Feminism and the emasculation of men

Femme_Fatale

lufties wrote: »

I'm just pointing out that feminism has had an effect on the male role in society(for some not all), which was traditionally a more dominant role.

In western society (because what you're talking about tends not to be the case elsewhere) men are still usually the breadwinner, and most senior figures are men. And I'm not complaining about that (I don't view it as "oppressive of women") but it flies in the face of the claim that (certain forms of) feminism has been emasculating.
In relation to problems men face due to their gender, some of them are due to feminism (advert/music video/TV/film depictions), some of them though, are due to other men ("Man up", "Shur aren't you lucky you're getting some") and some of them are historical (man as strong all the time, woman to be protected; matriarchal woman runs the house - man must not get involved; man as predatory, woman as victim), legislative (mother as the primary parent because of women being seen as more capable of parenting/nurturing).
It's easy to say "It's feminism's fault" but it would be more constructive to examine things further.

MadYaker

Isn't this the part where the OP decides to "bow out" of the discussion?

Czarcasm

lufties wrote: »

Look czarcasm, if you can't take or respect my point of view that's fine, but please lose the condescending attitude.

lufties I'm genuinely not being condescending. If I were being condescending, you wouldn't know because I wouldn't even engage with you, having dismissed your opinion out of hand as complete and utter rubbish. I'm discussing the ideas you're putting forward, and the fact I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm being condescending.

When Rhianna had red hair, I remember being down in Limerick and seeing a lot of the girls walking around down there with the same style. Now you can dismiss this as nonsense, but as far as I see 'celebs' do in fact infuence the masses...be they 'the kardashians' 'the beckhams' 'Harry stiles" or whoever. Anyway that's kind of going of topic.

See this is what I said about sociological and demographic factors. I live down in Limerick, and the trends amongst the youth change on an almost daily basis, but the vast majority don't buy into these trends (I see a couple of young ones sporting the side shaved head, is that because they were influenced by Rihanna, or just because all their mates are doing it, it looks cool, etc, I'd love to know the fcuker who's influencing the hipster trend!), but the vast majority of college age students just wear comfortable clothing while they study to be teachers, accountants, architects... They'd be insulted if you compared them to Rihanna!

I'm just pointing out that feminism has had an effect on the male role in society(for some not all), which was traditionally a more dominant role. I'm not blaming women at all (and I'd advise you to read my OP again). I started the thread as a discussion to get others' points of view, not to be offensive in any way.

I've read your OP, you started off with the concept of feminism, but pretty soon veered into sweeping generalisations about women and their rise to equality at the expense of traditional male dominance. Well it's hardly shocking that as women assert themselves more, it's perceived as a threat to male dominance. All society is doing is addressing an imbalance. Depending on which side you're on, that's either going to be a good thing, or a bad thing.

Equality has moved at a faster pace in Western society, but it still has leaps and bounds to make in developing nations. This change in Western society has come about as a result of better education, whereas in developing nations they have a very poor standard of education.

Do you still honestly think there are too many who view Oily Cyrus and Rihanna as someone to aspire to? Or is that just a very limited looking glass you have there?

mariaalice

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

In western society (because what you're talking about tends not to be the case elsewhere) men are still usually the breadwinner, and most senior figures are men. And I'm not complaining about that (I don't view it as "oppressive of women") but it flies in the face of the claim that (certain forms of) feminism has been emasculating.
In relation to problems men face due to their gender, some of them are due to feminism (advert/music video/TV/film depictions), some of them though, are due to other men ("Man up", "Shur aren't you lucky you're getting some") and some of them are historical (man as strong all the time, woman to be protected; matriarchal woman runs the house - man must not get involved), legislative (mother as the primary parent because of women being seen as more capable of parenting/nurturing).
It's easy to say "It's feminism's fault" but it would be more constructive to examine things further.

Do you really think men are still usually the bread winner in western society? despite the rise in the female partner having a higher education, as I said earlier an ESRI report says that 34% of Irish women have a higher education level that their partner, and the fact that the last recession was dubbed the man(ession ) due to the loss of construction jobs. Then there is the change in the economy away from manufacturing, and a whole host of evidence that the position of men in the world of work is changing...it not caused by feminism by the way, society is completely changing for a lot of very complicated reasons.

lufties

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

In western society (because what you're talking about tends not to be the case elsewhere) men are still usually the breadwinner, and most senior figures are men. And I'm not complaining about that (I don't view it as "oppressive of women") but it flies in the face of the claim that (certain forms of) feminism has been emasculating.
In relation to problems men face due to their gender, some of them are due to feminism (advert/music video/TV/film depictions), some of them though, are due to other men ("Man up", "Shur aren't you lucky you're getting some") and some of them are historical (man as strong all the time, woman to be protected).
It's easy to say "It's feminism's fault" but it would be more constructive to examine things further.

Your right in saying that , It's certainly is worth exploring. People have said in Eastern europe men are treated better and more respected by women. I can't vouch for that as I've never been there. If true, then perhaps its down to simply a lack of men, or maybe it's a cultural thing. Interesting all the same. I know that in some of Asian countries a man can feel like a king, but thats mainly due to having deep pockets.

TheLastMohican

shopaholic01 wrote: »

That might prevent the making of said babies.

Yup. Just doin' my bit for humanity.

tigger123

lufties wrote: »

Your right in saying that , It's certainly is worth exploring. People have said in Eastern europe men are treated better and more respected by women.

Do you really think western European women don't respect men? How do eastern European women respect men more? In what ways?

lufties wrote: »

I can't vouch for that as I've never been there. If true, then perhaps its down to simply a lack of men, or maybe it's a cultural thing. Interesting all the same. I know that in some of Asian countries a man can feel like a king, but thats mainly due to having deep pockets.

Are you referring to prostitution?

lufties

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you really think western European women don't respect men? How do eastern European women respect men more? In what ways?



Are you referring to prostitution?

Nope, I am not. That didn't even cross my mind in fact.

Although, If you spend a few nights/days with nice a lady and pay for food and drinks, that to some would be construed as such.

tigger123

lufties wrote: »

Nope, I am not. That didn't even cross my mind in fact.

Although, If you spend a few nights/days with nice a lady and pay for food and drinks, that to some would be construed as such.

And the question about eastern and western european women?

lufties

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you really think western European women don't respect men? How do eastern European women respect men more? In what ways?



Tigger if you read my post, I never said I think that because I've never been there. I have been with a Lithuanian girl years ago but that's my limited experience with East european women.

From reports and reading blogs, the jist was they are more approachable and appreciate the average guy, just because he is a man.

That of course could be total codswallop though, and I'd take it with a pinch of salt.

iwantmydinner

Lufties you've jumped the shark.

Daveysil15

lufties wrote: »

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you really think western European women don't respect men? How do eastern European women respect men more? In what ways?



Tigger if you read my post, I never said I think that because I've never been there. I have been with a Lithuanian girl years ago but that's my limited experience with East european women.

From reports and reading blogs, the jist was they are more approachable and appreciate the average guy, just because he is a man.

That of course could be total codswallop though, and I'd take it with a pinch of salt.

Maybe its because Eastern Europe hasn't been affected by feminism to the extent that the west has. They tend to be more old fashioned when it comes to gender roles, but you'll come across both hard core feminists and women who appreciate men wherever you go.

lufties

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Lufties you've jumped the shark.

Really? couldn't sworn I was eaten

Da Shins Kelly

I don't understand some men complaining about feminism. The objectives of feminism tend to focus on women no longer having to be confined to certain gender roles. This also offers a great deal of freedom to men. For example, if women are no longer expected to be stay at home mothers, then that means men are no longer considered the sole breadwinners and can be stay at home fathers if they wish, something that would have been unheard of only a few decades ago. I spoke to a German classmate recently about paternity in Germany, and he told me that it's now considered normal that men will spend a certain amount of time at home with their children and cultivate their fatherhood, and that it is no longer simply women who are meant to be the primary caregivers in the family. Something like this wouldn't happen if it weren't for feminism. It allows men to be a lot more involved in home life and the nurturing aspects of family, which can only be a good thing.

Gender roles are intrinsically linked. If you think that because you're a man that feminism somehow excludes you or is marginalising you, you're sadly mistaken. Feminism and masculinity play off each other, you can't have one without the other. In order to fully appreciate feminism, we have to understand masculinity and the role of men, and how something like feminism can free both genders from traditional roles. It's a symbiotic relationship, and if you thought of it less as an attack on your masculinity and more as the evolution and redefining of roles in society that will ultimately benefit everyone, you're not going to feel 'emasculated'.

To be honest, in my experience, the men who are not comfortable with feminism are the men who know very little about it anyway and don't even realize the ways in which it emancipates them as well as women.

Femme_Fatale

I've even seen it said that feminists would not be happy about paternity leave.
Yes, feminists clearly prefer their partner not being able to be around to help out with looking after the child(ren)...

And crap fathers' rights being blamed on feminism - yes, because a feminist would definitely prefer to do all the parenting on her own and not have a co-parent...

In the rush to blame feminism, logic can get thrown out the window.

iwantmydinner

lufties wrote: »

Really? couldn't sworn I was eaten

??

iwantmydinner

What does "appreciate men" mean??

Bannasidhe

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I've even seen it said that feminists would not be happy about paternity leave.
Yes, feminists clearly prefer their partner not being able to be around to help out with looking after the child(ren)...

And crap fathers' rights being blamed on feminism - yes, because a feminist would definitely prefer to do all the parenting on her own and not have a co-parent...

In the rush to blame feminism, logic can get thrown out the window.

and ignore the fact that the Guardianship of Children Act which makes the mother the sole guardian of children born outside marriage was enacted in 1964.

Apparently feminists travelled back in time to pre-Women's Liberation days and tricked the government into giving men a get out of being a daddy card - which is exactly what it was. 'Daddy' could walk away and Mammy ended up doing lots of laundry for no pay while waiting for her child to be born and possibly taken off her as 'she' was unfit to be a mother.

lufties

iwantmydinner wrote: »

What does "appreciate men" men mean??

Jesus, you really are out for blood...I don't know, how would a human appreciate another human more?

kunst nugget

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

I don't understand some men complaining about feminism. The objectives of feminism tend to focus on women no longer having to be confined to certain gender roles. This also offers a great deal of freedom to men. For example, if women are no longer expected to be stay at home mothers, then that means men are no longer considered the sole breadwinners and can be stay at home fathers if they wish, something that would have been unheard of only a few decades ago. I spoke to a German classmate recently about paternity in Germany, and he told me that it's now considered normal that men will spend a certain amount of time at home with their children and cultivate their fatherhood, and that it is no longer simply women who are meant to be the primary caregivers in the family. Something like this wouldn't happen if it weren't for feminism. It allows men to be a lot more involved in home life and the nurturing aspects of family, which can only be a good thing.

Gender roles are intrinsically linked. If you think that because you're a man that feminism somehow excludes you or is marginalising you, you're sadly mistaken. Feminism and masculinity play off each other, you can't have one without the other. In order to fully appreciate feminism, we have to understand masculinity and the role of men, and how something like feminism can free both genders from traditional roles. It's a symbiotic relationship, and if you thought of it less as an attack on your masculinity and more as the evolution and redefining of roles in society that will ultimately benefit everyone, you're not going to feel 'emasculated'.

To be honest, in my experience, the men who are not comfortable with feminism are the men who know very little about it anyway and don't even realize the ways in which it emancipates them as well as women.

Yeah, yeah, yeah... that's all well and good but this is not going to help a nice guy like me get a women who isn't immoral and will not try and peck me while she is whistling. Like I said, I'm a nice guy but women don't like me because I've been emasculated and that's their fault because they are so devious.

iwantmydinner

lufties wrote: »

Jesus, you really are out for blood...I don't know, how would a human appreciate another human more?

Out for blood?

I asked a question, if you're not going to answer it then fine, but you're the one banging on about wanting a 'discussion'

lufties

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Out for blood?

I asked a question, if you're not going to answer it then fine, but you're the one banging on about wanting a 'discussion'

I dunno, but I have a feeling that surely you are big enough and bould enough to understand how someone can appreciate one person more than another.

lufties

lufties wrote: »

Jesus, you really are out for blood...I don't know, how would a human appreciate another human more?

Mod

lufties you will need to drop the inflammatory tone if you wish to continue posting in your own thread.

Same goes for others, unnecessary baiting will result in mod action.

iwantmydinner

lufties wrote: »

I dunno, but I have a feeling that surely you are big enough and bould enough to understand how someone can appreciate one person more than another.

Not in the context of this thread, I don't.

By "appreciate men" do you mean just not be a feminist? Women who subscribe to the old-fashioned dominant male/submissive female gender roles - is that who you mean when you talk of women who appreciate men?

Toby Take a Bow

lufties wrote: »

Jesus, you really are out for blood...I don't know, how would a human appreciate another human more?

Oh, I know the answer to this one: respect for each other? And not worry about perceived gender roles?

lufties

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Not in the context of this thread, I don't.

By "appreciate men" do you mean just not be a feminist? Women who subscribe to the old-fashioned dominant male/submissive female gender roles - is that who you mean when you talk of women who appreciate men?

from what i gathered, guys were of the opinion that eastern girls were more receptive to there advances, and they were of supermodel quality. The girls were interesting, educated , mature and not so focused on whether they had game or wealth, status and power. This is actually the opinions of american men on a blog i read occasionally. Im not sure exactly where they were talking about, Belgrade, sofia and Riga I think was mentioned.

Femme_Fatale

Presumably not treat men like sh1t, which sometimes can be depicted as acceptable on ads/TV/film (slapping/nagging the guy is no big deal in comedies)/music videos (If I Were A Boy).
This isn't applicable to most women though; that's why people find it a problematic approach to examining the gender issues men face.

Femme_Fatale

lufties wrote: »

guys were of the opinion that eastern girls were more receptive to there advances, and they were of supermodel quality.

Oh dear. I don't know why that is, but if western women aren't interested in a guy, they're not interested in a guy. They don't owe him anything, even if they have the nerve not to be gorgeous.

The girls were interesting, educated , mature and not so focused on wealth, status and power.

The constant talk here of women being preoccupied with wealth refers to an alien world to me.
In the world I live in, if you like a person, you like a person - and that's all there is to it.
I know there are gold-diggers out there (I cannot relate to them in the slightest) - the stereotype exists for a reason. But is it as widespread as said here on AH? I doubt it very, very much.

iwantmydinner

lufties wrote: »

from what i gathered, guys were of the opinion that eastern girls were more receptive to there advances, and they were of supermodel quality. The girls were interesting, educated , mature and not so focused on wealth, status and power. This is actually the opinions of american men on a blog i read occasionally. Im not sure exactly where they were talking about, Belgrade, sofia and Riga I think was mentioned.

I don't get how any of the above equates to them appreciating men more than, fr'instance, I do.

This if course, is not to mind the fact that again, it's an awful generalisation.

lufties

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Presumably not treat men like sh1t, which sometimes can be depicted as acceptable on ads/TV/film (slapping/nagging the guy is no big deal in comedies)/music videos (If I Were A Boy).
This isn't applicable to most women though; that's why people find it a problematic approach to examining the gender issues men face.

good point femme.