Men's rights/issues thread- Grab 'em right by the willy

[Savannah]

3 hours ago, mormont said:

I knew lots of those. Most of them had two (heterosexual) parents.

How can you know anything about their sexuality? 

You simply assume that they were heterosexual because they raise a family with the opposite sex? 
That's incredibly bigoted.

I wouldn't make bigoted assumptions about their sexuality but 
I too have seen dysfunctional families with a mother and a father. 

Some have raised their kids openly homophobic and antisemitic.
Some of them had very strong  (yet unhealthy) fathers who, for example,

forced their daughters to wear a headscarf  before they had even reached puberty. 

[TerraPrime]

4 hours ago, Jo498 said:

 

As for "healthy" we will disagree about some things but we might also by and large agree on some other things. E.g. that it is not "healthy" if father comes home drunk and beats his wife and children. Or if homosexuals are forced into the closet. Or if a man has no right to check whether the childrens he raises are his own.

Still, there can be reasonable disagreement on stuff like whether the "stoic" coping strategies JonSnow mentioned are usually or always "toxic" or if there can be some value to them.

But when people root their definition of "healthy family structure" in the models of 50 years ago, that's exactly where those problematic ideas of "healthy family" existed. In the 1930s, state fairs across this country held "most fit families" competitions and they inevitably chose the blond hair blue eyed families as the most wholesome. That type of idea didn't die with WW2, you know. So yeah, if people start with saying that things were great 50 years ago I am going to interpret that as endorsement of a whole suite of social issues associated with the 50s and 60s. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

I completely agree. I don't see this as a particular problem for men or women.  I would like someone with more expertise to weigh in, but I would have thought it is the lack of STABILITY, rather than a lack of figures of a certain gender that drives a lot of these outcomes.  There are lots and lots and lots of really successful men who were raised by a single parent, and plenty of dysfunctional men who to all outside appearances grew up in an episode of Leave it to Beaver.  (I grew up in a very nice suburb and had NO IDEA that my next door neighbor's husband was an alcoholic and that a dad down the street regularly beat up the mom - but it explains SO MUCH about stuff I'd see with the kids).  

Yes. I agree that stability is a more determinant factor than the gender of primary caregivers. 

 

 

37 minutes ago, Savannah said:

forced their daughters to wear a headscarf  before they had even reached puberty. 

Yeah, I never liked the Catholics and their forced head-coverings either. Also, the Jews and their kippahs - what's up with that? The Mennonites around here all travel in packs only and all their women wear head coverings, too. It's all so very threatening. When will we ban immigration of Mennonites? 

[MerenthaClone]

48 minutes ago, Savannah said:

How can you know anything about their sexuality? 

You simply assume that they were heterosexual because they raise a family with the opposite sex? 
That's incredibly bigoted.

I wouldn't make bigoted assumptions about their sexuality but 
I too have seen dysfunctional families with a mother and a father. 

Some have raised their kids openly homophobic and antisemitic.
Some of them had very strong  (yet unhealthy) fathers who, for example,

forced their daughters to wear a headscarf  before they had even reached puberty. 

Must be weird to only pretend to care about gay people when you can use them as a weapon to bash others.  

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

1 hour ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

I completely agree. I don't see this as a particular problem for men or women.  I would like someone with more expertise to weigh in, but I would have thought it is the lack of STABILITY, rather than a lack of figures of a certain gender that drives a lot of these outcomes.  There are lots and lots and lots of really successful men who were raised by a single parent, and plenty of dysfunctional men who to all outside appearances grew up in an episode of Leave it to Beaver.  (I grew up in a very nice suburb and had NO IDEA that my next door neighbor's husband was an alcoholic and that a dad down the street regularly beat up the mom - but it explains SO MUCH about stuff I'd see with the kids).  

I don't think anybody is saying that it is better to have a father around who is abusive or destructive to the well-being of the child, than to not have any male role models at all. We shouldn't take it to extremes. At the same time i would suggest it was a definite positive aspect of a boys life for him to have male role models around and he will go looking for them somewhere. Whether that is his dad or a family friend or a teacher, i'm not sure it matters. 

Unfortunately man boys don't have even that these days.

 

[Theda Baratheon]

5 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

I don't think anybody is saying that it is better to have a father around who is abusive or destructive to the well-being of the child, than to not have any male role models at all. We shouldn't take it to extremes. At the same time i would suggest it was a definite positive aspect of a boys life for him to have male role models around and he will go looking for them somewhere. Whether that is his dad or a family friend or a teacher, i'm not sure it matters. 

Unfortunately man boys don't have even that these days.

 

Don't they? What are you basing this idea that boys these days don't have any male role models? 

[Week]

Just now, Theda Baratheon said:

Don't they? What are you basing this idea that boys these days don't have any male role models? 

Also, why must children only have role models that have the same sexual equipment? Maturity, responsibility, accountability, etc. etc. are admirable traits that individuals with vaginas (or eunuchs etc.) can have as well.

[James Arryn]

1 hour ago, Savannah said:

How can you know anything about their sexuality? 

You simply assume that they were heterosexual because they raise a family with the opposite sex? 
That's incredibly bigoted.

I wouldn't make bigoted assumptions about their sexuality but 
I too have seen dysfunctional families with a mother and a father. 

Some have raised their kids openly homophobic and antisemitic.
Some of them had very strong  (yet unhealthy) fathers who, for example,

forced their daughters to wear a headscarf  before they had even reached puberty. 

This raises an interesting point: why do we always say 'straw man', as in 'that argument is a complete strawman'? 

[Kalbear]

5 hours ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Sure if you are referring to broken up families then that is pretty harmful. In terms of how it relates to boys I think its important for boys to have male role models, in the same way you'd expect girls to have female ones. Wherever they come from it maybe doesn't matter, but if there isn't one then boys can feel quite lost and directionless. I know a couple of my friends who grew up with no fathers and basically had no men around to help them. One of them has been in prison for a couple of years the other is basically a bit of a bum. There is research suggesting lack of a father figure is a pretty major contributor to whether boys end up in crime later on too.

I'm not referring to broken up families; I'm referring to extended families.

One of the bigger changes in the last 40 years is that families in general do not hang out where they started from. It used to be the case that most of a family would be at best around a 30-50 mile radius from where they started; you see this all the time in genealogy studies, as an example. After WW2 but really after about 1965 you get these changes where people moved significantly further away and stayed away. 

As a result, we have multigenerational families who have often never met their grandparents or only meet them every year, who don't have aunts and uncles and cousins that they routinely see, who have far fewer safety nets and far fewer support mechanisms and much less continuity in the idea of a family. And this is very different from what human culture had been like in the past. There are a lot of studies that indicate that this is causing real harm for all sorts of people, but it's especially causing harm for boys. 

[Kalbear]

19 minutes ago, Week said:

Also, why must children only have role models that have the same sexual equipment? Maturity, responsibility, accountability, etc. etc. are admirable traits that individuals with vaginas (or eunuchs etc.) can have as well.

This is a silly argument to make if you're also wanting to see more representation of minorities in media. Yes, you can have a role model that isn't like you, but we've seen time and again how having role models who ARE like you is hugely important in facilitating positive identity, and that goes for everyone. And while what the actual values are differs significantly from culture to culture, the concept of gender amongst humans is universal and universally a differentiator. 

[Week]

Just now, Kalbear said:

This is a silly argument to make if you're also wanting to see more representation of minorities in media. Yes, you can have a role model that isn't like you, but we've seen time and again how having role models who ARE like you is hugely important in facilitating positive identity, and that goes for everyone. And while what the actual values are differs significantly from culture to culture, the concept of gender amongst humans is universal and universally a differentiator. 

Interesting points and I do find myself agreeing with you there - I hadn't considered it from that perspective. Thanks Kalbear.

[Theda Baratheon]

I do think it's important to have role models that you identify with and who look like you - so POC, LGBT representation for example is super important in media and elsewhere so I understand that boys would need male role models and I'm not challenging that boys are lacking this I jut don't know and would want to know what this idea is being based on?

[DunderMifflin]

Could be when it's reported as a given that we are in a partiarchy that gives men power in every area of life. Then a possible next thought for some could be that any man that achieves anything within this patriarchy is bad and abused his privilege, therefore not worthy of being a role model. Not trying to start a fight just throwing out a theory.

[Theda Baratheon]

7 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

Could be when it's reported as a given that we are in a partiarchy that gives men power in every area of life. Then a possible next thought for some could be that any man that achieves anything within this patriarchy is bad and abused his privilege, therefore not worthy of being a role model. Not trying to start a fight just throwing out a theory.

I don't think that's something little children are thinking of lol

[DunderMifflin]

6 minutes ago, Theda Baratheon said:

I don't think that's something little children are thinking of lol

Anectodally, I was fairly aware of gender complaints and issues as a a child. What's the earliest age you can remember being aware of gender issues such as sexism? For me it was pretty young. If not seeing and understanding it fully myself, definately aware of adults speaking about it.

[Theda Baratheon]

2 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

Anectodally, I was fairly aware of gender complaints and issues as a a child. What's the earliest age you can remember being aware of gender issues such as sexism? For me it was pretty young. If not seeing and understanding it fully myself but definately aware of adults speaking about it.

I honestly just thought about dinosaurs, robots, fairies and elves until I was like 17 LMAO. To be honest I actually don't remember thinking about gender at all as a kid 

[DunderMifflin]

Dinosaurs are ok role models.

Not robots or fairies or elves though.

[James Arryn]

4 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

Dinosaurs are ok role models.

Not robots or fairies or elves though.

You have just opened the Blade Runner box. Prepare for the consequences.

[Theda Baratheon]

19 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

You have just opened the Blade Runner box. Prepare for the consequences.

LOLOL.

24 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

Dinosaurs are ok role models.

Not robots or fairies or elves though.

HE'S RIGHT

i'm a future android activist 

*says in complete earnestness* 

[Myshkin]

Time to open a replicant's rights/issues thread. 

Issues to be discussed:

Why only 4 years, you pricks?

Is the Voight-Kampff test fundamentally humanist?

Is it okay to punch someone for calling you a skin-job?

[Jo498]

14 hours ago, DunderMifflin said:

Could be when it's reported as a given that we are in a partiarchy that gives men power in every area of life. Then a possible next thought for some could be that any man that achieves anything within this patriarchy is bad and abused his privilege, therefore not worthy of being a role model. Not trying to start a fight just throwing out a theory.

I don't think that this is relevant for young boys or even older teenagers. But what could be somewhat relevant is that because as a straight white male you do not belong to any group that is officially recognized as underprivileged, abused etc. all your failures are your own. You are told that you are comparably privileged, so if you don't "make it" you probably are a stupid or lazy bastard or both. And if you try a "stoic" coping strategy for your failure, you are poisoning what's left of your sorry self. Admittedly, I don't think that this is all that relevant before college age.

I am also very skeptical about the power of stereotypes etc. While I do not remember exactly, I think around the reproduction crisis in social sciences and psychology such studies were among the first to be debunked or at least the effect size turned out to be far smaller than originally claimed (IIRC Scott at slate star codex had something about this stuff last year).

As for role models, I think that public celebrity role models are vastly overrated. They are too far away and too successful for the average or typical person. Far more important for the minority/underclass etc. person are more local and reachable role models. E.g. I'd guess that it is far easier for a gifted underclass child to get into college and be successful there if there is some neighbor, second cousin etc. who did it before. (Of course this shows an hen-egg-problem.)

(While this is not a men's issue, I also suspect that celebrity role models can be problematic if, as for black Americans they are almost throughout in "winner takes it all fields" like sports and showbiz. Unless one is extremely gifted  and/or lucky one will NOT make it in those fields and they are not a reliable strategy to get into the middle class. And on top of that quite a few of these celebs show a clearly toxic lifestyle ( + toxic song texts) that serves as a very poor role model.  Not that white celebs in such fields are any better...)