Gillette | Toxic masculinity advert.

Wibbs

Pter wrote: »

Whether you have intended to or not, you have attributed suicide rates with the idea that toxic masculinity is being talked about, as well as a lack of 'masculinity'.

If that is indeed what you are saying, are you honest to god sure about that Wibbs?

No such change is so simple P, it's always multifactorial, however I have no problem stating I would hold it to be one factor involved, yes. Not a lack of "masculinity" in individuals. I should have been more clear there. It's more about simply being male being less valued overall. Our gender itself has the word and idea of "toxic" associated more and more with it, in a way that femininity simply isn't. And like I said telling men, particularly younger men that the answer to this for them is more "feminism", a politic that pushes this message constantly is beyond moronic.

Red Lightning wrote: »

Great to see awareness raised for how poor women are treated and how toxic masculinity negatively affects men. It does seem disingenuous cos it's an advert but I'm definitely for the message they are putting out.

Not sure if serious... The facts and statistics plainly show that indeed one gender is treated more poorly in society, but it isn't women. By nearly every metric outside sexual assault in adulthood men feature more, often much more on the negative side of the balance sheet. If women were on average less educated, more likely to kill themselves, more likely to be unemployed, more likely to be injured or killed, more likely to be addicts, more likely to be homeless, have fewer social supports and more likely to die younger, then you'd have a point - and the poo would hit the fan overall - but they don't and you haven't.

Baggly

Wibbs wrote: »

No such change is so simple P, it's always multifactorial, however I have no problem stating I would hold it to be one factor involved, yes. Not a lack of "masculinity" in individuals. I should have been more clear there. It's more about simply being male being less valued overall. Our gender itself has the word and idea of "toxic" associated more and more with it, in a way that femininity simply isn't. And like I said telling men, particularly younger men that the answer to this for them is more "feminism", a politic that pushes this message constantly is beyond moronic.

Thanks for the clarification. I understand the comment a bit better now.

With regards to the bolded bit; Not to get all philosophical, but self worth comes from within, not without. Perhaps the issue is people seeking validation externally and not finding it, rather than being happy with who they are and validating themselves internally.

Its the same for this ad tbh. I dont define myself by the terms the ad is putting forward. I dont recognise myself in any of the tropes and stereotypes featured in the ad, so it doesnt bother me.

The over arching messaging of men being more considerate to others (whatever their age, gender or creed) is fine by me and something i tried to do before the ad, and will continue to try to do afterwards.

With regards to the underlined bit; i dont buy this idea that because an idea is being put forward, that young men, as you put it, are powerless to question that idea and either accept it, accept parts of it, or reject it.

I also dont see how young men are ONLY being subjected to the idea of 'more feminism' curing what ails them. They arent. Its one POV being expressed. I mean i dont disagree with you, pushing ONE message only to the exclusion of others is silly, i just dont see that happening in the wider zeitgeist and, to focus a little bit more, in modern advertising. Ads are filled elsewhere with gender stereotypes. You cant get away from them. And as such, 'young men' are exposed to the ideas in this ad as well as all the 'traditional' gender stereotypes.

Wibbs

Pter wrote: »

With regards to the bolded bit; Not to get all philosophical, but self worth comes from within, not without. Perhaps the issue is people seeking validation externally and not finding it, rather than being happy with who they are and validating themselves internally.

I dunno P. It's a philosophy that I'd not quite agree with. It mostly stemmed from the whole "self love" thing that sprang up in the 60's and really got going in the 80's and 90's, particularly in the US. "The greatest love of all..." and so on. "Respect" inhabits a similar box, in that it should be given automatically, while missing the part where it's also earned. Though that's the hard work part. And while self worth sounds and is great, no man, or woman is an island. We're a social animal at our core, we judge ourselves and others by the society we inhabit, locally and in the wider culture. I would regard self worth as something that is a potential and is grown and fostered both internally and externally. It's especially external as we grow up and start to figure stuff out in childhood. It doesn;t just happen. Someone needs the tools to help them make it happen. Look at those poor kids who grow up in horrible environments, their self worth is crippled by external sources. Look at social media. It's heavily researched and engineered to plug into basic human desires and one of the biggest is external approval and a sense of "worth".

With regards to the underlined bit; i dont buy this idea that because an idea is being put forward, that young men, as you put it, are powerless to question that idea and either accept it, accept parts of it, or reject it.

Oh I agree and they should. And they should also be prepared for the usual "clearly has a tiny dick/can't get a real woman/lives in a basement" responses and ignore them.

I also dont see how young men are ONLY being subjected to the idea of 'more feminism' curing what ails them. They arent. Its one POV being expressed. I mean i dont disagree with you, pushing ONE message only to the exclusion of others is silly, i just dont see that happening in the wider zeitgeist

The push is pretty strong in the wider media P. Locally yer man "Blindboy" was one example of it. The "mens" group that set up in a few music festivals another(where one muppet whose name mercifully escapes, is so repulsed by being male he sought to wash the male from his body in his youth) and it's hard enough to avoid [insert film/music/TV/columnist/social media type here] who doesn't espouse "feminism" as the Universal Truth© of our age.

Look at Red Lightning's post where they say; Great to see awareness raised for how poor women are treated and how toxic masculinity negatively affects men, that's 100% a feminist viewpoint, almost certainly received secondhand, even if the facts speak of a different story, but I'd bet if you gathered a large group of average people the majority would nod their heads in general approval.

Baggly

Wibbs wrote: »

I dunno P. It's a philosophy that I'd not quite agree with. It mostly stemmed from the whole "self love" thing that sprang up in the 60's and really got going in the 80's and 90's, particularly in the US. "The greatest love of all..." and so on. "Respect" inhabits a similar box, in that it should be given automatically, while missing the part where it's also earned. Though that's the hard work part. And while self worth sounds and is great, no man, or woman is an island. We're a social animal at our core, we judge ourselves and others by the society we inhabit, locally and in the wider culture. I would regard self worth as something that is a potential and is grown and fostered both internally and externally. It's especially external as we grow up and start to figure stuff out in childhood. It doesn;t just happen. Someone needs the tools to help them make it happen. Look at those poor kids who grow up in horrible environments, their self worth is crippled by external sources. Look at social media. It's heavily researched and engineered to plug into basic human desires and one of the biggest is external approval and a sense of "worth".

My outlook on life and how i evaluate myself isnt a wide trend though. Its an example of how i, as one person, live my life. Its something i have worked on through trial and error, not something i have picked up from studying the available life philiosophies or by mimicing what the lads in the US did in the 60s. You have quoted wider trends there, but they dont apply to the personal example i gave, so i dont know where we can go from there.

Please dont confuse 'self love' or 'loving oneself' with self awareness and self validation. They arent the same thing. I can identify something about myself i dont like and want to improve upon with the latter, and it cannot be classed as 'loving oneself' or 'self love'. I dont see why you are bringing these terms or that movement into what i brought up, tbh, because they are completely different.

My point stands; if someone were to accuse me of toxic masulinity, even going so far to provide a specific definition that i may or may not have breached, it wouldnt matter. What matters is whether i think my actions were right or wrong. Maybe thats why the ad doesnt bother me.

Wibbs wrote: »

Oh I agree and they should. And they should also be prepared for the usual "clearly has a tiny dick/can't get a real woman/lives in a basement" responses and ignore them.

Agreed.

Wibbs wrote: »

The push is pretty strong in the wider media P. Locally yer man "Blindboy" was one example of it. The "mens" group that set up in a few music festivals another(where one muppet whose name mercifully escapes, is so repulsed by being male he sought to wash the male from his body in his youth) and it's hard enough to avoid [insert film/music/TV/columnist/social media type here] who doesn't espouse "feminism" as the Universal Truth© of our age.

Look at Red Lightning's post where they say; Great to see awareness raised for how poor women are treated and how toxic masculinity negatively affects men, that's 100% a feminist viewpoint, almost certainly received secondhand, even if the facts speak of a different story, but I'd bet if you gathered a large group of average people the majority would nod their heads in general approval.

Wider media?

Blindboy is hardly wide spread or traditional media. He exists almost solely on social media, which you will only see IF you subscribe to him. Thats not a push mechanic. Its a pull one. You literally have to go looking for him to hear what he says.

The example from the festival you mention is also niche. At that same festival you had a huge number of males not doing the same. Id have to interpret that in such a way as to find the trend you are describing as not widespread tbh.

Wibbs wrote: »

but I'd bet if you gathered a large group of average people the majority would nod their heads in general approval.

Id take that bet but i fear we have no way to prove it, so both our money would only be held in escrow forever more! [/QUOTE]

Seanachai

py2006 wrote: »

Another helping from this Kim Gehrig character...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDu0ay24Wio

Her work is shocking obtuse, she seems to just go for the stereotype straight away. They never seem to go for the white-collar guy destroying a town with the stroke of a pen, a lot of guys that are built or into combat sports are actually quite calm.

Wibbs

Pter wrote: »

My outlook on life and how i evaluate myself isnt a wide trend though. Its an example of how i, as one person, live my life. Its something i have worked on through trial and error, not something i have picked up from studying the available life philiosophies or by mimicing what the lads in the US did in the 60s. You have quoted wider trends there, but they dont apply to the personal example i gave, so i dont know where we can go from there.

Like I said P no man is an island, you didn't pop into the world with those traits fully formed. Like you said there was trial and error, but a huge part of that trial and error was positively or negatively reinforced by your environment, your peers, family and local and wider society. Your right and wrong would be both subtly and grossly different were you brought up in another place and another time. It wouldn't have to be such a different place or time either. If Boards was around and this was 1950's Ireland the subjects would be radically different as would most of the reactions and attitudes. We would be quite different people, in a few attitudes no doubt so different as to be uncomfortable, even abhorrent to us now. We all pick up a lot of external philosophies in our lives that inform who we are and what we believe and how we ultimately act and react to things.

Id take that bet but i fear we have no way to prove it, so both our money would only be held in escrow forever more!

Resting in my account...

1800_Ladladlad

Its getting like the promotional leg of a movie releases now.

https://twitter.com/terrycrews/status/1087471007906951169

Baggly

Wibbs wrote:

Like I said P no man is an island, you didn't pop into the world with those traits fully formed. Like you said there was trial and error, but a huge part of that trial and error was positively or negatively reinforced by your environment, your peers, family and local and wider society. Your right and wrong would be both subtly and grossly different were you brought up in another place and another time. It wouldn't have to be such a different place or time either. If Boards was around and this was 1950's Ireland the subjects would be radically different as would most of the reactions and attitudes. We would be quite different people, in a few attitudes no doubt so different as to be uncomfortable, even abhorrent to us now. We all pick up a lot of external philosophies in our lives that inform who we are and what we believe and how we ultimately act and react to things.

Wibbs, I get what you are saying and don't necessarily disagree.....but instead of giving us the wider context could you not try to tie all my opinions and actions back to wider trends.

Please stop trying to explain how I arrived at my opinion and debate the opinion. It doesn't particularly matter if I picked it up off the alpha feminazi or off the manliest man who ever cracked open a six-pack before rewiring the house and fighting a bear. Or indeed if I drew the opinion based off my own thinking.

Baggly

My point is no one should care simply because of the accusation alone.

Care if they say it and you agree you are guilty of a negative behavior.

If you disagree then just don't care or pay it heed.

py2006

Pter wrote: »

My point is no one should care simply because of the accusation alone.

Tell that to the men who are falsely accused of abuse or rape

Zorya

A pal of mine gave the opinion that ''toxic masculinity'' is more visible as naturally man acts outwards, is expressive, yang, while ''toxic femininity'' is less visible as women act more passively, secretly, yin.

Of course this depends upon whether or not one accepts that man and woman are different - I do. Difference is demonstrable in all areas, though of course the strength of gender qualities vary individually. There is a long metaphysical tradition iterating the differences in the male and female energies from the most subtle to the most physical. Both sexes have male and female qualities that are developed within and without to individual degrees. But on the whole woman has more female qualities and tends towards inward expression, man has more male qualities and tends towards outward. Even the genitals display this difference of energy.

Thus while a ''toxic'' man will be visibly aggressive, a ''toxic'' woman may destroy another person/child with quiet gossip, subterfuge, stealth bullying that appears passive because it is casting out or subtly undermining the victim rather than bashing their head in.

Personally I think these potentially toxic men or women who act out toxicity are relatively small in number.
There should not be publically displayed adverts conveying the idea that any one gender is more toxic than the other or that there is a large number of toxic persons in a given gender. It's grand for people who have a well developed sense of self awareness and worth, but for impressionable, depressed, vulnerable, young or unformed members of our society it is a disruptive and sinister message.

Muckka

Seanachai wrote: »

Her work is shocking obtuse, she seems to just go for the stereotype straight away. They never seem to go for the white-collar guy destroying a town with the stroke of a pen, a lot of guys that are built or into combat sports are actually quite calm.

That's true of course, one who's into combat sport's needs to be cool calm and collected.

Because one wrong move could land you on the floor.

In most fight's it's the technical fighter who's going to win hands down in a sparring contest.

He's able to read the haymaker, then wham.
Straight into the jaw, lights out.

It's the same as debating third wave femminists, you are them sized up before hand.
Usually when you speak to them with fact's they can't handle it.
Then try to manipulate the debate, draw you out, then accuse you of an attack.
Very much like a narcissist or sociopath.

They're very interesting to debate, because they shout you down, never give you a chance to speak.

If you want to see a real professional debating style.

Go on YouTube

Search for

Milo Vs femminists

He's a gay man who has all the facts, and I haven't yet seen a third wave femminist upset him or have better facts than him.

Again YouTube search Milo Vs femminists

Baggly

py2006 wrote: »

Tell that to the men who are falsely accused of abuse or rape

Such accusations existed before toxic masculinity was coined; they will exist after it has long fallen into disuse. They would also exist if the term had never been coined.

Separate issue imo.

Baggly

Zorya wrote: »

A pal of mine gave the opinion that ''toxic masculinity'' is more visible as naturally man acts outwards, is expressive, yang, while ''toxic femininity'' is less visible as women act more passively, secretly, yin.

Of course this depends upon whether or not one accepts that man and woman are different - I do. Difference is demonstrable in all areas, though of course the strength of gender qualities vary individually. There is a long metaphysical tradition iterating the differences in the male and female energies from the most subtle to the most physical. Both sexes have male and female qualities that are developed within and without to individual degrees. But on the whole woman has more female qualities and tends towards inward expression, man has more male qualities and tends towards outward. Even the genitals display this difference of energy.

Thus while a ''toxic'' man will be visibly aggressive, a ''toxic'' woman may destroy another person/child with quiet gossip, subterfuge, stealth bullying that appears passive because it is casting out or subtly undermining the victim rather than bashing their head in.

Personally I think these potentially toxic men or women who act out toxicity are relatively small in number.
There should not be publically displayed adverts conveying the idea that any one gender is more toxic than the other or that there is a large number of toxic persons in a given gender. It's grand for people who have a well developed sense of self awareness and worth, but for impressionable, depressed, vulnerable, young or unformed members of our society it is a disruptive and sinister message.

Thats a very fair POV. Thank you for sharing. Thats worth me thinking on imo.

Zorya

Pter wrote: »

Thats a very fair POV. Thank you for sharing. Thats worth me thinking on imo.

Thanks Pter. I like to cover all the ground between wildest conspiracy and cool logic

It was my pal got me thinking on the yin yang of it.

Red Lightning

Wibbs wrote:

Not sure if serious... The facts and statistics plainly show that indeed one gender is treated more poorly in society, but it isn't women. By nearly every metric outside sexual assault in adulthood men feature more, often much more on the negative side of the balance sheet. If women were on average less educated, more likely to kill themselves, more likely to be unemployed, more likely to be injured or killed, more likely to be addicts, more likely to be homeless, have fewer social supports and more likely to die younger, then you'd have a point - and the poo would hit the fan overall - but they don't and you haven't.

VERY little of that has nothing to do with women though. Whereas a lot of women's problems is due to men whether it be physical assault, sexual assault, mysoginy, pay gaps etc. If you realise how careful woman have to be on a day to day basis then you'll realise it's definitely a man's world.
Most of the issues you raised are very real but also a lot is our own doing.
Less educated? Maybe try harder in school. More likely to kill themselves? Ladish behaviour of burying our feelings. 'Oh we can't show weakness'.
More likely to be unemployed?
Cant see how that is a gender issue.
More likely to be injured or killed? Be more careful or don't go for such dangerous sports or jobs.
More likely to be addicts? More likely to be homeless? Again how is that a gender issue.
Less social supports? More likely to die young. That's our own fault again of not being open with one another and seeking the help that is definitely there.

Of course my explanations there are very simple but ya get my point because as men we have to take responsibility for our actions that contribute to these issues.

Im a male and I've lots of female friends and the stories they have told me are horror stories in relation to men etc. I've also lots of guy friends and have never heard one story that matches the majority of the girls I know and we would be open with one another.

Now a massive problem is the toxic masculinity where us guys feel we can't cry, can't show weakness, have to hide our sensitive sides etc which is why I feel this message is appropriate. Now Gillette using it as an advert is a bit odd tbh but I certainly don't see any major issue with it or any reason for it to cause such an uproar.

Wibbs

Pter wrote: »

Wibbs, I get what you are saying and don't necessarily disagree.....but instead of giving us the wider context could you not try to tie all my opinions and actions back to wider trends.

Please stop trying to explain how I arrived at my opinion and debate the opinion. It doesn't particularly matter if I picked it up off the alpha feminazi or off the manliest man who ever cracked open a six-pack before rewiring the house and fighting a bear. Or indeed if I drew the opinion based off my own thinking.

But how opinions, yours, mine, are reached is part of the debate in the context of what we've just been discussing and how certain trends in a society influence those within it. I am debating the opinion.

For example you said: "Not to get all philosophical, but self worth comes from within, not without". It doesn't. Rather it's not nearly that simple, your environment and the opinions within it have informed that journey massively. What you would pick up would almost entirely depend on the source(s).

The advert doesn't affect you(nor me for that matter) because we're not teenagers and we haven't been exposed to this trend for very long, so we're far better able to navigate it, far better able to see it doesn't apply to us as Men™ and can debate it, dismiss it or agree with it more readily.

Such accusations existed before toxic masculinity was coined; they will exist after it has long fallen into disuse. They would also exist if the term had never been coined.

Separate issue imo.

I'd agree with that P, though a part of the welcome discussion on the #metoo debate, there is a secondary thread of trail by social media and the mob, where for some an accusation is all that is deemed nessecary to "convict", but yeah, like you said, separate issue.

Wibbs

Zorya wrote: »

A pal of mine gave the opinion that ''toxic masculinity'' is more visible as naturally man acts outwards, is expressive, yang, while ''toxic femininity'' is less visible as women act more passively, secretly, yin.

+1 You see that in psychology. Men tend to lash outward, women inward. Women are more likely to self harm for example, men more likely to get physically aggressive with people and things.

Zorya

Red Lightning wrote: »

VERY little of that has nothing to do with women though. Whereas a lot of women's problems is due to men whether it be physical assault, sexual assault, mysoginy, pay gaps etc. If you realise how careful woman have to be on a day to day basis then you'll realise it's definitely a man's world.

Women do hvae to be careful. That's for sure, and many of us have experienced terrible assaults, myself included.
But having lots of brothers, and a couple of sons, I know men have to be careful too. They get into more fights, know more friends who have committed suicide, get randomly attacked, bullying in school can be vicious, the industrial accidents my brothers have witnessed and tried to rescue people from would scare the life out of me. Brutal stuff.

The pay gap is a myth. There is a motherhood income gap.

Red Lightning wrote: »

Most of the issues you raised are very real but also a lot is our own doing.
Less educated? Maybe try harder in school.

Teaching methods and environment may not suit boys. I home schooled boys and girls. They learn very differently.


More likely to kill themselves?
Ladish behaviour of burying our feelings. 'Oh we can't show weakness'.

That's not laddish behaviour. That is a natural inclination in the male that makes them vulnerable to long internalised suffering followed by rash decisions.

More likely to be unemployed?
Cant see how that is a gender issue.

See education above.


More likely to be injured or killed? Be more careful or don't go for such dangerous sports or jobs.

Who is going to do the dangerous jobs upon which the whole of society depends? Who is going to fix the trucks, cut the steel, mine the ores and fuels?

Red Lightning wrote: »

Im a male and I've lots of female friends and the stories they have told me are horror stories in relation to men etc. I've also lots of guy friends and have never heard one story that matches the majority of the girls I know and we would be open with one another.

.

I have heard plenty of horror stories from both sexes. There is not a hierarchy for difficulty between the sexes. How can you not have heard equivalent horror stories from men? Perhaps they did not tell them as expressively? The ones paralysed from motor bike accidents. The ones raped who can tell no one for shame at being a man who was raped. The ones who cannot see the children that they love with all their hearts because they can't get custody access. Etc.

All humans suffer. Women and men. Often terribly. This idea of a hierarchy of suffering is divisive.

(Sorry I don't seem to be able to break up comments into separate parts correctly)

El_Duderino 09

Wibbs wrote: »

Masculinity:

Emotional strength and consistency.

Protector of the weak. Both Physical and mental strength involved, with an element of expendability going on.

Provider of the above.

Internal struggle to improve oneself.

Do traits have to be positive to be masculine? Or is it a coincidence that the traits you listed happen to be broadly positive?

Red Lightning

Zorya wrote:

Women do hae to be careful. That's for sure, and many of us have experienced terrible assaults, myself included. But having lots of brothers, and a couple of sons, I know men have to be careful too. They get into more fights, know more friends who have committed suicide, get randomly attacked, bullying in school can be vicious, the industrial accidents my brothers have witnessed and tried to rescue people from would scare the life out of me. Brutal stuff.

I understand that but this is what the advert is trying to say, fighting isn't ok 'Boys will be boys'. Bullying isn't ok etc

As regards, education. I work as a SNA in a secondary school and although it doesn't suit all, the boys that struggle don't even try. Fair enough if youre weak but if you try your best then you'll get a job in the long run. The ability in these guys are there too, they are just lazy or uninterested and that's with the ones with a great support system. I know it can be different for ones with a poor support system at home but that's no different for boys or girls.

Why can't women do those jobs, no guy is being forced to work in those areas.

Wibbs

Here we go.... If ever my point about "feminism's" holy credo being swallowed wholesale without thinking here it is...

Red Lightning wrote: »

VERY little of that has nothing to do with women though. Whereas a lot of women's problems is due to men whether it be physical assault, sexual assault, mysoginy, pay gaps etc. If you realise how careful woman have to be on a day to day basis then you'll realise it's definitely a man's world.

Men are far more likely to be physically assaulted than women. Like I pointed out, except for sexual assault as adults(in children it's roughly equal) men are many times more likely to be victims of crimes against the person. These are facts.

Most of the issues you raised are very real but also a lot is our own doing.
Less educated? Maybe try harder in school. More likely to kill themselves? Ladish behaviour of burying our feelings. 'Oh we can't show weakness'.
More likely to be unemployed?
Cant see how that is a gender issue.
More likely to be injured or killed? Be more careful or don't go for such dangerous sports or jobs.
More likely to be addicts? More likely to be homeless? Again how is that a gender issue.
Less social supports? More likely to die young. That's our own fault again of not being open with one another and seeking the help that is definitely there.

Well fcuk me, there we have it folks. It's our own fault. Oh by god you're a feminist alright. Women are always the victims, men are always to blame, and even when men are victims, they're still to blame. To use another buzzword of the politic you've swallowed hook line and sinker, if someone was looking for a good example of "victim blaming" they'd have to travel a fair bit to find a better one than the nonsense you listed above and the words would choke in your throat before you'd say similar about women. Rightfully..

I don't even... Imagine gentle readers if you will and cast our minds back to the bad old days when active measurable sexism against women was the norm. Now further imagine if a man, or worse a woman, popped up at the time and said that it was all women's fault? Less educated? Do better in school girls. More likely to suffer from anxiety? Chin up girls, stop being so ditzy and emotional. More likely to be raped? Don't act slutty and get drunk young lady. She'd have been torn apart by those fighting for equality and rightfully. Yet here we have a man coming out with this about men? Dismissing and victim blaming his own gender. And he'd not be alone in this. And yet mainstream "feminist" ideas aren't having a major influence on how men consider themselves and their place in the world? Eh... wut?

Wibbs

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Do traits have to be positive to be masculine? Or is it a coincidence that the traits you listed happen to be broadly positive?

Selective thinking on your part. As usual. You missed the part where I said women were more likely to be conscientiousness and aware of the emotions of others. They're positives. Unless you think they're not.

Zorya

Red Lightning wrote: »

Why can't women do those jobs, no guy is being forced to work in those areas.

I wrote a long reply to your full comment but it won't post, so I am accepting the omens

But for this one point - BECAUSE WE AINT STRONG ENOUGH - and I can put on my big girl pants and admit that cheerfully!

Wibbs

Red Lightning wrote: »

As regards, education. I work as a SNA in a secondary school and although it doesn't suit all, the boys that struggle don't even try. Fair enough if youre weak but if you try your best then you'll get a job in the long run. The ability in these guys are there too, they are just lazy or uninterested and that's with the ones with a great support system. I know it can be different for ones with a poor support system at home but that's no different for boys or girls.

Hang on, you're a Special needs assistant in education and you're coming out with that about boys? You're literally dismissing a chunk of kids because of their gender. You don't seem to even ask questions why they're "lazy" or "disinterested". I'm genuinely bloody shocked after reading that. To think that somebody tasked with helping to educate our children regardless of gender or ability can come out with that and not even have the awareness, self and otherwise to understand how that might come across.. Christ.

Why can't women do those jobs, no guy is being forced to work in those areas.

Christ almighty, you keep bloody digging. :eek:

Why are so many women badly paid cleaners? Why can't men do those jobs? I mean, no woman is forced to work in those areas?

Penny drop yet? I'm genuinely floored reading your last few posts. I really am. And we wonder why the education gap is widening?

Red Lightning

Wibbs wrote:

I don't even... Imagine gentle readers if you will and cast our minds back to the bad old days when active measurable sexism against women was the norm. Now further imagine if a man, or worse a woman, popped up at the time and said that it was all women's fault? Less educated? Do better in school girls. More likely to suffer from anxiety? Chin up girls, stop being so ditzy and emotional. More likely to be raped? Don't act slutty and get drunk young lady. She'd have been torn apart by those fighting for equality and rightfully. Yet here we have a man coming out with this about men? Dismissing and victim blaming his own gender. And he'd not be alone in this. And yet mainstream "feminist" ideas aren't having a major influence on how men consider themselves and their place in the world? Eh... wut?

Cop yourself on. I'm not blaming men, I'm saying we need to realise that a lot is in our own control. Sounds like you're the one blaming people for our struggles (women mainly) As a fella who suffers from mental illness since a child. I know the full affect of toxic masculinity. But I now know not to be ashamed about it and am vocal to other guys to open up but I'm not blaming any guys for anything, we have to realise that a lot is in our own control. I said my post was very simplistic because it only applies to some cases. For example, more likely to be injured or killed? Horrific example but a lot of work place accidents are caused due to wrong practice. Now that's not a gender issue, that's an issue of the individual. This can be applied to all the examples you have earlier. More likely to be addicts? Go and get help. Problem with that answer is there is a stigma with these sorts of issues similar to mental health. The type of issues the Gillette ad highlights. It's ok to ask for help and say you are struggling.

Baggly

Wibbs wrote:

Hang on, you're a Special needs assistant in education and you're coming out with that about boys? You're literally dismissing a chunk of kids because of their gender. You don't seem to even ask questions why they're "lazy" or "disinterested". I'm genuinely bloody shocked after reading that. To think that somebody tasked with helping to educate our children regardless of gender or ability can come out with that and not even have the awareness, self and otherwise to understand how that might come across.. Christ.

I know the procedure is to report the post but you would want to cop yourself on attacking the poster like that. You are better than that Wibbs.

Red Lightning

Wibbs wrote:

Hang on, you're a Special needs assistant in education and you're coming out with that about boys? You're literally dismissing a chunk of kids because of their gender. You don't seem to even ask questions why they're "lazy" or "disinterested". I'm genuinely bloody shocked after reading that. To think that somebody tasked with helping to educate our children regardless of gender or ability can come out with that and not even have the awareness, self and otherwise to understand how that might come across.. Christ.

I'm very good at my job but thanks for the concern. I've studied this stuff. Would ya read the post. I'm done interacting with you on a topic you know nothing about lol

Red Lightning

Zorya wrote:

But for this one point - BECAUSE WE AINT STRONG ENOUGH - and I can put on my big girl pants and admit that cheerfully!

For some jobs, yes but not many.

Zorya

Red Lightning wrote: »

For some jobs, yes but not many.

This is not a comprehensive list. Look at the male dominated jobs. They require physical strength, endurance, they are often dangerous. Yes, they are MANY jobs.



Now look at the distribution of men and women. In top skilled jobs the numbers are even. In middle skills job women dominate. In the lower skilled, most difficult, heavy industry, dirty, harsh environment, physically demanding, etc, males dominate. Facts are facts.