Feminism

[Djevv]

can you share any examples where the male gender as a whole is being demonised by the media?

I answered this in the post you quoted. Terms like 'Toxic Masculinity' used by the media all the time demonise men. There are other examples too numerous to mention. If you can't see them I would suggest you are not looking very hard.

Its a bad old world out there. Politics is a blood sport. Men take advantage of women by getting them legless drunk. Domestic partners fight. Schoolboys don't understand that actions have consequences especially when inebriated. Got no problem with it being called out and the guilty made to pay - but I am responsible for my behavior and not anyone elses. That is what the rule of law is about.

and are you really suggesting men dont get better opportunities often because it is illegal?

Maybe I'm naive but yes.

 

[IanG]

I answered this in the post you quoted. Terms like 'Toxic Masculinity' used by the media all the time demonise men. There are other examples too numerous to mention. If you can't see them I would suggest you are not looking very hard.

So no examples then. And I'd say you're being over sensitive if you think such terms are being used generally to demonise all men.

 

[Brodders17]

I answered this in the post you quoted. Terms like 'Toxic Masculinity' used by the media all the time demonise men. There are other examples too numerous to mention. If you can't see them I would suggest you are not looking very hard.

I can't vouch for the quality of this article or the author, but i did a google search of news articles with the term Toxic Masculinity and this came up. i couldnt see any Australian articles.
if you want to know what men suicide more often, and why boys dont do as well at school maybe this author is on to something.

What Is Toxic Masculinity?

Toxic masculinity is the reason why women don't feel safe in the streets.

www.psychologytoday.com

What Is Toxic Masculinity?
Toxic masculinity is the reason why women do not feel safe in the streets.
Posted Mar 12, 2021 | Reviewed by Devon Frye

The tragic murder of Sarah Everard this past week sparked conversations about women’s safety, misogyny, and male violence. It is not the first time that our society is alerted to what has been termed "toxic masculinity." There have been many opportunities for discussions and self-reflection recently, particularly with the #MeToo movement a few years ago—and even further back in history, too, with countless feminists and other women speaking up over the years.

Why haven’t we listened yet? Why are there still men who are surprised to hear women’s daily experiences with misogyny? How many more stories of rape, violence, and murder must we face before we confront the roots of toxic masculinity?

Toxic masculinity is the result of a set of strict rules that prescribe what being a man should be. These toxic "man rules" include:

A man should suffer physical and emotional pain in silence.
A man shouldn’t seek warmth, comfort, or tenderness.
A man should only have the emotions of bravery and anger. Any other emotions are weaknesses. Weakness is unacceptable.
A man shouldn’t depend on anyone. Asking for help is also weak.
A man should always want to win, whether in sports, work, relationships, or sex.
We don’t have to look far to see traces of toxic masculinity in many men. Why is that? It is not because men are naturally bad people. It is because men were boys who were often taught terrible lessons from a very young age—for example, "boys shouldn’t cry," "boys shouldn’t be sensitive," "boys should defend themselves," "boys shouldn’t want to play with girl’s toys," "boys should be rough," "boys should want to conquer the heart of girls," etc. These are only a few of the very common damaging messages boys grow up to absorb.

The consequence of this kind of messaging is boys becoming men who are emotionally blunt, and who may find it hard to connect with others—particularly their girlfriends or wives, if they're heterosexual. In most cases, these messages will make it difficult for these men to have a good relationship with their partners. But in the worst of cases, it can transform into rage and, unfortunately, murder.

Toxic masculinity doesn’t only kill women. It kills men, too. Within those strict "man rules," men can become desperately unhappy and unable to reach out. Three-quarters of deaths by suicide in England and Wales are men.

If we want to change the world, if we want to stop misogyny, if we want women to be safe in our streets and men to be psychologically healthier, we need to start with how we raise our boys—in every single household, in schools, and in our communities.

It’s a long road to changing our society, but we must start now. Turning a blind eye or not challenging those "man rules" is colluding with them. We must challenge those rules every single time, and then, in time, we may prevent future tragedies.

 

[DavidSSS]

This is a weaponised definition of racism/sexism. Basically it says racism/sexism is OK so long as you use it in the pursuit of power. Well that's a two-edged sword if ever I heard of one. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

I see things differently. I think racism and sexism (ie discrimination on the basis of sex or race - not your definition) are both wrong regardless of the context.

What a load of bollocks.

It is saying that racism and sexism are used to exert power, and that is precisely what is wrong with them.

This is the usual trope of claiming that discrimination on the basis of sex or race somehow occurs in a vacuum, that it does not occur in a society where being white and/or being male is advantageous.

You claim that Selection for high positions is on the basis of merit, you also claim that women have equal opportunities as men. How do you then explain the fact that men outnumber women in so many positions: 1 woman has ever been PM, less women in cabinet, less than 40% of university professors are women, the vast majority of CEOs are men - men hold vastly more positions of power than women, this is a fact. If you are correct that women have equal opportunity and these positions are granted on merit then what is your explanation - do you think women are less capable?

Yes, men do take advantage of women when they are drunk and it is primarily the responsibility of the individual involved. But why is it always men taking the advantage? The very fact that it is overwhelmingly men who do this says something about men in society and about society. It cannot be just an individual issue when it is overwhelmingly one group who perpetrate this sort of behaviour on another group.

DS

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

What Is Toxic Masculinity?

Toxic masculinity is the reason why women don't feel safe in the streets.

www.psychologytoday.com

Tempted to draw a parallel between walking the streets after dark and ocean pastimes. There are sharks everywhere...

I'm all for increased penalties as a deterrent. The death penalty should apply to the Sean Prices of this world. But a certain political demographic is seemingly unable to distinguish between violent criminals and common crooks, or violent men and common men, and habitually resists.

 

[Brodders17]

Tempted to draw a parallel between walking the streets after dark and ocean pastimes. There are sharks everywhere...

I'm all for increased penalties as a deterrent. The death penalty should apply to the Sean Prices of this world. But a certain political demographic is seemingly unable to distinguish between violent criminals and common crooks, or violent men and common men, and habitually resists.

I would suggest keeping a conversation about the death penalty to a different thread.

i am also not surprised your response to women being unsafe at night is to suggest it is a risk and choice they knowingly take.

 

[MD Jazz]

women still have the majority of low paid jobs, there is still a gender wage gap

DS

So should there be positive discrimination to increase wages in childcare/cleaning/ education etc, those industries where women outnumber men?

Who pays for that increase? I imagine in the public service it is the taxpayer but in the private sector who funds it? Should the gov't have control over the profits of private enterprise?

In regards to the gender wage gap, can you point out examples of jobs where women doing the same job get paid less then men? I haven't seen it in any workplace I've been at in over 30 years. Worked in distribution, hospitality, finance and now wholesaling. Not one job, including warehousing, accounting, bookeeping, administration, bartending, purchasing etc had a different wage structure for men and women. We just hired a marketing manager and interviewed 2 men and 2 women and the salary did not differ. And the applicant who was on the largest salary was a woman.
Do women in general work in lower paid sectors - yes. Often to do with the flexibility of hours/role and lack of real responsibility and decision making.

FWIW my wife works in HR/change and they get paid phenomenally well.

 

[DavidSSS]

Why is it that low skilled jobs which are generally done by women are lower paid - just a coincidence I suppose.

Why is it that women don't get promotions at the same rate as men, yet apparently promotions are on merit alone - hmm, another coincidence I suppose.

Are you seriously claiming that the gender wage gap is a result of a lot of coincidences?

DS

 

[Djevv]

It is saying that racism and sexism are used to exert power, and that is precisely what is wrong with them.

What I'm actually saying is that when you use racist and sexist ideas (like diversity/gender quotas) you can no longer claim racism/sexism is wrong. You exert power with it. Its OK so long as you are in a group that is perceived as lacking power. Can't you see a problem with this?

This is the usual trope of claiming that discrimination on the basis of sex or race somehow occurs in a vacuum, that it does not occur in a society where being white and/or being male is advantageous.

Well is it wrong or not? For all people at all times?

You claim that Selection for high positions is on the basis of merit, you also claim that women have equal opportunities as men. How do you then explain the fact that men outnumber women in so many positions: 1 woman has ever been PM, less women in cabinet, less than 40% of university professors are women, the vast majority of CEOs are men - men hold vastly more positions of power than women, this is a fact. If you are correct that women have equal opportunity and these positions are granted on merit then what is your explanation - do you think women are less capable?

No but there could be many explanations for such imbalances apart from a conspiracy against women. Personally I think that these imbalances will resolve when younger better educated women start moving through workforce. A lot has changed in the last 50 years a lot more will change in the next 50.

Yes, men do take advantage of women when they are drunk and it is primarily the responsibility of the individual involved. But why is it always men taking the advantage? The very fact that it is overwhelmingly men who do this says something about men in society and about society. It cannot be just an individual issue when it is overwhelmingly one group who perpetrate this sort of behaviour on another group.

Breaking the law is an individual thing. Add an excess of alcohol into any situation and good judgement goes out the window. Especially with young inexperienced people. Taking advantage of a situation like an inebriated and insensate woman is, I'm afraid, human nature. People need to learn self control or stay off the turps.

 

[Djevv]

Why is it that low skilled jobs which are generally done by women are lower paid - just a coincidence I suppose.

Why is it that women don't get promotions at the same rate as men, yet apparently promotions are on merit alone - hmm, another coincidence I suppose.

Are you seriously claiming that the gender wage gap is a result of a lot of coincidences?

DS

Is the best explanation for this a conspiracy of men against women at all levels of society? Not different outlooks on life by the two genders? Not the fact that women do the bulk of the caring roles in our society? Not the fact they typically take time out of their careers to have children? Its a bit of narrow view of life to think that all that is important is how much power you have and how much you earn. The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.

On a personal note I made decisions in my early adulthood to put family first and not to pursue a lucrative career that took me away a lot. People of both genders make decisions like this every day. Maybe more women than men do?

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

i am also not surprised your response to women being unsafe at night is to suggest it is a risk and choice they knowingly take.

If it's not unsafe then fly on, fly on!

I'm suggesting a more visible police presence + harsher criminal penalties. Deport the gangs. Clean up the streets. Cull...

These are the bad guys, remember? It's ain't the good guys a-prowling.

 

[DavidSSS]

Djevv, nice of you to introduce the idea that this is a conspiracy, your words not mine. Nice try but no prize.

It is not a conspiracy it is a system. No need for anyone to conspire.

What is wrong with trying to correct a power imbalance? Or do you agree with the power imbalance continuing to benefit men?

Yes, it is wrong that men and white people have an advantage over those who are not men and/or who are not white, do you think it is ok?

50 years? 50 years things have come a long way but women should be content to wait another 50 years for equal opportunity and to be able to walk safely on the streets? Well I can see you clearly only agree with equal opportunity for some.

Yes, women are disadvantaged by having to take time out from work to have kids, because not only are they the only ones capable of carrying a baby, the burden of raising children generally still falls mainly on women. You can see the impact of this on their superannuation balances and it clearly impacts women's careers. Is this right?

DS

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Yes, women are disadvantaged by having to take time out from work to have kids, because not only are they the only ones capable of carrying a baby, the burden of raising children generally still falls mainly on women.

If dissatisfaction with one's birth-assigned gender is the issue, it's easier than ever to change sides.

 

[DavidSSS]

If dissatisfaction with one's birth-assigned gender is the issue, it's easier than ever to change sides.

I said sex not gender, you are trolling.

I understand that is all you have, but I will call it out when I see it.

DS

 

[RoarEmotion]

Djevv, nice of you to introduce the idea that this is a conspiracy, your words not mine. Nice try but no prize.

It is not a conspiracy it is a system. No need for anyone to conspire.

What is wrong with trying to correct a power imbalance? Or do you agree with the power imbalance continuing to benefit men?

Yes, it is wrong that men and white people have an advantage over those who are not men and/or who are not white, do you think it is ok?

50 years? 50 years things have come a long way but women should be content to wait another 50 years for equal opportunity and to be able to walk safely on the streets? Well I can see you clearly only agree with equal opportunity for some.

Yes, women are disadvantaged by having to take time out from work to have kids, because not only are they the only ones capable of carrying a baby, the burden of raising children generally still falls mainly on women. You can see the impact of this on their superannuation balances and it clearly impacts women's careers. Is this right?

DS

I’m not saying this is every situation but often this is what people want. Is this wrong? I think what we want is a primary caregiver choice to be one couple can make a balanced decision about.

It’s not always a ‘burden’ either. Framing everything through an Economic / dollars only Lens asserts that is the be all and end all of things. Raising kids can have its own intrinsic rewards which aren’t financial. As much as (generally speaking ) women are missing out on wages and pay, men (generally speaking) are missing out on seeing their kids grow up and talking to them while taking them to and from school etc.

should we put a cost on that? - I’d imagine there is a big gap for men in this space. Given it’s a hard thing to measure it won’t happen but

is the obvious yin to a pay gap yang.

If you elect to slow your career then it has a pay effect. It’s a choice to have a kid and then it’s a choice as to how you want to raise them. This doesn’t count for everything but it does count for a lot.

Similarly to other posts I’ve never seen inequality of pay for same job where I work and I’ve only seen positive discrimination to force more women into senior positions in the way the promotion system is handled - but will take a long time to play out. I’ve mixed feelings in this but is a way to counter unconscious bias and self selection issues.

personally I’m not going to king st after 11pm having been one punched many years ago - so I chose not to put myself In That situation. It shouldn’t happen but it did. But outside high risk times / areas agree we should just feel safe to walk around.

It is a tough chestnut. Men and women’s brains and physical make up are different so there is a biological thing that needs to be overcome. Society needs to over time change attitudes to make undesirable behaviours unacceptable. Will take a lot of effort and time.

 

[MD Jazz]

Why is it that low skilled jobs which are generally done by women are lower paid - just a coincidence I suppose.

Why is it that women don't get promotions at the same rate as men, yet apparently promotions are on merit alone - hmm, another coincidence I suppose.

Are you seriously claiming that the gender wage gap is a result of a lot of coincidences?

DS

I said it’s not my experience. Or anyone I know. I’d love to see examples of women doing the same job at the same level for less money?

So you think low skilled jobs should be high paid? Who is funding it?

 

[MB78]

Yes, women are disadvantaged by having to take time out from work to have kids, because not only are they the only ones capable of carrying a baby, the burden of raising children generally still falls mainly on women. You can see the impact of this on their superannuation balances and it clearly impacts women's careers. Is this right?

DS

In my family my wife works part time and does all the after school activities for our 3 children. We have made a decision as a family that I go for the highest salary while she goes for flexibility in a job that is very passionate about (has a lot higher job satisfaction than me). It works for us and it’s a team effort. I think you have to consider the family unit as a whole as if it was ability and intelligence my wife could be on a higher salary then me. But its a matter for us that there is less flexibility in the industry that I work in, but the salary for a household is higher enough to meet our family goals. Other issues we have considered is the tax implications, childcare costs, bringing in home help ie cleaner.

I have often thought that perhaps we could be taxed as an household rather that at personal level. And that the super contributions could be worked out this way and spouses encouraged to redirect their super contributions to an equal level

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

I said sex not gender, you are trolling.

I understand that is all you have, but I will call it out when I see it.

It's just a poor complaint. Raising a child is a major undertaking, and for many it comes down to a choice between career or family. Why should women expect to have the best of both worlds?

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Why is it that low skilled jobs which are generally done by women are lower paid - just a coincidence I suppose.

Why is it that men are far more likely to be killed in the workplace? Why aren't women queuing up for those jobs?

 

[Brodders17]

Why is it that men are far more likely to be killed in the workplace? Why aren't women queuing up for those jobs?

DO you think the stories coming out of the male dominated Liberal Party are unique to them? no, the abuse women working within in that party is what women in any male dominated industry face. doesnt make it an attractive work place for a female.
then there is there the male bias, which means the men in charge are more likely to higher men.
then there is the inflexible work practices often associated with those jobs, and the expectation from many men that women raise kids, look after the house etc.
then there is culture men are brought up with, where risk taking, and not being scared are promoted as worthy characteristics.

i know you dont actually give a *smile* about women's rights, but if you do care are men's well-being you should start fighting the prejudices women face as they actually harm men as well.