What a strange post!

Is there anything you have done that is actually heroic or is it just standard boys looking up to their dad?

If you have children, then you will know the answer to that question.

Well I don’t have children, so obviously I don’t know the answer to that question.

Can you please answer it for me?

I’m assuming he does the fun bits and his other half does the not fun bits. OTOH we have Perchy taking one for the team – he’s the real hero here!

There are male traits and female traits. Men are more likely to have more male traits. Women are more likely to have more female traits. There’s nothing wrong with celebrating them.

The research on the other thread basically said there is massive overlap between both genders and don’t generalise. You also have to take social conditioning into consideration.

“The research on the other thread basically said there is massive overlap between both genders and don’t generalise. ”

Generalisations can be useful especially as explanations. It depends on their application. If I look at employment statistics for tens of millions of men and women then I’d expect to see male and female ‘jobs’. We see it in Scandinavian countries. They fit ‘equality’ measures yet there are distinct differences in sex-based outcomes re. employment.

In my classroom (of 13), I treat every child as an individual and encourage them to be their best selves. However, if you tell me in 35 years that my students went on to work in ‘gendered’ jobs, I wouldn’t be surprised or disappointed or feel like I should have done something differently.

You say that we need to consider social conditioning. That’s true. But, feminists and others who are hard of thinking buck every application of logic when they try to blame social constructs for sex-based differences. There are so many observable and provable physical differences between the sexes that it seems entirely moronic to suggest that they end above the adam’s apple. Especially moronic when we know the brains are physically different before birth.

Given that brains are different for males and females from mid-gestation, why should we expect the same outcome?

Like how you emboldened ‘but’ so all the knuckle draggers eyes are immediately drawn to you suggesting feminists are hard of thinking.

sirromji

It’s more than a suggestion. The issue I have is twofold.

1. no one in a role which requires public approval would have the balls* to say they aren’t a feminist

2. anyone** who meets the definition of feminism as I see it is hard of thinking.

I asked why you need to be a knuckle dragger to think mens’ day is a bad thing. Care to answer?

*irony intended

**people are deserting feminism in their droves. It’s become a nasty, man-hating, sub-par branch of neoliberalism. Men and women are deserting this label in their droves. 80% of women distance themselves from the label. 45% think the term is an insult.

Feminism is a range of political movements, ideologies, and social movements that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve political, economic, personal, and social equality of sexes.This includes seeking to establish educational and professional opportunities for women that are equal to those for men.

What could your problem be with that?

80% of women distance themselves from the label. 45% think the term is an insult.

Where did you get this data from?

You sound like an American Redneck discussing “Liberals”.

Well that didn’t take long. 🙄

Why toxic masculinity? If I were a beard-wearing, wood-chopping, hunter-gatherer type, why am I toxic? These are masculine traits but there’s nothing inherently bad there.

I could be wide of the mark but my belief is there’s nothing inherently wrong with you being a bearded lumberjack, but there’s a whole gulf when you (or anyone else) start telling people they’re wrong/bad/inferior because they’re NOT bearded lumberjacks – that’s the ‘toxic’ part and that’s where the problems arise.

No single trait is toxic in isolation, the portrayal of a heirarchy based on those traits is the issue.

I asked why you need to be a knuckle dragger to think mens’ day is a good thing. Care to answer?

Fair question. I’m not really one to insist on applying labels to people because they behave in one way or another at some point in time. I don’t mix with very many people at all socially so should probably shut up.

Wheaton’s Law will suffice in all situations; Kant’s Categorical Imperative if you want to be a little fancier.

Fancier? Don’t you mean more educateder? Wheaton’s Law I’ve always found to be frustratingly simplistic, almost idiotic, lacking. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen the likes of Hitler being called a dick for example. Ok that’s easy then, I won’t go and do some genocide today.. But then tomorrow I’ll make a harmless crap joke and be called a dick for it. Oh no! I’m as bad as Hitler. What to do? Oh no now I’ve been pussified. This language is a messy business.

<p>I could be wide of the mark but my belief is there’s nothing inherently wrong with you being a bearded lumberjack, but there’s a whole gulf when you (or anyone else) start telling people they’re wrong/bad/inferior because they’re NOT bearded lumberjacks – that’s the ‘toxic’ part and that’s where the problems arise.</p><p>No single trait is toxic in isolation, the portrayal of a heirarchy based on those traits is the issue.</p>

<p>Nailed it.</p><p>As I said, traditional masculine traits are not toxic in themselves, it’s the notion that anything falling outside of those traits makes you less of a man or weak that is.</p><p></p><p>And yes, there is toxic femininity. Women can’t possibly be pretty if they have body hair can they? Or facial hair. Or be a bit bigger than average. There are a whole host of issues that could be described as toxic femininity. I wouldn;t describe feminine traits as toxic though in as much as I wouldn’t describe masculine traits as toxic in themselves either.</p>

<p>people are deserting feminism in their droves. It’s become a nasty, man-hating, sub-par branch of neoliberalism. Men and women are deserting this label in their droves. 80% of women distance themselves from the label. 45% think the term is an insult.</p>

<p>Shows you know **** all about feminism then. Perhaps third wave radical feminism is like that but the vast majority of feminists don’t think like that. Maybe speaking to some actual feminists rather than repeating data and second hand agenda driven opinions would alleviate you of that notion.</p>

gobuchul – the Fawcett Society. A “leading feminist charity”. 81% of women aged 18-24 wouldn’t describe themselves as feminist.

More than 25% of women said that the first word they associate with feminism is ‘bitchy’. 7% aligned their views on equality to feminism.

Acceptable? It’s strange you made a thinly veiled insult when all I did is mention widely-accepted stats. Why was that? I understand that there a lot of people in the public eye who wouldn’t dare question feminism, but why wouldn’t you?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/only-7-per-cent-of-britons-consider-themselves-feminists/

Pyro – I’m a non-bearded, non-axe-owning 30-something. A pale, stale male. Nice middle class parents, expensive education, now working in independent schools; perpetuating privilege, some could say.

We live in a society where [usually] people are financially rewarded for competence. Of course there are instances where one section of society will do better with the same grades (FYI, it’s women who benefit) but as a man, I need to accept it. Women do better in schools. Better in university and better in graduate employment.

<div class=”bbp-author-role”>squirrelking -</div>
Of course Wheaton’s Law is simplistic but at its heart is much more complex ideas. Do what you would do only if society would be its best if everyone did it, for example. Following your Hitler example, Hitler’s a dick as is anyone who does bad. In such a binary system, you’ll struggle if you think bad jokes are the same as genocide. I guess that Kant and Wheaton rely on a little more intelligence.

Pyro – I’m a non-bearded, non-axe-owning 30-something. A pale, stale male. Nice middle class parents, expensive education, now working in independent schools; perpetuating privilege, some could say.

MCPH – I’m a bearded, axe-owning late-30-something. Probably pale and stale, was definitely male when I last checked. Relatively middle-class, university education I probably didn’t deserve or appreciate at the time, work in IT Project Management for the NHS. Fell sideways into IT and PM work after a number of years working in data analysis.

My oppo at work is a non-bearded early 40-something lady – I’ve no idea about axes, but she does own several hockey sticks. Happily admits she’s working class, dropped out of school at 16, did various jobs starting with being a helpdesk monkey, worked her way up to helpdesk manager, Major Incident manager then jumped over to be a PM for us.

Am I privileged in this circumstance? Too bloody right I am. Her technical knowledge outweighs mine by several tonnes. If the boss called us both in and gave her a raise and not me, I wouldn’t object. We’re both damn good at our jobs, no doubt, but she could (should the situation occur where she needed to) kick my ass a very long way.

That said, in all of the above, gender is the *least* relevant detail. Aside from the beard, that’s a bit easier for me, I suspect.

 as a man, I need to accept it.

Yes, yes you do.

In the nicest possible way Pyro, I don’t know what point you’re trying to make.

That your oppo at work is female. Not nearly as educated as you but in a similar role. She’s a few (not too many) years older. This seems to support my stance that outcome is largely based on ability, doesn’t it?

There are a lot of soy boy beta cucks on this site.

Sigh.  There’s always one.

In the nicest possible way Pyro, I don’t know what point you’re trying to make.

I’m not sure I do either. But I wasn’t necessarily sure what point you were trying to make so I just thought I’d join in.

You started that response to me intimating that you should, at least theoretically, be in a position to be privileged, but then diverted to “generally we have a meritocracy” then to “except some places where women do better”. You didn’t offer an opinion as to whether women do better in those circumstances because they work harder or because they’re favoured in some way.

And I’m not sure whether my case supports your premise at all. If outcome was wholly based on ability, my oppo would be way, way ahead of me by now.

“I wasn’t necessarily sure what point you were trying to make so I just thought I’d join in.”

The perfect beginning of a pub conversation!

I’m theoretically privileged, yes. White. Straight. I come from (relative) money and this was leveraged throughout my education and networking beyond university.

In the last decade or so, I think I have witnessed this privilege come to an end. I have recently applied for a new role and had an eye-opening conversation with the boss including acknowledging that the Asian woman also applying for the role ticked more boxes for us than I did, all other things being equal. My white maleness which benefited me is now holding me back!

I think (and there are stats that show) that in quite a few roles, a woman with the same experience and qualifications as I do will get a job over me. Affirmative action and not meritocracy.

Females do better in school, universities and graduate jobs. A plain fact and almost entirely down to meritocracy. You can argue that the examination system could be changed to favour a gender but that’s [in my opinion] nonsense.

I think there’s a balance. We mostly live in a meritocracy. Equality of opportunity is pretty much there and equality of outcome is stupid.

“You didn’t offer an opinion as to whether women do better in those circumstances because they work harder or because they’re favoured in some way.”

Both. See above. We need to deny human nature to pretend that there is any such thing as a complete lack of bias. I don’t think that bias favours white men though.

As I don’t know you nor your oppo (nor what oppo means), I can only argue so much re. your specific example.

My question remains though. Why toxic masculinity? Why is internationalmensday for the knuckle draggers? I never want to tell my sons to be ashamed of their masculinity.

In the last decade or so, I think I have witnessed this privilege come to an end. I have recently applied for a new role and had an eye-opening conversation with the boss including acknowledging that the Asian woman also applying for the role ticked more boxes for us than I did, all other things being equal. My white maleness which benefited me is now holding me back!

Don’t you live in Asia? The main point about privilege in the west is that white male is the social norm.

I was working on the basis of “If you can’t convince them, confuse them” MCPH 😉

Alright, trying to continue civilised discourse, because I like civilised discourse.

We need to deny human nature to pretend that there is any such thing as a complete lack of bias. I don’t think that bias favours white men though.

I think it still does today, and it certainly has historically, which is what a lot of movements would like to redress. I think it’s also less noticeable to us middle-class white men – we can’t see the wood for the trees so-to-speak: It isn’t a problem for us and so we assume it isn’t a problem for anyone else. Which is part of the problem. And yes, that leads to a lot of “we’re damned if we do and we’re damned if we don’t” sentiment, because we probably are, but ignorance of our privilege isn’t a defence. Denial of it, or at least denial that we think it exists, certainly isn’t.

As I don’t know you nor your oppo (nor what oppo means), I can only argue so much re. your specific example.

‘Oppo’ is ‘opposite number’ – in my case, two of us in the same role. I can’t think of a proper, succinct term for it! There’s a debate as to which of us is the good cop and which is the bad cop though: the beardy lumberjack or the short angry hockey player…

My question remains though. Why toxic masculinity? Why is internationalmensday for the knuckle draggers? I never want to tell my sons to be ashamed of their masculinity.

My understanding of Houns original post – and again I may be wide of the mark – is that every March 8th (aka International Women’s Day) you get a tribe of neanderthals grunting on social media going “humph, that’s really sexist, if there was an International Men’s Day there’d be an uproar. Harrumph, grumble grumble chunter moan” . I took the post to be a jocular pointing out to those fine specimens that hey look, there IS one and it’s today (well, yesterday) and look again, no uproar from anyone! How rare.

And again, I think you may have missed the point on the whole ‘toxic masculinity’ thing. It’s not that masculinity itself is inherently toxic, it’s that portraying masculinity as superior  (or indeed, positing femininity as inferior) is toxic. I agree, you shouldn’t ever tell your sons to be ashamed of their masculinity, but they should acknowledge that their masculinity doesn’t make them superior to anyone else. It’s the ‘alpha male’ syndrome that makes masculinity toxic, and yes, the immediate knee-jerk comment of “well that’s not all men” is probably true but it’s the same as the ‘not all cyclists run red lights’ comments: not helpful in the wider context of the world and a somewhat slopey-shouldered response to a serious issue.

I’ve explained toxic masculinity at least twice now, if you’re having trouble understanding maybe you should go change your hand dressings.

‘Oppo’ is ‘opposite number’ – in my case, two of us in the same role. I can’t think of a proper, succinct term for it!

I always understood “oppo” to be a minion, some one who “hops to” your requests.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/oppo

By abbreviation of opposite number (for the first sense) and opponent/opposition (for the second).

Noun
oppo (plural oppos)

(Britain, slang) A friend, associate or colleague. [from 20th c.]
(US, politics, informal) Research into one’s opponent’s family, friends and past, which aims to uncover activities or interests which embarrass or discredit them (short for oppo research).
(US, politics, informal) Opponent or opposition; only used in oppo research.

Never heard that interpretation of it, Cougar! I’d definitely not call her a minion, more than my life’s worth that.

From gobuchul’s post, definitely the British version.