (like the Washington Post article). If it was a case that they weren't depressed and that they are simply doing what makes them happy, then who would we be to judge.

That said, it is a very bizarre situation looking at it from an Irish viewpoint. I would be interested in hearing a Japanese rationale on the matter.

It might be a big city thing where if people want to remain single then getting a property alone would be too expensive. So they end up stuck in their parents house.

mzungu

Letree wrote: »

It might be a big city thing where if people want to remain single then getting a property alone would be too expensive. So they end up stuck in their parents house.

Fair point, I have heard the likes of Tokyo and Nagoya are quite expensive (more so than here) so unless you had a pretty decent income, your options are limited to say the least.

kunst nugget

maybe

Letree wrote: »

It might be a big city thing where if people want to remain single then getting a property alone would be too expensive. So they end up stuck in their parents house.

Isn't Japan the home of the multigenerational mortgages? Why would you bother moving when you're going to be stuck with your parents mortgage when they die.

paralysed

mzungu wrote: »

Fair point, I have heard the likes of Tokyo and Nagoya are quite expensive (more so than here) so unless you had a pretty decent income, your options are limited to say the least.

There ya are!

I caught you mzungu... albeit vicariously through Wibbs. Honey's always better than vinegar.

Good luck

silverharp

I wonder if anyone showed up :pac:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/01/us-university-offers-course-for-men-to-deconstruct-toxic-masculi/

US university offers course for men to 'deconstruct toxic masculinities'



Harriet Alexander, new york
1 OCTOBER 2016 • 11:31PM
A university in the United States has begun offering classes in “constructive male allyship,” providing a space where male students are able to “question and deconstruct toxic masculinities.”

Duke University, based in the city of Durham, North Carolina, held its first Learning Community session last week. The women’s centre has organised a nine-week series of seminars, as part of the Duke Men’s Project.

And, with sexual harassment and sexism remaining hot topics on American university campuses, the university has created the seminar series under the banner of the Men’s Project.

“Our purpose is twofold: to foster constructive male allyship, and to question and deconstruct toxic masculinities,” the Men’s Project says on its website.

“We also understand how masculinity in its normative form alienates most – if not all – men, and recognise the part normative masculinity plays in alienating men and reproducing violence.

“We want to deconstruct toxic masculinities to reconstruct healthier, more inclusive notions of masculinity.”

The nine-week course aims to promote “unlearning violence.”

The organisers say: “We want to explore, dissect, and construct an intersectional understanding of masculinity and maleness, as well as to create destabilized spaces for those with privilege.”

Duke’s women centre opened the men’s project in the spring, and since then has held talks by sociologists on “sex, power and violence” and screened films about pornography.

“Duke is an environment where some are rarely made uncomfortable while others are made to bear the weight of their identities on a daily basis - we aim to flip that paradigm,” the organisers say.

The project has been backed by the student newspaper’s editorial board. They insisted it was “not a re-education camp being administered by an oppressed group, in the service of the feminisation of American society.”

And few would argue against there being a problem in certain American universities.

gizmo555

gizmo555 wrote: »

The O'Toole interview is in the context of a series started on Saturday by Hugh Linehan on "How to be a modern man in Ireland".

The extraordinary sexism of this series of articles is outdone today by Una Mullally who has a lengthy piece today on how to cut suicide rates in Ireland which doesn't mention gender in any way, shape or form, despite the glaring fact that suicide rates among men in this country run at over four times the rates for women.

Is it conceivable that if the figures were reversed and over 80% of victims of suicide were female, that Mullally wouldn't think this was worth mentioning? And what the fcuk is the editor thinking of in allowing this to appear in the paper he's responsible for?

silverharp

gizmo555 wrote: »

The extraordinary sexism of this series of articles is outdone today by Una Mullally who has a lengthy piece today on how to cut suicide rates in Ireland which doesn't mention gender in any way, shape or form, despite the glaring fact that suicide rates among men in this country run at over four times the rates for women.

Is it conceivable that if the figures were reversed and over 80% of victims of suicide were female, that Mullally wouldn't think this was worth mentioning? And what the fcuk is the editor thinking of in allowing this to appear in the paper he's responsible for?

The BBC were all over the self harming stats that came out in the UK last week and highlighted that women and girls self harm at twice the rate of boys yet the ultimate in self harm rarely gets split by gender in the headlines.

newport2

gizmo555 wrote: »

The extraordinary sexism of this series of articles is outdone today by Una Mullally who has a lengthy piece today on how to cut suicide rates in Ireland which doesn't mention gender in any way, shape or form, despite the glaring fact that suicide rates among men in this country run at over four times the rates for women.

Is it conceivable that if the figures were reversed and over 80% of victims of suicide were female, that Mullally wouldn't think this was worth mentioning? And what the fcuk is the editor thinking of in allowing this to appear in the paper he's responsible for?

If 80% of victims were female we would live in a "suicide-culture". It would be presented as if it didn't involve men at all.

newport2

We have to do compliance certs in work once or twice a year, brain-dead stuff where you watch a short video for each question and are asked if and who did something wrong in each piece. I've got 100% in the last 5 of them answering questions based on the theory that if the person is a woman or part of a minority then they didn't do anything wrong, if it's a white male, then they did. Every f***ing time.

Eric Cartman

newport2 wrote: »

We have to do compliance certs in work once or twice a year, brain-dead stuff where you watch a short video for each question and are asked if and who did something wrong in each piece. I've got 100% in the last 5 of them answering questions based on the theory that if the person is a woman or part of a minority then they didn't do anything wrong, if it's a white male, then they did. Every f***ing time.

sounds standard, sure there was a pool safety poster by the US red cross thats apparently super racist because minority kids are also doing bad things in it : https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2016/06/10858922_G.jpg&w=1484

White, Straight Men. The group that everyone is allowed blame.

Pawwed Rig

Eric Cartman wrote: »

sounds standard, sure there was a pool safety poster by the US red cross thats apparently super racist because minority kids are also doing bad things in it : https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2016/06/10858922_G.jpg&w=1484

There is a diving board in the pool but it is not cool to dive? Seems a bit of a cruel temptation.

kunst nugget

maybe

There's an article on the Irish Times about Peter Hook's revelations of abuse at the hands of Caroline Aherne. (Article here)

Some of the comments on the facebook page are pretty interesting…

silverharp

kunst nugget wrote: »

There's an article on the Irish Times about Peter Hook's revelations of abuse at the hands of Caroline Aherne. (Article here)

Some of the comments on the facebook page are pretty interesting…

can you link to the facebook page , its not a platform I use