Jump to content

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


mankytoes

Recommended Posts

On 11/03/2017 at 9:06 AM, Jo498 said:

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.

Well, that's not necessarily true. For a start, you might have a disability or come from an impoverished background or be an immigrant or have suffered childhood abuse or any number of other things. For a second thing, this thread exists in part to discuss the ways in which men in general, including straight white men, are at times disadvantaged, mostly in my view by a patriarchal system that is set up to benefit a lucky few but, pardon the phrase, not all men. :P

What you have to bear in mind is that privilege isn't a binary state. It's not a case of having it or lacking it. I can say that many straight white men are underprivileged while still pointing out that they are more privileged - or, if you prefer, less underprivileged - than women or minorities who have otherwise comparable backgrounds. That is not erasing the straight white guy's underprivileged status.

On 11/03/2017 at 9:06 AM, Jo498 said:

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.

Who's telling straight white men this? I've never seen anyone say that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2017 at 7:38 AM, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Yes totally. The difference is in longer term relationships where I guess different methods of contraception are relied upon more often. People tend to stop using condoms after a while, thats just how it is. 

 

 

On 3/8/2017 at 7:58 AM, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

That is true in the US too.  Children born during a marriage are legally presumed to be the product of the marriage.  

I had a lengthy conversation with a male friend of mine who is convinced that all male anger comes from not being able to have children that they KNOW are theirs.  Scot, I actually know a family that was hit by this law during divorce.  The child was conceived during a lengthy separation.  All parties were aware of this.  It was a private matter and no big deal once they sorted things out.

On 3/8/2017 at 9:19 AM, baxus said:

I'd be interested in hearing how you'd prove a woman got pregnant on purpose and it wasn't a matter of malfunctioning contraceptives. Confession would be the only way I can think of.

P. S. Getting pregnant is not as easy as having unprotected sex once. If it was, people would use more than one kind of contraceptives, just to be on the safe side.

Speak for yourself.  Birth control failures are very common for active people.  For people like me, it only takes the once.

On 3/8/2017 at 9:30 AM, Mikael said:

I'd still be interested in hearing what kind of individualisation people think would help boys in school. Personally, I think that the opposite is true, kids need to fall in line and do what's asked of them more, not less. In my experience, boys' problems aren't that they are "rowdy", it's that they don't value education.

Down here there are several different single sex schools that really work well for boys.  My son is a "boy's boy".  There's a school here where there are no chairs in the science labs for 5-7th graders.  They are active all day.  Sports and extra-curriculars are integrated into the school day.  Lit and logic are taught with debate encouraged.  There is a great deal of competition and mentorship.  Each entering student is paired with a kid from the upper school.  It's a matter of pride for the older boys to see how their "little brothers" are getting on.  There are a lot of male instructors, many of whom are alumni from the school.  

Do the boys think it sucks not to have girls?  Yes, but both the boys and girls perform better than their co-ed peers.  This is largely due to the specialization of the single sex schools and the alum / community participation.  I DO think that this kind of tailored education is really helpful for boys.  In addition, since most of the schools are old there are a lot more hands on deck to deal with the kids.  Many parents and alumni volunteer.  More participation is needed in schools to make programs like this possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2017 at 3:38 PM, Kalbear said:

Mormont linked to how UK folks use tinder compared to US. There are plenty of other studies about how dating and mating are different in different countries, as are cheating. This really shouldn't be that surprising. And while 18 to 45% is a big difference, it is not remotely what you characterized it as where every man simply swipes right on anything and every woman is choosy. It means that both men and women are pretty choosy, and men are less so overall. 

Of course you haven't. You wouldn't, because even if someone showed it to you you'd ignore it as it doesn't fit your very specific worldview.

As an example, this isn't the case in France, where people tend to be serial monogamists in flings or in longer term relationships, but almost never date more than one person at the same time. In Argentina men cheat all the time. In India there's almost nothing but very specific flings or courtships, with nothing in between. In Sweden women are the ones who approach men more often than not. This conversation talks about some of it, but really the idea that all men want to be polygamous and all women want to be monogamous is belied by absurd amounts of research and anecdotes.

Kal, I put some of this down to men being too damn picky in person.  By the time I arrange an OKC date, I've already decided I wanna bone unless they are stone crazy in person.  I've been on a couple where the man refused to admit he was my date (???????), and several where I was told "less cock!  More coquette!" and chastised because I was too forward,   We can't win this one.  Apparently I need to look like an airbrushed version of (pick your celeb) for this to be a real thing.  Yet men keep complaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lily Valley said:

Down here there are several different single sex schools that really work well for boys.  My son is a "boy's boy".  There's a school here where there are no chairs in the science labs for 5-7th graders.  They are active all day.  Sports and extra-curriculars are integrated into the school day.  Lit and logic are taught with debate encouraged.  There is a great deal of competition and mentorship.  Each entering student is paired with a kid from the upper school.  It's a matter of pride for the older boys to see how their "little brothers" are getting on.  There are a lot of male instructors, many of whom are alumni from the school.  

Do the boys think it sucks not to have girls?  Yes, but both the boys and girls perform better than their co-ed peers.  This is largely due to the specialization of the single sex schools and the alum / community participation.  I DO think that this kind of tailored education is really helpful for boys.  In addition, since most of the schools are old there are a lot more hands on deck to deal with the kids.  Many parents and alumni volunteer.  More participation is needed in schools to make programs like this possible.

There was a study recently in Sweden that suggested that daily phys-ed would benefit boys a whole lot. Looking at society and how much time we spend on our asses, I think both girls and boys could do with daily activity.

It isn't an option where I live, but if it was, I'd seriously consider sending my girls to an all girls school. Would probably be less inclined to do it with my son. There's just so much tension between boys and girls that isn't as easily corrected by their standing in the group as it is within their gender group.

What function does parents voluntaring in school fill by the way? That's unheard of where I'm from, and I'm not sure I would like it :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mikael said:

There was a study recently in Sweden that suggested that daily phys-ed would benefit boys a whole lot. Looking at society and how much time we spend on our asses, I think both girls and boys could do with daily activity.

It isn't an option where I live, but if it was, I'd seriously consider sending my girls to an all girls school. Would probably be less inclined to do it with my son. There's just so much tension between boys and girls that isn't as easily corrected by their standing in the group as it is within their gender group.

What function does parents voluntaring in school fill by the way? That's unheard of where I'm from, and I'm not sure I would like it :D

Oh My Gorsh, they volunteer for the fundraisers (that outfit the stuff tuition / church / public funds don't pay for) they do the after school / in school clubs, they have connections with local businesses that supply the school at cost for stuff.  They put-in extra hands for sports practice, social work, big brother mentoring, groundskeeping (and that involves the kids too).  Everything.  Organize the same things in the girls schools.  Get speakers in for different lines of work, open mentoring projects, etc.  Most importantly here has been music.  Band teachers, band clinics and teachers for production.  Our music has been stolen (culturally) and there has been a big push from both money and preservationists to support our music culture.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The interesting (or ironic) thing is that I am pretty sure that about 20-25 years ago I have seen articles in newspapers and magazines arguing to get rid of co-education mainly for the sake of girls. Because there were indications that (especially in science or maths class) they'd perform better without boys in class. Maybe it was even true back then and has changed.

on youtube there is a TED talk by Zimbardo (did not know he still was around) who claims it is absent fathers, video games, online porn, ADS and lack of outdoor physical activity that is ruining boys and young men.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, Lily Valley said:

Kal, I put some of this down to men being too damn picky in person.  By the time I arrange an OKC date, I've already decided I wanna bone unless they are stone crazy in person.  I've been on a couple where the man refused to admit he was my date (???????), and several where I was told "less cock!  More coquette!" and chastised because I was too forward,   We can't win this one.  Apparently I need to look like an airbrushed version of (pick your celeb) for this to be a real thing.  Yet men keep complaining.

Not all "forward" actions are the same.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that every man, except THE MOST traditional ones, likes when a woman takes initiative. Still, that initiative can take various forms and levels of intensity. What's ideal for someone might be too much or not enough for someone else and there's nothing wrong with that.

To be perfectly honest, if a girl/woman I was on a first date with came with a "I have already decided I wanna bone" attitude, I wouldn't be comfortable. I guess it has a lot to do with me never being "a player", or whatever the kids are calling it these days :lol:

5 hours ago, Lily Valley said:

Speak for yourself.  Birth control failures are very common for active people.  For people like me, it only takes the once.

Good for you, I guess?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously, the maxim "Children born during a marriage are legally presumed to be the product of the marriage." is the only reasonable one. Anything else would be both impractical and imply an unbearable presumption of distrust. And there is no reason to dig up dirt if a man silently accepts a child he suspects is not his own. But he should not be forced to such silent acceptance and if there is reason for distrust anyway, I think the right of the man to know whether he is the father and the right of the child to know about the biological father clearly trumps the right of the unfaithful woman to not name the real father or the real father's right for anonymity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paternity test doesn't give you an answer who the father is. It gives you an answer whether the tested man is the father of the child in question. There is no breach of anonymity in that. Woman may or may not be pressured to name the biological father after tests show that her husband is not child's father but that's a whole different issue.

Also, biological father should face the consequences of fathering a child. Forcing parental responsibilities on another man is insane, regardless of the fact he has had sex with child's mother on numerous occasions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mikael said:

There was a study recently in Sweden that suggested that daily phys-ed would benefit boys a whole lot. Looking at society and how much time we spend on our asses, I think both girls and boys could do with daily activity.

It isn't an option where I live, but if it was, I'd seriously consider sending my girls to an all girls school. Would probably be less inclined to do it with my son. There's just so much tension between boys and girls that isn't as easily corrected by their standing in the group as it is within their gender group.

Daily phys-ed? Oh my god, I would have died in such a school. Similarly in that one Lily Valley is describing. I guess the specialization works for some, but the entire attitude of the school administration, the mentors and the parents seem to have quite a lot of influence on why the boys do better there. It sure sounds interesting and I can imagine further evaluation of such a system could net some useful conclusions.

But in the end, I believe giving everyone the ability to choose his school is important, because not every boy is the same. This might be my own bias, but again, I would have died in such a school, being the feeble and underweight asthmatic who got every shred of fun with sports bullied out of him by his failed professional footballer father. I'm the guy who associates competitiveness with 'ganging up on the weak' and instead values cooperation above everything else. It shouldn't surprise anyone that I always got along better with girls and was constantly at odds with boys...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Toth said:

Daily phys-ed? Oh my god, I would have died in such a school. Similarly in that one Lily Valley is describing. I guess the specialization works for some, but the entire attitude of the school administration, the mentors and the parents seem to have quite a lot of influence on why the boys do better there. It sure sounds interesting and I can imagine further evaluation of such a system could net some useful conclusions.

But in the end, I believe giving everyone the ability to choose his school is important, because not every boy is the same. This might be my own bias, but again, I would have died in such a school, being the feeble and underweight asthmatic who got every shred of fun with sports bullied out of him by his failed professional footballer father. I'm the guy who associates competitiveness with 'ganging up on the weak' and instead values cooperation above everything else. It shouldn't surprise anyone that I always got along better with girls and was constantly at odds with boys...

I think I had a similar upbringing to you, I can identify with all you just said. However I'd say if I was given more opportunity to exercise and ever given the chance to be good at a sport then I'd have done far better at those things instead of viewing sport as punishment. 

Of course I would have chosen a school where there was no sports or activity but would that have been good for me?  No of course not. 

The real issue was I was never given a system to improve at sports, you were just expected to be good and if you weren't then you were thrown to the dogs 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Toth said:

Daily phys-ed? Oh my god, I would have died in such a school. Similarly in that one Lily Valley is describing. I guess the specialization works for some, but the entire attitude of the school administration, the mentors and the parents seem to have quite a lot of influence on why the boys do better there. It sure sounds interesting and I can imagine further evaluation of such a system could net some useful conclusions.

But in the end, I believe giving everyone the ability to choose his school is important, because not every boy is the same. This might be my own bias, but again, I would have died in such a school, being the feeble and underweight asthmatic who got every shred of fun with sports bullied out of him by his failed professional footballer father. I'm the guy who associates competitiveness with 'ganging up on the weak' and instead values cooperation above everything else. It shouldn't surprise anyone that I always got along better with girls and was constantly at odds with boys...

I'm sorry about the way your father turned you off sports in the way he seems to have, but there aren't many things that can teach you cooperation (dare I say: "teamwork") better than sports can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, baxus said:

I'm sorry about the way your father turned you off sports in the way he seems to have, but there aren't many things that can teach you cooperation (dare I say: "teamwork") better than sports can.

That's not the way I remember P.E. as well. During games I was always the guy who was picked on for playing bad. And when I played well for a change I was immediately fouled because nobody wanted to be seen playing worse than me. At some point I just gave up and thought I was better off playing bad because at least then you are not physically assaulted.

Admittedly, there were other factors playing into this, too. My schools were atrocious and so were my classmates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know what a paternity test does. The point is that as far as I understand the legal situation it is not at all obvious that one can pressure the woman to reveal the biological father and it is hard to impossible for the legal father to get anyone else (e.g. the government) to pay child support if e.g. he divorces the wife and does not want to pay support for other men's children that are legally his. As far as I can see the situation is still quite messy in Germany. Admittedly, there are probably only about 1-2% (as opposed to some outrageous numbers mentioned sometimes) of children with misattributed legal fathers, so it is rare but by no means something made up by angry MRA but quite real. Whatever, the point was that among the dubious and spurious things raised by MRA this one is real and important and the current situation does not seem all that well for men. (Some rightly point out the flip side, that these are also often cases where the biological father was denied contact or even the mere knowledge that he fathered a child - it is not only about who pays the support.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with Phys Ed is that often they focus too much on team sports and one has to concede that the environment can be even more darwinist than the classroom in other subjects.

Ideally, Phys Ed should somehow especially help the asthmatic asthenic or overweight guy to improve his condition and gain confidence. While not always easy, this is possible in many cases.

I have myself known a guy who developed from an extremely awkward and gangly 16-17 year old (I think he was actually suffering from some hip problem - when I got to know him, I was 3 years younger but although (then) slim and not very athletic myself I was faster and stronger than him in all respects, I think) to a not very muscular but fit and confident runner who ran several sub 3 hours marathons with 20 or so (so all this took place within 3-4 years). Not in school, of course, but with help of a private athletics/running club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Toth said:

That's not the way I remember P.E. as well. During games I was always the guy who was picked on for playing bad. And when I played well for a change I was immediately fouled because nobody wanted to be seen playing worse than me. At some point I just gave up and thought I was better off playing bad because at least then you are not physically assaulted.

Admittedly, there were other factors playing into this, too. My schools were atrocious and so were my classmates.

I was really good at sports in school and I still got bullied constantly and all the worst people were in the top P.E group (same as me) I hated it and I haTed then and they hated me too because I was ...I don't even know?? I think back at my young self now and there was honestly nothing wrong with her at all except being a bit socially awkward and Ugly and a nerd but a couple years after leaving school dragons (game of Thrones and skyrim) were cool!?!?! WTF!! I was livid!!! Having been bullied for being Into that stuff all through school!! So I totally get you on shit schools and shit classmates and also my dad was an unsuccessful rugby player LOL so similar in that regard too except I'm a girl 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Jo498 said:

The problem with Phys Ed is that often they focus too much on team sports and one has to concede that the environment can be even more darwinist than the classroom in other subjects.

Ideally, Phys Ed should somehow especially help the asthmatic asthenic or overweight guy to improve his condition and gain confidence. While not always easy, this is possible in many cases.

I have myself known a guy who developed from an extremely awkward and gangly 16-17 year old (I think he was actually suffering from some hip problem - when I got to know him, I was 3 years younger but although (then) slim and not very athletic myself I was faster and stronger than him in all respects, I think) to a not very muscular but fit and confident runner who ran several sub 3 hours marathons with 20 or so (so all this took place within 3-4 years). Not in school, of course, but with help of a private athletics/running club.

Yeah with P.E they pick the new "shining stars" and focus on them (stress those kids out too tho tbh) and ignore the rest when although they should be encouraging kids to maintain fitness they should be helping EVERYONE become fit and healthy and maintain that I had had ENOUGH OF SPORTS by the time I left school (at 16) I didn't really try and main't sin any kind of fitness until this year (I'm 23 next month) LOL it burnt me out and ignored the kids that needed some extra encouragement 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...