Society/Culture Feminism - Pt III

[SBD Gonzalez]

Much to ponder.

Framing men as the ‘villains’ gets women no closer to better romantic relationships | Moya Lothian-McLean

Romantic victimhood allows us to believe we’re forever the wounded party – and that men are incapable of change, says Moya Lothian-McLean, a contributing editor at Novara Media

www.theguardian.com

​

 

[Gralin]

Much to ponder.

Framing men as the ‘villains’ gets women no closer to better romantic relationships | Moya Lothian-McLean

Romantic victimhood allows us to believe we’re forever the wounded party – and that men are incapable of change, says Moya Lothian-McLean, a contributing editor at Novara Media

www.theguardian.com

​

Always good to see someone quoting Hooks correctly and with an understanding of what she was getting at.

 

[owen87]

Much to ponder.

Framing men as the ‘villains’ gets women no closer to better romantic relationships | Moya Lothian-McLean

Romantic victimhood allows us to believe we’re forever the wounded party – and that men are incapable of change, says Moya Lothian-McLean, a contributing editor at Novara Media

www.theguardian.com

​

Certainly a much better and more nuanced view than most.

There’s certainly (in my experience anyway) a big difference in the dating dynamic if you’re with someone who has a strong sense of their own independence and person than someone who doesn’t. Where they feel much more able to communicate their wants and needs in a relationship instead of passively existing in it.

The trope of the immutable and uncaring male partner, and the passively tolerant female partner doesn’t really represent reality nor does it really depict what a good relationship looks like.

IMO most men do want their partners to be happy; emotionally and in the bedroom. They just don’t always know how to do that, and if their partner never tells them then how do they ever know?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Certainly a much better and more nuanced view than most.

There’s certainly (in my experience anyway) a big difference in the dating dynamic if you’re with someone who has a strong sense of their own independence and person than someone who doesn’t. Where they feel much more able to communicate their wants and needs in a relationship instead of passively existing in it.

The trope of the immutable and uncaring male partner, and the passively tolerant female partner doesn’t really represent reality nor does it really depict what a good relationship looks like.

IMO most men do want their partners to be happy; emotionally and in the bedroom. They just don’t always know how to do that, and if their partner never tells them then how do they ever know?

That article is a breath of fresh air, and it does point out IMO poor use of terms.

Terms like 'masculinity' and 'patriarchy' are immediately portrayed as the intentional bad.

The trope of the immutable and uncaring male partner, and the passively tolerant female partner doesn’t really represent reality nor does it really depict what a good relationship looks like.

What you've claimed here, that immutable uncaring male partner does exist, and that is why society has 'effort' (for want of a better term) to protect the tolerant female partner from such individuals.

The problem is, the way msm and social media, and by extension society as a whole, paints it as the normal rather than the exception. Something Moya alludes to in the article.

I'm also pleasantly surprised by the positive reaction that article has received on here. Very unexpected.

 

[owen87]

That article is a breath of fresh air, and it does point out IMO poor use of terms.

Terms like 'masculinity' and 'patriarchy' are immediately portrayed as the intentional bad.

The trope of the immutable and uncaring male partner, and the passively tolerant female partner doesn’t really represent reality nor does it really depict what a good relationship looks like.

What you've claimed here, that immutable uncaring male partner does exist, and that is why society has 'effort' (for want of a better term) to protect the tolerant female partner from such individuals.

The problem is, the way msm and social media, and by extension society as a whole, paints it as the normal rather than the exception. Something Moya alludes to in the article.

I'm also pleasantly surprised by the positive reaction that article has received on here. Very unexpected.

Of course there's some males (and females) who genuinely don't give a toss about their partner, or compromising, or changing, but that wouldn't represent the dynamic of most relationships I wouldn't have said.

It's a commonly used trope though, much easier than discussing how relationships are a two-way street where you can't assume your partner can telepathically communicate what you're wanting or feeling or needing.

Generally (not always) dysfunctional relationships are a product of both parties being dysfunctional in the relationships. That's not to say that people experiencing abuse (for example) should be blamed for that abuse of course. But it's more nuanced than simply man bad, woman good.

 

[Gethelred]

Much to ponder.

Framing men as the ‘villains’ gets women no closer to better romantic relationships | Moya Lothian-McLean

Romantic victimhood allows us to believe we’re forever the wounded party – and that men are incapable of change, says Moya Lothian-McLean, a contributing editor at Novara Media

www.theguardian.com

​

I'm left with this thinking a bit of 'well, no s**t'. It's a bit of surface/straw criticism of contempory pop feminism - as seen though a sex-positive lens - and behaving as though it's groundbreaking insight.

It'd be good if there was more focus on how to free men from the patriarchy's effect on them, so it isn't as though I disagree with the author on any of that. Just, sex positive feminists have been saying this stuff for decades now. It's not new.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I'm left with this thinking a bit of 'well, no s**t'. It's a bit of surface/straw criticism of contempory pop feminism - as seen though a sex-positive lens - and behaving as though it's groundbreaking insight.

It'd be good if there was more focus on how to free men from the patriarchy's effect on them, so it isn't as though I disagree with the author on any of that. Just, sex positive feminists have been saying this stuff for decades now. It's not new.

But let's be honest, most people don't read the work of sex positive feminists. I just think it's refreshing to see it said in a mainstream newspaper.

 

[the_interloper]

Of course there's some males (and females) who genuinely don't give a toss about their partner, or compromising, or changing, but that wouldn't represent the dynamic of most relationships I wouldn't have said.

It's a commonly used trope though, much easier than discussing how relationships are a two-way street where you can't assume your partner can telepathically communicate what you're wanting or feeling or needing.

Generally (not always) dysfunctional relationships are a product of both parties being dysfunctional in the relationships. That's not to say that people experiencing abuse (for example) should be blamed for that abuse of course. But it's more nuanced than simply man bad, woman good.

You'd think this is obvious but it's worth pointing out. Though it is funny how when a relationship of a couple we know breaks up, automatically it seems my wife is "on her side" and I'm on the other. It's not always actually true, I've know some a-hole blokes, but I think we naturally sort of apply it to if it happened to us and see it through that lens.

But yeah, your points about communication are spot on of course. I know of a couple who haven't been good for years, and one of my mates saw his missus in the city the other week and they had coffee (all above board). My mate saw the husband a few weeks later and mentioned the coffee "date", he had no idea about it, I'm not sure they talk too much.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Division of labour over housework is one of the great ongoing gripes of feminism.

Now a new study suggests men and women actually perceive mess differently.

But people can change. Should men start to see mess more as women do, or vice versa? Or both “sides” compromise equally? Who’s to say which perception of mess is “right”?

Men don’t see mess the same way women do, researchers say

University of Cambridge academics investigated why women, on the whole, are left to do more housework than men and why men fail to see this imbalance.

www.smh.com.au

 

[Evolved1]

Division of labour over housework is one of the great ongoing gripes of feminism.

Now a new study suggests men and women actually perceive mess differently.

But people can change. Should men start to see mess more as women do, or vice versa? Or both “sides” compromise equally? Who’s to say which perception of mess is “right”?

Men don’t see mess the same way women do, researchers say

University of Cambridge academics investigated why women, on the whole, are left to do more housework than men and why men fail to see this imbalance.

www.smh.com.au

That's very interesting, and explains a lot about my marriage. I wonder if it works in reverse for all things outside the home? Decks, pools, cars, gardens, lawns, etc.

 

[Cmarsh]

Division of labour over housework is one of the great ongoing gripes of feminism.

Now a new study suggests men and women actually perceive mess differently.

But people can change. Should men start to see mess more as women do, or vice versa? Or both “sides” compromise equally? Who’s to say which perception of mess is “right”?

Men don’t see mess the same way women do, researchers say

University of Cambridge academics investigated why women, on the whole, are left to do more housework than men and why men fail to see this imbalance.

www.smh.com.au

My wife is currently spending nearly every waking hour of the next week "decluttering" every nook and cranny of the house.

Meanwhile I'm watching the cricket wondering what mess there actually is.

 

[MrKK]

That's very interesting, and explains a lot about my marriage. I wonder if it works in reverse for all things outside the home? Decks, pools, cars, gardens, lawns, etc.

Anecdotally, it does. Mrs KK is a clutter nazi inside the house but the cars would never get cleaned if I didn't do them.

 

[Evolved1]

My wife is currently spending nearly every waking hour of the next week "decluttering" every nook and cranny of the house.

Meanwhile I'm watching the cricket wondering what mess there actually is.

My wife decluttered the house to the point that all the s**t is kept in the garage. The garage is my territory.

 

[Evolved1]

Anecdotally, it does. Mrs KK is a clutter nazi inside the house but the cars would never get cleaned if I didn't do them.

I feel you, brother!

Mrs Evolved bought a new car this year that doesn't get cleaned unless I do it under the threat of her spending $100+ to get it done elsewhere.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I think both men and women need a recalibration of their attitudes to mess.

As the article suggests, just because men tend to see mess differently doesn’t mean they can’t unlearn that, and change their behaviour.

On the other hand, maybe some women need to read economics writer Tim Hartford’s “Messy”, which makes a pretty good case that neatness is often a drag on creativity and output, and recalibrate their attitude of all mess being bad.

 

[Gralin]

I think both men and women need a recalibration of their attitudes to mess.

As the article suggests, just because men tend to see mess differently doesn’t mean they can’t unlearn that, and change their behaviour.

On the other hand, maybe some women need to read economics writer Tim Hartford’s “Messy”, which makes a pretty good case that neatness is often a drag on creativity and output, and recalibrate their attitude of all mess being bad.

Compromise is always good.

 

[raskolnikov]

Division of labour over housework is one of the great ongoing gripes of feminism.

Now a new study suggests men and women actually perceive mess differently.

But people can change. Should men start to see mess more as women do, or vice versa? Or both “sides” compromise equally? Who’s to say which perception of mess is “right”?

Men don’t see mess the same way women do, researchers say

University of Cambridge academics investigated why women, on the whole, are left to do more housework than men and why men fail to see this imbalance.

www.smh.com.au

I must have a female brain, which comes as no surprise, as I am almost OCD about mess in my house. My mum and sister always comment how clean my house is. Conversely there are women who live like pigs.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I must have a female brain, which comes as no surprise, as I am almost OCD about mess in my house. My mum and sister always comment how clean my house is. Conversely there are women who live like pigs.

I prefer neatness but am quite capable of ignoring mess when I feel I'm focussed on some higher purpose. I must be trans.

 

[the_interloper]

That's very interesting, and explains a lot about my marriage. I wonder if it works in reverse for all things outside the home? Decks, pools, cars, gardens, lawns, etc.

My wife whinges about having to clean the bathrooms, I always offer to swap with my lawn mowing tasks.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Andrew Tate isn’t feminism’s inadvertent bastard child. He’s sexism’s last gasp | Feminism | The Guardian

Equality has spawned a masculinity crisis, goes the theory. But a glance around the world’s patriarchies proves otherwise

amp.theguardian.com

 

[the_interloper]

Andrew Tate isn’t feminism’s inadvertent bastard child. He’s sexism’s last gasp | Feminism | The Guardian

Equality has spawned a masculinity crisis, goes the theory. But a glance around the world’s patriarchies proves otherwise

amp.theguardian.com

I used to think Tate was just a "grifter", saying whatever in social media to get followers and make money. But if he's been doing what is alleged he's far far more damaging clearly. Just a comment more than anything else, I'm not really across what his messaging was specifically, probably some helpful stuff in there but I feel things are a little different now.

 

[Gralin]

I used to think Tate was just a "grifter", saying whatever in social media to get followers and make money. But if he's been doing what is alleged he's far far more damaging clearly. Just a comment more than anything else, I'm not really across what his messaging was specifically, probably some helpful stuff in there but I feel things are a little different now.

He was definitely a grifter, he just also looks like he's a human trafficker and abuser of women

did that whole get fit get rich and you'll get women who you should then treat like s**t because they didn't want you until you were fit and rich thing

 

[Chief]

Physical fitness and financial success as the only path to revenge on the girls who rejected you.

Become the person you've always hated to get the girls you've always hated.

 

[the_interloper]

Physical fitness and financial success as the only path to revenge on the girls who rejected you.

Become the person you've always hated to get the girls you've always hated.

It's why people like this usually have some good advice, I mean getting physically fit is a great idea for so many reasons. I guess it's how this sort of advice gets delivered clearly (and also if the deliverer doesn't traffick people or kidnap them etc obvs)

 

[Chief]

I mean getting physically fit is a great idea for so many reasons

His reasoning was "because girls are all just sex objects and you're stupid if you think otherwise".