Louise O'Neill on manned mission to Mars: "Why not go to Venus?" (MOD Warning post 1)

Sunny Disposition

Ye seem to believe that anyone who challenges the entrenched sexism ye hold so dear is winding ye up, so outlandish do ye find the challenge.

Time's up for that attitude, the third wave is breaking and a lot of the world's injustices will be washed away by 2028.

deaddonkey15

LLMMLL wrote: »

He said I thought women cant be sexist. He didn't say I didn't think LON was sexist.....

I think he was referring to Louise O'Neill in his post.

Wibbs

mzungu wrote: »

Women in lesbian relationships are more at risk than their heterosexual counterparts for experiencing domestic violence. Does this now mean that the label "toxic femininity" or "toxic lesbianism" can be attributed to these cases?

As above, I don't think it can. Merely a case of vile human beings acting like vile human beings. Although, if we follow the logic of "toxic masculinity", this is the path it leads you down.

Well funny enough... when those stats have come out guess who is often blamed? The "patriarchy". I sh1t thee not gentle reader. Lesbian abusers are apparently being influenced by the patriarchy, or the abuser grew up in a home where the father abused the mother(abuse is often learned, but they never tag the mother as the possible abuser). So again it's men's fault in some way.

Going by US stats(which to be fair can be dubious)

The National Violence Against Women survey found that 21.5 percent of men and 35.4 percent of women living with a same-sex partner experienced intimate-partner physical violence in their lifetimes, compared with 7.1 percent and 20.4 percent for men and women, respectively, with a history of only opposite-sex cohabitation. Transgender respondents had an incidence of 34.6 percent over a lifetime according to a Massachusetts survey.

And as the author points out:

These studies refute the myths that only straight women get battered, that men are never victims, and that women never batter

Indeed stats within straight relationships show that in non reciprocal violence it's just as likely to be the woman that's the abuser. Which was what Erin Pizzey the woman who started the first domestic abuse shelter in the world back in the 60's said from the off and her shelter(s) were open to both men and women and their kids. However that didn't suit the hardline feminist movement and narrative growing in the 70's and Erin has gotten death threats down the years because she kept to this position and she is no longer welcome in the very organisation she founded.

Now male abusers are held up as examples of "toxic masculinity". OK, fine, but what toxicity are female abusers guilty of? "Toxic femininity"? The word would stick in the gullet of feminists. It just wouldn't compute. Personally I would describe them - if I had to - as examples of toxic humanity.

Oh and where are the shelters and supports for abused men? Never mind abused gay men and women? In Ireland one would swear that such folks are never abused. Worldwide would reflect the same. Hell, there are shelters for the pets of abused women in a few countries. I kid thee not(that one directly states women as the abused). A cat or dog of an abused woman is more likely to get support and shelter than an abused man or gay person. So pardon me if I call bullsh1t on feminist "equality".

LLMMLL wrote: »

Thanks again for telling me what I believe. Again I must be mistaken because I thought I believed something different.

What you apparently believe and what you write seem at odds. I certainly can't recall you going off the women are victims, men are abusers narrative.

Excellent post, as usual. Thanks Wibbs.

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

He said I thought women cant be sexist. He didn't say I didn't think LON was sexist.....

You do realise he's come to that conclusion because you don't believe LON to be sexist, a woman who actually herself believes women can't be sexist. The mind boggles.

EDIT. Never mind. He was on about LON not you!

LLMMLL

Wibbs wrote: »

What you apparently believe and what you write seem at odds. I certainly can't recall you going off the women are victims, men are abusers narrative.

My main concern (and I've been very consistent in this) is sexual harrassment as a social problem. And men are overwhelmingly responsible for this.

I've no problem with studies showing that in the case of domestic violence this may not be the case.

But this is NEVER raised by either men or women as an issue in itself. It's only ever raised in threads about sexual harrassment or violence of women and is designed to distract.

If someone started a thread on domestic violence of male victims that wasn't started in response to a thread or discussion of female victims then I'd wholeheartedly support that.

But in a thread designed to make fun of feminists and derail any point they make that men are responsible for the vast majority of sexual violence and harrassment, either by trying to pretend women harass men as much as men harass women, or trying to move the discussion to DV...... Nah I'm not gonna engage with that.

py2006

LLMMLL wrote: »

My main concern (and I've been very consistent in this) is sexual harrassment as a social problem. And men are overwhelmingly responsible for this.

If you are referring to what is reported I would agree with you.

Reality is very different. Women get away with a LOT. Men generally don't give a **** or are not fully aware that what they are experiencing is sexual harassment. And even if they did are very VERY unlikely to report it.

LLMMLL

py2006 wrote: »

If you are referring to what is reported I would agree with you.

Reality is very different. Women get away with a LOT. Men generally don't give a **** or are not fully aware that what they are experiencing is sexual harassment. And even if they did are very VERY unlikely to report it.

Yet in a study of sexual harrassment men seemed perfectly ok reporting that other men have harrassed them.

If you're talking about police reports then pretty much nobody reports sexual harrassment.

The best figures we have say that men overwhelmingly harrassment women rather than the other way around.

cantdecide

LLMMLL wrote: »

Yet in a study of sexual harrassment men seemed perfectly ok reporting that other men have harrassed them.

Evidence please

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Yet in a study of sexual harrassment men seemed perfectly ok reporting that other men have harrassed them.

I'd like to see that study, where men stated they felt no fear in reporting sexual harassment against them.

And once again, you ignore the effects of social perception on whether people make such claims or not.

Let me put it this way. Since the introduction of Sexual harassment laws, and the promotion of anti-harassment campaigns but targeting male behavior, the numbers of women claiming against men skyrocketed in comparison to previous decades. Naturally, the claim was that previously women would not be believed and therefore ignored when such a claim was made. With the changes in society and law, then women felt more secure in making a claim. It didn't remove the fear entirely for everyone, but it helped a lot of women to come forward. The laws themselves were important but the support that women received both within the company and externally from society or the media were very influential.

Now, in the case of men being harassed by other men, that's difficult because sexual harassment by other men is going to be probably homosexual, and homosexuals have become somewhat protected in society as being gay became more acceptable. You could highlight the aggressive behavior of gay men because it was commonly acknowledged that gay men were often aggressive in their advances... although the social stigma was, for many men, difficult because of guilt by association. Better to ignore it than have other men consider you to be gay while you're actually single.

When it comes to harassment by women towards men, social perception is far more unforgiving because of both the campaigns painting men as aggressors, but also, the traditional cultural beliefs that paint women as being "nice" (gentle, sensitive, shy, etc). The fear by males about not being believed is very real, because modern society does not seek to promote females as being the aggressor. Repeatedly the media and social movements have sought to encourage the idea of women as victims, and only as victims. Even when the woman is an aggressor, excuses are found for that behavior.

So, when it comes to claims about sexual harassment towards men, I can be very confident that the numbers unreported are far higher than what is actually logged, and recorded as being true.

If you're talking about police reports then pretty much nobody reports sexual harrassment.

Work related sexual harassment is the best example for sexual harassment because companies take it so seriously, and all claims are recorded/noted for review. Interviews regarding sexual harassment tend to be video recorded, and have equal numbers of both genders as the interviewers. When the laws were first introduced there was a lot of mismanagement regarding the interviews, and results... but they've become a lot better than before (which is why there were so many false claims initially allowed, but later dismissed). All claims have to be investigated and have external investigators for insurance purposes.

The best figures we have say that men overwhelmingly harrassment women rather than the other way around.

Yup. I'd imagine most of the posters here have no problem accepting that the statistics show more men harass women, than women harassing men. I'm not even going to suggest that the numbers are remotely near each other. I don't believe they are...

Although, I do think a lot of that though is because of the differences in how men and women perceive what constitutes sexual harassment. I've known women to file claims for simply hearing a dirty joke in the kitchen area that wasn't connected to her personally, while I've seen men shrug off jokes by female colleagues insulting their physical appearance (sharing photos and rating them).

There is very little encouragement being applied to balance the attitudes of what constitutes sexual harassment, and instead gender stereotypes are being actively encouraged in society, with different attitudes being applied depending on the gender.

endacl

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Ye seem to believe that anyone who challenges the entrenched sexism ye hold so dear is winding ye up, so outlandish do ye find the challenge.

Time's up for that attitude, the third wave is breaking and a lot of the world's injustices will be washed away by 2028.

G’wan away witcha, ye mad yoke!*




* Not representative of endacl’s actual position re equality. Just seemed the most appropriate response to a mad yoke who would be advised to go on away with herself.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'd like to see that study, where men stated they felt no fear in reporting sexual harassment against them.

And once again, you ignore the effects of social perception on whether people make such claims or not.

Let me put it this way. Since the introduction of Sexual harassment laws, and the promotion of anti-harassment campaigns but targeting male behavior, the numbers of women claiming against men skyrocketed in comparison to previous decades. Naturally, the claim was that previously women would not be believed and therefore ignored when such a claim was made. With the changes in society and law, then women felt more secure in making a claim. It didn't remove the fear entirely for everyone, but it helped a lot of women to come forward. The laws themselves were important but the support that women received both within the company and externally from society or the media were very influential.

Now, in the case of men being harassed by other men, that's difficult because sexual harassment by other men is going to be probably homosexual, and homosexuals have become somewhat protected in society as being gay became more acceptable. You could highlight the aggressive behavior of gay men because it was commonly acknowledged that gay men were often aggressive in their advances... although the social stigma was, for many men, difficult because of guilt by association. Better to ignore it than have other men consider you to be gay while you're actually single.

When it comes to harassment by women towards men, social perception is far more unforgiving because of both the campaigns painting men as aggressors, but also, the traditional cultural beliefs that paint women as being "nice" (gentle, sensitive, shy, etc). The fear by males about not being believed is very real, because modern society does not seek to promote females as being the aggressor. Repeatedly the media and social movements have sought to encourage the idea of women as victims, and only as victims. Even when the woman is an aggressor, excuses are found for that behavior.

So, when it comes to claims about sexual harassment towards men, I can be very confident that the numbers unreported are far higher than what is actually logged, and recorded as being true.



Work related sexual harassment is the best example for sexual harassment because companies take it so seriously, and all claims are recorded/noted for review. Interviews regarding sexual harassment tend to be video recorded, and have equal numbers of both genders as the interviewers. When the laws were first introduced there was a lot of mismanagement regarding the interviews, and results... but they've become a lot better than before (which is why there were so many false claims initially allowed, but later dismissed). All claims have to be investigated and have external investigators for insurance purposes.



Yup. I'd imagine most of the posters here have no problem accepting that the statistics show more men harass women, than women harassing men. I'm not even going to suggest that the numbers are remotely near each other. I don't believe they are...

Although, I do think a lot of that though is because of the differences in how men and women perceive what constitutes sexual harassment. I've known women to file claims for simply hearing a dirty joke in the kitchen area that wasn't connected to her personally, while I've seen men shrug off jokes by female colleagues insulting their physical appearance (sharing photos and rating them).

There is very little encouragement being applied to balance the attitudes of what constitutes sexual harassment, and instead gender stereotypes are being actively encouraged in society, with different attitudes being applied depending on the gender.

The study in question was interview based. It wasn't based on reports in the workplace. I highly doubt the men interviewed would fear not being believed if someone specifically wants to interview them unsolicited about the harrassment they face.

And women equally don't always realise they've been harrassed. I've spoken to many women about this and the ones who have said they are not harrassed I've followed up by giving some examples of harrassment and they then agree that yes they have been harrassed.

I've seen no evidence to suggest that men underreport or not even realise they've been harrassed any more than women do. Just some personal opinions which I would be crucified for if I suggested that women underreported more than men without figures to back it up.

And in the absence of evidence that men underreport significantly more than women, we should rely on the study. It's the standards that have been applied to my arguments.

RabbleRouser2k

Gravelly wrote: »

Ah, here.

I have to agree-that's not to say Mullaly can't be a pain at times, but regarding stuff such as the Rugby trial, she was actually pretty reasonable. Surprisingly so.
Read her article, and then read LON's-the difference is a reasonable, well articulated opinion piece versus a histrionic, libellous article written by a a teenaged girl who just found out One Direction broke up.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

She did, but now that he's jumped on the MAGA train, I'd say she won't.

Indeed, it's amazing how quick the liberal media in America will tear you asunder if you go off script.

Check the following out from 3m 30seconds in....... unbe-fcuking-lievable. Just imagine Jimmy Kimmel/Fallon doing and saying similar about Leslie Jones, for example.

There's an ugly undercurrent of racism when someone who isn't white 'speaks out of line', both by white people, and minorities. You almost expect an 'Uncle Tom' namecalling.
How dare he not have an opinion in line with the 'intelligent' majority...:rolleyes:
Or maybe he's trying to get the conservative audience to buy his music, since so many idiotic liberals are pumping out the 'If you support Trump, don't see my movie, listen to my music, or buy my books'.

SterlingArcher

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Ye seem to believe that anyone who challenges the entrenched sexism ye hold so dear is winding ye up, so outlandish do ye find the challenge.

Time's up for that attitude, the third wave is breaking and a lot of the world's injustices will be washed away by 2028.

Ah sure by 2028 Islam be well on its way to being the most dominant religion in Europe. And we have all seen how so called 3rd wave is desperate keen to hitch to any bandwagon, even if it means it turns into a puddle of puke when it hits the Arab springs.

And just like all the so called " feminists" who head out to the middle east. You'll cover up and shut up. While the REAL women out there fighting actual issues be rotting in some hell hole jail for refusing to wear hers. But hey don't let that stop you taking bin men's jobs aigh.

Zulu

LLMMLL wrote: »

The study in question was interview based.

Go on then, let's have it. Link please.

Wibbs

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I have to agree-that's not to say Mullaly can't be a pain at times, but regarding stuff such as the Rugby trial, she was actually pretty reasonable. Surprisingly so.
Read her article, and then read LON's-the difference is a reasonable, well articulated opinion piece versus a histrionic, libellous article written by a a teenaged girl who just found out One Direction broke up.

This pretty much.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

The study in question was interview based. It wasn't based on reports in the workplace. I highly doubt the men interviewed would fear not being believed if someone specifically wants to interview them unsolicited about the harrassment they face.

You've been asked twice for this study. Cough it up.

And women equally don't always realise they've been harrassed. I've spoken to many women about this and the ones who have said they are not harrassed I've followed up by giving some examples of harrassment and they then agree that yes they have been harrassed.

We were talking about sexual harassment against men... but you return it to focusing on women being harassed. You really don't have to reinforce the point. I've already stated clearly that I believe women get harassed far more than men.

And in the absence of evidence that men underreport significantly more than women, we should rely on the study. It's the standards that have been applied to my arguments.

Except that you've provided no evidence. Just your opinion. So, your standards don't mean anything until we see the evidence you're promoting as justification for your stance.

LLMMLL

Zulu wrote: »

Go on then, let's have it. Link please.

https://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf

Grayson

Wibbs wrote: »

Well funny enough... when those stats have come out guess who is often blamed? The "patriarchy". I sh1t thee not gentle reader. Lesbian abusers are apparently being influenced by the patriarchy, or the abuser grew up in a home where the father abused the mother(abuse is often learned, but they never tag the mother as the possible abuser). So again it's men's fault in some way.

Going by US stats(which to be fair can be dubious)

The National Violence Against Women survey found that 21.5 percent of men and 35.4 percent of women living with a same-sex partner experienced intimate-partner physical violence in their lifetimes, compared with 7.1 percent and 20.4 percent for men and women, respectively, with a history of only opposite-sex cohabitation. Transgender respondents had an incidence of 34.6 percent over a lifetime according to a Massachusetts survey.

And as the author points out:

These studies refute the myths that only straight women get battered, that men are never victims, and that women never batter

Indeed stats within straight relationships show that in non reciprocal violence it's just as likely to be the woman that's the abuser. Which was what Erin Pizzey the woman who started the first domestic abuse shelter in the world back in the 60's said from the off and her shelter(s) were open to both men and women and their kids. However that didn't suit the hardline feminist movement and narrative growing in the 70's and Erin has gotten death threats down the years because she kept to this position and she is no longer welcome in the very organisation she founded.

Now male abusers are held up as examples of "toxic masculinity". OK, fine, but what toxicity are female abusers guilty of? "Toxic femininity"? The word would stick in the gullet of feminists. It just wouldn't compute. Personally I would describe them - if I had to - as examples of toxic humanity.

Oh and where are the shelters and supports for abused men? Never mind abused gay men and women? In Ireland one would swear that such folks are never abused. Worldwide would reflect the same. Hell, there are shelters for the pets of abused women in a few countries. I kid thee not(that one directly states women as the abused). A cat or dog of an abused woman is more likely to get support and shelter than an abused man or gay person. So pardon me if I call bullsh1t on feminist "equality".





What you apparently believe and what you write seem at odds. I certainly can't recall you going off the women are victims, men are abusers narrative.

There haven't been many studies. Most have a very small sample size that isn't chosen at random and aren't deemed to be that accurate.
Now you're trying to use violence amongst lesbians as a reason to dismiss toxic masculinity. You can'y do that. Proving B exists does not prove that A doesn't.

To see if there is such a thing as toxic lesbianism you have to look at what causes lesbian violence. That will tell you what causes lesbian domestic violence.
You also have to look at what causes male domestic violence and see what causes that.
You can't simply say that lesbian domestic violence exists and say therefore it nullifies a reason for male domestic violence.

Because there aren't as many studies as there are for hetrosexuals there isn't as much information about what causes it. However it's thought that the stresses of society can cause it. An example given is internalised homophobia. One person doesn't want to be out and the other doesn't.

This is from the wiki article
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_in_lesbian_relationships

Self-esteem is another underlying factor of domestic abuse. Low self-esteem and a negative self-image are qualities that characterize both perpetrators and victims of heterosexual domestic violence. The jealousy and the possessiveness that are frequently linked to battering behavior are associated with problems of low self-esteem and negative self-concept. Lesbians who report more frequent use of violent tactics in conflicts with their partners will report a lower level of self-esteem as a personality trait.[4]

The whole wiki article makes for interesting reading but it's a fraction of the size of the article on domestic violence in general.

As for toxic masculinity, I'd say that as far as domestic abuse goes it's far less than it was. It was a completely different story 50 years ago. However we seem to have broken a lot of cycles that led one generation to pass the experience onto another. We can see this because the numbers have dropped drastically over the last century. But they haven't disappeared. But that's just one aspect of toxic masculinity.

Toxic masculinity does exist. The example I've been using recently is the fact that male rape victims are far less likely to report rape than women. It's because men feel more shame and that's because men are taught not to show weakness. That's an example of a negative male attitude that is perpetrated that directly affects men and is caused by male attitudes. Similarly I could point out that men with depression were less likely to seek help and therefore account for more suicides. These are examples of toxic masculinity. They're attitudes that are caused by male culture.
That doesn't mean that every man believes it. I certainly don't and I know plenty of men who don't. And it doesn't even mean that it's caused only by men. Women too can hold toxic male attitudes. Women can have that idea of a man too and that's just as bad since young men may try to live up to those ideas because they feel they need to. However it's called toxic masculinity because it's men who practice it.
Yet if I was to suggest that there's a prevailing male attitude that impacts females negatively, I'm labelled a crazy feminist.

We, as a society have to change how we view men. However when someone says that men need better role models or say how we need to change the definition of being a man, or how we need better role models, they're lambasted.

Toxic masculinity is something that hurts men. We need to look at it and stop shrugging it off.

And by the way, it was a group of men who coined the term.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You've been asked twice for this study. Cough it up.



We were talking about sexual harassment against men... but you return it to focusing on women being harassed. You really don't have to reinforce the point. I've already stated clearly that I believe women get harassed far more than men.



Except that you've provided no evidence. Just your opinion. So, your standards don't mean anything until we see the evidence you're promoting as justification for your stance.

You know what the study is. It was discussed in another thread. You posted saying you were currently going through it then went silent about it and never mentioned it again.

My point has always been that women are harrassed far more than men. And I got a lot of criticism about that opinion from you and others. Are you now saying you agreed with me all along?

That's actually great. We both believe that men harass far more than women do.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

You know what the study is. It was discussed in another thread. You posted saying you were currently going through it then went silent about it and never mentioned it again.

Well, yes... I asked for your research, read it, and it supported some of the points made about it. Was I supposed to applaud because you actually posted relevant evidence? But then again, you have also gone rather silent when I or others posted other studies as evidence which opposed your views...

However, I've gone through the study a few times now, and I still don't see this proof that men are not intimidated against making sexual harassment claims. In fact, the study makes the point that the stigma about reporting claims is likely to affect their results. (Pg. 95)

Now, I don't suppose you'd be willing to go back over the claims you've made recently, and show the pages within the study that support those claims? And, no, not that women experience more harassment than men. That was never in dispute.

My point has always been that women are harrassed far more than men. And I got a lot of criticism about that opinion from you and others. Are you now saying you agreed with me all along?

That's actually great. We both believe that men harass far more than women do.

You've made quite a few points based on this study. Am I to agree with all of your statements just because I agreed with one? Err. No.

In fact, I'd ask you to quote me (from any thread) where I said that men experience more harassment than women... However, I'm still waiting for proof that engaging in sexual harassment is specific to men.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well, yes... I asked for your research, read it, and it supported some of the points made about it. Was I supposed to applaud because you actually posted relevant evidence? But then again, you have also gone rather silent when I or others posted other studies as evidence which opposed your views...

However, I've gone through the study a few times now, and I still don't see this proof that men are not intimidated against making sexual harassment claims. In fact, the study makes the point that the stigma about reporting claims is likely to affect their results. (Pg. 95)

Now, I don't suppose you'd be willing to go back over the claims you've made recently, and show the pages within the study that support those claims? And, no, not that women experience more harassment than men. That was never in dispute.



You've made quite a few points based on this study. Am I to agree with all of your statements just because I agreed with one? Err. No.

In fact, I'd ask you to quote me (from any thread) where I said that men experience more harassment than women... However, I'm still waiting for proof that engaging in sexual harassment is specific to men.

http://usi.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/say-something-Final-Online-Report.pdf


Page 23 of this report deals with who a victim (male.or.female) of obsessove behaviour (stalking) reported to. You can see from this that the figures for males and females who confided in Friends/family/colleagues are remarkably similar, nearly always within a few percentage points across all categories, with men confiding more in colleagues than women, and women confiding more in partners.

I don't see anything there to suggest that men significantly underreport more than women do. The previous page outlines the reasons they did not report to gardai and i dont see any striking difference between the sexes.

I'll change "specific to men" to "men are overwhelmingly the perpetrators of" if that's better.

And my claim that women experience more harrassment than men has been in dispute throughout this thread. I've been asked multiple times to prove it. If you all supposedly agreed that men harass far more than women do why would I be asked so often for proof and countered with "men underreport" and "I was harrassed once".

MikeyTaylor

Will she be teaching Laura Whitmore American English as well so she can make it over there? Instead of "yer wan off the telly" it'll be "that chick off, like, the TV dude"!

givyjoe

Where's that block button again...

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Page 23 of this report deals with who a victim (male.or.female) of obsessove behaviour (stalking) reported to. You can see from this that the figures for males and females who confided in Friends/family/colleagues are remarkably similar, nearly always within a few percentage points across all categories, with men confiding more in colleagues than women, and women confiding more in partners.

So, in other words, you can't prove your assertions. Instead, you deflect towards an entirely different situation, using a different study to support yourself in spite of your earlier declarations. It's always the same. Make vague and somewhat sweeping generatisations about men, suggesting that it's based on useful research, but it falls through on inspection.

I'm done, and done with you. Ignored.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So, in other words, you can't prove your assertions. Instead, you deflect towards an entirely different situation, using a different study to support yourself in spite of your earlier declarations. It's always the same. Make vague and somewhat sweeping generatisations about men, suggesting that it's based on useful research, but it falls through on inspection.

I'm done, and done with you. Ignored.

That's a very aggressive post.

I've shown that men harass women more than women harass men.

I've now shown that men don't underreport significantly more than women.

Why do they have to be the same study? The CDC study didn't deal with reporting.

I can understand why you'd want to ignore that.

LLMMLL

Also can you stop the whole "I'm never engaging with you again" guff followed by quoting me the next day and claiming you'll never seriously engage then a week later starting a debate with me. Then claiming you'll never engage again. It's getting old.

LLMMLL

Broker_Quote wrote: »

Young men are at significantly greater risk of unprovoked assault. Fact.

Also, much of harrasment committed by women is often not as obvious as that of men, think of mean girls type behavour, that isn't made up, it's very common amongst women and I would regard it as harassment and abusive.

What have either of these got to do with sexual harrassment?

mzungu

Grayson wrote: »

There haven't been many studies. Most have a very small sample size that isn't chosen at random and aren't deemed to be that accurate.
Now you're trying to use violence amongst lesbians as a reason to dismiss toxic masculinity. You can'y do that. Proving B exists does not prove that A doesn't.

Thing is though, the behaviours that make up what is called "toxic masculinity" do happen and need to be stamped out. No arguments there. The problem is the label. Go out onto the street and ask one hundred men what masculinity means to them and you will get one hundred different answers. Masculinity means different things to different people. Therefore, labelling something as "toxic masculinity" and defining it as a series of negative male traits when there really is no consensus on what "masculinity" even is. Well, not among the public anyway.

Grayson wrote: »

To see if there is such a thing as toxic lesbianism you have to look at what causes lesbian violence. That will tell you what causes lesbian domestic violence.
You also have to look at what causes male domestic violence and see what causes that.
You can't simply say that lesbian domestic violence exists and say therefore it nullifies a reason for male domestic violence.

Because there aren't as many studies as there are for hetrosexuals there isn't as much information about what causes it. However it's thought that the stresses of society can cause it. An example given is internalised homophobia. One person doesn't want to be out and the other doesn't.

I agree. It does not nullify it at all. What it does show is that nasty character traits that would be described as "toxic masculinity" occur in relationships where no males are present. I don't dispute that the behaviours that get labelled as "toxic masculinity" are a big social problem, but if some of these traits exist outside of relationships where males are present, does gendering the term not strike you as being problematic?

BTW there is more research being done now about abuse in all kinds of relationships, however a decision was made not to rock the boat whilst the LGBT groups were fighting for civil rights in the US as it would have been detrimental to the cause. That is fair enough, it would have given the Christian right wing a stick to beat them with so I understand why they were hesitant. Source: Jennings, M. A., & Gunther, J. (1999). Community practice on behalf of victims of same-gender domestic violence. In J. C. McClennen & J. Gunther (Eds.), A professional’s guide to understanding gay and lesbian domestic violence: Understanding practice interventions (pp. 223–238). Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellon Press.

Grayson wrote: »

As for toxic masculinity, I'd say that as far as domestic abuse goes it's far less than it was. It was a completely different story 50 years ago. However we seem to have broken a lot of cycles that led one generation to pass the experience onto another. We can see this because the numbers have dropped drastically over the last century. But they haven't disappeared. But that's just one aspect of toxic masculinity.

Toxic masculinity does exist. The example I've been using recently is the fact that male rape victims are far less likely to report rape than women. It's because men feel more shame and that's because men are taught not to show weakness. That's an example of a negative male attitude that is perpetrated that directly affects men and is caused by male attitudes. Similarly I could point out that men with depression were less likely to seek help and therefore account for more suicides. These are examples of toxic masculinity. They're attitudes that are caused by male culture.
That doesn't mean that every man believes it. I certainly don't and I know plenty of men who don't. And it doesn't even mean that it's caused only by men. Women too can hold toxic male attitudes. Women can have that idea of a man too and that's just as bad since young men may try to live up to those ideas because they feel they need to. However it's called toxic masculinity because it's men who practice it.
Yet if I was to suggest that there's a prevailing male attitude that impacts females negatively, I'm labelled a crazy feminist.

If women hold those attitudes how does it make it a male attitude? For me, that takes away agency from the woman that holds that attitude. Funnily enough, it sounds very patriarchal to me!

Grayson wrote: »

We, as a society have to change how we view men. However when someone says that men need better role models or say how we need to change the definition of being a man, or how we need better role models, they're lambasted.

Toxic masculinity is something that hurts men. We need to look at it and stop shrugging it off.

I have no problem with better role models or any of that kind of stuff. Mind you, I always like to know who is pushing the message, but overall I do think it's a good thing. I still do not agree on the label "toxic masculinity", though!

Grayson wrote: »

And by the way, it was a group of men who coined the term.

Now that is an example of "toxic masculinity!" :pac::pac:

PCeeeee

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Ye seem to believe that anyone who challenges the entrenched sexism ye hold so dear is winding ye up, so outlandish do ye find the challenge.

Time's up for that attitude, the third wave is breaking and a lot of the world's injustices will be washed away by 2028.

I may regret asking but why 2028?